HomeMy WebLinkAboutTIC 2019-08-20 COMPLETE AGENDA PACKETCity of Tukwila
Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee
❖ Zak Idan, Chair
❖ Kate Kruller
❖ Thomas McLeod
Distribution:
Z.Idan
K. Kruller
T. McLeod
K. Hougardy
D. Robertson
Mayor Ekberg
D. Cline
R. Bianchi
L. Humphrey
H. Hash
H. Ponnekanti
G. Labanara
AGENDA
TUESDAY, AUGUST 20, 2019 — 5:30 PM
HAZELNUT CONFERENCE Room
(EAST ENTRANCE OF CITY HALL)
H. Kirkland
B. Still
R. Turpin
A. Youn
Clerk File Copy
2 Extra
Place pkt pdf on Z:\Trans &
Infra Agendas
e-mail cover to: F. Ayala,
A. Le, C. O'Flaherty, A.
Youn, B. Saxton, S. Norris,
L. Humphrey
Item
Recommended Action
Page
1. PRESENTATIONS
2. BUSINESS AGENDA
a) King County Comprehensive Solid Waste Mgmt Plan
a) Forward to 9/3/19 Regular
Pg. 1
Resolution adopting the 2019 Plan
Consent Agenda
b) Job Order Contracting
b) Forward to 9/3/19 Regular
Pg. 21
Interlace! Joint Purchasing Agreement with Bellevue
Consent Agenda
c) Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program Update
c) Information only. To 8/26/19
Pg. 35
C.O.W.
3. SCATBd/RTC
• SCATBd July 2019 meeting cancelled
4. MISCELLANEOUS
5. ANNOUNCEMENTS
Future Agendas:
Next Scheduled Meeting: Tuesday, September 4, 2019 (due to holiday)
The City of Tukwila strives to accommodate individuals with disabilities
Please contact the Public Works Department at 206-433-0179 for assistance.
Allan Ekberg, Mayor
Public I/Vorks Deportment - Henry Hash, Director
INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
TO: Transportation and Infrastructure Committee
FROM: Henry Hash, Public Works Director ,,1,4411
BY: Hari Ponnekanti, City Engineer
CC: Mayor Ekberg
DATE: August 16, 2019
SUBJECT: King County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan Resolution
ISSUE
Resolution adopting King County's Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan.
BACKGROUND
King County is required to update their Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan periodically.
The Plan presents strategies for managing King County's solid waste and recycling over the next six
years, with consideration for the next 20 years. King County staff provided a PowerPoint presentation
to the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee on June 18, 2019. The Plan is approved if it is
approved by cities representing greater than 75% of the population of cities that act within 120 days.
DISCUSSION
County staff has engaged in a collaborative process and involved the City during the development of
the plan. There are no outstanding issues or concerns with this plan from the City staff.
Attachment 2 provides a summary of the final Comprehensive Solid Waste Management plan.
Key elements include:
• The plan presents goals to increase recycling in our area.
• The Plan also identifies modernizing facilities to benefit customers' experience and increase
equitable service levels.
• The updated Plan also provides details to maximize capacity within our existing landfill footprint
to better manage waste locally.
City has a choice of three options:
• Option 1 is to non -concur with the Plan and submit a "no" vote to King County.
• Option 2 is to adopt the Plan which requires City Council to pass a Resolution.
• Option 3 is to take no action.
RECOMMENDATION
Council is being asked to choose from the above three option regarding King County's Comprehensive
Solid Waste Management Plan and consider this item on the Consent Agenda at the September 3,
2019 Regular Meeting.
Attachments: Resolution
King County Solid Waste Division Comp Plan PowerPoint Presentation
W:\PW Eng\OTHER\Cyndy Knighton\TIC Agenda Items\8-20-19\KC Solid Waste\INFO MEMO KC Solid Waste docx
1
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING THE 2019
COMPREHENSIVE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN
FOR THE KING COUNTY SOLID WASTE SYSTEM.
WHEREAS, the purpose of the 2019 Comprehensive Solid Waste Management
Plan (the "2019 Plan") is to plan for solid waste and materials reduction, collection,
handling, and management services and programs in the geographic area for which
King County has comprehensive planning authority for solid waste management by law
or by interlocal agreement, or both; and
WHEREAS, the 2019 Plan was prepared in accordance with RCW 70.95.080,
which requires that each county within the state, in cooperation with the various cities
located within such county, prepare and periodically update a coordinated,
comprehensive solid waste management plan; and
WHEREAS, King County and all cities in King County except Seattle and Milton
have executed the 2013 Amended and Restated Interlocal Agreement ("the Interlocal
Agreement"); and under the Interlocal Agreement, King County serves as the planning
authority for solid waste; and
WHEREAS, King County worked with city representatives serving on the
Metropolitan Solid Waste Management Advisory Committee to develop the 2019 Plan;
and
WHEREAS, the 2019 Plan updates and replaces the 2001 Comprehensive Solid
Waste Management Plan; and
WHEREAS, on April 17, 2019, the King County Regional Policy Committee, acting
as the Metropolitan King County Council Solid Waste Interlocal Forum, recommended
adoption of King County Ordinance 18893 for approval of the 2019 Plan; and
WHEREAS, on April 24, 2019, the Metropolitan King County Council adopted
Ordinance 18893, which approved the 2019 Plan; and
W:\Legislative Development\Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan adopted 8-13-19
HP:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 1 of 22
WHEREAS, the Interlocal Agreement sets a 120-day period for cities to take action
on the 2019 Plan; and the 2019 Plan cannot receive final approval unless cities
representing at least 75 percent of the incorporated population of the cities that take
action in the 120-day period approve the Plan; and the 120-day period runs from receipt
by a city of the Plan recommended by the Regional Policy Committee and approved by
the Metropolitan King County Council; and
WHEREAS, after City approval the 2019 Plan is further subject to final approval by
the Washington State Department of Ecology; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Tukwila desires to approve the 2019
Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan for the King County Solid Waste
System;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
The City Council approves adoption of the document entitled "2019 Comprehensive
Solid Waste Management Plan," dated April 17, 2019, and hereby incorporated by
reference as "Attachment A."
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at
a Regular Meeting thereof this day of , 2019.
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk Kathy Hougardy, Council President
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
Rachel B. Turpin, City Attorney
Filed with the City Clerk:
Passed by the City Council:
Resolution Number:
Attachment A: 2019 Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan updated April 17, 2019
W:\Legislative Development\Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan adopted 8-13-19
HP:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 2 of 2 3
1
Kim County
,moo
Department of \\ `�
soiidResources:Divi and Parks \ ��
Stpiid Waste Tiivisias� `
4
5
6
Public
commen
Jan 8 -
Develop plan and EIS = Mar 8
Oct 2016 Dec 2017 = 2018
2016 2017 2018
Discuss with Advisory
Committees
Oct 2016 - Nov 2017
Regional Policy -�
Committee and County
Council review
Jul 2018 - Apr 2019
City approval
May - Sep 2019
Preliminary
state review
Jan May
2018
Final
state
approval
Oct 2019
7
8
9
King County
Department of
Natural Resources and Parks
Solid Waste Division
\\\\ Waste
L t 1I\ Disposal
10
11
King CountY
=Department of
m
Natural
_�____. �
/ Waste
m�
- %
12
1! t
>_a_,
_zma nsferz
T a— Station
w Capacity is
crq > ncifli ,
K Cop Is v Drop m
A eawLan.b,15
13
14
King County
Department of
Natural Resources and Parks
Solid Waste -Division -V�
o0 0
W
15
16
17
18
19
King County
Department of
Natural Resources and Parks
Solid Waste Division
Waste
Disposal
20
Allan Ekberg, Mayor
is Works Department _ Henry Hash, Director
INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
TO: Transportation & Infrastructure Committee
FROM: Henry Hash Public Works Director
BY: Gail Labanara, Public Works Analyst
CC: Mayor Ekberg
DATE: August 16, 2019
SUBJECT: Public Works Interlocal Joint Purchasing Agreement with the City of Bellevue
Piggybacking for Job Order Contracting
ISSUE
Approve Interlocal Joint Purchasing Agreement with the City of Bellevue to piggyback the use of
their Job Order Contract for a maximum amount of $1,000,000.
BACKGROUND
A Job Order Contract (JOC) is a State approved procurement method in which a contractor agrees
to provide an indefinite quantity delivery of negotiated and definitive work orders from a pre-
established catalog on public works contracts, all over a fixed period of time. The JOC
procurement method is intended to streamline the public works process and reduce costs by
utilizing pre -fixed unit prices, as submitted and agreed to by the selected contractor after an RFP
process. Job Order Contracting reduces the lead-time for smaller public works projects and allows
for work orders to be issued. The benefit to the contractor is that they are motivated to perform
quality work at a reasonable cost by the promise of continued work orders and potential extension
of the contract.
On July 28, 2019, the State legislature amended RCW 39.10.420 for Job Order Contracting and
are now allowing all public bodies of the State of Washington to award job order contracts (which
was formerly limited to cities greater than 75,000 population).
The City of Bellevue is allowing us to "piggyback" on their main JOC contract with Saybr
Construction and their JOC consultant, Gordian Group, and allow Tukwila to use up to $1 million in
capacity (out of Bellevue's $4 million capacity per year over three years through September 2021).
ANALYSIS
RCW 39.10.440 limits the use of JOC to no more than three job order contracts in effect at any one
time. With Bellevue's Interlocal Joint Purchasing Agreement, 5% of costs would be payable to
Gordian, 10% to the main general contractor, Saybr, and at least 90% of the work would be
subcontracted. All work would be paid prevailing wages and the job order contractor must
distribute contracts as equitably as possible among qualified and available subcontractors,
including certified minority and woman -owned subcontractors. The maximum dollar amount for any
one work order is now $500,000.
\\PWSTORE\PW Common$\PW Eng\OTHER\Gail Labanara\Job Order Contract - Gordian\Info Memo Job Order Contracting 081619.docx
21
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 2
The process for a Job Order Contract is to identify the project and work with Gordian and Saybr to
develop a scope of work. The contractor would then use a fixed pricing mechanism (from the RFP
catalog) to list the proposed sub -contractors, the schedule, and the lump sum cost. In addition, any
change orders would also be on the same fixed unit prices. The City would then decide if to
approve the proposed work order with Gordian/Saybr or look at other options. There is no
obligation to use JOC and other bidding options are always available.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no financial impact. Budget limitations would still be applied, and we would use the City
policy of Council approval for any contract over $40,000. Finance may look at our financial policies
when Tukwila surpasses the 20,000-population level.
RECOMMENDATION
Council is being asked to approve the Intergovernmental Agreement with the City of Bellevue for
use of their Job Order Contract and to consider this item on the Consent Agenda at the September
3, 2019 Regular Meeting.
Attachments: Intergovernmental Agreement with the City of Bellevue
Job Order Contracting for Novices
Job Order Contracting Substitute House Bill 1295 for RCW 39.10.420 - 450
\\PWSTORE\PW Common$\PW Eng\OTHER\Gail Labanara\Job Order Contract - Gordian\Info Memo Job Order Contracting 081619.docx
22
INTERLOCAL JOINT PURCHASING AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is between the City of Bellevue, a political subdivision of the State of
Washington, and City of Tukwila
agency under the laws of the State of Washington.
WITNESSETH:
a public
WHEREAS, the Interlocal Cooperation Act, as amended, and codified in Chapter 39.34 of
the Revised Code of Washington provided for interlocal cooperation between governmental
agencies; and
WHEREAS, Chapter 39.33 of the Revised Code of Washington provides for
intergovernmental disposition of property; and
WHEREAS, the parties desire to utilize each other's procurement agreements when it is
in their mutual interest; --
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:
PURPOSE: The purpose of this agreement is to acknowledge the parties' mutual
interest to jointly bid the acquisition of goods and services where such mutual effort
can be planned in advance and to authorize the acquisition of goods and services
and the purchase or acquisition of goods and services under contracts where a price
is extended by either party's bidder to other governmental agencies.
2. ADMINISTRATION: No new or separate legal or administrative entity is created to
administer the provisions of this agreement.
3. SCOPE: This agreement shall allow the following activities:
A. Purchase or acquisition of goods and services by each party acting as agent for
either or both parties when agreed to in advance, in writing;
B. Purchase or acquisition of goods and services by each party where provision has
been provided in contracts for other governmental agencies to avail themselves
of goods and services offered under the contract and/or where either party's
bidder is willing to extend prices to other governmental agencies.
4. DURATION AGREEMENT _: TERMINATION: This agreement shall remain in force
until cancelled by either party in writing.
5. RIGHT TO CONTRACT INDEPENDENT ACTIONi PRESERVED: Each party
reserves the right to contract independently for the acquisition of goods or services
without notice to the other party and shall not bind or otherwise obligate the other
party to participate in the activity.
6. COMPLIANCE WITH LEGAL REQUIREMENT: Each party accepts responsibility for
compliance with federal, state or local laws and regulations including, in particular,
bidding requirements applicable to its acquisition of goods and services.
FINANCING:The method of financing of payment shall be through budgeted funds
or other available funds of the party for whose use the property is actually acquired or
disposed. Each party accepts no responsibility for the payment of the acquisition
23
price of any goods or services intended for use by the other party.
8. FILING: Executed copies of this agreement shall be filed as required by Section
39.34.040 of the Revised Code of Washington prior to this agreement becoming
effective.
9. INTERLOCAL COOPERATION DISCLOSURE: Each party may insert in its
solicitation for goods a provision disclosing that other authorized governmental
agencies may also wish to procure the goods being offered to the party and allowing
the bidder the option of extending its bid to other agencies at the same bid price,
terms and conditions.
10. NON-DELEGATION/NON-ASSIGNMENT: Neither party may delegate the
performance of any contractual obligation, to a third party, unless mutually agreed in
writing. Neither party may assign this agreement without the written consent of the
other party.
11. HOLD HARMLESS Each party shall be liable and responsible for the consequence
of any negligent or wrongful act or failure to act on the part of itself and its
employees. Neither party assumes responsibility to the other party for the
consequences of any act or omission of any person, firm or corporation not a party to
this agreement.
12. SEVERABILITY: Any provision of this agreement, which is prohibited or
unenforceable, shall be ineffective to the extent of such prohibition or
unenforceability, without invalidating the remaining provision or affecting the validity
or enforcement of such provisions.
APPROVED
�nnnnn�
Agency Name
Signature
Title
Date
Signature (if needed)
Title
Date
APPROVED, CITY OF BELLEVUE
Procurement Manager Date
APPROVED AS TO FORM:.
Assistant City Attorney
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Date
Date
24
June 19th, 2019
Saybr Contractors
Attention: John Pallotta
3852 S 66th St
Tacoma, WA 98409
RE: Job Order Contracting; City of Tukwila use of Bellevue Contract
Dear Mr. Pallotta:
The City of Bellevue and the City of Tukwila recently entered into the attached agreement,
indicating intent to allow the City of Tukwila to issue work orders in a total amount not to exceed
$1,000,000 under the terms and conditions of Bellevue's Job Order Contracting agreements with
Gordian Group and Saybr. A copy of the agreement between the Bellevue and City of Tukwila is
attached for your reference.
The City of Bellevue is requesting that Saybr provide services directly to the City of Tukwila on the
same terms and conditions as exist in those certain "Job Order Contracting Saybr" contract, dated
September 19th, 2018. For work orders issued by the City of Tukwila for City of Tukwila projects,
any obligations owed by Saybr under the Saybr contract shall be performed for or provided directly
to the City of Tukwila.
Any invoice issued by Saybr for work for the City of Tukwila should contain the following:
All work described herein provided directly to the City of Tukwila and Saybr are subject to the
terms and conditions of those certain "Job Order Contracting Saybr". The City of Bellevue is not a
party to nor responsible for performance of or payment for the work described in this invoice."
Please indicate your consent to this joint purchasing arrangement by countersigning this letter
where indicated below. This letter may be countersigned in multiple counterparts, which together
shall constitute a single agreement. Please contact me if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
CITY OF BELLEVUE
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
Nicholas Melissinos
Deputy City Attorney
Enclosure:
DATE
25
ACKNOWLEDGED AND ACCEPTED BY SAYBR
Signature
Printed Name
Title
ACKNOWLEDGED AND ACCEPTED BY THE CITY OF TUKWILA
Signature
Printed Name
Title
26
Job Order Contracting for Novices
Just the Basics
By: Gary Aller
So, what is JOC?
Job Order Contracting (JOC) is a way of getting small, simple, and commonly encountered
construction projects done easily and quickly. A JOC contract usually applies to a specific site or
sites and can be used for any number of jobs that need to be done for as long as the contract is in
effect. The JOC method of project delivery was devised by the military sector in the 1980s as a
way to overcome problems with the traditional Design Bid Build (DBB) or low -bid method.
Using DBB, every project, no matter how small, had to be designed and put out for bid, with the
award going to the lowest bidder.
Going through this procedure for every little job was becoming impractical. The common
occurrences of construction delays, cost over -runs, and quality disputes were successfully
reduced using the new method, and JOC has been equally successful in the private sector for
more than a decade. Recent legislation and existing procurement regulations have authorized the
use of JOC for public construction in many states (including New Mexico). Essentially, JOC
provides owners with an on -call general contractor who is familiar with the site and the owner's
needs.
When is JOC Used?
The JOC delivery method is particularly well suited to repetitive jobs and situations in which
owners know that many small tasks will arise, but the timing, type of work, and quantity of work
are unknown at the time the contract is signed. Many diverse tasks such as routine upgrades and
renovations, remodeling, alterations, and minor new construction for a site are very efficiently
handled using a single JOC contract. These jobs usually have minimal design requirements.
The JOC method should not be used for large, complex new construction projects that require
extensive or innovative design or are likely to encounter changes and revisions during
construction. In fact, some states require each job completed under a JOC contract to cost less
than $1,000,000.
Why is JOC Useful?
There are several important advantages provided by Job Order Contracting. Projects done under
JOC contracts are completed faster and incur fewer "soft costs," and the quality of the work is
equal to or higher than that of projects done using DBB.
The most obvious benefit of JOC is the fact that it is not necessary to write separate contracts for
each job. Since procurement procedures are major contributors to overhead and require
significant staff resources, bypassing this procedure saves time and money.
Jobs get done faster and more cost effectively because the procurement costs are spread over
many jobs. In fact, for most jobs done under JOC contracts, work beings 20 — 30 days after the
need for work is communicated to the contractor, as compared to 180 days for DBB.
27
Another advantage is that the JOC contract establishes unit prices for labor and material, so once
quantities are determined, it is fast and easy to arrive at a fixed price for each job. There are no
price negotiations involved in implementing a JOC contract.
Additionally, because the owner establishes a long-term relationship with the Job Order
Contractor, communication can be very efficient as the contractor becomes familiar with the
needs and expectations of the owner. This long-term partnership, when established in a
cooperative environment, leads to better quality and better value. JOC contracts are written with
minimum and maximum dollar amounts of work that may be assigned under the contract. This
situation creates a powerful incentive for the contractor to provide fast, high quality, reliable
service to the owner. Owners are also motivated to establish positive relationships with the Job
Order Contractors in order to reap the maximum benefits from the contract.
Finally, a very important feature of the JOC process is that the contractor is chosen by
Qualifications Based Selection. This means that the choice will be based on experience with
similar sites, knowledge and capability of personnel, and other factors that directly impact the
quality of work delivered.
The JOC contractor typically uses his in-house design staff or an architect already under contract
to quickly draw up plans for jobs as the need arises, saving substantial time.
How is a JOC Contract Used?
The process of using a JOC contract is very fast and straightforward. When a need is identified,
the owner contacts the JOC contractor and they walk through the site, define the extent of the
project, and discuss alternate approaches to be considered. The contractor then draws up a
design, if necessary, and a detailed project list, including all materials and labor needed. Using
the chosen unit price book, the contractor can establish a firm price for the job. The owner
reviews the proposal and issues an authorization to proceed. The process from request to
authorization to begin work takes a very short time, sometimes as little as ten days to two weeks
and not more than 30 days. The flow diagram below shows the steps of the process.
Illllu uumwrhod
1111111111111111111111111111111111
Ope wxuwmimam
Il�gmuusm9�wns
Illg lllff 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
wwe�m�l:amiwa��l
I
Gary L. Aller is the foil ler Director of the Alliance for Construction Excellence (ACE) and was
instrumental in the Arizona state legislative process incorporating Alternate Delivery Project Methods
into law in the early 2000's, including JOC. ACE is an outreach/inreach organization that is part of the
Del E. Webb School of Construction at Arizona State University.
28
1 build projects. In determining the amount of the honorarium, the
2 public body shall ((consider)) recognize the level of effort required
3 to meet the selection criteria.
4 Sec. 7. RCW 39.10.420 and 2017 c 136 s 1 are each amended to
5 read as follows:
6 (1) (('?'he following)) All public bodies of the state of
7 Washington are authorized to award job order contracts and use the
8 job order contracting procedure((=
9 (a) The deportment . en e u r epa� ..� �t�rNr�c.. ..,crviccs,
10 (b) The state univer✓iticc, regional univereitice, and The
11 Evergreen State Ccllcgc -
12 (c) Sound ( astral �uget Sour. _ gisool trancit
13 authority)-*
14 (d) Every city with a pcpulol-ion greater than .,-.✓....3 th ',sand
15 any
a ...., a public .. authority chartered by a . .- ,-. v, ti . . ,.' d - ROW ? j 2 1 7 a
16 thr✓uuh 1S.21.75�.
17 (c) Ever
19
20
21
c. unt2 ..�th a
-4*- E ory port district
million dollars �ars per ems;.
(g) E.,ery public utility district :gat
population grcatcr than
22.-
23
24
25
26 ; r
27
proJcto e .yonly*
(y)
J i
Every ,.,--i-, .�
m11.e
with
ferry system*
The Washington
department
total r uee gr�a���
✓ui :i:..nar.. ...i'
4— 1, F. -Cca
revenues from ono -gy c _ ,
of transportation,
28 (k) Every public hospital district with t tal revenues y e
29 t' on fif er. .. , , dell rcpor yclar;
30 (1)public transportation benefit rca authority as def
31 under aCW. 3' .57i 010) ) .
32 (2)(a) The department of enterprise services may issue job order
33 contract work orders for Washington state parks department projects
34 and public hospital districts.
35 (b) The department of enterprise services, the University of
36 Washington, and Washington State University may issue job order
37 contract work orders for the state regional universities and The
38 Evergreen State College.
p. 11 SHB 12952p,
1 (3) Public bodies may use a job order contract for public works
2 projects when a determination is made that the use of job order
3 contracts will benefit the public by providing an effective means of
4 reducing the total lead-time and cost for the construction of public
5 works projects for repair and renovation required at public
6 facilities through the use of unit price books and work orders by
7 eliminating time-consuming, costly aspects of the traditional public
8 works process, which require separate contracting actions for each
9 small project.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
Sec.
read as follows:
(1)
process using public requests for proposals.
(2) The public body shall make an effort to solicit proposals
from certified minority or certified woman -owned contractors to the
extent permitted by the Washington state civil rights act, RCW
49.60.400.
(3) The public body shall publish, at least once in a statewide
publication and legal newspaper of general circulation published in
every county in which the public works project is anticipated, a
request for proposals for job order contracts and the availability
and location of the request for proposal documents. The public body
8. RCW 39.10.430 and 2007 c 494 s 402 are each amended to
V"kr14
Job order contracts shall be awarded through a competitive
shall ensure that
includes:
(a) A detailed
the request for proposal documents at a minimum
description of the scope of the job order contract
including performance, technical requirements and specifications,
functional and operational elements, minimum and maximum work order
amounts, duration
order contract;
(b) The reasons for using job order
of the
contract,
and options
contracts;
to extend the
job
(c) A description of the qualifications required of the proposer;
(d) The identity of the specific unit price book to be used;
(e) The minimum contracted amount committed to the selected job
order contractor;
(f) A description of the process the public body will use to
evaluate qualifications and proposals, including evaluation factors
and the relative weight of factors. The public body shall ensure that
evaluation factors include, but are not limited to, proposal price
and the ability of the proposer to perform the job order contract. In
p. 12 SHB 1295.SL
30
1 evaluating the ability of the proposer to perform the job order
2 contract, the public body may consider: The ability of the
3 professional personnel who will work on the job order contract; past
4 performance on similar contracts; ability to meet time and budget
5 requirements; past performance on approved subcontractor inclusion
6 plans; ability to provide a performance and payment bond for the job
7 order contract; recent, current, and projected workloads of the
8 proposer; location; and the concept of the proposal;
9 (g) The form of the contract to be awarded;
10 (h) The method for pricing renewals of or extensions to the job
11 order contract;
12 (i) A notice that the proposals are subject to RCW 39.10.470; and
13 (j) Other information relevant to the project.
14 (4) A public body shall establish a committee to evaluate the
15 proposals. After the committee has selected the most qualified
16 finalists, the finalists shall submit final proposals, including
17 sealed bids based upon the identified unit price book. Such bids may
18 be in the form of coefficient markups from listed price book costs.
19 The public body shall award the contract to the firm submitting the
20 highest scored final proposal using the evaluation factors and the
21 relative weight of factors published in the public request for
22 proposals and will notify the board of the award of the contract.
23 (5) The public body shall provide a protest period of at least
24 ten business days following the day of the announcement of the
25 apparent successful proposal to allow a protester to file a detailed
26 statement of the grounds of the protest. The public body shall
27 promptly make a determination on the merits of the protest and
28 provide to all proposers a written decision of denial or acceptance
29 of the protest. The public body shall not execute the contract until
30 two business days following the public body's decision on the
31 protest.
32 (6) The requirements of RCW 39.30.060 do not apply to requests
33 for proposals for job order contracts.
34 Sec. 9. RCW 39.10.440 and 2015 c 173 s 1 are each amended to
35 read as follows:
36 (1) The maximum total dollar amount that may be awarded under a
37 job order contract is four million dollars per year for a maximum of
38 three years. Any unused capacity from the previous year may be
39 carried over for one year and added to the immediate following year's
p. 13 SHB 1295sL
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
limit. The maximum annual volume including unused capacity shall not
exceed the limit of two years. The
may be awarded under a job order
maximum total dollar amount that
contract for the department of
enterprise services, counties with a population
million, and cities with a population
of more
of more than one
than four hundred
thousand is six million dollars per year for a maximum of three
years. The maximum total
8 state sales and use tax.
(2) Job order contracts may be executed for an initial contract
term of not to exceed two years, with the option of extending or
renewing the job order contract for one year. All extensions or
renewals must be priced as provided in the request for proposals. The
extension or renewal must be mutually agreed to by the public body
and the job order contractor.
(3) A public body may have no more than ((tea )) three job order
contracts in effect at any one time, with the exception of the
department of enterprise services, which may have six job order
contracts in effect at any one time.
(4) At least ninety percent of work contained in a job order
contract must be subcontracted to entities other than the job order
contractor. The job order contractor must distribute contracts as
equitably as possible among qualified and available subcontractors
dollar amounts are exclusive
of Washington
including certified minority
extent permitted by law as
supplier roject submission,
and woman -owned
demonstrated on
and shall limit
subcontractors to the
the subcontractor and
subcontractor bonding
requirements to the greatest extent possible.
(5) The job order contractor shall publish notification of intent
to perform public works projects at the beginning of each contract
year in a statewide publication and in a legal newspaper of general
circulation in every county in which the public works projects are
anticipated.
(6) Job order contractors shall pay prevailing wages for all work
that would otherwise be subject to the requirements of chapter 39.12
RCW. Prevailing wages for all work performed pursuant to each work
order must be the rates in effect at the time the individual work
order is issued.
(7) If, in the initial contract term, the public body, at no
fault of the job order contractor, fails to issue the minimum amount
of work orders stated in the public request for proposals, the public
body shall pay the contractor an amount equal to the difference
p. 14
SHB 129352. SL
1 between the minimum work order amount and the actual total of the
2 work orders issued multiplied by an appropriate percentage for
3 overhead and profit contained in the contract award coefficient for
4 services as specified in the request for proposals. This is the
5 contractor's sole remedy.
6 (8) All job order contracts awarded under this section must be
7 signed before July 1, 2021; however the job order contract may be
8 extended or renewed as provided for in this section.
9 (9) Public bodies may amend job order contracts awarded prior to
10 July 1, 2007, in accordance with this chapter.
11 Sec. 10. RCW 39.10.450 and 2012 c 102 s 2 are each amended to
12
13
14
15
16 (2) All work orders issued for the same project shall be treated
17 as a single work order for purposes of the dollar limit on work
18 orders.
19 (3) No more than twenty percent of the dollar value of a work
20 order may consist of items of work not contained in the unit price
21 book.
22 (4) Any new stand-alone permanent((ncicccd building cpc e))
23 structure constructed under a work order shall not exceed ((two))
24 three thousand gross square feet.
25 (5) A public body may issue no work orders under a job order
26 contract until it has approved, in consultation with the office of
27 minority and women's business enterprises or the equivalent local
28 agency, a plan prepared by the job order contractor that equitably
29 spreads certified women and minority business enterprise
30 subcontracting opportunities, to the extent permitted by the
31 Washington state civil rights act, RCW 49.60.400, among the various
32 subcontract disciplines.
33 (6) For purposes of chapters 39.08, 39.12, 39.76, and 60.28 RCW,
34 each work order issued shall be treated as a separate contract. The
35 alternate filing provisions of RCW 39.12.040(2) apply to each work
36 order that otherwise meets the eligibility requirements of RCW
37 39.12.040(2).
38 (7) The job order contract shall not be used for the procurement
39 of architectural or engineering services not associated with specific
p. 15 SHB 1295nSL
read as
(1)
hundred
and use
follows:
The maximum dollar
((::fty)) thousand
tax.
amount for a work order is ((thrco)) five
dollars, excluding Washington state sales
1 work orders. Architectural and engineering services shall be procured
2 in accordance with RCW 39.80.040.
3
4 excluding Washington state sales and use tax, and including over six
5 hundred sinale trade hours shall utilize a state reaistered
6 apprenticeship program for that sinale trade in accordance with RCW
7 39.04.320. Awardina entities may ad)ust this requirement for a
8 specific work order for the following reasons:
9 (a) The demonstrated lack of availability of apprentices in
10 specific geographic areas;
11
12 hours, which does not make feasible the required minimum levels of
13 apprentice participation;
14 (c) Participating contractors
15 effort to comply with the requirements of RCW 39.04.300 and
16 39.04.310; or
17 (d) Other criteria the awarding entity deems appropriate.
8) Any work order over three hundred
fifty thousand dollars,
(b) A disproportionately high ratio of material costs to labor
have demonstrated a good
faith
18 Sec. 11. RCW 39.10.470 and 2014 c 19 s 2 are each amended to
19 read as follows:
20 (1) Except as provided in subsections (2) and (3) of this
21 section, all proceedings, records, contracts, and other public
22 records relating to alternative public works transactions under this
23 chapter shall be open to the inspection of any interested person,
24 firm, or corporation in accordance with chapter 42.56 RCW.
25 (2) Trade secrets, as defined in RCW 19.108.010, or other
26 proprietary information submitted by a bidder, offeror, or contractor
27 in connection with an alternative public works transaction under this
28 chapter shall not be subject to chapter 42.56 RCW if the bidder,
29 offeror, or contractor specifically states in writing the reasons why
30 protection is necessary, and identifies the data or materials to be
31 protected.
32 (3) ((rropccalc cub ittcd by dccig r-bile finalicta)) All
33 documents related to a procurement under RCW 39.10.330 are exempt
34 from disclosure until the notification of the highest scoring
35 finalist is made in accordance with RCW 39.10.330(((5))) (6) or the
36 selection process is terminated except as expressly required under
37 RCW 39.10.330(3).
p. 16 SHB 129 34. SL
Allan Ekberg, Mayor
Public l,'Vnrks Department Henry Hash, Director
INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
TO: Transportation and Infrastructure Committee
FROM: Henry Hash, Public Works Director 1, 4/
BY: Cyndy Knighton, Senior Program Manager
Scott Bates, Traffic Engineering Project Manager
CC: Mayor Ekberg
DATE: August 16, 2019
SUBJECT: Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program
Project No. 80910301
2019 Progress Report
ISSUE
Provide a summary of progress to date for the Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program (NTCP).
BACKGROUND
The NTCP was adopted by Council Resolution (No.1955) at the end of 2018 to address neighborhood
concerns with traffic safety. The Council also wanted to ensure that traffic calming safety decisions are
based on technical engineering and applied in a uniform and consistent manner. The 2019-2020 budget
provides annual funding to implement traffic calming strategies on residential streets and other safety
improvements throughout Tukwila. Although some work was accomplished in 2018, this program is taking
off and much more has been accomplished in 2019.
DISCUSSION
Staff has collected requests for traffic calming treatments and other improvements in residential areas
for many years. Requests for calming treatments and other safety improvements come into staff via a
variety of ways:
• Enrollment requests from the City's website • Face-to-face conversations
• See-Click-Fix/Tukwila Works • Other Departments, especially Police
• Email inquiries • Historical knowledge
• Phone calls • Elected officials
The NTCP is a welcoming program for our community and has already produced positive results to
improve safety. When the Council adopted the NTCP, staff had a list of approximately 22 requests.
Currently, there are more than 40 individual requests for improvements, and it is not uncommon for new
requests to come in weekly.
The NTCP has two levels of calming treatment types to use. Level I treatments are considered passive
traffic control and are generally less restrictive than Level II treatments. Level II treatments focus on
physical devices which are more costly and restrictive. Due to an increased number of requests today,
staff is not strictly following the steps of the NTCP.
In order to begin addressing requests quickly, staff has been installing new permanent speed feedback
signs and LED enhanced signs which fall under the Level 1 category of improvements in the NTCP.
Additionally, staff has installed many new parking restriction signs at the request of both residents and
the Police Department to aid in enforcing parking violators and improve safety. These also fall under the
Level 1 category. 35
W:1PW EngIPROJECTSIA- RW & RS Projects\Traffic Calming\Tukwila Traffic Calming Program\NTCP 2099 Progress report.docx
Traffic Calming Info Memo
Page 2
The attached map shows the locations where traffic calming treatments have been implemented to date.
Requests have come in for new crosswalks in the vicinity of schools, parks and other high pedestrian
generation areas. Crosswalks require engineering study to ensure that they are safely sited, and the City
is legally protected. For example, one location, S 144th Street at 37th Avenue S, staff is recommending
installation of a Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) on the west leg of the intersection's existing
crosswalk because of the close proximity to high density residential and the Cascade View Park. A new
marked crosswalk is considered a Level 1 treatment, but the RRFB is a Level 2.
KPG has recently been contracted to assist staff with the engineering for crosswalk siting studies,
development of general RRFB plans, and other needs that may come up on an on -call basis. It is likely
that additional consultants would also be retained for on -call engineering services to support the NTCP
program.
The NTCP is a great program that brings staff closer to the community which helps staff understand their
needs and issues. In order to keep up with the requests in a timely, professional and safe manner, a
more organized, programmatic traffic calming program is needed. To reach this point, dedicated staff are
required to provide accurate ranking and studies as well as to install and maintain the additional
infrastructure. Additional staffing will move this new program into one that complies fully with the adopted
NTCP.
RECOM M ENDATION
Information only. Committee is being asked to have the Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program update
presented to full Council at the August 26, 2019 Committee of the Whole.
ATTACHMENTS
• Page 8, 2019 CIP
• Resolution No. 1955 — Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program
• Map of 2019 NTCP improvements
• Matrix of Description of Traffic Calming Methods
• Matrix of Traffic Calming Methods — General Overview
36
CITY OF TUKWILA CAPITAL PROJECT SUMMARY
2019 to 2024
PROJECT: Traffic Calming/Residential Safety Improvements Project No. 90210301
Programmatic approach to addressing neighborhood traffic concerns through a variety of methods.
DESCRIPTION: Residential street improvements with sidewalks, safety improvements, and bike facilities.
JUSTIFICATION: Neighborhood revitalization by improving residential streets.
STATUS: Future candidates are listed in the citywide comprehensive update and safety -based prioritization of
residential street improvements, sidewalks, and bike lanes.
MAINT. IMPACT: Varies, depends on treatment(s) used.
COMMENT: Residential improvements have included 42nd Ave S, 53rd Ave S. Speed cushions installed at S 160th St.
FINANCIAL Through Estimated
(in $000's)
2017 2018 2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
BEYOND TOTAL
EXPENSES
Design
9
80
80
80
80
80
80
80
569
Land (RNV)
0
Const. Mgmt.
0
Construction
38
320
320
320
320
320
320
320
2,278
TOTAL EXPENSES
47
0
400
400
400
400
400
400
400
2,847
FUND SOURCES
Awarded Grant
0
Proposed Grant
0
Mitigation Actual
0
Mitigation Expected
0
City Oper. Revenue
47
0
400
400
400
400
400
400
400
2,847
TOTAL SOURCES
47
0
400
400
400
400
400
400
400
2,847
2019 - 2024 Capital Improvement Program
8
37
Special Meeting thereof this 10174 day of
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
(,) ---
Chrigty y, MMC, City
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
Rachel .-Turpin, City Attorney
Washington
Resolution No.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING THE "CITY OF TUKWILA
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC CALMING PROGRAM."
WHEREAS, one of the top concerns of Tukwila community members is speeding and other
dangers associated with motor vehicles; and
WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila desires to reduce the negative effects of motor vehicle use,
alter driver behavior, and improve conditions for non -motorized street users; and
WHEREAS, the adopted Tukwila Comprehensive Plan recommends implementation of a
neighborhood traffic calming program in both the Transportation Element and the Residential
Neighborhoods Element; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to document a transparent, predictable and equitable
process for implementing effective traffic calming measures in neighborhoods throughout the City;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON,
HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
The "City of Tukwila Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program," as evidenced in Exhibit A, is
adopted.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a
./e° , 2018.
o
Verna SeI,Cou'fliI President
Filed with the City Clerk:
Passed by the City Council: ) Resolution Number:
Number: i C
Attachment: Exhibit A — City of Tukwila Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program
W:\Word Processing \Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program 11-30-18
LH:bjs
Page 1 of 138
ulnuu
CITY OF TUKWILA
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC
CALMING PROGRAM
Adopted December 10, 2018
By Resolution No. 1955
39
Table of Contents
OBJECTIVES 1
PROCESS STEPS 1
INITIATING A REQUEST 1
PRELIMINARY EVALUATION 2
SOLUTION ALTERNATIVES 2
No Action 3
Level I 3
Level 11 3
PROCESS FOR QUALIFYING FOR LEVEL II TREATMENTS 3
PLAN DEVELOPMENT 4
PROJECT FUNDING 4
PROJECT DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION 5
EVALUATION 5
RE -ENROLLMENT 5
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: DEFINITIONS OF TYPES OF STREETS
APPENDIX B: PRIORITY RANKING WORKSHEET
40
Introduction
Traffic conditions on residential streets greatly affect neighborhood livability. Speeding and
unnecessary through -traffic in neighborhoods create safety hazards on residential streets. The City
of Tukwila Public Works Department has developed a Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program
(NTCP) to guide City staff and inform residents about the procedures for implementing traffic
calming on residential streets and collector streets.
The NTCP is designed for local residential streets and collector arterials only. The NTCP does
not apply to local or arterial streets in commercial areas or to streets classified as principal or minor
arterials.
As defined by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), traffic calming is the application of
measures which can be taken which reduces the negative effects of motor vehicle use, alters driver
behavior and improves conditions for non -motorized street users. The City's NTCP outlines a
process for staff and residents to carry out a traffic calming program. It provides a way to
objectively prioritize traffic calming requests. These procedures incorporate prioritization,
planning, evaluation, implementation, and maintenance of the traffic -calming devices in
residential areas. It also combines the four E's — Education, Engineering, Enforcement and
Emergency Services.
Obi ectives
The primary goal of the City's NTCP is to improve the livability of the local streets and residential
collectors. The City has identified the following objectives:
• Provide alternative solutions to reduce vehicular speeds and accidents on residential streets.
• Endorse safe and pleasant conditions for motorists, bicyclists, pedestrians, and residents of
neighborhood streets.
• Provide a means for a collaborative working relationship between City staff and
neighborhood residents in development of traffic calming measures.
• Discourage use of residential streets for cut -through vehicular traffic.
Process Steps
Initiating a Request
Request for traffic calming assistance can come from a resident's association or from concerned
individuals. Requests can be made in writing by clearly stating the problem and location,
accompanied with completed application which is provided by the City. The request can be made
by either mailing or emailing the request to the Public Works Department. The request must
include a contact name, address, phone number and email.
41
Staff will then acknowledge the completed application in writing to the resident's association or
to the contact person listed in the application. An application fee could be implemented in the
future to offset some of the costs involved.
Preliminary Evaluation
Each street in the community is a part of the larger roadway network that connects residents to
each other, work, schools, goods, services and the countless destinations to which drivers and
pedestrians travel daily. Common issues within neighborhoods include speeding, traffic volumes,
and the utilization of neighborhood streets as a cut -through route, among others. In order to ensure
that traffic calming concerns are addressed in an equitable manner, staff must assess the situation
by reviewing the request and determining if the area qualifies for treatment using set criteria. The
primary purpose of a preliminary evaluation is to determine whether the speeding or accident
situation is significant enough to warrant further study. At this stage, staff collects data to analyze
it to determine whether:
• The roadway is eligible for traffic calming treatment.
o Only residential streets classified as collector arterial or local access are eligible.
• City recorded data supports the problem identified in the application.
o Speeding: Traffic counts are taken to determine if 15% of the motorists travel at 5
mph or more above the posted speed limit. This is also referred to as the 85th
percentile speed being at or above 5 mph over the speed limit.
o Volume: Traffic counts also collect the number of daily vehicles on a street. This
information is used to determine the best type of solution and is used to rank project
priorities.
o Traffic Accidents: The number of accidents for over a three-year period is collected
and studied.
The Public Works Director has the discretion to move an application forward or to address any
safety issues discovered outside of the NTCP process.
If the analysis confirms that a traffic problem exists based upon the above criteria, the Public
Works Department will conduct a traffic calming study as explained in the following sections and
staff calculates the priority score for the street segment using the Priority Worksheet in Appendix
C.
A written response back to the contact person with the findings of the preliminary evaluation is
generally provided within 60 calendar days of the request.
Solution Alternatives
The solution alternatives are defined into three levels.
42
No Action
After data collection and analysis is complete, any location not meeting the above criteria will be
determined to not be eligible for any NTCP assistance. Staff will inform the applicant in writing
that their request does not meet the City criteria for action and the request will be closed.
Level I
The first level improvement for traffic calming that should be considered are passive traffic control
treatments, known as Level I. Level I improvements are less restrictive measures, and do not
require a vote of the affected residents. The improvements used in Level I include: trimming
bushes to allow better sight distance; pavement markings and striping; increased police
enforcement; traffic speed display signs; neighborhood awareness campaigns; and education. This
reduces the need for installing physical devices on every local street.
If a marked crosswalk is recommended for installation where ADA-compliant ramps do not
currently exist, the improvement will be automatically treated as a Level II solution.
Level If
Level II improvements should be considered only after Level I treatments have been in place for
a minimum of 6 months and data collection and analysis indicate the problem(s) has not been
resolved, or as determined by the Public Works Director. Level 11 improvements focus on physical
devices such as speed cushions, traffic circles, and chicanes to calm traffic. These solution
alternatives are much costlier than Level I and are generally permanent. Therefore, a more detailed
evaluation is required and approval by key departments and impacted area residents is required
before the implementation. The detailed evaluation includes as follows:
• The speed, volume and accident history collected during the preliminary evaluation.
• Collect new traffic speed and volume data and accident history for the past three
consecutive years.
• Other factors such as proximity to schools, parks and other pedestrian generators, lack of
sidewalks, accessibility, presence of bicycle facilities, and other roadway characteristics.
• Identify users of the affected streets.
• Identify traffic and major pedestrian generators, such as schools, parks and shopping
centers.
• Analyze street use with respect to street classification.
• Document any other relative factors.
Process for Qualifying for Level II Treatments
If the traffic problem(s) has not resolved with Level I treatments, an impact area is established by
staff after identifying users of the affected street(s), identifying major traffic generators such as
schools and parks, analyzing the actual street use with respect to roadway classification, and any
other relative factors. The impact area includes the location requesting treatment as well as other
streets in the immediate area that could be impacted by Level II treatment installation.
43
Plan Development
Once an area has been selected for a traffic -calming project, steps need to be taken to determine
solutions. The applications are prioritized based on the scores. The highest-ranking applications
will be given priority in moving forward into Plan Development, as funding allows.
Since Level I solutions are simpler in scope, the solution formulation process can usually be
handled by staff. Public meetings are not usually required, although some type of public
communication is beneficial and recommended.
Level II improvements require a more comprehensive plan development due to the higher cost and
impact of the actions taken. A public meeting with all affected residents may be held, as
determined by the Public Works Director. The initial public meeting will:
• Discuss the steps to develop a traffic -calming plan.
• Gather additional information regarding traffic problems and related neighborhood needs.
A ballot may be provided to each resident, either in person or via the postal service, to vote to
indicate support of the NTCP plan. The implementation plan must receive at least 2/3 approval of
all residents on the impacted street in order to proceed. In addition to the community support, the
approval of the following public officials is required:
• City Police and Fire Departments
• City Council
Once the necessary level of support is documented, projects may be funded and constructed
according to their prioritization and as available staffing and budget permits.
In cases where a Level II request does not receive sufficient support, the project is dropped from
the list and the next highest ranked project can go through the same process. Residents in an area
where a project has been dropped are able to resubmit their request for the following program year.
Project Funding
The number of traffic -calming projects undertaken each year depends on the City's budget and
staffing availability. The City Council's Transportation & Infrastructure (or successor) Committee
will be kept apprised on projects both proposed and selected on a regular basis, and the City
Council will be notified of the NTCP's progress and expenditures at least every six months.
In some cases, landscaping, maintenance and necessary easement dedication may be the
responsibility of the residents or the homeowner's association. If this is the case, an agreement
must be signed between the City and residents before the project is implemented.
44
Project Design and Construction
Once traffic -calming treatments have been determined, the City's staff or a consultant develops
the detailed plan, based on the study and the residents' input. The traffic calming device will be
installed.
In some situations, a test installation may be warranted to assure that the device is both effective
and truly desired by the community. In this case, within three to twelve months after installation,
staff evaluates how well the test installation performed in terms of the defined problems.
Evaluation
An evaluation shall be conducted between six months to one year after the implementation of any
permanent traffic calming devices. Speed, volume and collision data is collected and compared
with the data collected before the installation of the traffic -calming device. The data collection
should be done at approximately the same time of year as the original data collection.
Re -enrollment
If additional traffic calming treatments become necessary in the future due to changes in traffic
patterns unrelated to the NTCP treatments, requests can be made for a new enrollment 12 months
or more after the last evaluation period has been completed. The submission will be treated as a
new request beginning with preliminary evaluation and will follow the NTCP process. Any future
traffic calming treatments will be scored and ranked along with all other active requests and are
subject to funding and staffing availability.
45
Appendices
46
Appendix A: Definitions of types of streets
The City's Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan defines the street functional
classifications. For the sake of this program, only residential local streets and collector arterials
are eligible for NTCP treatments. Streets in commercial areas or which are classified as principal
or minor arterials are not eligible for treatments under this program. Traffic calming on principal
and minor arterials is very different than on residential streets, requiring substantial design,
permitting, environmental approval, and budget in order to construct. These calming projects are
developed into standalone capital improvement projects.
Local streets (typical speed limit 25 mph) serve local circulation needs for motor vehicles,
bicycles, and pedestrian traffic and provide access to residences and some businesses. Local
streets are not intended to carry significant volumes of through traffic. Sixty to 80 percent of
the roadway network is considered local streets.
Collector arterials (typical speed limit 30-35 mph) are typically streets that provide access
between local service streets or from local streets to thorough -fares. Collectors often carry
some through traffic. Collectors in residential areas are eligible for NTCP treatments whereas
collectors in commercial areas are not. Five to 10 percent of the roadway network is classified
as collector arterials.
Minor arterials (typical speed limit 30-40 mph) are streets which are typically wider and
may have more lanes than collectors which connect the smaller arterial streets to destinations
or to the regional roadway network. Minor arterials carry a large percentage of through traffic
as well as traffic from the local area. Ten to 20 percent of the streets in network are minor
arterials.
Principal arterials (typical speed limit 35-50 mph) are major streets and highways that
provide regional connections between major destinations. Speeds are higher, access and
traffic control favors providing fast and smooth movement on the arterial over the lower
classified streets. Five to 10 percent of a roadway network is classified as principal arterials.
47
1101lcr 131vd
Roadway Classification
afiatifitf Freeway
Principal
inaanna Minor
Collector
City of Tukwila
oio Potential Annexation Area
NOT TO SCALE
ROADWAY CLASSIFICATION
Appendix B: Priority Ranking Worksheet
Location:
Date:
Staff Name:
Category
Data
Score
Accidents:
Five points for each recorded accident over the past three years. Three
additional points will be added for each accident with a recorded injury.
Volume:
Average weekday traffic volume divided by 100, rounded up to the
nearest whole number. Maximum of 7 points possible.
Speed:
Five points for every mph greater than 5mph above the posted speed or
(85th percentile speed - posted speed limit - 5) x 5 points.
Sidewalks:
Five points if there is not a continuous sidewalk on one side of
residential streets or both sides of collectors.
Pedestrian Generators:
Five points for every K-12 school on and 2 points for school property
within 500 ft of the subject street. Three points for other major
pedestrian generator on the subject street. Major pedestrian generators
may include parks, community centers, senior housing, or other uses
with significant pedestrian traffic.
Total Points:
49
S 86 pi
N 0
0
3
4
S 128 St
MJ
Pending
LED Curve Signs
Speed Cushion
Radar feedback
LED Stop Sign
RRFB Crossing
School Zone Flasher
Map Legend
OH
City Facility
City Bathroom
• Fire Station
0
0
1111111
Police Facility
School
Trail
Street
Tukwila Park
Waterbody
City Limits
0
6
6
0
S 112 St
m
ecord
enter S 1 ,2 St
S 142 St
CO S146 St 0
S 152 St
CO S158 St
S 164 St
City of Tukwila
NTCP 2019 Installations
3h. alter
S
S 160 St
S 161
< S 162 St
01
6
0
0
0
0
5
11
0
0
0
ior
6
0
/ Foster Golf
Clubhouse
nm e
Parks & Golf.. \
Maintenance ,)
rue twig
Shops
143St
S 143 P1
Tukwila Lib
FS 52
Resource
Center
Strander Blvd
Corporate Dr S
Mlnkler Blvd
Upland Dr
Midland Dr a
0
a
Trlland Dr Q
S 180 St
NOT TO SCALE
0
M;nN
Sho,
Saxon Dr
O
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
O
0
0
6
11
0
0
0
0
6
s
0
0
0
0
0
s
0
11
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
51
0
0
0
GIS
Tukwila
DU
Method
Speed Watch
Program
Descriptions of Traffic Calming Methods
Description
• Residents check out radar gun and gather speed data in spot locations
• Data gathered is used to validate other speed data
• Residents learn what certain speeds "feel like" when standing on or near the roadway
Cost
$
Radar Speed
Signs
• Solar powered signs can be installed permanently or rotated
• Can be used in conjunction with a target enforcement emphasis -- traffic officers can be found further down the road to provide
police backup of the legal speed limit
$-$$
Targeted
Enforcement
• A progressively stricter enforcement schedule with low thresholds for citations
• Traffic officers work a select location over a period of time, graduating from marked police cars to ultimately unmarked cars
$$-$$$
Striping
• Installing center, walkway, and edge line markings to narrow or modify the travel lanes
• Unique striping in individual cases can be used successfully
«iint`
• Striping can include: IIII v% Ay
yellow center skip strip Edge Lille
white edge lines
wording on pavement
ped walkways and bike lanes c,
marked crosswalks
• Applications are determined in each instance and can be modified to fit
individual needs
• Paint cannot be applied year round -- weather dependent installation
• Striping an unstriped roadway gives the appearance of a narrowed road
and assigns where vehicle and pedestrian areas are located
nir B
es "
A° ,'
,,;,
N WA
$ n t o&ri
don
$-$$
Vegetation
Trimming
• City crews will trim vegetation in public right-of-way to improve sight distance at intersections, sign visibility, or general safety
• Vegetation that is in private property can only be trimmed by city crews if impeding sight distance or creating a safety hazard
• Property owners are always first encouraged to trim their private plantings
$
Improved Signage
• Signs already in place may be improved by installing larger signs, or LED enhanced signs
• New signs may be installed as warranted
• Existing signs may be relocated to provide maximum impact
$-$$
Traffic Safety
Campaign
• This effort not currently defined by Tukwila
• Could include development of traffic safety brochures or flyers
• Could be developed to incorporate local high school education
• Could be jointly implemented using the PD Sprint program and targeted enforcement
$$-$$$
Multi -way Stop
• All -way, or multi -way stops are installed at intersections where traffic flows are generally fairly equal on all legs
• Engineering warrants must be met before installation can occur
$-$$
Pedestrian Safety
• Improvements can include:
$$-$$$
Measures
Sidewalk or walkway installation 41
Crosswalk installation ,,h1
P.1.4
paint
textured pavement treatment
Pedestrian signals (RRFB, HAWK)
lj
m"'"" °
Pedestrian scale lighting improvements
Pathways
Raised crosswalks
tt
"
_,, _ .„_
w
<w
Mid block crossings
:
fiss
`�
with or without
•; < ' -�.►n
refuge area
,'`«
;
1
y
.01111
a
II;
��i't(
Gateway/
Entrance
• Sometimes called planter islands, these are typically
• On wide streets, curb
long
and
narrow islands placed in the middle of roads
at
intersections
$$-$$$
Treatment
extensions may be used on
both sides of the roadway
while still maintaining 2
��
ti
lanes of roadway width
13
i
• In some cases, pedestrian
w
i
amenities such as raised,,
crosswalks, decorative
or simple
x
pavement,
u
painted crosswalks are also
included as part of the !��,"
s''
z>
q,.
treatment
• May also include additional
street lighting for the
intersection and decorative entrance signs
A
`"
51
Descriptions of Traffic Calming Methods
Method
Description
Cost
Traffic Circle
• Round islands installed at intersections to force traffic to circle around the
island, thus disrupting the flow of traffic
• Less expensive traffic circles can be painted on the asphalt, marked with
raised pavement markers
:- ,.
$$-$$$
• More costly traffic circles are made with curbing and back filled with asphalt __._
-
• The most expensive traffic circle to construct include curbing and removal of
.
existing asphalt from the center. Soil and approved landscaping are installedWNW/NM
�:
L{r IL Op
1
Chicane
• A series of tight turns in a straight section of road that restricts traffic speeds
.ti
$$-$$$
• Fire Code may limit chicanes or any other treatment from narrowing the road
to less than 20 feet
Ty
• Chicanes can be made of wooden traffic barricades, curbing with fencing,
curbing with asphalt back fill, or curbing with landscaping
• Can be combined with on -street parking
'"
_
,
y
t
Y
Speed Cushion
• A raised mound across the roadway that reduces speeds as vehicles
c'
$$
travel over them
.-*
Pi
m
• To be effective, should be placed 300-500 feet apart and installed in a r
ow
"'
Of
4r..
series of typically at least 2 cushions
• Not recommended on primary emergency response routes or on major
transit routes
i
--
1 1
,
1
, t
(p
'
Turn Prohibitor:
Signing
restrictions
• Signs are placed at intersection to restrict certain turning movements or to only allow a certain
• Restrictions can be all the time or can be during certain times of day only
movement
$-$$
Turn Prohibitor:
Physical deterrent
• Also known as half
• Physically directs
• Many variations can
• Can be combined
or
traffic
be
with
y/p�yM�pedestrian
partial closures or diverters
flow at intersections, prohibiting
implemented, depending on the
amenities such as textured
specific
need
movements
of the
pavement
particular street
or raised crosswalks
$$-$$$
II
Plirl
I
6i
)
v�:✓� ..;,,..,.f, �
r
�.�„..
._,..
T
es,
_
,::.
�;, T
F
-- ---
_.
4.
Diagonal Road
Closure
• Diagonal road closure completely closes a road to through traffic without
completely closing a road
• Diagonal diverters can be used to fully or partially divert traffic
• Implementation can be done by using wooden barricades, concrete
,p
$-$$$
11
barricades, curbing, and landscaping
• Diagonal diverters are not applicable in most places as minimum travel lane
widths of 20 feet must still be maintained
mm. :-
I.
Alit
Street Closure
• Streets are closed to through traffic by forming a cul-de-sac or44
$-$$$
hammerhead
• Additional right-of-way may be necessary to construct the cul-de-sac or
hammerhead
, tits
=
• Street closures are not applicable in most locations
iiiik° -gab
._._,
,e.
•,
'
s.
5i4
52
Method
Speed
Watch
Program
Potential
Degree of
Effectiveness
Mild
Advantages
• Educates residents on what the
legal speed limit "feels" like from a
pedestrian stand point.
Traffic Calming Methods
Disadvantages
• Does not reduce speeds or volumes.
- GENERAL
Volume
Reduction
No
Speed
Reduction
No
OVERVIEW
Noise &
Pollution
N/A
Safety
N/A
Access
Restrictions
N/A
Emergency
Vehicle
Access
N/A
Dependence
on Police
Enforcement
N/A
Operation
and/or
Construction
Cost
N/A
Maintenance
Cost/
Problems
N/A
Radar Speed
Trailer
Mild
• Educates motorists of their current,
actual speed of travel
• Makes motorists aware of the
activeness of the community they
are driving through.
• Only changes behavior in motorists while in
place.
• Some motorists use the reader board to "clock"
how fast they can go.
No
Only when
Present
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
None to High
Can be used in
conjunction
with target
enforcement
Low to
Moderate
Low
Target
Enforcement
Mild
• Reduces speeds and raises
awareness of drivers.
• Effective only when program is ongoing
• Staffing needs vary based on area specific
needs
Very Slight
Yes
N/A
Possibly
Improved
N/A
N/A
High
N/A
N/A
Striping
Mild
• Does not require infrastructure
construction
• Can promote slower traveling
vehicles
• Best in correcting vehicles traveling
in middle of road
• Can significantly reduce speeds of
users
• Not commonly used method of speed control
• Degree of effectiveness may vary substantially
Unlikely
Possible
N/A
Possibly
Improved
None
No Problem
N/A
Low
Low to
Moderate
Vegetation
Trimming
Mild
• Increases visibility.
• Must be constantly maintained
• Must be constantly monitored
No
No
N/A
Improved
N/A
N/A
N/A
Moderate
Moderate
Improved
Signage
Mild
• Corrects sign deficiencies
• Develop motorist awareness of
regulations and restrictions
• Requires monitoring and planning to avoid visual
clutter
• Probably not effective to habitual violator
Unlikely
Unlikely
Increased
visual
pollution
Possibly
Improved
N/A
N/A
Low to
Moderate
Low
Low
Traffic
Safety
Campaign
Mild
• Raises awareness, cooperation, and
appreciation of general motoring
public.
• City does not currently have a program
established
• Requires development of program and
continuation of staffing and program
• Impact may be reduced when "newness" of
program is lost
No
Possible
N/A
Slight
Improvement
N/A
N/A
N/A
Moderate
Low
Multi -way
Stop
Mild to
Moderate
• Creates more stopping points for
vehicles
• Addresses concerns at locations
with conflict potential
• Stop signs that are installed that don't meet
engineering warrants are often not obeyed by
motorists familiar with the intersection(s)
• Can reduces pedestrian safety if not correctly
installed
• Should not use Stop signs as speed control: stop
signs should be used to define right of way at
intersections only
Slight
Slight
Increased
Mixed
None
No problem
Moderate to
High
Low
Low
Gateway/
Entrance
Treatment
Moderate
• Provides visual transition between
arterials and residential areas
• Can improve pedestrian crossing
safety on wider streets
• Speed change could result in rear -end accidents
• May move traffic/problem to other roads
• Neglect of landscaping can become a sight
distance problems
• Neglect of landscaping can become
neighborhood "eyesores"
• Ongoing maintenance costs
• Definition of who is responsible for maintenance
- possible landscape maintenance agreements
with residents
Possible
Slight
No
Possibly
Improved
None
No Problem
N/A
Low to
Moderate
Low to
Moderate/
Possible
Vandalism
Pedestrian
Safety
Measures
Moderate
• Creates clearly defined areas for
pedestrians
• Provides safer areas for pedestrians
• Painted crosswalks could create a false sense of
security for pedestrians
• Pavement markings require additional
maintenance.
No
No
N/A
Mixed
None
No Problem
N/A
Moderate
Moderate
53
Method
Traffic Circle
Potential
Degree of
Effectiveness
Moderate
Advantages
• Requires reduction in vehicle speed
without use of stop signs
• Removes conflict potential for many
types of accidents
Traffic Calming Methods
Disadvantages
• May be restrictive for larger vehicles or vehicles
with trailers
• May move traffic/problem to other roads
• May require additional lighting
• May be confusing for left turns
• May require additional Right-of-way
• Requires consideration for aesthetics
• Requires consideration for maintenance of
landscaping, if used
- GENERAL
Volume
Reduction
Possible
Speed
Reduction
Likely
OVERVIEW
Noise &
Pollution
No
Change
Safety
Improved
Access
Restrictions
None
Emergency
Vehicle
Access
Some
Constraint
Dependence
on Police
Enforcement
Low
Operation
and/or
Construction
Cost
Moderate
Maintenance
Cost/
Problems
Moderate/
Possible
Vandalism
Chicane
Moderate
• Effectively slows motorists traveling
through and approaching the treated
section
• Can be designed to improve
pedestrian safety.
• Moves traffic/problem to other roads
• May be restrictive for larger vehicles or vehicles
with trailers
• May require additional lighting
• Can create confrontations between opposing
motorists
• Fire codes requirement must be maintained
• Requires consideration for aesthetics
• Requires consideration for maintenance of
landscaping, if used
Yes
Yes
Decrease
Mixed
None
Minor
Constraint
N/A
Moderate to
High
Moderate to
High/Possible
Vandalism
Speed Hump
Extreme
• Reduces speeds of vehicles at and
in the vicinity of the bump
• Can be designed for any speed
• Better if used in a series of 300 to
500 foot spacing.
• Causes increased noise from braking and
accelerating vehicles, particularly if there are
loose items in the vehicle
• May move traffic/problem to other roads
• Causes delays in emergency vehicle response
time
• Not supported by Fire Department
• Can cause damage to fire trucks during
emergency responses
Possible
Yes
Increase
at humps
Improved
None
Minor
constraint
Self Enforcing
Moderate
Moderate/
impacts street
sweeping,
snow removal
Turn
Prohibitor:
Signing
restrictions
Moderate
• Can reduces through traffic.
• Moves traffic/problem to other roads
• Inconveniences local residents in gaining access
to their property
• Becomes an enforcement problem
Yes
Possible
Decrease
Mixed
Somewhat
Restricted
Minor
Constraint
Moderate to
High
Low
Moderate/
Possible
Vandalism
Turn
Prohibitor:
Physical
deterrent
Extreme
• Reduces through traffic.
• Moves traffic/problem to other roads
• Inconveniences local residents in gaining access
to their property
• Can affect emergency vehicle response time
• Becomes an enforcement problem
Yes
Likely
Decrease
Improved
Restricted
Some
Constraint
Moderate to
High
Moderate to
High
Moderate/
Possible
Vandalism
Diagonal
Road
Closure
Extreme
• Eliminates through traffic
• Provides for landscaping
• Reduces conflicts
• Increases pedestrian safety.
• Not viable in most locations
• Moves traffic/problem to other roads
• Inconveniences local residents in gaining access
to their property
• Not generally supported by Fire Department
• Affects emergency vehicle response time
Yes
Likely
Decrease
Improved
Left or Right
turn only
Some
Constraint
Low to High,
dependent on
features
High
Moderate/
Possible
Vandalism
Street
Closure
Extreme
• Eliminates through traffic
• Can reduce speed of remaining
traffic
• Improves safety on the street closed
• Reduces accessibility of emergency vehicles
• Forces the problems onto another street
• Reduces access to properties by residents
Yes
Yes
Decrease
Improved
Yes
Some
Constraint
Low
Moderate to
High
Moderate to
High/Possible
Vandalism
54