The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutTIC 2020-09-21 COMPLETE AGENDA PACKET The City of Tukwila strives to accommodate individuals with disabilities. Please contact the Public Works Department at 206-433-0179 for assistance. AGENDA MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2020 – 5:30 PM Virtual Meeting - Members of the public may listen by dialing 1-253-292-9750 and entering conference ID 105 206 473# (6300 BUILDING, SUITE 100) Next Scheduled Meeting: Monday, October 5, 2020 City of Tukwila Transportation and Infrastructure Committee  Cynthia Delostrinos Johnson, Chair  Verna Seal  Kate Kruller Distribution: C. Delostrinos Johnson (email) V. Seal K. Kruller K. Hougardy(email) D. Quinn L. Humphrey H. Ponnekanti H. Kirkland G. Labanara B. Still (email) City Attorney (email) A. Youn Clerk File Copy 2 Extra Place pkt pdf on SharePoint: Z Trans & Infra Agendas email 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) 2019 Small Drainage Program Completion and Acceptance (Mike Ronda) a) Forward to 10/05/20 Regular Consent Agenda Pg. 1 b) CBD Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation 2020 Bid Award (Adib Altallal) b) Forward to 10/05/20 Regular Consent Agenda Pg. 5 c) 42nd Ave South Bridge In-depth Inspection Results (Adam Cox) c) Information only Pg. 9 d) 42nd Ave South Bridge Replacement Design Consultant Selection and Ag (Adam Cox) d) Forward to 09/28/20 Committee of the Whole Pg. 31 e) Development Review Support Amendment No. 1 (Cyndy Knighton) e) Forward to 10/05/20 Regular Consent Agenda Pg. 115 f) Ordinance and Public Works Fee Resolution Concurrency Management Update (Cyndy Knighton) f) Forward to 10/12/20 Committee of the Whole Pg. 121 3. MISCELLANEOUS g) 53rd Ave S Traffic Revisions g) Information only Pg. 143 Future Agendas:  Pavement Management Report  PW Shops SOJ Amendment  PW Shops Minkler Update  PW Fee Resolution – Water, Sewer & SWM 2021 & 2022 Rates  S 152nd St Grant Acceptance https://tukwilawa.sharepoint.com/sites/publicworks/engineering/PW Drop Box/01 TIC Agenda/2020 Agenda Items/TIC 09-21-2020/01. 2019 Small Drainage Closeout/Info Memo 2019 SDP Final Acceptance - 07-16- 2020.doc INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Transportation & Infrastructure Committee FROM: Hari Ponnekanti, Acting Public Works Director BY: Michael Ronda, PW Project Manager CC: Mayor Ekberg DATE: September 18, 2020 SUBJECT: 2019 Small Drainage Program Project No. 91941201, Contract No. 19-163 Project Completion and Acceptance ISSUE Accept contract as complete and authorize release of retainage and performance bonds. BACKGROUND The Notice to Proceed for Contract No. 19-163 with KC Equipment LLC, of Seattle Washington, was issued on January 6, 2020 for the 2019 Small Drainage Program. This project provided for drainage improvements at seven locations within Tukwila including access improvements at critical maintenance facilities, repairs to several sections of pipe in the Tukwila storm drainage system and cast-in-place pipe liners at five specific locations. DISCUSSION Construction was physically completed on April 1, 2020. One change order for $3,658.86 was executed and several minor changes were implemented through the Force Account (FA) and Field Directive (FD) process. These changes included using a slightly modified liner method which should provide a better quality product for the existing field conditions, removal of an illicit connection to the storm system prior to lining and modifications to a handrail at one of the intake structures to meet current safety standards. FINANCIAL IMPACT The construction contract at award was $434,267.50, and the total project budget included a 10% contingency for a total of $477,694.25. Changes in underruns and overruns experienced in existing unit price items were due to minor changes in material quantities measured during construction and amounts charged to the force account items. These under/over quantities only slightly exceeded the original contract amount and the project was completed with using just under 2% of the contingency. Project Costs Construction Contract $434,267.50 Changes and Net Over/Under Quantities 7,848.44 Total Final Contract Amount $442,115.94 RECOMMENDATION Council is being asked to formally accept the 2019 Small Drainage Project with KC Equipment LLC, in the amount of $442,115.94 as complete and authorize the release of the retainage and performance bond, subject to standard claim and lien release procedures, and consider this item on the Consent Agenda at the October 5, 2020 Regular Council Meeting. Attachments: Notice of Completion Contract #19-163 1 Department Use Only NOTICE OF COMPLETION OF PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT Assigned to:Date Assigned: Date 08/11/2020 Form Version Revised# 1 Revision Reason Penny Error in final payment calculation Awarding Agency Information Prime Contractor Information Name TUKWILA, CITY OF UBI 179000208 Name KC EQUIPMENT LLC UBI 602602529 Address 6300 S CENTER BLVD #101 TUKWILA,WA-98188 Address 2410 Boyer Ave E #3 Seattle,WA-98112 Email Address Mike.Ronda@TukwilaWA.gov Email Address kcequipment@gmail.com Contact Name Michael Ronda Phone 206-433-7194 Contact Name KC EQUIPMENT LLC Phone 206-522-3767 Project Information Project Name 2019 Small Drainage Program Contract # 91941201 Affidavit ID 955530 Jobsite Address 6 locations in Tukwila. Date Awarded 10/21/2019 Date Work Commenced 01/06/2020 Date Work Completed 04/01/2020 Date Work Accepted 08/10/2020 Federally Funded Transportation Project If yes, attach Contract Bond Statement. Bond Waived? Retainage Waived?Subcontractors Used? If yes, complete Addendum A. Detailed Description of Work Completed Control Structure Maintenance Access Improvements. Inlet Structure Maintenance Access Improvements. Rockery Wall Construction. Cured-in-place pipe lining. Storm sewer pipe repair. Providing temporary erosion/water pollution control. Removing and replacing cement concrete sidewalk and curb and gutter. DOR Tax Information *Right-click on the total field and select Update Field to auto-calculate. Contract Amount $419,600.00 Liquidated Damages $ 0.00 Additions (+)$6,994.83 Amount Disbursed $442,115.94 Reductions (-)$ 0.00 Amount Retained $ 0.00 Sub-Total*$426,594.83 Other $ 0.00 Sales Tax Amount $15,521.11 Sales Tax Rate If multiple rates, attach a list. 10.00% TOTAL*$442,115.94 TOTAL*$442,115.94 These two totals must be equal. Apprentice Utilization Information Was Apprentice Utilization Required? If yes, complete this entire section. Engineer’s Estimate $ 0.00 Utilization % 0.00%Was a Good Faith Effort approved? Comments The project had two Bid Schedules (A & B) which were taxed at different rates. One had all taxes included in the listed bid items (A) and one had taxes calculated on the total of the bid items from that schedule (B). The taxes shown are those applied to the bid items in Schedule B. The Disbursing Officer must submit this completed notice immediately after acceptance of the work done under this contract.2 NO PAYMENT SHALL BE MADE FROM THE RETAINED FUNDS until receipt of all release certificates and affidavits. Submitting Form: Submit the completed form by email to all three agencies below. Addendum A: Please List all Subcontractors and Sub-tiers Below This addendum can be submitted in other formats. Provide known affidavits at this time. No L&I release will be granted until all affidavits are listed. Subcontractor’s Name:UBI Number: (Required)Affidavit ID* BRAVO ENVIRONMENTAL 602946216 931346 ERC II INC 602833152 949606 EVERGREEN CONCRETE CUTTING INC 601605667 927007 FENCE SPECIALISTS LLC 602372567 929370 INFORMED LAND SURVEY LLC 602487061 930827 MCDOWELL NW PILE KING INC 601637637 951015 MICHELS CORP 601061071 931951 MILES SAND & GRAVEL COMPANY 171004760 934084 WILSON CONCRETE CONST INC 602168956 934372 Contract Release (855) 545-8163, option # 4 ContractRelease@LNI.WA.GOV Employment Security Department Registration, Inquiry, Standards & Coordination Unit (360) 890-3499 publicworks@esd.wa.gov 3 4 https://tukwilawa.sharepoint.com/sites/publicworks/engineering/PW Drop Box/01 TIC Agenda/2020 Agenda Items/TIC 09-21-2020/02. CBD Sewer Bid Award/Info memo award to Michels 09182020.docx INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Transportation and Infrastructure Committee FROM: Hari Ponnekanti, Interim Public Works Director BY: Adib Altallal, Project Manager CC: Mayor Ekberg DATE: September 18, 2020 SUBJECT: CBD Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation - 2020 Project No. 91140203 Bid Award ISSUE Award the contract to Michels Corporation for the 2020 Central Business District (CBD) Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project. BACKGROUND The 2020 CBD Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project will address deterioration of the approximately 50-year old sanitary sewer pipes by relining the pipes with little impact to roadways and no excavation. DISCUSSION Three bids were received on August 27, 2020 for the 2020 Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project. The bids were reviewed and tabulated (see attached sheet) and no errors were found. Michels Corporation submitted the apparent low bid of $709,907.00 and the Engineer’s estimate was $848,177.00. Michels Corporation has previously performed work for the City and completed that work satisfactory. BUDGET AND BID SUMMARY Engineers Bid Amount Budget Estimate Michels Corporation $848,177.00 $ 709,907.00 $ 1,100,000.00 Contingency 20% 141,981.40 $ 851,888.40 $1,100,000.00 With the awarding contract to the Michels Corporation with a of the bid of $709,907.00, we also have a 20% contingency on the project. The contingency amount of $141,981.40 is the allowable expense that the Mayor will be able to approve for any change orders to the construction contracts. If at any time the project overruns the contingency am ount, staff will return to Committee and Council for approval. RECOMMENDATION Council is being asked to award the construction of the 2020 CBD Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project to Michels Corporation in the amount of $709,907.00 and is being asked to consider this item on the Consent Agenda at the October 5, 2020 Regular Meeting. Attachments: Page 77, 2019 CIP Map Bid Tabulation 5 &,7<2)78.:,/$&$3,7$/352-(&76800$5< WR 352-(&7 &%'6DQLWDU\6HZHU5HKDELOLWDWLRQ 3URMHFW1R '(6&5,37,21 -867,),&$7,21 67$786 0$,17,03$&7 &200(17 ),1$1&,$/ 7KURXJK (VWLPDWHG LQ V %(<21' 727$/ (;3(16(6 'HVLJQ /DQG5: &RQVW0JPW &RQVWUXFWLRQ 727$/(;3(16(6 )81'6285&(6 $ZDUGHG*UDQW 3:7UXVW)XQG 0LWLJDWLRQ$FWXDO 0LWLJDWLRQ([SHFWHG 8WLOLW\5HYHQXH 727$/6285&(6 7KHDVEHVWRVFRQFUHWHSLSHLQWKH&%'FRPPHUFLDOEXVLQHVVGLVWULFWLVDSSUR[LPDWHO\\HDUVROGDQG EHFRPLQJVRIW6OLSOLQLQJWKHSLSHZLOOUHLQIRUFHWKHVWUHQJWKZLWKOLWWOHLPSDFWWRURDGZD\VDQGPLQLPDOH[FDYDWLRQ ,IWKHSLSHFROODSVHVWKHVWUHHWZLOOKDYHWREHH[FDYDWHGDQGWKHFRVWRIWKHUHSDLUVZLOOEHVLJQLILFDQW,QWKH ODVWILYH\HDUVZHKDYHKDGIRXUPDMRUSLSHIDLOXUHVRQ$QGRYHU3DUN:HVWDQG$QGRYHU3DUN(DVW $3XEOLF:RUNV7UXVW)XQGORDQZDVVXFFHVVIXOO\REWDLQHGLQIRUN 5HGXFHGPDLQWHQDQFHDQGUHSDLUFRVWV ,QDQGRYHUIHHWRIDVEHVWRVVDQLWDU\VHZHUSLSHZHUHUHOLQHG,QWKURXJK IHHWRIDVEHVWRVVHZHULVVFKHGXOHGWREHUHOLQHG 2019 - 2024 Capital Improvement Program 6 !2 !2!2 !2 !2 !2 !2 !2 !2 !2 !2!2 !2 !2 !2 !2 !2!2!2!2 !2 !2 !2!2!2 !2 !2!2!2 !2 !2 !2!2 ") &R&R &R&R &R &R&R &R&R &R &R &R &R &R&R&R &R &R &R&R &R &R &R &R&R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R&R &R &R &R &R&R&R&R &R &R &R&R&R&R&R &R &R &R&R&R&R&R&R&R &R&R &R &R &R &R &R&R &R &R &R&R &R&R &R &R &R &R&R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R&R&R&R &R &R &R &R &R &R&R&R&R&R &R &R &R &R &R&R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R&R&R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R&R&R&R&R &R&R &R &R&R &R&R &R &R &R&R&R&R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R&R&R &R &R&R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R&R &R &R &R &R &R&R&R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R&R &R &R &R &R &R &R&R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R&R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R&R &R &R&R &R &R &R &R &R&R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R&R &R &R &R &R&R &R&R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R &R 30'' 20''15''14''8''6''10' ' 12'' 24' ' 18'' 0'' 12'' 8''12''12''18''18''8''8''10''8''8''6''18''12''12' '8''15''12'' 20'' 12''8''14''8''8''18''12''8''18''12''12' '8''18''8''20''8''8'' 8'' 8'' 8''12''20''12''8''8''8''8'' 12'' 8'' 12''8''8'' 8''6' ' 8''8''8''12''8''12'' 0''12''12''12''8''6''8''8'' 8'' 8''8''12''12''12''8' '12''20'' 12''12' ' 12'' 8''12''6''12' ' 30'' 8''18''18''12''12''12' '8''8''8' '10' '12''12''12''12''8''0''18''12'' 8''18''12''15''15''18''8''12''12''12' '8''12''8''8''12''8'' 20''8''12''12'' 8'' 12''12''8''12''8''30'' 8''12''12' '8''12' ' 12''8''12''12'' 12' ' 6'' 8'' 8'' 6'' 8'' 8''12''6''8'' 12'' 30''12''8''12''12''12''12'' 18''12''6'' 0'' 12''12''12'' 8'' 12'' 12''12''8''8''18''8''12''12''8'' 8''12''30'' 8''8''8'' 8''12''15''8'' 8''8' '12''10''12''8''8'' 12''8''12''8''12''12' 'I-5 FWYANDOVER PARK WI-405 F W Y SOUTHCENTER PKWYS 180TH STMINKLER BLVD S 17 8 T H S T TUKWILA P K W Y S 184TH PLKLICKITAT DRSOUT H C E N T E R B L V D 54TH AVE S61ST AVE S65TH AVE S SLADE WAY 54TH PL SKILICKI T A T D R I-5 FWY SOUTHCENTER PKWYI-405 FWY I-405 FWY I-5 FWYPicto m etry, Kin g Co un ty N DRAW ING IS FU LL SCALE W HEN BAR M EASU RES 2” Legend Ra ilro a d Pa rcel Sewer Infrastructure City Sewer M a in &R City M a n ho le ")City Pum p Sta tio n City Fo rce M a in Kin g Co . Sewer M a in !2 Kin g Co . M a n ho le CBD CIPP Lining 2014 2015 2018 Pro po sed Pha se 4 Future Lin in g Pro ject J:\DATA\TU K\118-082\GIS\2019 CBD SEW ER REHAB M AP - U PDATED.M X D BY: KGOM EZ PLOT DATE: M AR 29, 2019 COORDINATE SYSTEM : NAD 1983 HARN STATEPLANE W ASHINGTON NORTH FIPS 4601 FEET Vicinity Map Esri, HERE, DeLo rm e,M a pm yIn dia , ©Open StreetM a p co n trib uto rs,a n d the GIS user co m m un ity 0 300 600150 Feet 1 in ch = 300 feet This m a p is a gra phic represen ta tio n derived fro mthe City o f Tukwila 's (City) Geo gra phicIn fo rm a tio n System . It wa s design ed a n d in ten dedfo r City sta ff use o n ly; it is n o t gua ra n teed tosurvey a ccura cy. This m a p is b a sed o n the b estin fo rm a tio n a va ila b le o n the da te sho wn o n thism a p. An y repro ductio n o r sa le o f this m a p, o r po rtio n sthereo f, is pro hib ited witho ut express writtena utho riza tio n b y theCity. This m a teria l is o wn ed a n d co pyrighted b y theCity.PRELIMINARY Central Business DistrictSewer Repair CIPP Lining CompleteCity of TukwilaCity of TukwilaCBD Sewer Rehabilitation - Phase 4CBD Sewer Rehabilitation - Phase 4 7 CITY OF TUKWILA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 2020 Central Business District Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation - Phase 4 Apparent Low Bid BID TABULATION Tukwila Project # 91140203 August 27, 2020 Base Bid 1 Mobilization 1 LS 74,700.00$ 74,700.00$ 35,524.00$ 35,524.00$ 38,500.00$ 38,500.00$ 50,000.00$ 50,000.00$ 2 Traffic Control - Flagger Labor (Minimum Bid of $43.11)216 HR 75.00$ 16,200.00$ 76.75$ 16,578.00$ 75.00$ 16,200.00$ 62.00$ 13,392.00$ 3 Traffic Control - Off-Duty Uniformed Police Officer 108 HR 110.00$ 11,880.00$ 110.00$ 11,880.00$ 110.00$ 11,880.00$ 110.00$ 11,880.00$ 4 Project Temporary Traffic Control 1 LS 32,000.00$ 32,000.00$ 68,174.00$ 68,174.00$ 35,000.00$ 35,000.00$ 75,000.00$ 75,000.00$ 5 Pre-Cleaning Video Inspection 1 LS 7,000.00$ 7,000.00$ 16,614.00$ 16,614.00$ 15,000.00$ 15,000.00$ 35,000.00$ 35,000.00$ 6 Clean and Prep Sewer Prior to Construction 1 LS 13,900.00$ 13,900.00$ 20,243.00$ 20,243.00$ 15,000.00$ 15,000.00$ 47,000.00$ 47,000.00$ 7 Video Inspection Prior to Construction 1 LS 7,000.00$ 7,000.00$ 8,370.00$ 8,307.00$ 15,000.00$ 15,000.00$ 23,800.00$ 23,800.00$ 8 Provide, Install, and Manage Wastewater Bypasses 1 LS 19,500.00$ 19,500.00$ 78,542.00$ 78,542.00$ 85,000.00$ 85,000.00$ 120,000.00$ 120,000.00$ 9 8-inch Main Line Cured-in-Place-Pipe (CIPP)1,833 LF 50.00$ 91,650.00$ 37.00$ 67,821.00$ 38.00$ 69,654.00$ 45.00$ 82,485.00$ 10 12-inch Main Line Cured-in-Place-Pipe (CIPP)1,554 LF 70.00$ 108,780.00$ 49.00$ 76,146.00$ 56.00$ 87,024.00$ 77.00$ 119,658.00$ 11 21-inch Main Line Cured-in-Place-Pipe (CIPP)2,160 LF 135.00$ 291,600.00$ 83.00$ 179,280.00$ 120.00$ 259,200.00$ 152.00$ 328,320.00$ 12 24-inch Main Line Cured-in-Place-Pipe (CIPP)400 LF 190.00$ 76,000.00$ 120.00$ 48,000.00$ 150.00$ 60,000.00$ 155.00$ 62,000.00$ 13 8-inch Main Line Cured-in-Place-Pipe (CIPP) Pre-liner 180 LF 3.00$ 540.00$ 2.00$ 360.00$ 1.00$ 180.00$ -$ -$ 14 12-inch Main Line Cured-in-Place-Pipe (CIPP) Pre-liner 160 LF 5.00$ 800.00$ 2.50$ 400.00$ 1.00$ 160.00$ -$ -$ 15 21-inch Main Line Cured-in-Place-Pipe (CIPP) Pre-liner 220 LF 15.00$ 3,300.00$ 3.75$ 825.00$ 1.00$ 220.00$ -$ -$ 16 24-inch Main Line Cured-in-Place-Pipe (CIPP) Pre-liner 40 LF 18.00$ 720.00$ 4.25$ 170.00$ 1.00$ 40.00$ -$ -$ 17 Trenchless Lateral Connection Reinstatement and Packer Injection Grouting 3 EA 1,000.00$ 3,000.00$ 1,286.00$ 3,858.00$ 1,500.00$ 4,500.00$ 2,500.00$ 7,500.00$ 18 Trenchless Outside Manhole Drop Connection Reinstatement 1 EA 500.00$ 500.00$ 648.00$ 648.00$ 1,000.00$ 1,000.00$ 1,200.00$ 1,200.00$ 19 Force Account - Minor Changes 1 LS 12,000.00$ 12,000.00$ 12,000.00$ 12,000.00$ 12,000.00$ 12,000.00$ 12,000.00$ 12,000.00$ Subtotal 771,070.00$ 645,370.00$ 725,558.00$ 989,235.00$ Sale Tax 10.0%1 -77,107.00$ 64,537.00$ 72,555.80$ 98,923.50$ TOTAL ESTIMATE 848,177.00$ TOTAL BID 709,907.00$ TOTAL BID 798,113.80$ TOTAL BID 1,088,158.50$ Engineer's Estimate Qty Unit Unit Cost Total Cost No.Item Planned and Engineered Construction, Inc. Unit Cost Total Cost Michels Corporation Unit Cost Total Cost Iron Horse LLC Unit Cost Total Cost 1 of 1 8 INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Transportation and Infrastructure Committee FROM: Hari Ponnekanti, Interim Public Works Director BY: Adam Cox, Transportation Project Manager CC: Mayor Allan Ekberg DATE: September 18, 2020 SUBJECT: 42nd Avenue South Bridge In-Depth Inspection Project No. 91810404 Bridge Results ISSUE Provide results from the in-depth inspection of the 42nd Avenue South Bridge. The Committee received a status report in August 2020 on the bridge closure that was necessary for the inspection to be safely completed and the feedback the City received during and after the closure. BACKGROUND Currently, the 42nd Ave S Bridge has a sufficiency rating of 7.56 out of 100, per King County Road Division’s inspection. Sufficiency ratings are calculated by a formula implemented by the Federal Highway Administration to inventory the nation’s infrastructure, and to determine allocation of federal funds for bridge replacement. Some of the considerations in establishing a bridge’s rating include: • Structural Adequacy • Serviceability and Functional Obsolescence • Special Reductions In December 2019, the full Council supported staff’s recommendation to perform additional analysis beyond the routine scope of inspection that King County normally performs on the City’s bridges. The City contracted with TranTech Engineering for a more in-depth structural inspection in the amount of $39,884.00. This in-depth inspection provides a better understanding of how the bridge steel is performing internally. During the inspection, the 42nd Ave S Bridge was closed to all vehicular traffic to allow the inspectors to safely maneuver on the bridge. The inspection was delayed due to the Seattle Department of Transportation (SDOT) restricting the use of the Under- Bridge Inspection Truck (UBIT) due to the West Seattle Bridge closure and COVID-19 measures. The UBIT inspection was conducted on July 22 and 23, 2020, allowing inspectors access to the steel members under the 42nd Ave S Bridge. The inspectors then used a boom lift on July 24 to access the connection points at the top of the bridge. ANALYSIS The 42nd Ave S Bridge has areas of section loss and corrosion (i.e. an element has lost area from its original design/constructed area, affecting its engineering properties) that had been painted over in the last painting of the bridge. This analysis shows that the corrosion is particularly true along the lower chord and gusset plates. In some areas, the corrosion is becoming active again with minimal 9 42nd Ave South Bridge In-depth Inspection September 18, 2020 Page 2 https://tukwilawa.sharepoint.com/sites/publicworks/engineering/PW Drop Box/01 TIC Agenda/2020 Agenda Items/TIC 09-21-2020/03. 42nd Ave S Bridge In-Depth Report/InfoMemo_42nd Ave Inspection Results_2020-09-21.docx section loss at the panel points. Most diagonal members that are in compression have rust along seams where two of the steel beams have been secured together with rivets. The corrosion along the seam is causing the rivet heads to deflect along the diagonal members. Additionally, there is seam rust along most vertical steel members and along sway bracing with areas of rust with minimal section loss. Several sway bracing members have high load impact damage due to oversized trucks striking the overhead members, which have caused upward deflection in flange angles. The observed section loss and deflection in the steel members are within design standards given the age of the bridge but should continue to be monitored to observe if the corrosion or section loss is expanding or becoming an issue. According to the attached TranTech report, the results of in-depth inspection and the subsequent analysis showcase that the deficiencies observed/measured do not require further weight restrictions for the 42nd Ave S Bridge. It is of the opinion of the Professional Engineer who performed the analysis, that if the truck traffic continues to abide by the posted weight, speed, and occupancy restrictions, the deterioration of the bridge will be minimal. However, in the event of a catastrophic event (e.g., earthquake, flood, or major impact damage), the bridge is highly susceptible to damage that could require a full shutdown and further analysis. The results from the inspection and analysis also confirm that the 42nd Ave S Bridge is approaching the end of its service life. Without replacement or major maintenance repairs, it will require more and more restrictions for its continued safe use in the coming years. Maintenance projects have been studied from the past and it has been determined that the cost of repairing the bridge would exceed the replacement cost and a full replacement of the bridge would still need to occur. NEXT STEPS The 42nd Ave S Bridge will continue to receive interim inspections to monitor its concrete piers and will continue to receive annual inspections and biennial fracture critical inspections performed by King County. Public Works staff will continue with the bridge replacement design and explore multiple funding sources to replace the structure. Following receipt of the in-depth inspection, staff continues to believe that this is an important project to pursue diligently. As early as 2016, the City recognized the issues with this important bridge, the magnitude of required rehabilitation, and the scope of a potential replacement project. Projects of this scale historically take years and sometimes decades to develop and fund. As such, the City has been correctly prudent to start the work on the 42nd Ave S Bridge before the end of the bridge’s designed service life. Attachments: Bridge Memo Report Bridge Inspection Pictures 10 TranTech Engineering, LLC 365 – 118th Ave SE, Suite 100, Bellevue, WA 98005 425-453-5545. Fax: 425-453-6779 42nd AVE S BRIDGE INSPECTION EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Date: September 9, 2020 To: City of Tukwila From: Kash Nikzad, PhD, P.E. Re: 42nd Ave S Bridge Inspection Executive Summary TranTech Engineering (TranTech) and Fickett Structural Solutions (Fickett) teamed up to provide an in- depth fracture critical inspection of the 42nd Avenue South Bridge under City of Tukwila (Tukwila) Contract Number 20-030. The field inspection was performed by Fickett on July 22-24, 2020. The inspection details are presented in Appendix A and have been used to form an opinion of the ability of the existing truss to continue to safely serve with continued proper management and monitoring. Background The 42nd Avenue South Bridge is a 3-span 280-foot-long bridge built in 1949. The bridge is composed of a 220-foot-long fracture critical steel thru-truss main span with 30-foot-long concrete T-beam approach spans at each end. A critical feature of the bridge is it’s extreme 38° skew, a design aspect that has contributed to its current condition rating. The existing bridge has a sufficiency rating of 7.53 and is both Structurally Deficient and Functionally Obsolete. The Sufficiency rating (SR) is a method of evaluating highway bridge data by calculating four separate factors to obtain a numeric value which is indicative of bridge sufficiency to remain in service. The result of this method is a percentage in which 100 percent would represent an entirely sufficient bridge and zero percent would represent an entirely insufficient or deficient bridge. The four factors are: 1. Structural Adequacy and Safety 2. Serviceability and Functional Obsolescence 3. Essentiality for Public Use 4. Other Special Reductions for bridges where the first three factors sum to less than a score of 50. The SR is not a direct indication of the service life remaining but is an evaluation of the condition of the bridge, how it fits the route it serves, and what kind of demand route puts on the bridge. Historically, the SR has been used as a funding eligibility measurement and ranking tool. In addition, structural deficiency has been given priority over functionality and risk-based deficiencies in funding decisions. As long as the bridge is managed properly, it can be safely used. This management of the structure usually means a reduction in service to the travelling public. As a result, the 42nd Avenue Truss has been load-restricted to limit additional damage from the high volume of trucks crossing the bridge each day. The current SR is a combination of its functional problems, how important it is to the traveling public, and its deteriorating condition. Analysis shows that the 42nd Avenue Truss is at risk during a seismic event, but in order to seek funding from the Local Agency Bridge Program, Tukwila must show condition issues. This has been done through analysis and inspection. While the bridge’s condition does not indicate imminent collapse, it does point to the risk of collapse during a major seismic event and/or the continued accumulation of fatigue stresses in the fracture critical bridge which at some point may result in a fracture collapse. A fracture critical bridge is constructed of steel and has only two major load carrying components. In the 11 TranTech Engineering, LLC 365 – 118th Ave SE, Suite 100, Bellevue, WA 98005 425-453-5545. Fax: 425-453-6779 case of the 42nd Ave S Bridge, these primary load carrying components are the two longitudinal steel trusses. In-depth Inspection To further ensure the safety of the load-posted 42nd Ave S Bridge, Tukwila requested that TranTech provide an in-depth inspection to ensure its continued safe use. The attached inspection report tabulates and locates the condition of each main span truss element. Below is a summary of the in-depth inspection results provided by the bridge inspectors from Fickett Structural Solutions: The structure has areas of painted over section loss in localized areas along the lower chord and gusset plates. In some areas, the corrosion is becoming active again with minimal section loss at panel points. There are large amounts of debris and guano in most lower panel points and some upper panel points. Most diagonal compression members have pack rust along seams between rivet heads causing up to 1/8” deflection along the member. There is seam rust along most vertical members and along sway bracing with areas of pack rust up to 1/4” and 1/16” section loss. Several sway bracing members have high load impact damage which have caused upward deflection in flange angles. The paint system has widespread areas of peeling paint with surface corrosion present. Concluding Remarks Based on this in-depth inspection, it is TranTech’s opinion that the bridge can safely continue to serve at a restricted level barring a large-scale seismic event. This continued use must be monitored by more frequent inspections and adjusted as necessary while the process of funding and designing the replacement bridge continues. These results also confirm that the bridge is approaching the end of its service life. Without replacement or major maintenance repairs, it will require more and more restrictions for its continued safe use in the coming years. Maintenance projects have been investigated in the past and it has been determined that the cost of repairing the bridge would not be justified as compared to the replacement cost. Especially the cost to strengthen an old fracture critical bridge to allow unrestricted legal loads. TranTech concurs with Tukwila’s timely decision to begin the development of a replacement project. As early as 2016, the City recognized the issues with this important bridge, the magnitude of required rehabilitation, and the scope of a potential replacement project. Projects of this scale historically takes years and sometimes decades to fund /develop and was correctly started well before the end of the bridge’s designed service life. Should you have any questions, please call me at 425.453.5545 or email me at knikzad@trantecheng.com Best regards, Kash Nikzad, PhD, PE Project Manager TranTech Engineering, LLC Attachments: Appendix A – In-depth Inspection Tabulated Results Appendix B - Select Inspection Photos 12 APPENDIX A |In-depth Inspection Tabulated Results 13 Bridge # 0810970042nd Ave South Bridge, Span 2Owner: City of TukwilaSUMMARY:Bridge #08109700 is 3 span bridge built in 1949 carrying 42nd Ave South. The main span is a 220 ft. steel riveted through truss built with a 38oskew over the Duwamish River. There is one 32 ft. concrete T-girder approach span on each end. An in-depth inspection of the main span was completed by Fickett Structural Solutions on behalf of TranTech Engineering and the City of Tukwila to determine the extent of section loss throughout the structure. A 62-ft UBIT was used to inspect the lower chords, lower panel points, floor beams, and lower lateral system. A 45-ft. man-lift was used to inspect the upper chords, upper panel points, sway bracing, and upper lateral system. DATE:July 22, 2020-July 24, 2020Agency: Fickett Structural SolutionsLead Inspector Signature:Co-Inspector Signature:Printed: 8/17/202042nd Ave Truss 2020 In-DepthPage 1 of 1114 Inspection SummaryCondition Notes:The structure has areas of painted over section loss in localized areas along the lower chord and gusset plates. In some areas, the corrosion is becoming active again with minimal section loss at panel points. There are large amounts of debris and guano in most lower panel points and some upper panel points. Most diagonal compression members have pack rust along seams between rivet heads causing up to 1/8” deflection along the member. There is seam rust along most vertical members and along sway bracing with areas of pack rust up to 1/4” and minimal section loss. Several sway bracing members have high load impact damage which have caused upward deflection in flange angles. The paint system has widespread areas of peeling paint with surface corrosion present. Legend:IB - Inboard side of member OB = Outboard side of member General Notes:Note 1: Pack rust with section loss in gusset plates along seam with member.Note 2: Section loss in gusset plate.Note 3: Section loss in member flangesNote 4: Section loss in member websNote 5: Pack rust between cover platesNote 6: Section loss in tie platesNote 7: Pack rust with section loss in bottom flange along transverse seam with wind plate.Note 8: Section loss to rivet headsNote 9: Surface corrosionNote 10: Debris accumulationNote 11: Pack rust along seam stressing exterior rivet line.Note 12: Peeling paint, exposed steel with surface corrosion.Note 13: Pack rust along top and bottom edges of interior web plate, near full member length w/ 1/4” distortion along the edge bulging out up to1/2” between rivets Note 14: Pack rust between vertical flanges with distortion in wind bracing.Note 15: Seam rust along gusset plate and lower chord outboard web vertical seam.Note 16: Seam rust along top chord cover plates.Note 17: Seam rust along sway brace angle connection to truss. Note 18: Spots of peeling paint with surface corrosion present on exposed steel. No measurable section loss or pack rust.Note 19: Pockets of pack rust along seams between diagonal channels and web plates. North and South webs are deflecting from painted over pack rust. No strained rivets. Note 20: Pack rust along bottom seam of handrail plate and between member angles, IB face of member.Note 21: Some corrosion along member seams.Printed: 8/17/202042nd Ave Truss 2020 In-DepthPage 2 of 1115 Span 2 Layout and NomenclaturePrinted: 8/17/202042nd Ave Truss 2020 In-DepthPage 3 of 1116 Bridge: TUKxNx14 42nd Avenue South BridgeStructure ID: 08109700Date Inspected:West TrussEast TrussL0-L1 Bottom ChordL1: Note 1, 1/8" pack rust, no section loss, between wind plate and bottom flange of chord. Note 14.L1: Note 1, 1/8" pack rust along OB vertical seam with gusset plate, no section loss. Note 1, 1/4" pack rust along OB horizontal seam between gusset plate and web and between wind plate and bottom flange of chord, no section loss. Surface corrosion forming along top flange of chord below seam with wind plate, no section loss. L1-L2 Bottom ChordL1: Note 1, 1/8" pack rust, no section loss, between wind plate and bottom. Note 14.L2: Note 14.L2: Note 10.L2-L3 Bottom ChordL2: Note 10. Paint along top flanges of chord and wind plate is bubbling and peeling. Note 14.Along member: Note 13.L3: Note 1, 1/4" pack rust, active, no section loss, between top size of wind plate and bottom flange of lower chord, along full length of OB gusset plate. Note 3, 1/32" OB and IB. Note 14, along bracing.L2: Note 10. L3: Note 4, 1/16" section loss along bottom edge of web plate. Note 13. Note 14.L3-L4 Bottom ChordL3: Note 1, 1/4" pack rust, active, no section loss, between top size of wind plate and bottom flange of lower chord, along full length of OB gusset plate. Note 3, 1/32" OB.Along member: Note 13.L4: Note 10. Note 14, up to 1/2" pack rust.Along member: Note 13. L4: Note 10. Note 14, along wind plate.L4-L5 Bottom ChordL4: Note 1, 1/4" pack rust, no section loss between wind plate and bottom flange. Note 10. Note 14, up to 1/2" pack rust. Short fillet welds between OB gusset plate and member.Along member: Note 13.L5: Note 10. Note 14, up to 1/2" pack rust.L4: Note 10. Note 14, along wind plate.Along member: Note 13.L5: Note 14, along wind plate.L5-L6 Bottom ChordL5: Note 10. Note 14 up to 1/2" pack rust.Along member: Note 13.L6: Note 4, 1/16" section loss to top of wind plate along end 1", IB and OB. Note 10. Note 14, up to 1/2" pack rust along end 4 ft.L5: Note 14, along wind plate.L6: Note 9. Note 10. Note 14, along wind plate.L6-L7 Bottom ChordL6: Note 10. Note 14, up to 1/2" pack rust along end 4 ft.Along member: Note 13, web bracing.L7: Note 1, 1/8" pack rust, no section loss, along horizontal seam between wind plate and OB bottom flange. Note 9, no section loss, along top side of top flange, 3" OB, 6" IB. Note 14, up to 1/2" pack rust along end 4 ft. L6: Note 4, 1/16" section loss to thickness along bottom edge of interior web plates, IB and OB, no section loss. Note 7, no pack rust, 1/16" loss of bottom flange along seam with IB gusset plate. Note 8, 10% section loss, 6 rivets, along bottom flange. Note 9. Note 10. Note 14, along wind plate. No paint on member from last tie plate to end of member.Along member: Note 13, web bracing.L7-L8Bottom ChordL7: Note 1, 1/8" pack rust, no section loss, along horizontal seam between wind plate and OB bottom flange. Note 14, up to 1/2" pack rust, along end 4 ft. Along member: Pack rust along top and bottom edges of interior web plate, near full member length, with 1/4" distortion along edge, bulging out up to 1/2" between rivets. Note 12.Along member: Note 13, web bracing.L8: Note 10. Note 15. Note 14, along wind plate. Note 15.Member7/22/2020-7/24/2020Printed: 8/17/202042nd Ave Truss 2020 In-DepthPage 4 of 1117 West TrussEast TrussMemberL8-L9 Bottom ChordL8: Note 8, 10% head loss, 8 rivets, along bottom flange. Note 10. Note 14, 1/2" pack rust along vertical flanges of sway bracing. Note 12.L9: Note 1, 3/8" pack rust, no section loss between wind plate and bottom flange. Note 3, 1/32" pitting type corrosion. Note 9. Note 12.L8: Note 4, 1/16" section loss to thickness along bottom edge of web plate. Note 8, 10% section loss, 8 rivets along bottom flange. Note 10. Note 14, along wind plate.L9: Note 9, along top tie plate surface, no section loss. Note 10. Note 14, along wind plate.L9-L10 Bottom ChordL9: Note 1, 3/8" pack rust, no section loss between wind plate and bottom flange. Note 3, 1/32" pitting type corrosion. Note 12.L9: Note 10. Note 14, along wind plate.U1-U2Upper chord U1: Note 16, 1/8", no section loss. Note 17, along seams with angle connections.U1: Note 16, 1/4", no section loss.U2-U3Upper chord U2: Note 10. Note 16, 1/8", no section loss.Along member: Note 5, 1/8", 3 ft. long.U3: Note 16, 1/8" between bottom wind plate and bottom cover plate.U3-U4Upper chordU3: Note 5, 20 ft. long, 1/4" along bottom flange, 1/16" top flange. Note 12.U4: Note 16, 1/8" top, no section loss, 1/4" bottom, no section loss.Along member: Note 5, along bottom flange, 1/8", 10 ft. longU4-U5Upper chordU4: Note 16, 1/8" top, no section loss, 1/4" bottom, no section loss.U5: Note 12.U4: Note 10. Along member: Note 5, along bottom flange, 1/8", 10 ft. longU5-U6Upper chordU5: Note 12.U6: Note 10. Note 12. Note 16.U6: Note 12. Note 16, 1/8" along top wind plate and top cover plate.U6-U7Upper chord U6: Note 12. Note 16.U6: Note 12. Note 16, 1/8" along top wind plate and top cover plate.U7: Note 12, along top and bottom wind plates.U7-U8Upper chord Along member: Note 5, 1/8" along center 10 ft.U8: Note 12, along top wind plate and top cover plate.U8-U9Upper chord U9: Note 16, 1/16".U9: Note 12, along top wind plate and top cover plate.L0-U1Diagonal No defects observed.Along member: Note 18.L1-U1Vertical Note 20, 1/4" pack rust, with up to 1/32" section loss in each member angle, for 4". Along member: Note 18.L2-U1Diagonal No defects observed.Along member: Note 10, with moss growth along member. Note 18.U1: Note 16.L2-U2Vertical Note 20, 1/4" pack rust, no section loss, for 1".Along member: Note 10, with moss growth along member. Note 18. At 4.5 ft. from deck level, 3 areas of scattered pitting corrosion up to 2" long, along seam between member web plate and IB south angle with up to 5/32" painted over section loss. Paint is starting to peel from active corrosion in areas. L2-U3Diagonal No defects observed.Along member: Note 10, with moss growth along member. Note 18. Note 19, up to 1/16" active pack rust along seams and 1/8" deflection of members. Peeling paint along top web.U3: Note 1, no pack rust, with 1/32" section loss in member web. Tack welds along end of member and IB side web plates along rivet line.L3-U3Vertical No defects observed.Along member: Note 18. L4-U3Diagonal No defects observed.L4: Pitting corrosion with lass than 1/32" section loss for 4 in. along vertical gusset plate seam. Corrosion has been painted over, but is active again with peeling paint. L4-U4Vertical L4: Note 1, seam rust only.L4: Up to 1/32" pitting corrosion, painted over but becoming active, along angle leg at IB gusset plate vertical seam for 6". L4-U5DiagonalAlong member: Note 18, along top member web. Note 19, starting at 6 ft. above deck level. U5: Tack welds along top and IB web, no cracking observed.Along member: Note 19, up to 1/16" active pack rust along seams and 1/8" deflection of members. Peeling paint along top web.U5: Note 1, 1/4" pack rust, 2" long, no section loss. Short tack welds along top and IB web, no cracking observed. Printed: 8/17/202042nd Ave Truss 2020 In-DepthPage 5 of 1118 West TrussEast TrussMemberL5-U5Vertical No defects observed.Along member: Active pitting corrosion, along OB face of IB angle, no section loss. Less than 1/32" section loss along 2" seam with original railing. Railing is bolted, not welded.U5: Vertical tack welds along member and gusset plate. No cracking observed.L6-U5DiagonalAlong member: Note 19, up to 1/8" deflection. Note 20, 1/16" pack rust, no section loss, for 4".L6: Note 21.Along member: Note 19, up to 1/16" active pack rust along seams and 1/8" deflection of members. L6-U6Vertical L6: Note 21.L6: Note 1, 1/32" pack rust along top seam with OB gusset plate for 4", no section loss. Pitting corrosion, painted over but becoming active, along vertical seam with IB gusset plate. Paint is cracked, bulging, and peeling. Tack welds along vertical seams between member and gusset plate.L6-U7Diagonal L6: Note 21.L6: Note 1, 1/32" pack rust along OB top seam for 4", no section loss. 1 rivet with surface corrosion. U7: Note 12, especially on tie plates.L7-U7Vertical No defects observed.Along member: Note 18.L8-U7DiagonalAlong member: Note 19, 1/8" deflection on bottom web plate.L8: Seam rust along member near panel point.At L8: Heavy moss growth.Along member: Note 19, up to 1/16" active pack rust along seams and less than 1/8" deflection of members. Peeling paint along top web.L8-U8VerticalAlong member: Note 20, corrosion just beginning, no section loss . L8: Seam rust along member near panel point.L8: Heavy moss growth.L8-U9Diagonal L8: Seam rust along member near panel point. L8: Heavy moss growth.U9: Note 17, up to 1/16".L9-U9VerticalAlong member: Note 20, 1/32" section loss for 1". Scattered seam rust between angles, no section loss, full length.U9: Tack welds present between gusset plate and member.Along member: Note 18.L10-U9Diagonal No defects observed.Along member: 1/32" pitting corrosion with up to 1/32" section loss in bottom plate near IB face at original rail bracket seam. At original rail, along topside of bottom plate and OB face of OB angle seam, peeling paint with surface corrosion and no section loss, 6" long. Bracket is bolted to member.L0Gusset Plate Minor rust bleeding on OB gusset around bearing pin. No section loss. No defects observed.L1Gusset PlateNo defects observed.L2Gusset PlateNote 1, 1/8" pack rust, no section loss, along OB gusset plate and vertical member seam. Note 1, 1/4" pack rust, no section loss, along IB gusset plate edge seams with vertical members. Note 9, peeling paint, no section loss in OB gusset along member seams.No defects observed.L3Gusset PlateNo defects observed.L4Gusset PlateNote 1, 1/8" pack rust, 1/32" loss in OB gusset plate, 1/8" pack rust, no section loss in IB gusset plate. Note 9 OB.4" active corrosion along top seam of gusset plate, OB face, no section loss. Peeling paint.L5Gusset PlateNote 1, 1/4" pack rust between gusset plate and lower chord web and gusset plate and bottom flange, OB and IB. Note 8, heavy surface corrosion with pitting, 1 rivet. Note 15, OB and IB. Note 1, 1/4" pack rust between OB gusset plate and web, no section loss. L6Gusset Plate No defects observed.Note 1, 1/32"pack rust, active, for 4" along top seams of OB gusset plate, no section loss. L7Gusset Plate Note 1, 1/8" pack rust, no section loss, along vertical seams with bottom chord, OB. Note 1, 1/8" pack rust, no section loss, along OB gusset plate top seam with U7-L7. Note 1, 1/8" pack rust, no section loss, along bottom edge of OB gusset plate.L8Gusset Plate No defects observed.No defects observed.Printed: 8/17/202042nd Ave Truss 2020 In-DepthPage 6 of 1119 West TrussEast TrussMemberL9Gusset PlateNote 1, up to 1/8" pack rust, no section loss along OB gusset plate edge seams. Note 1, OB gusset plate no pack rust with up to 1/32" section loss along horizontal seam with bottom chord top flange.No defects observed.L10Gusset Plate No defects observed.No defects observed.U1Gusset Plate No defects observed.No defects observed.U2Gusset Plate No defects observed.No defects observed.U3Gusset Plate No defects observed.No defects observed.U4Gusset Plate No defects observed.No defects observed.U5Gusset Plate No defects observed.No defects observed.U6Gusset Plate No defects observed.No defects observed.U7Gusset Plate No defects observed.No defects observed.U8Gusset Plate No defects observed.No defects observed.U9Gusset PlateNote 1, 1/16" pack rust, no section loss between OB gusset plate and L8-U9. Note 1, 3/8" pack rust, no section loss between OB gusset plate and bottom chord web.Note 1, 1/8" between gusset plate and L8-U9.U10Gusset Plate No defects observed.No defects observed.L0W-L0E Floor beam No defects observed.No defects observed.L0W-L1E Floor beam No defects observed.No defects observed.L1W-L2E Floor beam No defects observed.Corrosion along edge of top flange. Full thickness of flange edge affected, no lifting of deck or adjacent deck area distress observed. Monitor for pack rust formation and lifting of deck.L2W-L3E Floor beam No defects observed.No defects observed.L3W-L4E Floor beam No defects observed.No defects observed.L4W-L5E Floor beam No defects observed.No defects observed.L5W-L6E Floor beam No defects observed.No defects observed.L6W-L7E Floor beam No defects observed.No defects observed.L7W-L8E Floor beam No defects observed.Lite surface corrosion along edge of top flange embed between stringer #1 and stringer #2. Stringer #2, south face of floor beam looking west. Typical sharp 90o cope. No cracking observed.L8W-L9E Floor beam No defects observed.No defects observed.L9W-L10E Floor beam No defects observed.No defects observed.L10W-L10E Floor beam No defects observed.No defects observed.South Portal (U1W-U1E)Sway BracingAlong member: Note 1, with up to 1/8" pack rust, active along gusset seams. Up to 1/32" pitting type corrosion active along angle seams and gussets. Note 22, up to 1/4" pack rust, scattered. Along member: Note 1, with up to 1/32" pitting type corrosion, active along gusset seams. South inboard face gusset plate has up to 1/16" pitting corrosion along gusset and horizontal sway brace angle seam. Note 22, up to 1/4" pack rust, scattered. Just east of centerline along lower portal angle, 1 high impact load hit: 7" long impact bowed 1/2" north. Paint is still in tact and no cracks observed. 2 ft. east of lower gusset plate 1 high impact load hit along lower portal angle: 21" long impact bowed 1" north with paint missing along impact area, heavy surface corrosion with no measurable section loss. Inboard face of portal angle is cracked at leg bend, approximately 50% depth, 6" long. No active crack growth observed. U1E: Lower portal connection angle web exhibits corrosion along northern seam, full length, with up to 1/8" pack rust and 1/32" of section loss in pockets near gusset plates and brackets. Paint is bubbling and cracked, scattered along length due to active corrosion underneath.U1W-U2E Sway BracingAlong member: Note 22, up to 1/4" pack rust, scattered. Note 23, up to 1/8" pack rust at all connections. Along member: Note 22, up to 1/4" pack rust, scattered. Note 23, up to 1/8" pack rust at all connections. High impact load hit, no cracked or peeling paint.U2W-U3E Sway BracingAlong member: Note 22, up to 1/4" pack rust, scattered. Note 23, up to 1/8" pack rust at all connections. Along member: Note 22, up to 1/4" pack rust, scattered. High impact load hit, no cracked or peeling paint. Note 23, up to 1/8" pack rust at all connections. U3E: Note 17, connection to truss. Printed: 8/17/202042nd Ave Truss 2020 In-DepthPage 7 of 1120 West TrussEast TrussMemberU3W-U4E Sway BracingAlong member: Note 22, up to 1/4" pack rust, scattered. Note 23, up to 1/8" pack rust at all connections. Along member: Note 22, up to 1/4" pack rust, scattered. Note 23, up to 1/8" pack rust at all connections. U4W-U5E Sway BracingAlong member: Note 22, up to 1/4" pack rust, scattered. Note 23, up to 1/8" pack rust at all connections. Along member: Note 22, up to 1/4" pack rust, scattered. Note 23, up to 1/8" pack rust at all connections. U5W-U6E Sway BracingAlong member: Note 22, up to 1/4" pack rust, scattered. Note 23, up to 1/8" pack rust at all connections. Along member: Note 22, up to 1/4" pack rust, scattered. Note 23, up to 1/8" pack rust at all connections. U6W-U7E Sway BracingAlong member: Note 22, up to 1/4" pack rust, scattered. Note 23, up to 1/8" pack rust at all connections. Along member: Note 22, up to 1/4" pack rust, scattered. Note 23, up to 1/8" pack rust at all connections. U7W-U8E Sway BracingAlong member: Note 22, up to 1/4" pack rust, scattered. Note 23, up to 1/8" pack rust at all connections. Along member: Note 22, up to 1/4" pack rust, scattered. Note 23, up to 1/8" pack rust at all connections. U8W-U9E Sway BracingAlong member: Note 22, up to 1/4" pack rust, scattered. Note 23, up to 1/8" pack rust at all connections. U8W: Note 17, 1/8". Along member: Note 22, up to 1/4" pack rust, scattered. Note 23, up to 1/8" pack rust at all connections. North Portal (U9W-U9E)Sway BracingAlong member: Note 22, up to 1/4" pack rust, full length. U9W: Note 1, up to 1/16" pack rust, no section loss, at all connections.Along member: Note 22, up to 1/4" pack rust, full length.U9E: Note 1, up to 1/16" pack rust, no section loss, at all connections.L0 Movable BearingBearing in expanded position with weather: 61oF and overcast. Rocker is tilted south approx. 7o. Rust bleeding on both inboard and outboard plates indicating possible pin corrosion. No signs of pin movement.Bearing in expanded position with weather: 61oF and overcast. Rocker is tilted south approx. 7o. Rust bleeding on inboard plate indicating possible pin corrosion. No signs of pin movement.L10 Fixed Bearing No defects observed.No defects observed.Lateral systemsGeneral CommentsLead Inspector:Co-Inspector:Alyssa Escobedo, P.E. G2001*Note: Sway bracing nomenclature does not match "Nomenclature FC Plan" Document in WSBIS. See page 2 in this document titled "Nomenclature" for nomenclature used in this in-depth report.Andy Packard, P.E. G0507Top chord lateral bracing horizontal struts and diagonal members have seam rust scattered between bottom flange angle and web plate with cracked and peeling paint, full length. Members have similar seam between top flange angle and web, full length. No section observed in members.Printed: 8/17/202042nd Ave Truss 2020 In-DepthPage 8 of 1121 Photo Number Location Photo Description Inspector Initials 3518 L9W 1/32" section loss in OB gusset plate along horizontal seam with top flange of bottom chord, looking south.ALP 3519 L9W 3/8" pack rust, no section loss between OB gusset plate and bottom chord web seam and between wind plate and bottom chord bottom flange. ALP 3520 L10E-L9W, L9W General floor beam photo, near panel point. ALP 3521 L9W "Note 12"ALP 3522 L9W General gusset plate photo, looking north.ALP 3523 L8W 10% head loss, 8 rivets along bottom flange of lower chord.ALP 3524 L8W General gusset plate photo, looking south.ALP 3525 L8W 1/2" pack rust between vertical flanges of sway bracing at L8W.ALP 3526 L9E-L8W, L8W South face of floor beam, looking north near panel point. ALP 3530 L8W General gusset plate photo, looking down. Note seam rust along vertical members.ALP 3533 L8E-L7W, L7W North face of floor beam, looking south near panel point. ALP 3534 L7W 1/8" pack rust, no section loss, along horizontal seam between wind plate and bottom chord bottom flange OB. ALP 3535 L7E-L6W, L6W North face of floor beam, looking south near panel point. ALP 3536 L6W General gusset plate photo, looking north.ALP 3538 L6E-L5W, L5W General floor beam photo, near panel point. ALP 3539 L5W "Note 15"ALP 3540 L6E 1/16" section loss along bottom flange transverse seam with wind plate, looking south.ALP 3541 L6E-L5W, L6E North face of floor beam, looking south near panel point. ALP 3542 L6E General gusset plate, looking south.ALP 3545 L7E General gusset plate photo, looking south.ALP 3546 L8E-L7W, L8E General floor beam photo near panel point.ALP 3547 L8E-L7W, L8E Lite surface corrosion along edge of top flange embed between stringer #1 and stringer #2.ALP 3548 L8E General gusset plate photo, looking south.ALP 3549 L9E-L8W, L9E General floor beam photo, near panel point. ALP 3550 L9E General gusset plate photo, looking south.ALP 3566 L4W Typical of short fillet welds between OB gusset plate and lower chord member.ALP 3567 L5E-L4W, L4W South face of floor beam, looking north near panel point. ALP 3568 L4W General gusset plate photo, looking north.ALP 3571 L3W General gusset plate photo, looking north.ALP 3572 L4E-L3W, L3W North face of floor beam, looking south near panel point. ALP 3573 L4E-L3W, L3W South face of floor beam, looking east near stringer #3. ALP 3578 FB L3E-L2W, L2W South face of floor beam, looking north near panel point. ALP 3579 FB L2E-L1W, L1W South face of floor beam, looking north near panel point. ALP 3580 L1W General gusset plate photo, looking north.ALP 3581 L1W General wind plate photo, looking south.ALP 3584 FB L2E-L1W, L2E South face of floor beam near panel point , looking north. ALP 3585 L2E General gusset plate photo, looking south. ALP 3586 L2E General gusset plate, looking south.ALP 3586 FB L3E-L2W, L3E South face of floor beam, looking north near panel point. ALP 3587 L3E General gusset plate, interior, looking north.ALP 3588 L3E General gusset plate photo, looking south.ALP 3589 L4E-L3W, L4E South face of floor beam, looking north near panel point. ALP 3590 L4E General gusset plate photo, looking south.ALP 3591 L4E Typical of debris accumulation and nesting pigeons.ALP 3599 L5E General gusset plate, looking south.ALP 3600 L5E-L4W, L5E North face of floor beam, looking south near panel point. ALP 3605 L6E-L5W, L6E South face of floor beam, looking north near panel point. ALP 3659 U1W General gusset plate photo, looking south.ALP 3662 U2E Top of upper chord, looking south.ALP 3663 U2E General gusset plate, looking south.ALP 3667 U3E 1/32" section loss in gusset plate along seam with L2E-U3E.ALP 3670 U1E-U3E High load impact hit between sway bracing members U1-U3.ALP 3671 U1E General gusset plate, looking south.ALP 3674 U4E Top of upper chord, looking south.ALP 3675 U4E General gusset plate photo, looking south.ALP 3678 U5E General gusset plate photo 3678, looking north.ALP 3681 U4W Top of upper chord, looking north.ALP 3682 U4W General gusset plate photo, looking north.ALP 3685 U3W Top of upper chord, looking south.ALP 3689 U5W Top of upper chord, looking south.ALP 3690 U5W General gusset plate photo, looking south.ALP 3691 U6W General gusset plate photo, looking north.ALP 3692 U6W Top of upper chord, looking north.ALP Photo Log Printed: 9 42nd Ave Truss 2020 In-Depth Page 9 of 1122 Photo Number Location Photo Description Inspector Initials 3693 U7E General gusset plate photo, looking north.ALP 3694 U7E Top of upper chord, looking north.ALP 3695 U6E Top of upper chord, looking south.ALP 3698 U7W General gusset plate photo, looking south. ALP 3699 U7W Top of upper chord, looking south.ALP 3700 U7W General gusset plate photo, OB, looking south.ALP 3704 U8W Top of upper chord, looking north.ALP 3706 U9E General gusset plate photo, looking north.ALP 3708 U8E General gusset plate photo, looking south.ALP 3709 U8E Top of upper chord, looking south.ALP 3717 U9W Top of upper chord and portal connections, looking north.ALP 3718 U9W General gusset plate photo, looking north.ALP 3722 North Portal U9E- U9W North portal looking south.ALP 3727 L10E-L10W, L10W Leaking joint looking from below.ALP 3730 L10W General gusset plate photo, OB, looking south.ALP 3731 L10E-L10W, L10W South face of floor beam, looking north near panel point. ALP 3750 U9E Top of upper chord, looking north.ALP 3752 Bearing L0W Degree of tilt toward south.ALP 3757 Bearing L0E Degree of tilt toward south.ALP 3759 Bearing L0E Underside of deck, looking north.ALP 3707 U9E General picture of gusset plate exterior face at end portal.ALP 3527-3529 L8W Pack rust along top edges of interior web plate, near full member length, with 1/4" distortion along edge, bulging out up to 1/2" between rivets.ALP 3532-3533 L8W Pack rust along bottom edges of interior web plate, near full member length, with 1/4" distortion along edge, bulging out up to 1/2" between rivets.ALP 3543-3544 L7E-L6W, L7E North face of floor beam, looking south near panel point. ALP 3551-3552 L8E-L7W, L8E Stringer #2, south face of floor beam looking west. Typical sharp 90 o cope. No cracking observed.ALP 3553-3565 Diag. U7W-L8W, U7W "Note 13" between top and bottom flange of cover plates, full length. ALP 3564-3577 L3W General gusset plate photo, looking north.ALP 3569-3570 L4W General gusset plate photo IB, looking south. Note: 1/8" pack rust between gusset plate and member seams.ALP 3582-3583 FB L2E-L1W, L2E South face of floor beam, looking north near panel point. Corrosion along edge of top flange. Monitor for pack rust formation and lifting of deck.ALP 3592-3596 L1E General gusset plate, looking north. (Up to 1/4" pack rust with no section lack along seam with member.)ALP 3597-3598 FB L1E-L0W, L1E South face of floor beam near panel point, looking north.ALP 3655-3658 U1W Top of upper chord and portal connections, looking south.ALP 3664-3665 L2E-U3E Rippling from pack rust along L2-U3 East compression member. Tack welds between top of member at U3 and IB side web plates of chord along rivet line.ALP 3668-3669 U3E Top of upper chord, looking north.ALP 3672-3673 U1E Top of upper chord, looking south. "Note 16"ALP 3676-3677 U5E Top of upper chord, looking north ALP 3679-3680 U5E Vertical tack welds between member and gusset plate, looking south.ALP 3684-3685 Typical pack rust between cover plate and member.ALP 3686-3688 U3W General gusset plate photo, looking north.ALP 3696-3697 U6E General gusset plate, looking south.ALP 3702-3703 Sway Brace U9E- U8W, U8W "Note 17" with 1/8" seam rust, looking north.ALP 3710-3717 Sway Braces General photos of sway bracing conditions includes: U8E-U9W looking northeast, U8E-U7W looking south, and U9E-U9W (north portal) looking northeast. ALP 3719-3721 North Portal U9E- U9W North portal looking north. ALP 3728-3729 Bearing L10W General bearing photos.ALP 3760-3765 Span 1 General photos of underside framing, Span 1, looking south.ALP South Approach 1 - South Approach 6 Span 2 General Span 2 deck and structure photo, looking north.ADE L0E 1-L0E 4 L0E General panel point internal, looking down.ADE L1E 1-L1E 2 L1E General panel point internal, looking down.ADE L1E 3 L1E General member elevation photo at deck level, looking north.ADE L1E 4 L1E General member elevation photo at deck level, looking south.ADE L2E 1-L2E 2 L2E General member elevation photo at deck level, looking north.ADE L2E 3 L2E General panel point elevation photo at deck level, looking northeast.ADE L2E 4-L2E 5 L2E General panel point internal, looking down.ADE L3E 1-L3E 2 L3E General member elevation photo at deck level, looking north. ADE L3E 3 L3E General member elevation photo at deck level, looking south.ADE L3E 4-L3E 5 L3E General panel point internal, looking down.ADE Printed: 10 42nd Ave Truss 2020 In-Depth Page 10 of 1123 Photo Number Location Photo Description Inspector Initials L4E 1-L4E 7 L4E-U5E Pockets of pack rust along seams between diagonal channels and web plates. North and South webs are deflecting from painted over pack rust. No strained rivets. ADE L4E 8-L4E 9 L4E-U5E General member internal photo.ADE L4E 10-L4E 13 L4E General panel point internal, looking down.ADE L4E 14-L4E 16 L4E General panel point external at deck level, looking down.ADE L5E 1 L5E-U5E General member elevation photo at deck level, looking west.ADE L5E 2 L5E-U5E General member elevation photo at deck level, looking south.ADE L5E 3-L5E4 L5E-U5E General member elevation photo at deck level, looking north.ADE L5E 5-L5E 7 L5E General panel point internal, looking down.ADE L6E 1 L6E General panel point elevation photo at deck level, looking southwest.ADE L6E 2-L6E 5 L6E General panel point internal, looking down.ADE L6E 6- L6E 9 L6E-U5E Pockets of pack rust along seams between diagonal channels and web plates. South web is deflecting from painted over pack rust. No strained rivets. ADE L1W 1-L1W4 L1W-U1W 1/4" pack rust along bottom seam of handrail plate and between member angles and IB face of member with up to 1/32" section loss in each member angle, for 4". ADE L1W 5 L1W-U1W General member elevation photo, looking south.ADE L1W 6 L1W General panel point internal, looking down.ADE L2W 1-L2W 2 L2W-U2W 1/4" pack rust along bottom seam of handrail plate and between member angles and IB face of member with no section loss, for 1". ADE L2W 3-L2W 4 L2W General panel point internal, L2W southside, looking down.ADE L2W 5 L2W General panel point internal, L2W northside, looking down.ADE L3W 1-L3W 2 L3W General panel point internal, L3W southside, looking down.ADE L3W 3-L3W 4 L3W General panel point internal, L3W northside, looking down.ADE L3W 5 L3W-U3W General member elevation photo at deck level, looking west.ADE L3W 6 L3W-U3W General member elevation photo at deck level, looking northwest.ADE L4W 1 L4W-U4W General member elevation photo at deck level, looking west.ADE L4W 2 L4W General panel point elevation photo at deck level, looking west.ADE L4W 3-5 L4W-U5W Pockets of pack rust along seams between diagonal channels and web plates. North and South webs are deflecting from painted over pack rust. No strained rivets. ADE L4W 6 L4W General panel point internal, L4W northside, looking down.ADE L4W 7 L4W General panel point internal, L4W southside, looking down.ADE L8E 1, L8E 5 L8E-U7E General member elevation photo at deck level, looking east. Note: pockets of pack rust along seams between diagonal channels and web plates with up to 1/16" active pack rust along seams and less than 1/8" deflection of members.ADE L8E 2 L8E General panel point elevation photo at deck level, looking northwest.ADE L8E 3 L8E General panel point elevation photo at deck level, looking southwest.ADE L8E 4 L8E General panel point internal, looking down.ADE L10E 1 L10E-U9E General member elevation photo at deck level, looking northwest.ADE L10E 2 L10E-U9E General member elevation photo at deck level, looking southwest.ADE L10E 3 L10E-U9E At original rail, along topside of bottom plate and OB face of OB angle seam, peeling paint with surface corrosion and no section loss, 6" long. Note: Bracket is bolted to member.ADE L10E 4 L10E General panel point internal, looking down.ADE L8W 1 L8W General panel point elevation photo, looking west.ADE L8W 2 L8W-U8W Pack rust just beginning along bottom seam of handrail plate and between member angles and IB face of member, no section loss.ADE L8W3 - L8W6 L8W-U7W Pockets of pack rust along seams between diagonal channels and web plates. South web is deflecting 1/8" from painted over pack rust. No strained rivets. ADE L6W 1 L6W General panel point elevation photo at deck level, looking west.ADE L6W 2-L6W 7 L6W-U5W Pockets of pack rust along seams between diagonal channels and web plates. South web is deflecting 1/8". No strained rivets. ADE L5W 1- L5W 2 L5W-U5W General member elevation at deck level, looking west.ADE L5W 3-L5W 4 L5W General panel point internal, L5W southside, looking down.ADE P3 Joint 1-P3 Joint 3, P3 Joint 5 Joint at P3 General joint condition photos.ADE P3 Joint 4 Joint at P3 D spalling near centerline of joint.ADE Deck 1 Span 2 Typical deck cracking and abrasion across deck.ADE Deck 2 Span 2 General deck photo, looking south.ADE P2 Joint 1-4 Joint at P2 General joint condition photos.ADE B L0W 1 Bearing L0W General bearing photos, looking east. Note: Rocker is tilted southward approx. 7o ADE B L0E 1, B L0E 4 Bearing L0E General bearing photos, looking northwest. Note Rocker is tilted southward approx. 7o ADE B L0E 2-B L0E 3 Bearing L0E General bearing photos, looking northeast.ADE SP 1-SP 3, SP 6-SP 7, SP 11 UW1-U1E Active pack rust along gusset and angle seams.ADE SP 4-SP 5 UW1-U1E 21" long impact bowed 1" north with paint missing along impact area, heavy surface corrosion with no measurable section loss. ADE SP 8 - SP 10 UW1-U1E 21" long impact bowed 1" north with paint missing along impact area, heavy surface corrosion with no measurable section loss. Inboard face of portal angle is cracked at leg bend, approximately 50% depth, 6" long. ADE Printed: 11 42nd Ave Truss 2020 In-Depth Page 11 of 1124 APPENDIX B |Select Inspection Photos 25 TranTech Engineering, LLC 365 – 118th Ave SE, Suite 100, Bellevue, WA 98005 425-453-5545. Fax: 425-453-6779 Inspection Photo 1 – Deck View Looking South Inspection Photo 2 – Elevation View Looking North Bridge Inspection Pictures 26 TranTech Engineering, LLC 365 – 118th Ave SE, Suite 100, Bellevue, WA 98005 425-453-5545. Fax: 425-453-6779 Inspection Photo 3 – Lower Connections with Horizontal Gussets Retain Moisture and Guano Inspection Photo 4 – Frozen Truss Bearings Induce Additional Stresses on the Trusses 27 TranTech Engineering, LLC 365 – 118th Ave SE, Suite 100, Bellevue, WA 98005 425-453-5545. Fax: 425-453-6779 Inspection Photo 5 – Pack Rust is Distorting some Connections Inspection Photo 6 – Rust and Guano at Truss Bottom Chord 28 TranTech Engineering, LLC 365 – 118th Ave SE, Suite 100, Bellevue, WA 98005 425-453-5545. Fax: 425-453-6779 Inspection Photo 7 – Rust at Top Flange of Fracture Critical Floor Beams Inspection Photo 8 – Moisture from Deck Penetrating and Corroding Top Flange of Stringers 29 30 https://tukwilawa.sharepoint.com/sites/publicworks/engineering/PW Drop Box/01 TIC Agenda/2020 Agenda Items/TIC 09-21-2020/04. 42nd Ave S Br Replacement 30% Design/Info Memo_PE TransTech_2020_09_21.docx INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Transportation and Infrastructure Committee FROM: Hari Ponnekanti, Interim Public Works Director BY: Adam Cox, Transportation Project Manager CC: Mayor Ekberg DATE: September 18, 2020 SUBJECT: 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement Project No. 91810404 Design Consultant Selection and Agreement ISSUE Execute an agreement with TranTech Engineering, LLC (TranTech) for plans and engineering services for the 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement Project for either 30% plans and engineering estimate (P&E) or 100% plans, specifications, and engineering estimate (PS&E). BACKGROUND In February of 2020 both the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee (TIC) and the full Council were presented with three options for moving forward with the 42nd Ave South Bridge Replacement. It was decided at the February 24, 2020 Committee of the Whole Meeting that Option 3 was preferred. Option 3 included starting design up to the 30% level, which facilitates the City exploring funding options and being adequately prepared to solicit grant funds from both the State and Federal governments. Option 3 also included an in-depth structural inspection of the bridge to illustrate the internal configuration/deterioration of the steel components of the bridge. The in-depth inspection took place on July 22 through July 24, 2020 and the results will be presented to TIC in a separate agenda item. Upon selecting Option 3 to prepare the 30% design, staff initiated the Request for Qualifications process that is required under federal and state protocol in order to be considered in compliance and eligible for future federal grant requirements. The City advertised in the Seattle Times and the Daily Journal of Commerce on April 28 and May 5, 2020 and four design firms submitted proposal packages on May 19, 2020. Two firms were invited to interview, and TranTech was the highest-rated firm from the selection process. The City then requested that TranTech submit a scope of work and cost estimate for 30% P&E and 100% PS&E. A traffic count study was performed to get a better understanding of the current usage of the 42nd Ave South Bridge and the surrounding side streets. It also gave an understanding of local impacts and reroutes if the bridge should ever be closed to traffic. The counts illustrated the importance of the structure even at a time of reduced traffic due to COVID-19 restrictions. The traffic counts showcased that before and after the inspection, approximately 7,400 vehicles crossed the bridge daily. The number was reduced to an average of 5,000 vehicles during the inspection (the bridge was closed for an 8-hour period during the inspection) and it was open to traffic during nighttime hours. Please see the attached traffic data for details. DISCUSSION The City owns and operates the 42nd Ave South Bridge and is required to maintain the infrastructure as the sole owner of the bridge. The 42nd Ave South Bridge was constructed in 1949 and has continued to carry vehicular traffic and load-restricted truck traffic for approximately 20 years beyond its designed lifespan. Per the inspection report, this critically deficient bridge should be repaired or replaced. Further analysis indicated that a complete bridge rehabilitation would cost approximately the same, if not more, than a full replacement of the structure due to the bridge’s configuration and the bridge’s inadequacy to carry current truck loadings. 31 42nd Ave South Bridge Replacement September 18, 2020 Page 2 https://tukwilawa.sharepoint.com/sites/publicworks/engineering/PW Drop Box/01 TIC Agenda/2020 Agenda Items/TIC 09-21-2020/04. 42nd Ave S Br Replacement 30% Design/Info Memo_PE TransTech_2020_09_21.docx The 30% P&E package, which Council initiated by selecting Option 3 in February 2020, gives the City the opportunity to be “grant ready.” Being grant-ready means having early (30%) design plans and engineering estimates and a Type, Size and Location (TS&L) report. The TS&L report will describe various options such as alternative conceptual designs as well as locations for proposed structures. The TS&L will enable the City to give clear direction to TranTech, when the City selects one of the listed options. One conceptual option that will be included in the TS&L report is building a new bridge at South 124th Street. This option would require additional exploration and coordination, but this is the time to analyze all possibilities. A new bridge at S 124th Street will allow the 42nd Ave South Bridge to remain operational during construction of a new bridge. However, this will take more coordination to incorporate the existing East Marginal Way with new traffic control, which is beyond the scope of the bridge replacement. With this concept, the City would have the opportunity to apply for funding that is non-bridge related and more transportation related. By moving the replacement bridge structure, additional transportation infrastructure can be updated to keep traffic flowing through the area. TranTech Engineering has also presented the scope of work and a cost estimate to perform 100% PS&E. Please note, the 100% scope of work and cost estimate is subject to change once the bridge design and location is selected. The 100% “shovel ready” PS&E package will include all the required permits and advertisement-ready plans needed to begin the bridge replacement project and advertise for construction bids. FINANCIAL IMPACT Council in February was informed that the approximate costs to perform the in-depth inspection was $39,000 and there was sufficient budget in the Annual Bridge Inspection CIP Program. The 30% design was estimated at $1.0 million and would require at least six months to complete from the date the contract was awarded. Budget for the $1M would be funded from the $680k Solid Waste Utility tax and $320k from the General Fund. TranTech’s attached scope of work and cost estimate for a “grant ready” 30% design P&E is $1,078,487.00 which includes $98,044.00 in management reserve/contingency. The cost estimate for a complete “shovel ready” 100% design PS&E is $2,330,488.00, which includes $211,863.00 in management reserve/contingency. Note, the 100% design cost estimate has the ability to change due to multiple unknowns of the final 42nd Ave South Bridge replacement configuration. See attached proposed 2021 CIP sheet for the full funding breakdown. Design Estimate City Funding Grants/Solid Waste 30% Design Contract Estimate $1,078,487.00 $428,000 $650,000 100% Design Contract Estimate $2,330,488.00 $980,000 $1,350,000 The 100% design option is the most time and cost-efficient choice. There will be options for stopping points at 30%, 60% and 100% of the design if needed. The 100% option would allow the City an opportunity to present a shovel ready project sooner to granting agencies and state/federal representatives. Grant Funding Information The City continues to research funding opportunities beyond the Local Bridge Program grant and is exploring other possible funding partners and other funding sources to accelerate the replacement of the 42nd Ave South Bridge. Public Works staff has applied for design funding from the Puget Sound Regional Council that would have been available in 2023 for $1,500,000; however, we found that the project was not recommended to move forward by PSRC. We have also met with representatives from the Washington State Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board (FMSIB) and have maintained contacts at BNSF, who have expressed eagerness to assist the City with transportation and freight movement grants. In addition, the Mayor and City Administrator, with assistance from David Foster, the City’s state government lobbyist, have met with each of the members of the 11th District delegation, as well as other members in transportation leadership in both the State’s House and Senate (see list). 32 42nd Ave South Bridge Replacement September 18, 2020 Page 3 https://tukwilawa.sharepoint.com/sites/publicworks/engineering/PW Drop Box/01 TIC Agenda/2020 Agenda Items/TIC 09-21-2020/04. 42nd Ave S Br Replacement 30% Design/Info Memo_PE TransTech_2020_09_21.docx List of Legislators  Sen Bob Hasegawa, 11th District, Rep Steve Bergquist, 11th District, Rep Zack Hudgins, 11th District  Rep Jake Fey, Chair House Transportation Committee  Rep Javier Valdez, Vice Chair House Transportation Committee,  Rep Sharon Wylie, Vice Chair House Transportation Committee  Sen Curtis King, Ranking Member Senate Transportation Committee  Sen Joe Nguyen, Senate Transportation Committee Upcoming meetings  Sen Rebecca Saldana, Vice Chair Senate Transportation Committee  Rep Andrew Barkis, Ranking Member House Transportation Committee  Rep Vandana Slatter, Vice Chair House Transportation Committee List of Legislative Staff  Beth Redfield, House Transportation Staff  Danny Masterson, Senate Transportation staff  David Bremer, House Democratic Caucus  Hannah McCarty, Senate Democratic Caucus  State Transportation Staff  Ashley Probart, Executive Director, Transportation Improvement Board  Greg Armstrong, Transportation Improvement Board Engineer Upcoming meetings  Kyle McKeon, WSDOT Local Programs At each of these meetings the City was strongly encouraged to initiate the 30% design immediately in order to be ready for a potential voter-approved transportation package and other grants. It was made very clear that without the initial design completed, the project would not be a strong candidate for grant funding, both on the State and Federal levels. The City has previously applied for federal grants for the 42nd Ave South Bridge without first having the 30% grant ready design in-hand and was not successful. Staff has reached out to receive feedback on those applications from the granting agencies and those conversations have further reinforced that the City must prepare design at this level to compete successfully. Staff have learned that projects that are ahead in design are placed in earlier years of funding package. City staff held a meeting with Ashley Probart, the Executive Director of the Transportation Improvement Board and was told that the City would be in a significantly better position to seek funding from all granting agencies with design completed. Staff strongly believes that a 30% design, better cost estimates and considering alternating locations for the replacement bridge will make this project grant ready, improving the City’s chances to successfully receive grant funding. Some of the grant options are:  Local Bridge Program (formally known as BRAC) Federal grant programs (BUILD grant)  State grant programs, including Public Works Board Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) and  Washington Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board (FMSIB). In addition, as mentioned above, there remains at least some interest in Olympia to explore a voter-approved transportation package in the next few years. This project could be very viable for inclusion, particularly given its impact on regional freight mobility and the fact that the City has a strong partner, with influence in Olympia, in BNSF. 33 42nd Ave South Bridge Replacement September 18, 2020 Page 4 https://tukwilawa.sharepoint.com/sites/publicworks/engineering/PW Drop Box/01 TIC Agenda/2020 Agenda Items/TIC 09-21-2020/04. 42nd Ave S Br Replacement 30% Design/Info Memo_PE TransTech_2020_09_21.docx RECOMMENDATION Local governments play a key role in funding, operating, and maintaining local roads, bridges, airports, transit facilities, drinking water, sewer systems, and other types of infrastructure. The City has an obligation to maintain its current infrastructure. Replacement options for the 42nd Ave South Bridge are needed at this time. Safety must be of paramount concern in the design, construction, maintenance, and traffic operations of the City’s infrastructure. It is also in the City’s economic benefit to create a comprehensive and coordinated maintenance/replacement program to facilitate freight movement between and among local, national and international markets. A significant bridge replacement project like this will take several years to get designed and constructed. Given the low sufficiency rating of the existing bridge structure, proceeding with the design will make sure that we will have adequate time to replace the bridge before fatigue deterioration due to the truck traffic. There are two recommended options for making progress on this project. Staff would like Council’s consideration of both options listed below: 1. Council is being asked to approve, at a minimum, the 30% design P&E contract with TranTech Engineering, LLC, in the amount of $1,078,487.00 for the 42nd Ave South Bridge Replacement Project. 2. Council is also being asked to consider 100% design in the amount of $2,330,488.00, with possible stopping points at 30%, 60% and 100% of the design. Depending on the decision made by TIC at the September 21 meeting, staff is seeking direction for the next steps for Options 1 or 2 and to consider this item at the September 28, 2020 Committee of the Whole. Attachments: 1 Proposed 2021 CIP 2 Consultant Scoring Sheet 3 Traffic Counts 4 TranTech Bridge 30% Scope of Work and cost estimate 5 TranTech Bridge 100% Scope of Work and cost estimate 6 2020 Legislative Agenda 34 CITY OF TUKWILA CAPITAL PROJECT SUMMARY 2021 to 2026 PROJECT:Project No. 91810404 DESCRIPTION: JUSTIFICATION: STATUS: MAINT. IMPACT: COMMENT: FINANCIAL Through Estimated (in $000's)2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 BEYOND TOTAL EXPENSES Design 19 200 878 1,252 2,349 Land (R/W)30 30 Const. Mgmt.250 1,650 1,650 3,550 Construction 7,800 7,800 15,600 TOTAL EXPENSES 19 200 878 1,252 280 9,450 9,450 0 0 21,529 FUND SOURCES Awarded Grant 0 Proposed BRAC Grant 6,000 6,000 12,000 Proposed STP Grant 1,000 1,000 2,000 Proposed TIB 1,500 1,500 3,000 Proposed FMSIB 500 500 Solid Waste Utility Tax 650 700 700 710 720 549 4,029 City Oper. Revenue 19 200 228 552 (420)240 (270) (549)00 TOTAL SOURCES 19 200 878 1,252 280 9,450 9,450 0 0 21,529 STP funding has 13.5% match requirement. BRAC funding would be at 80% match for up to $12 million. Project partners may include FMSIB & BNSF Railroad as they have over 1,800 trips a day on the 42nd Ave S Bridge and it is the only ingress/egress available for their intermodal yard. Also State TIB for $3M. 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Design and construct a replacement structure for the existing 42nd Ave S Bridge near the Tukwila Community Center. Council approved 30% design with City funding of $1M in 2020, remaining scheduled in 2022. The current bridge has a sufficiency rating of 7.6 (out of 100), is load restricted for AASHTO Type 3 trucks and is structurally deficient. Truck speed was reduced to 15 mph in 2018. In 2017 and 2019, Bridge Replacement Advisory Committee (BRAC) funding was submitted, but not awarded. Staff will apply for future BRAC funding during the next call. Applying for STP funding in 2020 for $1.5m for design. New bridge. 2021 - 2026 Capital Improvement Program 9 35 Consultant Selection Approach to DBE GoalProject Understanding and ApproachQualifications/Expertise of Project ManagerQualifications/Expertise of TeamExperience with Utility and Third Party CoordinationSubtotalInterviewTotalRank42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Submitter 20 30 20 20 10 100 200 KPFF 45 75 47 58 21 309 555 Average Score 15.0 25.0 15.7 19.3 7.0 82.0 77.3 138.8 Henry 15 25 17 18 8 83 80 163 Hari 15 20 15 20 5 75 72 147 Adam 15 30 15 20 8 88 86 174 Peter 71 71 TranTECH 47 72 58 57 30 320 584 Average Score 15.7 24.0 19.3 19.0 10.0 88.0 80.0 146.0 Henry 14 27 20 19 10 90 90 180 Hari 15 20 20 20 10 85 80 165 Adam 18 25 18 18 10 89 78 167 Peter 72 72 SCJ Alliance*30 50 37 36 13 0 166 Average Score 10.0 16.7 12.3 12.0 4.3 55.3 #DIV/0!#DIV/0! Henry 10 22 12 11 5 60 Hari 10 20 10 10 5 55 Adam 10 8 15 15 3 51 Peter 1 2 36 Approach to DBE GoalProject Understanding and ApproachQualifications/Expertise of Project ManagerQualifications/Expertise of TeamExperience with Utility and Third Party CoordinationSubtotalInterviewTotalRank42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement RHC Engineering*48 49 49 48 15 0 209 Average Score 16.0 16.3 16.3 16.0 5.0 69.7 #DIV/0!#DIV/0! Henry 15 14 16 15 5 65 Hari 15 15 15 15 5 65 Adam 18 20 18 18 5 79 Peter *Did not interview 37 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 12:00 AM02:00 AM04:00 AM06:00 AM08:00 AM10:00 AM12:00 PM02:00 PM04:00 PM06:00 PM08:00 PM10:00 PM12:00 AM02:00 AM04:00 AM06:00 AM08:00 AM10:00 AM12:00 PM02:00 PM04:00 PM06:00 PM08:00 PM10:00 PM12:00 AM02:00 AM04:00 AM06:00 AM08:00 AM10:00 AM12:00 PM02:00 PM04:00 PM06:00 PM08:00 PM10:00 PMPre-Inspection Hourly During Inspection Hourly Post-Inspection HourlyAverage VolumeVehicle Classification (Segregated by Type) 42nd Avenue S Average Hourly Volumes (Segregated by Type) Motor Bikes Passenger Vehicles Trucks 38 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 1 of 32 EXHIBIT A CITY OF TUKWILA 42ND AVE S BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PHASE 1 SCOPE OF WORK Background: This project will replace the existing City of Tukwila’s (City) 42nd Ave South Bridge with a new multi-span bridge. The existing 42nd Ave South was built in 1949. It is a 3-span bridge that is 280-foot-long (30’:220’:30’) and 28-feet wide (24’ curb-to-curb) with the main span consisting a through-truss that spans over the Duwamish River. T he existing bridge has a sufficiency rating of 7.56 SD and is considered Structurally Deficient and Functionally Obsolete. The 2018 Average D aily T raffic volume (ADT) was 10,300 vehicles per day with 30% of those vehicles being heavy trucks. The 42nd Ave South Bridge is a primary crossing of the Duwamish River for the Allentown neighborhood, the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Intermodal Facility, and the Baker Commodities Facility which are considered as major stakeholders of this project. Improving the level of service is extremely important on the 42nd Ave South Ave. as it serves in excess of 10,000 vehicle per day with 30% of those vehicles being trucks and it is the only viable route for container trucks entering and leaving the Tukwila BNSF Intermodal Facility. The Bridge on this important roadway facility is not only narrow, only 24 feet curb to curb, but also has many structural deficiencies and is currently load posted, restricting the free movement of that freight. City of Tukwila desires to replace the existing bridge structure with a new bridge and has tasked TranTech Engineering, LLC’s team (TranTech) to preparing a Type, Size, & Location Report (TS&L) and 30% Plans and Estimate (P&E) as part of the Phase 1 of this project. It is TranTech’s understanding that Phase 2 services consisting of 60%, 90%, and 100% Plans, Specifications, & Estimate (PS&E) submittals, bid ready documents and environmental permitting documentation for the bridge will be supplemented to the TranTech’s contract following completion of the Phase 1 services at a future date. Furthermore, the City of Tukwila reserves the right to retain the services of TranTech’s team for Phase 3 of the project consisting of construction phase engineering services and construction inspection and management. All work performed by TranTech’s team shall be in accordance with the WSDOT Local Agency Guidelines (LAG) Manual for federally funded projects, in anticipation of receiving future federal funding. The following work elements present a summary of the services associated with Phase 1 of the project: 39 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 2 of 32 Phase 1 Scope Summary: 1. Project Management 2. Surveying 3. Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering 4. Environmental Permitting (preapplication) 5. Bridge Aesthetics & Landscape 6. Utility Engineering and Coordination 7. Constructability Review, Construction Schedule & Estimation 8. Traffic Control & Traffic Signal 9. Illumination 10. Community Outreach 11. Type, Size & Location Report 12. 30% Plans, & Estimate (P&E) Future anticipated work as a contract supplement: • 60%, 90%, 100% and Bid-ready PS&E • Completion of permitting documentation • Ad-ready Construction Documents • Construction Phase Services Reports and plans, to the extent feasible, shall be developed in accordance with the latest edition and amendments of the following guidelines and documents: • AASHTO 2001, “A Policy of Geometric Design of Highways and Streets” • Washington State Department of Transportation, “Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction” • Washington State Department of Transportation, “Design Manual” • Washington State Department of Transportation, “Bridge Design Manual” • AASHTO LRFD Bridge design Specifications – Seventh Edition • Washington State Department of Transportation, “Materials Laboratory Outline” • Washington State Department of Transportation, “Construction Manual” • Washington State Department of Transportation, “Local Agency Guidelines” • Highway Research Board’s Manual entitled “Highway Capacity” • United State Department of Transportation and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) “Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways” • Standard drawings prepared by City shall be used as a guide in all cases where they fit design conditions. • AASHTO “Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities” • WSDOT Highway Runoff Manual • WSDOT Hydraulics Manual • King County 2016 Edition of the King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) 40 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 3 of 32 WORK ELEMENT 1 PROJECT MANAGEMENT: This work element includes administration of the contract between the Consultant and the City, preparation of monthly progress reports and quality control, necessary for the Project. The task includes all administrative services needed to coordinate with the sub-consultant/s and to complete the Project on time and within budget. The following are the categorized activities associated with this work element: • Project Schedule Updating. • Meetings and Meeting Minutes – approximately 12 team meetings are assumed for the duration of the design activities. • Monthly Progress Reports, and Invoicing. Progress reports will contain a narrative that identifies and describes significant activities performed in the previous month and the significant planned activities for the upcoming month. • Design Team Management: a. Schedule and coordinate with design team. b. Prepare sub-consultant agreements, coordinate, budget and review the project progress and submittals. c. Prepare, monitor, and update project schedule. Monitor project budget. d. Prepare monthly billings, progress reports, and updated monthly project schedule. e. Maintain regular informal contact telephone discussions, and electronic mail. f. Obtain, with assistance from the City, rights of entry necessary for geotechnical studies, etc. Deliverables: • Progress Reports • Meeting Minutes • Monthly Invoicing • Project Schedule 41 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 4 of 32 WORK ELEMENT 2 SURVEYING: This Work Element is performed by 1-Alliance to provide topographic survey and engineering basemaps of the existing 42nd Ave South Bridge and its surroundings, including pick-ups of flagging for Ordinary High-Water Mark (OHWM) of the river and topo mapping of the river bank 100 feet east and west of the existing bridge and 500 feet north and south approaches. Survey shall extend laterally to the apparent right-of-way. Below please find Exhibit A, Surveying Limits. 2.1 Survey PM, Admin, QA/QC This task includes the survey project management, administrative duties, and quality control required for a project of this complexity and magnitude. 2.2 Survey Control This task includes the establishment of survey control, or the recovery of existing survey control, as required for the project. Survey control will be set, found, or referenced utilizing Real Time Kinematic (RTK) GPS (GNSS) and the Washington State Reference Network (WSRN) in conformance with industry standards. This survey control is then propagated, as required, utilizing standard terrestrial total station measurements. 2.2.1 Geodetic Survey Control 2.2.1.1 Survey work shall reference the Washington State Plane Coordinate System of 1983 as established in accordance with Chapter 58.20 Revised Code of Washington. 2.2.1.2 Vertical Datum shall reference the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88). 2.2.2 Cadastral Survey Control 2.2.2.1 Public Land Survey System monumentation required for right-of-way resolution. 2.3 Field Surveying and Mapping This task includes the field surveying and mapping required for this specific effort. Topographic– approx. 1500 linear feet along 42nd Ave South and intersections of adjoining streets. The consultant shall locate and map visible features necessary for the creation of an engineering design base map. Typical features include: 2.3.1 Topographic and Planimetric, including channelization. 2.3.2 Edge of Pavement, gravel, grass, concrete, etc. 2.3.3 Curb and sidewalk, including curb cuts and ADA ramps. 2.3.4 Signs and signals, poles and appurtences. 2.3.5 Trees, 4” in diameter or greater, and edges of significant vegetation. 2.3.6 Walls, rockeries, and fences (or faces of). 2.3.7 Ground measurements to generate a digital terrain model at one-foot contours. 2.3.8 Visible improvements situated within the described mapping limits. 2.3.9 Bridge abutment as-builts and soffit elevations. 42 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 5 of 32 2.4 Utility Surveying Services This task includes the mapping of utilities throughout the survey limits. The Consultant shall arrange for underground ‘conductible’ utility locating, by means of a private utility firm. 2.4.1 Surface Observable: power poles, vaults, risers, fire hydrants, water valves/meters, gas valves, traffic signal/traffic control boxes, and overhead utility lines. 2.4.2 Stormwater and Sanitary sewer structures shall be located. Standard efforts will be made for obtaining pipe invert elevations, size, and materials. 2.5 Office Processing This task includes the office processing of the collected survey data, data extraction, field book reductions, CADD drafting, and other duties required for the generation of the deliverable(s). For 3D laser scanning efforts, sub-tasks include the registering of point clouds; evaluating the registrations; exporting the point cloud data to Civil3D; creating or picking of appropriate points in Civil3D; Linework and Layering, and standard CADD drafting of the deliverables, as required. 2.6 Right-of-Way and Boundary Resolution(s) 2.6.1 Right-of-Way – Resolve right-of-way within the project limits. 2.6.2 Parcel Resolution – Resolve boundaries for parcels Assumptions: • Rights-of-Entry will be provided by the City. • Traffic control, if required, will be implemented and billed as an invoiced ODC. • Tree Tags, driplines/canopies are not a part of the scope services. • Setting of property corners is not a part of the scope of services. • A record of Survey is not a part of the scope of services. • Up to 60 Ordinary High-Water Mark flags, set by others, to be located. • Title reports with underlying documents for parcels to be provided by the CITY. Deliverables: • Topographic Survey with 1-foot contour intervals (electronic copy). • AutoCAD Surfaces (DTM Files) (electronic copy) or any other desired electronic source file. • ASCII file of control points. 43 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 6 of 32 Exhibit A, Surveying Limits 44 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 7 of 32 WORK ELEMENT 3 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING: This Work Element, the purpose of which is to provide preliminary geotechnical engineering recommendations and reporting to support the design team, will be performed by Landau Associates, Inc. The preliminary geotechnical engineering effort will include the following activities: 3.1 Review Existing Geotechnical Information Consultant will review readily available existing subsurface exploration data for the project area. This will include a review of subsurface information previously gathered by others as part of the nearby King County Allentown Trunk and Sound Transit Central Link Light Rail projects. The purpose of reviewing this data is to facilitate the planning of the Consultant’s subsurface exploration program and incorporate geotechnical information from previous explorations into the Consultant’s preliminary geotechnical design considerations and recommendations. The data review will also include a review of published geologic and topographic information for the project area. 3.2 Geotechnical Support Related to Preparation of the TS&L Report Consultant will evaluate the above described information collected by others from the project area in order to develop preliminary geotechnical engineering conclusions and recommendations related to preparation of the TS&L Report. Preliminary geotechnical engineering conclusions and recommendation will be prepared for a replacement bridge that is located within the corridor that the existing bridge is currently located, as well as within the South 124th Street corridor. 3.3 Geotechnical Investigation Program To characterize subsurface soil and groundwater conditions along the selected bridge alignment, Consultant will subcontract a drilling contractor to advance up to four exploratory borings at or near the proposed bridge foundation locations using a track-mounted drill rig. The Consultant’s cost estimate includes budget to advance two borings each to a depth of about 90 ft below ground surface (bgs) and two borings each to a depth of about 60 ft bgs. The Consultant’s cost estimate also includes budget to subcontract a small tracked excavator to clear brush and/or create relatively level working surfaces for the drill rig. The Consultant’s cost estimate also includes budget to stabilize areas of disturbed ground with mulch or straw at the completion of the subsurface investigation. Finally, the Consultant’s cost estimate includes budget to obtain access permission from King County for the two borings that will be advanced along or adjacent to the Green River Trail. A geotechnical representative of the Consultant will observe the advancement of the exploratory borings, obtain soil samples from the borings, and prepare field logs of conditions observed. Soil samples will be obtained from the exploratory borings on about a 2½- or 5-ft depth interval using the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) procedure. The soil samples will be delivered to the Consultant’s laboratory for further examination and classification. Soil samples obtained from the exploration will be held in the laboratory for 30 days after submittal of the final report. After that date, the soil samples will be disposed of unless arrangements are made to retain them. While monitoring wells are not planned for the proposed borings, groundwater occurrence will be noted on the summary boring logs. Upon completion of sampling and logging, the borings will be decommissioned in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 173-160 of the Washington 45 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 8 of 32 Administrative Code (WAC). Excess cuttings from the exploratory borings will be properly disposed of offsite. If present, the pavement section at borehole locations will be patched using fast setting concrete. Prior to performing the above described field activities, Consultant will arrange for underground utility location (“call before you dig”). Consultant will also hire a private utility locating service to check for the presence of buried utilities at planned boring locations. Consultant will complete a geotechnical laboratory testing program consisting of natural moisture content and grain size and/or Atterberg Limits determinations on selected soil samples to aid in classifying site soils. Laboratory testing will include up to 30 moisture content determinations and 16 grain size distributions or Atterberg limits determinations. 3.4 Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Analysis Consultant will evaluate the information collected as part of the above described data review and field investigation program in order to develop preliminary geotechnical engineering conclusions and recommendations related to the preliminary design (i.e. 30 percent) of the proposed replacement bridge. 3.5 Draft and Final Preliminary Geotechnical Reports Deliverables will include a draft geotechnical report containing preliminary geotechnical conclusions and recommendations. A final preliminary geotechnical report will be created that contains the results of mutually agreed upon consolidated comments from other team members and the City. The preliminary geotechnical reports will include the following information: • Summary logs and a site plan showing the locations of the exploratory borings advanced by the Consultant. • Seismic design criteria in accordance with applicable AASHTO standards. • A preliminary qualitative evaluation of the liquefaction and lateral spread hazards at the project site, if warranted. If such hazards exist at the project site, a detailed evaluation of the liquefaction and lateral spread hazards would need to be performed during a subsequent design phase of the project. • Recommendations for site preparation and fill placement, including: criteria for clearing, stripping and grubbing; an evaluation of the suitability of on-site soil for use as structural fill; gradation criteria for imported fill; guidance for preparation of subgrade soil, which will support the bridge approaches; and criteria for structural fill placement and compaction. • Geotechnical recommendations for the preliminary design of deep foundations for the proposed replacement bridge, as well as temporary foundation support for the existing bridge if it will be used as a temporary bridge during construction of the replacement bridge. The recommendations will include preliminary estimates of the following: tip elevation, axial resistance, downdrag loads and loss of side resistance during seismic loading, uplift resistance, lateral shaft analysis, and construction considerations. • Lateral earth pressure criteria for design of proposed bridge abutment walls and permanent retaining walls including equivalent fluid densities for the active, at-rest and passive states of stress. 46 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 9 of 32 • A discussion related to known or anticipated geotechnical issues that should be considered during final design of the project or that could influence construction of the replacement bridge. The discussion will include methods to mitigate such issues, if identified. • Recommendations for supplemental geotechnical services to support final design of the proposed replacement bridge. 3.6 Meeting Participation For estimating purposes, it is assumed that the Consultant’s geotechnical engineer will participate in up to three internal meetings with the design team for consultation during preliminary design of the project. Assumptions: • The replacement bridge will consist of a two or three-span structure with no in water foundation elements. • The replacement bridge will be located either within the corridor that the existing bridge is currently located or within the South 124th Street corridor. • Permits will not be required to clear brush and/or create relatively level working surfaces for the drill rig. • Consultant will not need to provide preliminary foundation design recommendations for more than 3 different foundation options. • Additional exploratory borings may be required if during the design process the locations of the bridge foundations change. Deliverables: • An electronic (Adobe PDF) copy of the draft Preliminary Geotechnical Report • An electronic (Adobe PDF) copy of the final Preliminary Geotechnical Report 47 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 10 of 32 WORK ELEMENT 4 ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING (PREAPPLICATION): This Work Element will be performed by Landau Associates, Inc. to provide environmental permitting documentation for preapplication support for the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), and local permits/approvals. Federal funding is anticipated to be administered through WSDOT Local Programs. Consultant therefore assumes that the WSDOT will be the lead coordinator for NEPA. For the purposes of this Scope of Services, Consultant assumes that this project can be authorized under a NEPA Categorical Exclusion (CE). The necessary work elements associated with preapplication documentation are assumed to be: 4.1 Wetland/Waterway Delineation Consultant will conduct wetland delineations in accordance with the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) 1987 Wetlands Delineation Manual and the 2010 USACE Regional Supplement to the Wetland Delineation Manual. The ordinary high-water mark (OHWM) of waterways will be delineated using guidance provided in Ecology’s Determining the Ordinary High-Water Mark on Streams in Washington State. The high tide line for the Duwamish River, which is tidally influenced in the project area, will be obtained from available tide gauge data and field observation. Consultant will compile and review environmental information from readily available public domain resources to gain a general understanding of potential wetland issues at the site. Public domain resources include, but are not limited to: • Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey data • National Wetlands Inventory mapping • Local Critical Areas mapping • US Geological Survey topographic mapping • Recent aerial photography. The field investigation will include an examination of vegetation, soils, and hydrology within the project area for two alternative alignments. Flagging will be placed along the wetland/waterway boundaries and will be confined to the project area. Any wetland/waterway habitat that extends beyond the project area, and within 200 ft (referred to as the study area), will be estimated both visually and using public domain resources to assess extent. Included in this task is time to provide the project surveyors with a hand-sketch of wetland/waterway boundaries to assist the surveyors to locate project flagging. Consultant also included time to review the survey map and request any necessary changes to accurately represent existing wetland/waterway conditions. Wetlands within the study area will be rated in accordance with Ecology’s Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington, and buffer widths will be determined in compliance with applicable Critical Areas regulations. Stream typing and buffer widths will be based on Chapter 18.45 of the TMC, and the water typing system promulgated in WAC 222-15- 131. Consultant will prepare a draft Wetland and Waterway Delineation Technical Memorandum for the selected alternative with the information obtained from field delineation and ratings. The memorandum will be acceptable to the City for shoreline permitting and other regulatory agencies that will include: • A summary of the methodology used 48 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 11 of 32 • The size and rating of each wetland and waterway; a characterization of wetland vegetation, soils, and hydrology; and field data sheets • A scaled site map showing the locations of wetland/waterway boundaries and buffers, locations of wetland data plots, and site topography • Supporting photographs. The draft memorandum will be provided to the City for review. Comments will be reviewed and incorporated, as appropriate, into a final Wetland and Waterway Delineation Technical Memorandum. The delineation report memorandum will be used in pre application meetings for the purposes of discussing potential project impacts and determining agency jurisdiction. This task includes efforts to summarize wetland/waterway delineation results, including figure, for two project alternatives for use in the Type, Size, and Location report. 4.2 WSDOT Local Program National Environmental Policy Act Categorical Exclusion Form Consultant will prepare a preliminary version of the WSDOT Local Programs NEPA Categorical Exclusion (CE) Form (formerly the Local Agency Environmental Classification Summary). The purpose of the preliminary NEPA CE form is to facilitate discussion with WSDOT Local Programs to determine subsequent NEPA compliance needs. To complete the preliminary version of the CE form, Consultant will compile and review environmental information from readily available public domain resources to gain a general understanding of relevant environmental resources along the project corridor. 4.3 Agency Preapplication Meetings Consultant will assist in scheduling and participate in pre-application meetings, as needed, with the City, Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW), Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR), US Army Corps of Engineers, and US Coast Guard to coordinate jurisdictional limits and permit conditions for the project. This task includes participation in at least two onsite meetings, three conference calls and associated correspondence to support preapplication inquiries. 4.4 Permit Matrix Consultant will prepare a permit matrix identifying all anticipated environmental permits and a rough schedule including required reviews, duration of reviews by agencies, public notice or comment periods, public outreach requirements, hearings, and other permit related timing constraints. The permit matrix will evaluate permit needs for no more than two alternatives. Assumptions: • The proposed project will receive funding from the FHWA administered through WSDOT Highways and Local Programs. 49 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 12 of 32 • The preliminary NEPA CE form will only be prepared for the selected bridge alignment. • The preliminary NEPA CE form will identify individual discipline reports anticipated to be prepared for the project. Development of discipline reports is not included in this scope of services. • The City will provide access permissions if needed. • Wetland/waterway boundary flagging will be placed only in accessible parts of the project area. • Permit matrix will be limited to environmental permits related to SEPA, NEPA and Shoreline compliance, and will not include construction permits, building permits, or stormwater permits. Deliverables: • An electronic (Adobe PDF) copy of the preliminary NEPA CE form • An electronic (Adobe PDF) copy of the draft and final Wetland and Waterway Delineation Technical Memorandum. • An electronic (Adobe PDF) copy of the permit matrix 50 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 13 of 32 WORK ELEMENT 5 BRIDGE AESTHETICS & LANDSCAPE This Work Element is performed by Makers to provide Bridge Aesthetics and Landscaping design. The following outlines the tasks associated with this work: 5.1 Concept Design for Urban Design Elements a. Review engineering work, site constraints, existing City policies and activities relevant to the project. Assist as requested regarding street configuration and relationship to adjacent properties. Meet with City Staff and Consultant Team to discuss opportunities, constraints and ideas. (Follow-up with selected Staff and team members may be necessary b. Sketch preliminary concepts c. Review with staff (one meeting) and engineering team and refine the concepts. d. Assist Enviro-issues with public open house. (Event time only) e. Review results of the open house with the Staff/Consultant team. f. Work up preferred ideas to a 30% design level for aesthetic and landscaping features. Provide drawings in a format compatible with the engineering documents. (Format provided by the engineering team.) Provide narrative description of urban design and/or outline g. Prepare 30% design level quantity estimate and opinion of cost estimate for the selected aesthetic and landscaping features. Assumptions: • City and Enviro-issues will organize the open house and publicize and arrange for the meetings and presentations. Makers will assist in conducting the sessions. • Makers will not be involved in lighting, electrical or utilities work. • The budget assumes 6 meetings or conferences with the engineering/City team and one public event (open house). • The engineering team will provide Makers with CAD layouts, templates and numbering to meet the requirements of the final bid document formatting. Deliverables: • Concept sketches for the open house • 30% Documents of urban design (Aesthetic) and landscaping elements in digital format (CAD) as provided by the engineering team. 51 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 14 of 32 WORK ELEMENT 6 UTILITY COORDINATION This Work Element is performed by TranTech to provide utility coordination and potentially design for the project. 6.1 Utility Coordination Utilities owned and operated by other agencies/entities, other than the City, that are within the project corridor of the bridge improvements will be identified. TranTech will acquire and review record drawings of existing utilities within the project limits and define potential utility conflicts. For the purpose of preparing this scope of work, it is anticipated that up to four (4) utilities are located in the project corridor. Known utilities within the project limits include Puget Sound Energy (PSE) Gas and Electric, Comcast, King County Wastewater Treatment Services and Seattle City Light (SCL). TranTech will schedule meetings with utility owners to discuss the project and define utility needs and design criteria if the utility is impacted by the proposed bridge improvements. A total of four (4) meetings are anticipated under this subtask. Meeting will be conducted by, and minutes will be prepared by TranTech. Prepare Memorandum - Prepare a short technical memorandum to outline all the findings on the utilities at and around the project site. Assumptions: • No utility design is part of this Work Element Deliverables: • Utility coordination memorandum 52 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 15 of 32 WORK ELEMENT 7 CONSTRUCTABILITY REVIEW, AND ESTIMATION: This work element is performed by Ott-Sakai Construction Consultants (OS), to provide constructability review, construction schedule, and construction estimation services. The work element includes the following activities: 7.1 Constructability review and Cost Estimation OS will provide constructability review and cost Estimation of the design team’s prepared TS&L Report and Plans, & Estimate (P&E) package at 30% design level. Deliverables: • Constructability Review and Estimation for TS&L Report. • Constructability Review and Estimation for 30% P&E design level. 53 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 16 of 32 WORK ELEMENT 8 - TRAFFIC CONTROL AND TRAFFIC SIGNAL: This work element is performed by Transpo Group, Inc. (Transpo) to provide traffic analysis, traffic control, detour, and traffic signal plans for the Contractor’s use in constructing the proposed bridge and roadway improvements. 8.1 Traffic Analysis Transpo will evaluate existing and future traffic conditions as described within this subsection at the following intersections: • 42nd Ave S/Interurban Ave S • 42nd Ave S/S 124th St • Interurban Ave S/S 124th St • Interurban Ave S/Access Roadway Transpo will coordinate with the City to identify appropriate evaluation criteria for comparing and analyzing potential improvement options. Future Demand It is assumed that the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) travel demand model will be used to develop future year traffic projections at the study intersections identified above. The Consultant will coordinate with the Client to identify an appropriate existing year and design year for analysis. Traffic Operations and Level-of-Service Synchro (Traffic Signals) and aaSidra (Roundabouts) software will be utilized to analyze existing and future traffic operations, queue lengths, and levels-of-service at the study intersections. The purpose of this analysis will be to establish baseline and future no-build conditions for vehicle delay, level-of-service, and travel times through the intersection for vehicles, transit vehicles, and non-motorized users. Evaluate Options It is assumed that the following improvement options will be evaluated: • Option 1 – S 124th St Bridge – Traffic Signal o S 124th St is connected to Interurban Ave S with a new bridge across the Duwamish River. o A new traffic signal is installed at the S 124th St/Interurban Ave S intersection. o The north leg at the 42nd Ave S/Interurban Ave S intersection is removed. o The existing signal at 42nd Ave S/Interurban Ave S is modified as needed and the Interurban Ave S/Access Roadway intersection is signalized, if warrants are met. • Option 2 – S 124th St Bridge – Roundabout 54 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 17 of 32 o S 124th St is connected to Interurban Ave S with a new bridge across the Duwamish River. o A new roundabout is installed at the S 124th St/Interurban Ave S intersection. o The north leg at the 42nd Ave S/Interurban Ave S intersection is removed. o The existing signal at 42nd Ave S/Interurban Ave S is modified as needed and the Interurban Ave S/Access Roadway intersection is signalized, if warrants are met. • Option 3 – 42nd Ave S Bridge – Existing Condition The options will be evaluated against previously established evaluation criteria to help refine and prioritize the potential improvement options for each intersection. In cooperation with the Client and project team, a scoring matrix will be developed with appropriately weighted evaluation criteria for the purpose of rating and prioritizing improvement options. Conceptual Drawings of Improvements The Consultant will develop conceptual drawings of Options 1, 2, and 3 utilizing survey data (if available) and/or readily available aerial imagery. The conceptual drawings will represent an approximately 10 percent design level. Summary Report The Consultant will prepare a final report that summarizes the results of the traffic analysis, evaluation of alternatives, and the Project Team’s recommendations. Following one round of comments from the Client, the report will be finalized. Deliverables: • Concept drawings • Summary traffic analysis report 8.2 Traffic Control The Consultant will prepare traffic control plans, special provisions, and engineer’s opinion of cost for constructing the proposed bridge and roadway improvements. Attend a total of 3 team meetings to discuss what type and duration of closures are needed for which phase of the bridge reconstruction. Attend up to 2 neighborhood meetings to present and discuss closure plans. The exact limits of the traffic control will be determined jointly between the City and the Consultant; however, the initial scope and fee are based on the listed assumptions below. The plans will conform with MUTCD and/or WSDOT/City procedures and standard plans. 55 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 18 of 32 Assumptions: • The limits, details, and types of traffic control plans are unknown at the time of contracting. The Consultant has budgeted to provide up to three generic short-term traffic control plans, and one specific traffic control plan to include: o TCP 1: Short term plan, including pedestrian and vehicle detour plan as needed o TCP 2: Short term plan, including pedestrian and vehicle detour plan as needed o TCP 3: Short term plan, including pedestrian and vehicle detour plan as needed o TCP 4: Short term – full closure of Green River Trail plan, including detour plan • It is assumed that others will prepare all civil-related plans for temporary traffic control. This includes, but is not limited to, the design of temporary curbs, sidewalks, paving, grading, utilities, drainage, structures, geotechnical design, and related work. • Traffic analysis is not included in task 8.2. • Special provisions are not included in the Phase 1 deliverables/fee Deliverables: • Traffic Control packages for TS&L design level. 8.3 Traffic Signal Design Transpo will prepare traffic signal plans, and engineer’s opinion of cost for constructing traffic signal improvements/modifications for the project. Assumptions: • The traffic signal design deliverables/fee is based on Option 1 from sub-task 8.1. • The existing traffic signal at the 42nd Ave S/Interurban Ave S intersection will continue to operate during construction and temporary signal modifications will not be required. • Temporary traffic signals will not be required during construction at the S 124th St/Interurban Ave S, 42nd Ave S/S 124th St, and/or Interurban Ave S/Access Roadway intersections. • Permanent signal improvements at the 42nd Ave S/Interurban Ave S intersection are anticipated to primarily include: o Removing the existing mast arm and traffic signals for southbound 42nd Ave S traffic o Modifying the existing phasing and traffic signals for northbound 42nd Ave S traffic to be left turn signal heads only o Removing pedestrian signal heads and pushbuttons for crossing the north leg of the intersection • Permanent signal improvements at the Interurban Ave S/Access Roadway intersection are anticipated to primarily include: o Fully signalizing the intersection to be tied into the existing traffic signal system at the 42nd Ave S/Interurban Ave S intersection 56 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 19 of 32 • Permanent signal improvements at the S 124th St/Interurban Ave S intersection are anticipated to primarily include: o Fully signalizing the intersection • Existing traffic signal controller and service cabinets will not be impacted by the project and will remain in operation as-is • Special signal pole foundation design is not anticipated • Transformer and/or electrical service connection design is not anticipated • It is assumed that others will prepare all civil-related plans for temporary traffic control. This includes, but is not limited to, the design of curbs, sidewalks, paving, grading, utilities, drainage, structures, geotechnical design, and related work • Special provisions are not included in the Phase 1 deliverables/fee • Wire termination details and pole chart details are not included in the Phase 1 deliverables/fee Deliverables: • Traffic Signal packages for TS&L and 30% design levels. 57 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 20 of 32 WORK ELEMENT 9 ILLUMINATION: This work element is performed by TranTech, to provide preliminary illumination design services. TranTech team will prepare for illumination and signing preliminary design for 30% P&E design level. Based on the City’s selected Alternative, TranTech will provide design services associated with illumination, and permanent signing design. The illumination design is intended for the Bridge and its immediate approaches. TranTech team will prepare 30% plans, and engineering cost estimates. This work element includes the following tasks: 9.1 Illumination The design team will discuss guidelines and criteria with the City. The team will develop a design basis report outlining the lighting design approach, AGi32 software, design criteria, target luminance and luminance levels, power densities, wiring schematics, sources (discuss with the PUD service types and locations), color temperature and control intent. Following the input from the City, the lighting engineer will develop illumination P&E, lighting schedules and provide required fixture catalog cuts. Assumptions: • The bridge will have full illumination for bicycles, pedestrians and vehicles. • The approaches will have full illumination and transition to existing conditions as required. Deliverables: • Illumination P&E at 30% design levels. 58 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 21 of 32 WORK ELEMENT 10 COMMUNITY OUTREACH: This work element is performed by EnviroIssues and TranTech to provide Community Outreach services in the TS&L Phase. Community outreach will be broken into two phases: Phase 1: Early engagement and coordination (at project initiation) During Phase 1, EnviroIssues will focus on building relationships with key stakeholders, establish local avenues for project communications and develop a plan for outreach. EnviroIssues will also develop initial project messaging and materials. Outreach will include interviews and briefings with key stakeholders and community organizations to gather initial feedback about the project, potential solutions, decision criteria and tradeoffs and outreach approach. Phase 2: Technical options and tradeoffs (with draft TS&L/pre 30% design) During Phase 2, EnviroIssues will focus outreach efforts on broader public engagement to gather feedback on the technical options, potential tradeoffs and impacts, and decision criteria to identify a preferred solution. Outreach will include stakeholder briefings, an online open house, an in - person public event and broad public notification. 10.1 Community outreach plans Objectives Through collaboration with the project team, City and the surrounding community, EnviroIssues will create an overall community outreach plan and phase-specific plans that set outreach goals, methods and messaging. Activities/Approach • EnviroIssues will do initial research into the community, including previous and current engagement and a demographic analysis to help guide the outreach approach. • EnviroIssues will create a general community outreach plan that sets the overall project goals, messaging, etc. • EnviroIssues will develop outreach plans for phase 1 and 2, outlining goals and strategies specific to each phase that allows us to build in flexibility as the project team learns more about community needs. Assumptions • EnviroIssues will lead development of community outreach plans and update consistently as community needs are better understood. Deliverables • General community outreach plan, assumes 2 rounds of review, to be updated up to 2 times • Phase 1 community outreach plan, assumes 2 rounds of review, to be updated up to 2 times • Phase 2 community outreach plan, assumes 2 rounds of review, to be updated up to 2 times 10.2 Stakeholder interviews, briefings and phone calls Objectives 59 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 22 of 32 In the light of Covid 19 restrictions and in partnership with the project team, EnviroIssues will support City staff to schedule, develop questions and materials for, conduct, and document stakeholder interviews through website and webinar facilitations and/or phone briefings for Phases 1 and 2. Outreach to stakeholders will include area residents, businesses, community and cultural organizations, and others. The purpose of the initial interviews and follow-up briefings will be to further understand community interests, concerns and priorities related to the bridge replacement and how the community would like to stay informed and engaged during this and future phases of the project, including pre-construction and construction phases. The interviews, briefings and phone calls provide an opportunity for key stakeholders to share their unique perspectives on the project issues and potential solutions prior to broader community outreach. The interviews, briefings and phone calls also provide an opportunity for the City to get ahead of and/or proactively address stakeholder concerns and questions prior to outreach to the broader public and share how stakeholder input has been used to inform City decisions. Activities/Approach • EnviroIssues, with the support of the project team, will identify project stakeholders and tailor an engagement approach that best suits individual stakeholder needs. • A phased approach to direct engagement will be used starting with 1) interview, 2) briefings and gather feedback and correspondence to close the loop with stakeholders. • Stay Home, Stay Safe orders will be considered when determining which engagement approach to use. Assumptions • Representatives from the City and consultant team will attend online interviews and briefings. • EnviroIssues will facilitate scheduling interviews and briefings, either in person or via online platforms. • EnviroIssues will draft meeting minutes and additional notes. • Time billed to attending in-person activities includes up to 30 minutes of travel each way. • EnviroIssues will record feedback received during these outreach activities in Task 10.3. Deliverables • Assume up to 6 stakeholder interviews and summaries • Assume up to 6 briefings and summaries • Assume up to 10 emails • Assume up to 10 phone calls and associated summaries 10.3 Online engagement Objectives Online engagement will be robust as measures to address the COVID pandemic limit in-person activities. Online engagement tools will include an online open house, project website, email correspondence and an online webinar. EnviroIssues will develop an online open house website to share project information and interact with the public. An online open house tool is particularly helpful to solicit broader public input 60 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 23 of 32 from those who are unable to attend the in-person meeting yet still have a desire to provide their input on the project. The online open house includes use of a custom sub-domain website that will be seamlessly linked from the City’s website, have a project-specific customized layout, station tabs to match in-person meeting station materials, fully responsive design (i.e. for smart phones, tablets, etc.), integration social share, and a full report of comments submitted. Activities/Approach • Develop online project-specific website within City’s website which is maintained by the City • Develop online open house to share project information and solicit community feedback • Plan and implement an online workshop to engage with community stakeholders. • Develop up-to-date content and coordinate with City to update the project website. • Correspond and share information with public via email. Assumptions • EnviroIssues will coordinate with the consultant team and City to develop content and graphics for an online open house. • EnviroIssues will use the Participate Online platform to develop the online open house. • EnviroIssues will lead online open house development and online open house updates. • EnviroIssues will coordinate translation of online open house in up to 4 additional languages. The City will be responsible for directs related to translation services. • EnviroIssues will lead planning and implementation of an online webinar to coincide with the online open house. Assume 1 preparation meeting with all participating staff. • Consultant team and City staff will attend the online webinar to provide technical and expert information. • Community comments and feedback will be collected and tracked for the duration of the online open house. Deliverables • Participate Online online open house, content updated up to 1 time. • Online open house look and feel. • Presentation for online webinar, assumes 1 round of review. • Webinar plan assumes 1 round of review. • Webinar agenda and annotation agenda assumes 1 round of review. • Webinar summary assumes 1 round of review. • Spreadsheet tracking all communications, comments, and feedback collected in this Task and task 10.2. 10.4 Outreach materials Objectives EnviroIssues will develop a suite of materials and notifications to encourage stakeholders to engage with the project and share project information. 61 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 24 of 32 Activities/Approach • EnviroIssues will develop a project look-and-feel, including branding (standards for project material color, font, etc.) and document templates, utilizing any City-established guidelines as a starting point where they are available. • EnviroIssues will develop content for the City’s project website to provide details about the project including a schedule and engagement timeline. EnviroIssues will collaborate with the City to post website content for Phase 1 and 2. • EnviroIssues will develop content and graphics for project fact sheet/FAQs, to provide an overview of the project during Phase 1 and 2 outreach phases. EnviroIssues will also collaborate with the City to provide needed materials translation/transcreation. • EnviroIssues will develop an overview presentation to be used during Phase 1 at the stakeholder interviews and an updated presentation to be used during Phase 2 for stakeholder briefings. • Materials will be translated into languages identified by the project team. • Materials will present project information, including existing conditions, an outline of ways the public can provide feedback, information about design options, and project contact information. • EnviroIssues will develop notifications for the project, including: o Content and graphics for a postcard to notify the local community about the project and upcoming Phase 2 online engagement opportunities. o Content and graphics for up to two (2) different sized display ads during Phase 2 outreach. o Content for up to three (3) email updates for the City to share with interested stakeholders. o Content and graphics for one (1) yard sign to share the online engagement site. o Content and images for up to two (2) rounds of social media content for Phase 2 outreach. Assumptions • EnviroIssues will work with the project team and City to develop content for materials. • EnviroIssues will circulate drafts of materials with the project team and City for approval before distributing to the public. • EnviroIssues will assist the project team in developing graphics, including maps, and format materials. • The City will be responsible for covering the direct costs associated with printing and mailing materials. • EnviroIssues will coordinate translations, the City will be responsible for direct costs. • The City will coordinate the posting of social media content on City social media accounts. • EnviroIssues will assist in developing project website updates in coordination with the project team. • The City will be responsible for updating the project website. • EnviroIssues will draft project updates to be sent via City listserv. Deliverables • Look and feel of outreach material in full collaboration with the City 62 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 25 of 32 • Fact sheet, assumes 1 round of review, up to 2 updates • FAQ, assumes 1 round of review, up to 2 updates • Presentation, assumes 2 rounds of review • Mailed postcards, assumes 1 round of review • Up to 2 display ads, assumes 1 round of review • Yard signs, assumes 1 round of review • Social media content, assumes 1 round of review, up to 2 updates • City-provide translated versions of final materials listed above • Draft up to 2 project website updates, assumes 1 round of review • Draft up to 2 email listserv updates, assumes 1 round of review 10.5 Outreach summaries Objectives EnviroIssues will summarize feedback heard through the three phases of community engagement activities including online engagement, interviews, briefings and phone calls, to communicate the engagement process and how community feedback was incorporated into the final design. Activities/Approach • Outline community engagement activities and objectives. • Summarize feedback. • Show how feedback was used. • Reflect on success and lessons learned of engagement activities. Assumptions • The summaries will be shared with the public and partner agencies. Deliverables • Phase 1 community outreach summary, assumes 1 round of review • Phase 2 community outreach summary, assumes 1 round of review 63 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 26 of 32 Work Element 11 Type, Size, Location (TS&L) Report: Based on the City’s input and based on the results from the engineering activities associated with work elements 1 through 11 , TranTech will provide structural, civil, roadway, and drainage engineering services with the goal of preparing a TS&L Report that satisfies current WSDOT BDM Section 2.1.5 requirements and will study up to four bridge replacement alternatives. Two alignment alternatives will be studied; one alternative will look at replacing the bridge in its existing location and one alternative will look at replacing the bridge back to its historical location between Interurban Ave S and S 124th St. Evaluation criteria for comparing different alternatives will be developed and scoping level engineering designs and cost estimates for each alternative will be provided. All activities associated with this task will be closely coordinated with the City and the design team will work as an extension of the City staff for recommending a preferred bridge replacement alternative. The following describes the design subtasks associated with this work element: 11.1 – Civil/ Roadway Design a. Alignment and Right-of-Way Plans Consultant will prepare the preliminary alignment and ROW plan to include proposed right-of-way acquisitions, proposed preliminary permanent easements layout, and proposed preliminary temporary construction easements (TCEs) layout, for each studied alternative. b. Site Preparation and Demolition Plans A preliminary Site Preparation and Demolition plan will be prepared for each of the studied alternatives. These plans will show topography, existing utilities, existing surface features and items for demolition, removal, or salvage. c. Roadway Plans & Profiles A preliminary Plan and Profile plan will be prepared for each of the studied alternatives in accordance with City and AASHTO design standards as appropriate for the projected 20- year ADT level of traffic. The City shall provide all current and historical traffic count data available to assist in determining an approximate 20-year ADT projection. It is assumed a formal traffic count will be conducted as part of this scope of work for 42nd Ave, 124th Street and Interurban Ave. For the alignment option at S 124th Street traffic modeling will be completed by the Transpo Group as described in work element 8. The modeling will be utilized to determine if a roundabout (single lane or two lane) or a signal is the best intersection option for the S 124th Street and Interurban Avenue S location. The modeling, coordination with the City and King County, and estimates for each option will be utilized for arriving at the recommended S 124th Street and Interurban Avenue S intersection option. Feasible connection options to the Green River Trail will be included. For the TS&L phase it is assumed the intersection at 42nd Ave S and S 124th Street will be a stop controlled intersection similar to other intersections along 124th Street, such as 43rd to 49th Ave S. and 64 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 27 of 32 this will not be modeled or designed for during the TS&L portion of the project. If the 124th Street location is selected, the intersection of 124th Street and 42nd Ave intersection will be designed in a future phase. d. Coordination with Districts, Utilities, and Stakeholders Construction of this project will affect multiple parties. Coordination will occur as part of Work Element 11. Additional coordination with outside utilities will occur as part of Work Element 6. Coordination with City utilities will occur with this Work Element. This element will include implementing results of Work Element 11 into the TS&L. e. Conceptual stormwater management plan Construction of a new bridge and approaches will require pavement replacement. A conceptual stormwater management approach will be developed for each project alternative to identify whether stormwater runoff treatment and/or stormwater flow control thresholds will be exceeded. For each alternative the Low Impact Development Performance Standard will be evaluated and possible scenarios for meeting this requirement will be explored. 11.2 TS&L Report Consultant will prepare horizontal and vertical alignment alternatives for the project to support the analysis of up to four bridge alignment alternatives. The horizontal alignment for the project has been determined by the existing roadway alignment. However, the exact alignment remains to be fixed based on detailed survey information. An opinion of cost will be prepared based on the alternatives. The opinion of cost will be based on unit prices and incorporate about a 30% contingency to account for the level of completeness of plan preparation, and to reflect experience on similar projects within the region. An evaluation matrix will be developed for purpose of comparing the costs, construction feasibility, staged construction flexibility, and other criteria as may be developed during the work. Selection of the preferred alternative will be made by the City stakeholders, an d the preferred alternative will be carried forward in the design. Deliverables: • Up to four alternative roadway/bridge plans and profiles • Opinion of Cost for each alternative • Evaluation matrix Design Criteria for Civil, Roadway, Stormwater, and Traffic Control Elements: Reports, plans, and estimates, to the extent feasible, shall be developed in accordance with the latest edition and amendments of the following: • City Standards and Specifications. • AASHTO 2011, “A Policy of Geometric Design of Highways and Streets; 6th Edition”; 65 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 28 of 32 • AASHTO 2004, “A Guide for Achieving Flexibility in Highway Design of Highways; 1st Edition”; • Washington State Department of Transportation, “Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction”; • Washington State Department of Transportation, “Design Manual”; • Washington State Department of Transportation, “Standard Plans” • Washington State Department of Transportation, “Materials Laboratory Outline”; • Washington State Department of Transportation, “Construction Manual”; • Washington State Department of Transportation, “Local Agency Guidelines”; • Highway Research Board’s Manual entitled “Highway Capacity”; • FHWA and USDOT, “Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways”; • WSDOT Highway Runoff Manual; • WSDOT Hydraulics Manual; • King County – 2016 Edition of the King County Surface Water Design Manual 11.3 Structural Design Based on input from the City and engineering activities associated with work elements 1 through 11 , TranTech’s structural team will perform preliminary structural design associated with up to four viable bridge replacement alternatives for each of the investigated alignments (i.e., existing and S124th). The design will follow most current WSDOT Bridge Design Manual (BDM), AASHTO, and City requirements. Throughout the structural design activities, special care will be given to incorporate low impact design approaches like noise reduction, minimization of traffic impacts, Life Cost Analysis based on City-desired parameters, and environmental protection. Our bridge design activities start with a review of the gathered data provided by team members including survey, geotechnical, hydrology, traffic, civil, etc. Throughout our preliminary structural assessment/design of the studied alternatives, we will be in continuous communication with the City for consultations on parameters like structure location, length and vertical clearance. Also, required roadway elevations would be addressed. Our approach will be to work together with the City and our design team to address all engineering aspects of this bridge replacement project to optimally assess up to four viable bridge replacement alternatives for each of the investigated alignments. The team will recommend one alternative for a preferred alignment that possesses most of the City-desired attributes to advance to full design stage. All engineering work will be done per AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications - sixth Edition, WSDOT Standard Specifications 2020 M41-10, WSDOT Bridge Design Manual M 23- 50, June 2019 and current City Standards. 66 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 29 of 32 All data and final products will become the property of City upon project completion. All data will be provided in a mutually agreeable format. Deliverables: • Draft TS&L Report • Final TS&L Report 67 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 30 of 32 WORK ELEMENT 12 30% P&E This work element is performed by TranTech to provide 30% level P&E documentation in accordance with WSDOT LAG Manual. 12.1 30% Plans and Opinion of Cost This work element item encompasses all the activities associated with the preparation of the 30% Plans and engineer’s opinion of construction cost Estimate (P&E) documents. Constructability Review and QA/QC activities are an inherent part of this element. Assumptions: City to provide: • Title block and CAD standards Deliverables: • Two 11x17 (half size) copies of Plans. • Two copies of the quantity Estimates and opinion of construction cost. • Electronic PDF copies of the Plans and opinion of construction cost in both PDF and Excel. 68 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 31 of 32 WORK ELEMENT 13 - PHASE 2 SUPPLEMENT- AD-READY DESIGN At the discretion of the City additional design phase services may be added as a supplement to this contract. 69 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 32 of 32 WORK ELEMENT 14 - PHASE 2 SUPPLEMENT - CONSTRUCTION PHASE SERVICES: At the discretion of the City construction phase services may be added as a supplement to this contract. 70 Exhibit D - Prime Consultant Cost Computations Summary City of Tukwila - 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement TRANTECH TEAM BUDGET BREAKDOWN TranTech 629,461$ 1 Alliance 89,614$ Landau- Geotechnical 72,328$ Landau- Environmental 31,660$ Makers 26,623$ Ott-Sakai 25,781$ Transpo 49,693$ EnviroIssues 55,283$ TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET 980,443$ MANAGEMENT RESERVE 98,044$ TOTAL CONTRACT BUDGET 1,078,487$ 71 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 1 of 41 EXHIBIT A CITY OF TUKWILA 42ND AVE S BRIDGE REPLACEMENT SCOPE OF WORK – FULL DESIGN Background: This project will replace the existing City of Tukwila’s (City) 42nd Ave South Bridge with a new multi-span bridge. The existing 42nd Ave South was built in 1949. It is a 3-span bridge that is 280-foot-long (30’:220’:30’) and 28-feet wide (24’ curb-to-curb) with the main span consisting a through-truss that spans over the Duwamish River. T he existing bridge has a sufficiency rating of 7.56 SD and is considered Structurally Deficient and Functionally Obsolete. The 2018 Average D aily T raffic volume (ADT) was 10,300 vehicles per day with 30% of those vehicles being heavy trucks. The 42nd Ave South Bridge is a primary crossing of the Duwamish River for the Allentown neighborhood, the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Intermodal Facility, and the Baker Commodities Facility which are considered as major stakeholders of this project. Improving the level of service is extremely important on the 42nd Ave South Ave. as it serves in excess of 10,000 vehicle per day with 30% of those vehicles being trucks and it is the only viable route for container trucks entering and leaving the Tukwila BNSF Intermodal Facility. The Bridge on this important roadway facility is not only narrow, only 24 feet curb to curb, but also has many structural deficiencies and is currently load posted, restricting the free movement of that freight. City of Tukwila desires to replace the existing bridge structure with a new bridge and has tasked TranTech Engineering, LLC’s team (TranTech) to preparing Plans, Specifications and Estimate (PS&E) of this project. Furthermore, the City of Tukwila reserves the right to retain the services of TranTech’s team for the project’s construction phase engineering services and construction inspection and management. All work performed by TranTech’s team shall be in accordance with the WSDOT Local Agency Guidelines (LAG) Manual for federally funded projects, in anticipation of receiving future federal funding. The following work elements present a summary of the services associated with full design of this project: 72 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 2 of 41 Scope Summary: 1. Project Management 2. Surveying 3. Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering 4. Environmental Permitting (preapplication) 5. Bridge Aesthetics 6. Utility Engineering and Coordination 7. Constructability Review, Construction Schedule & Estimation 8. Traffic Control & Traffic Signal 9. Illumination & Signage 10. Community Outreach 11. Type, Size & Location Report 12. Plans, Specifications & Estimate (PS&E) Future anticipated work as a contract supplement: • Construction Phase Services Reports and plans, to the extent feasible, shall be developed in accordance with the latest edition and amendments of the following guidelines and documents: • AASHTO 2001, “A Policy of Geometric Design of Highways and Streets” • Washington State Department of Transportation, “Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction” • Washington State Department of Transportation, “Design Manual” • Washington State Department of Transportation, “Bridge Design Manual” • AASHTO LRFD Bridge design Specifications – Seventh Edition • Washington State Department of Transportation, “Materials Laboratory Outline” • Washington State Department of Transportation, “Construction Manual” • Washington State Department of Transportation, “Local Agency Guidelines” • Highway Research Board’s Manual entitled “Highway Capacity” • United State Department of Transportation and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) “Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways” • Standard drawings prepared by City shall be used as a guide in all cases where they fit design conditions. • AASHTO “Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities” • WSDOT Highway Runoff Manual • WSDOT Hydraulics Manual • King County 2016 Edition of the King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) 73 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 3 of 41 WORK ELEMENT 1 PROJECT MANAGEMENT: This work element includes administration of the contract between the Consultant and the Agency, preparation of monthly progress reports and quality control, necessary for the Project. The task includes all administrative services needed to coordinate with the sub-consultant/s and to complete the Project on time and within budget. The following are the categorized activities associated with this work element: • Project Schedule Updating. • Meetings and Meeting Minutes – approximately 20 team meetings are assumed for the duration of the design activities. • Monthly Progress Reports, and Invoicing. Progress reports will contain a narrative that identifies and describes significant activities performed in the previous month and the significant planned activities for the upcoming month. • Design Team Management: a. Schedule and coordinate with design team. b. Prepare sub-consultant agreements, coordinate, budget and review the project progress and submittals. c. Prepare, monitor, and update project schedule. Monitor project budget. d. Prepare monthly billings, progress reports, and updated monthly project schedule. e. Maintain regular informal contact telephone discussions, and electronic mail. f. Obtain, with assistance from the City, rights of entry necessary for geotechnical studies, etc. Deliverables: • Progress Reports • Meeting Minutes • Monthly Invoicing • Project Schedule 74 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 4 of 41 WORK ELEMENT 2 SURVEYING: This Work Element is performed by 1-Alliance to provide topographic survey and engineering basemaps of the existing 42nd Ave South Bridge and its surroundings, including pick-ups of flagging for Ordinary High-Water Mark (OHWM) of the river and topo mapping of the river bank 100 feet east and west of the existing bridge and 500 feet north and south approaches. Survey shall extend laterally to the apparent right-of-way. Below please find Exhibit A, Surveying Limits. 2.1 Survey PM, Admin, QA/QC This task includes the survey project management, administrative duties, and quality control required for a project of this complexity and magnitude. 2.2 Survey Control This task includes the establishment of survey control, or the recovery of existing survey control, as required for the project. Survey control will be set, found, or referenced utilizing Real Time Kinematic (RTK) GPS (GNSS) and the Washington State Reference Network (WSRN) in conformance with industry standards. This survey control is then propagated, as required, utilizing standard terrestrial total station measurements. 2.2.1 Geodetic Survey Control 2.2.1.1 Survey work shall reference the Washington State Plane Coordinate System of 1983 as established in accordance with Chapter 58.20 Revised Code of Washington. 2.2.1.2 Vertical Datum shall reference the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88). 2.2.2 Cadastral Survey Control 2.2.2.1 Public Land Survey System monumentation required for right-of-way resolution. 2.3 Field Surveying and Mapping This task includes the field surveying and mapping required for this specific effort. Topographic– approx. 1500 linear feet along 42nd Ave South and intersections of adjoining streets. The consultant shall locate and map visible features necessary for the creation of an engineering design base map. Typical features include: 2.3.1 Topographic and Planimetric, including channelization. 2.3.2 Edge of Pavement, gravel, grass, concrete, etc. 2.3.3 Curb and sidewalk, including curb cuts and ADA ramps. 2.3.4 Signs and signals, poles and appurtences. 2.3.5 Trees, 4” in diameter or greater, and edges of significant vegetation. 2.3.6 Walls, rockeries, and fences (or faces of). 2.3.7 Ground measurements to generate a digital terrain model at one-foot contours. 2.3.8 Visible improvements situated within the described mapping limits. 2.3.9 Bridge abutment as-builts and soffit elevations. 75 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 5 of 41 2.4 Utility Surveying Services This task includes the mapping of utilities throughout the survey limits. The Consultant shall arrange for underground ‘conductible’ utility locating, by means of a private utility firm. 2.4.1 Surface Observable: power poles, vaults, risers, fire hydrants, water valves/meters, gas valves, traffic signal/traffic control boxes, and overhead utility lines. 2.4.2 Stormwater and Sanitary sewer structures shall be located. Standard efforts will be made for obtaining pipe invert elevations, size, and materials. 2.5 Office Processing This task includes the office processing of the collected survey data, data extraction, field book reductions, CADD drafting, and other duties required for the generation of the deliverable(s). For 3D laser scanning efforts, sub-tasks include the registering of point clouds; evaluating the registrations; exporting the point cloud data to Civil3D; creating or picking of appropriate points in Civil3D; Linework and Layering, and standard CADD drafting of the deliverables, as required. 2.6 Right-of-Way and Boundary Resolution(s) 2.6.1 Right-of-Way – Resolve right-of-way within the project limits. 2.6.2 Parcel Resolution – Resolve boundaries for parcels Assumptions: • Rights-of-Entry will be provided by the City. • Traffic control, if required, will be implemented and billed as an invoiced ODC. • Tree Tags, driplines/canopies are not a part of the scope services. • Setting of property corners is not a part of the scope of services. • A record of Survey is not a part of the scope of services. • Up to 60 Ordinary High-Water Mark flags, set by others, to be located. • Title reports with underlying documents for parcels to be provided by the CITY. Deliverables: • Topographic Survey with 1-foot contour intervals (electronic copy). • AutoCAD Surfaces (DTM Files) (electronic copy) or any other desired electronic source file. • ASCII file of control points. 76 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 6 of 41 Exhibit A, Surveying Limits 77 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 7 of 41 WORK ELEMENT 3 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING: This Work Element, the purpose of which is to provide geotechnical engineering recommendations and reporting to support the design team, will be performed by Landau Associates, Inc. The geotechnical engineering effort will include the following activities: 3.1 Review Existing Geotechnical Information Consultant will review readily available existing subsurface exploration data for the project area. This will include a review of subsurface information previously gathered by others as part of the nearby King County Allentown Trunk and Sound Transit Central Link Light Rail projects. The purpose of reviewing this data is to facilitate the planning of the Consultant’s subsurface exploration program and incorporate geotechnical information from previous explorations into the Consultant’s preliminary geotechnical design considerations and recommendations. The data review will also include a review of published geologic and topographic information for the project area. 3.2 Geotechnical Support Related to Preparation of the TS&L Report Consultant will evaluate the above described information collected by others from the project area in order to develop preliminary geotechnical engineering conclusions and recommendations related to preparation of the TS&L Report. Preliminary geotechnical engineering conclusions and recommendation will be prepared for a replacement bridge that is located within the corridor that the existing bridge is currently located, as well as within the South 124th Street corridor. Consultant’s geotechnical input for the TS&L report will be presented in a technical memorandum. 3.3 Geotechnical Investigation Program To characterize subsurface soil and groundwater conditions along the selected bridge alignment, Consultant will subcontract a drilling contractor to advance up to four exploratory borings at or near the proposed bridge foundation locations using a track-mounted drill rig. The Consultant’s cost estimate includes budget to advance two borings each to a depth of about 90 ft below ground surface (bgs) and two borings each to a depth of about 60 ft bgs. The Consultant’s cost estimate also includes budget to subcontract a small tracked excavator to clear brush and/or create relatively level working surfaces for the drill rig. The Consultant’s cost estimate also includes budget to stabilize areas of disturbed ground with mulch or straw at the completion of the subsurface investigation. Finally, the Consultant’s cost estimate includes budget to obtain access permission from King County for the two borings that will be advanced along or adjacent to the Green River Trail. 78 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 8 of 41 A geotechnical representative of the Consultant will observe the advancement of the exploratory borings, obtain soil samples from the borings, and prepare field logs of conditions observed. Soil samples will be obtained from the exploratory borings on about a 2½- or 5-ft depth interval using the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) procedure. The soil samples will be delivered to the Consultant’s laboratory for further examination and classification. Soil samples obtained from the explorations will be held in the laboratory for 30 days after submittal of the final report. After that date, the soil samples will be disposed of unless arrangements are made to retain them. While monitoring wells are not planned for the proposed borings, groundwater occurrence will be noted on the summary boring logs. Upon completion of sampling and logging, the boreholes will be decommissioned in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 173-160 of the Washington Administrative Code (WAC). Excess cuttings from the exploratory borings will be properly disposed of offsite. If present, the pavement section at borehole locations will be patched using fast setting concrete. Prior to performing the above described field activities, Consultant will arrange for underground utility location (“call before you dig”). Consultant will also hire a private utility locating service to check for the presence of buried utilities at planned boring locations. Consultant will complete a geotechnical laboratory testing program consisting of natural moisture content and grain size and/or Atterberg Limits determinations on selected soil samples to aid in classifying site soils. Laboratory testing will include up to 30 moisture content determinations and 16 grain size distributions or Atterberg limits determinations. 3.4 Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Analysis Consultant will evaluate the information collected as part of the above described data review and field investigation program in order to develop preliminary geotechnical engineering conclusions and recommendations related to preliminary design (up to 30 percent) of the proposed replacement bridge. 3.5 Draft and Final Preliminary Geotechnical Reports Deliverables will include a draft geotechnical report containing preliminary geotechnical conclusions and recommendations. A final preliminary geotechnical report will be created that contains the results of mutually agreed upon consolidated comments from other team members and the City. The preliminary geotechnical report will include the following information: 79 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 9 of 41 • Summary logs and a site plan showing the locations of the exploratory borings advanced by the Consultant. • Seismic design criteria in accordance with applicable AASHTO standards. • A preliminary qualitative evaluation of the liquefaction and lateral spread hazards at the project site, if warranted. If such hazards exist at the project site, a detailed evaluation of the liquefaction and lateral spread hazards would need to be performed during a subsequent design phase of the project. • Recommendations for site preparation and fill placement, including: criteria for clearing, stripping and grubbing; an evaluation of the suitability of on-site soil for use as structural fill; gradation criteria for imported fill; guidance for preparation of subgrade soil, which will support the bridge approaches; and criteria for structural fill placement and compaction. • Geotechnical recommendations for the preliminary design of deep foundations for the proposed replacement bridge, as well as temporary foundation support for the existing bridge if it will be used as a temporary bridge during construction of the replacement bridge. The recommendations will include preliminary estimates of the following: tip elevation, axial resistance, downdrag loads and loss of side resistance during seismic loading, uplift resistance, lateral shaft analysis, and construction considerations. • Lateral earth pressure criteria for design of proposed bridge abutment walls and permanent retaining walls including equivalent fluid densities for the active, at-rest and passive states of stress. • A discussion related to known or anticipated geotechnical issues that should be considered during final design of the project or that could influence construction of the replacement bridge. The discussion will include methods to mitigate such issues, if identified. • Recommendations for supplemental geotechnical services to support final design of the proposed replacement bridge. 3.6 Final Geotechnical Engineering Analysis Consultant will finalize the preliminary geotechnical engineering conclusions and recommendations related to preliminary design of the proposed replacement bridge and develop geotechnical engineering conclusions and recommendations related to final design of the proposed replacement bridge. 3.7 Draft and Final Geotechnical Reports Deliverables will include a draft geotechnical report containing design-level geotechnical conclusions and recommendations. A final geotechnical report will be created that contains the results of mutually agreed upon consolidated comments from other team members and the City. 80 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 10 of 41 The geotechnical report will include the same information as the above described preliminary geotechnical report, plus finalized geotechnical recommendations related to liquefaction and lateral spread hazards at the project site and deep foundation design. 3.8 Meeting Participation For estimating purposes, it is assumed that the Consultant’s geotechnical engineer will participate in up to six internal meetings with the design team for consultation during design of the project. Assumptions: • The replacement bridge will consist of a two- or three-span structure with no in water foundation elements. • The replacement bridge will be located either within the corridor that the existing bridge is currently located or within the South 124th Street corridor. • Permits will not be required to clear brush and/or create relatively level working surfaces for the drill rig. • Consultant will not need to provide preliminary foundation design recommendations for more than 3 different foundation options. • Additional exploratory borings may be required if during the design process the locations of the bridge foundations change. Deliverables: • An electronic (Adobe PDF) copy of the technical memorandum with geotechnical input for the TS&L Report • An electronic (Adobe PDF) copy of the draft Preliminary Geotechnical Report • An electronic (Adobe PDF) copy of the final Preliminary Geotechnical Report • An electronic (Adobe PDF) copy of the draft Geotechnical Report • An electronic (Adobe PDF) copy of the final Geotechnical Report 81 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 11 of 41 WORK ELEMENT 4 ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING: This Work Element will be performed by Landau Associates, Inc. to provide environmental permitting documentation support for the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), and local permits/approvals. Federal funding is anticipated to be administered through WSDOT Local Programs. Consultant therefore assumes that the WSDOT will be the lead coordinator for NEPA. For the purposes of this Scope of Services, Consultant assumes that this project can be authorized under a NEPA Categorical Exclusion (CE). The necessary work elements associated with Environmental Permitting are assumed to be: 4.1 Wetland/Waterway Delineation Consultant will conduct wetland delineations in accordance with the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) 1987 Wetlands Delineation Manual and the 2010 USACE Regional Supplement to the Wetland Delineation Manual. The ordinary high-water mark (OHWM) of waterways will be delineated using guidance provided in Ecology’s Determining the Ordinary High-Water Mark on Streams in Washington State. The high tide line for the Duwamish River, which is tidally influenced in the project area, will be obtained from available tide gauge data and field observation. Consultant will compile and review environmental information from readily available public domain resources to gain a general understanding of potential wetland issues at the site. Public domain resources include, but are not limited to: • Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey data • National Wetlands Inventory mapping • Local Critical Areas mapping • US Geological Survey topographic mapping • Recent aerial photography. The field investigation will include an examination of vegetation, soils, and hydrology within the project area for two alternative alignments. Flagging will be placed along the wetland/waterway boundaries and will be confined to the project area. Any wetland/waterway habitat that extends beyond the project area, and within 200 ft (referred to as the study area), will be estimated both visually and using public domain resources to assess extent. Included in this task is time to provide the project surveyors with a hand-sketch of wetland/waterway boundaries to assist the surveyors to locate project flagging. Consultant also included time to review the survey map and request any necessary changes to accurately represent existing wetland/waterway conditions. Wetlands within the study area will be rated in accordance with Ecology’s Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington, and buffer widths will be determined in compliance with applicable Critical Areas regulations. Stream typing and buffer widths will be 82 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 12 of 41 based on Chapter 18.45 of the TMC, and the water typing system promulgated in WAC 222-15- 131. Consultant will prepare a draft Wetland and Waterway Delineation Technical Memorandum for the selected alternative with the information obtained from field delineation and ratings. The memorandum will be acceptable to the City for shoreline permitting and other regulatory agencies that will include: • A summary of the methodology used • The size and rating of each wetland and waterway; a characterization of wetland vegetation, soils, and hydrology; and field data sheets • A scaled site map showing the locations of wetland/waterway boundaries and buffers, locations of wetland data plots, and site topography • Supporting photographs. The draft memorandum will be provided to the City for review. Comments will be reviewed and incorporated, as appropriate, into a final Wetland and Waterway Delineation Technical Memorandum. The delineation report memorandum will be used in pre application meetings for the purposes of discussing potential project impacts and determining agency jurisdiction. This task includes efforts to summarize wetland/waterway delineation results, including figure, for two project alternatives for use in the Type, Size, and Location report. 4.2 WSDOT Local Program National Environmental Policy Act Categorical Exclusion Form Consultant will prepare a preliminary version of the WSDOT Local Programs NEPA Categorical Exclusion (CE) Form (formerly the Local Agency Environmental Classification Summary). The purpose of the preliminary NEPA CE form is to facilitate discussion with WSDOT Local Programs to determine subsequent NEPA compliance needs. To complete the preliminary version of the CE form, Consultant will compile and review environmental information from readily available public domain resources to gain a general understanding of relevant environmental resources along the project corridor. 4.3 Agency Preapplication Meetings Consultant will assist in scheduling and participate in pre-application meetings, as needed, with the City, Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW), Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR), US Army Corps of Engineers, and US Coast Guard to coordinate jurisdictional limits and permit conditions for the project. 83 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 13 of 41 This task includes participation in at least two onsite meetings, three conference calls and associated correspondence to support preapplication inquiries. 4.4 Permit Matrix Consultant will prepare a permit matrix identifying all anticipated environmental permits and a rough schedule including required reviews, duration of reviews by agencies, public notice or comment periods, public outreach requirements, hearings, and other permit related timing constraints. The permit matrix will evaluate permit needs for no more than two alternatives. 4.5 Hazardous Materials Linear Corridor Screening LAI will conduct a screening-level assessment of sites along the project corridor for the potential presence of contamination. The screening-level assessment of the project corridor will include the following components: • Review available aerial photographs to assess past uses of the project corridor and adjacent properties from the present back to their first developed use, or back to 1940, whichever is earlier. • Review listings from a subcontracted database service (Environmental Data Resources Inc.) of confirmed and suspected contaminated sites within a 1-mile radius of the project corridor abstracted from US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), tribal, and Ecology environmental databases. • Review reports documenting previous environmental investigations completed at sites along the project corridor (if available from the City and/or WSDOT). • Conduct a site reconnaissance of the project corridor to visually and physically observe current land-use activities and environmental conditions. • LAI will request and collect information from Ecology to further evaluate the sites of potential hazardous and problem waste concerns for the project that were identified in the regulatory database search or site reconnaissance, if any. This task will include: o Visit Ecology’s Northwestern Regional office in Bellevue, Washington to review documents available from the agency files and to request copies of relevant information related to environmental conditions at sites along the project corridor o Review/photocopy pertinent documents/information. The data collected will be summarized in a technical memorandum provided in electronic (Adobe PDF) format. 84 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 14 of 41 4.6 Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) Biological Assessment (BA); Magnuson-Stevens Act Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) Evaluation LAI will prepare a BA for selected species federally listed as threatened or endangered in the action area under the ESA and an EFH Evaluation for the proposed project. LAI will obtain updated species lists from agency websites, request site-specific species and habitat information from the WDFW Priority Habitats and Species database, and review information from the Washington Natural Heritage Program. Evaluation of specific project details, such as construction techniques and equipment used, timing of construction, and best management practices (BMPs) will be based on information provided by TranTech. The report will establish the project action area, which incorporates the furthest extent of both aquatic and terrestrial impacts. Appropriate environmental baseline information and species history will be summarized in the BA. A determination of “no effect” (NE) or “may effect, not likely to adversely affect” (NLAA) is anticipated. The project is not expected to impact EFH. LAI will prepare a draft BA and EFH for review and comment by TranTech and the City, and then a final document. 4.7 Cultural Resources LAI will identify the Area of Potential Effects (APE) in accordance with 36 CFR 800.16(d) and coordinate with the Local Program Engineer and WSDOT archeologist for on the APE request and a Section 106 exemption. 4.8 Section 4(f) Documentation LAI will prepare the WSDOT Section 4(f) De Minimis Impact Determination form. The form will provide: • A project description • A description of Section 4(f) resources (i.e., park and/or historic sites) affected by the project and proposed impacts (including figure) • A summary of public outreach efforts. LAI will prepare a draft form for review and comment by TranTech and the City, and then a final document. 85 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 15 of 41 4.9 Traffic Noise Assessment LAI will conduct a traffic noise assessment for the project corridor, for potential noise impacts to sensitive receivers within the project study area. The traffic noise assessment will include the following components: • Site Reconnaissance: An initial site visit will be performed to identify potential noise sensitive receptors along the project corridor. • Pre-Consultation with WSDOT: Before conducting field work or TNM noise model development, we will consult with WSDOT noise specialists to confirm the appropriate number of modeling receptors and noise validation measurement locations. • Noise Measurements for TNM Model Validation: Noise measurements for the proposed project will be collected along select existing and proposed roadway/bridge segments that may be affected by the proposed project where frequent human use is likely to occur. Data collection will be used for model validation as part of the Noise Assessment. • Noise Assessment: Noise levels shall be predicted for the existing road/bridge (the “no- build” alternative) and one “build” alternative. The City planning department will be consulted to determine the locations where dwellings have been issued building permits in currently vacant lots adjacent to the roadway/bridge. A land use inventory shall be performed to identify the existing and currently-permitted future noise-sensitive land uses and to assist in selection of noise modeling locations. Representative receiver locations shall be modeled for prediction of noise levels and determination of noise impacts. LAI will incorporate provided traffic data into the model. The traffic noise impact criteria against which the Project traffic noise levels are evaluated are taken from WSDOT’s Traffic Noise Assessment & Abatement Policy guidance manual. • Noise Barrier Analysis: If the noise analysis indicates impacts in areas where noise barriers (or building acoustical insulation) is constructible, then we will use the TNM model to design the height and length of noise barrier walls that satisfy WSDOT’s acoustical feasibility criteria. For each wall we will estimate the construction cost by using WSDOT’s unit cost factor, and we will determine the economic reasonableness based on the number of benefited receptor locations shielded. Based on inspection of preliminary aerial photographs, for budgetary purposes we assume will evaluate up to 4 separate noise walls. We will coordinate with the civil engineering design team to provide the required heights, top elevations, and lengths of each noise wall that satisfies both the feasibility and reasonableness criteria. • Noise Discipline Report: LAI will compile a technical report summarizing the findings of the noise study. The contents shall include land use in the area, existing noise conditions, methods of analysis, impacts and all evaluated noise mitigation measures. Mitigation cost estimates shall be included. Construction noise impacts shall be discussed. The report shall include maps of the existing and proposed alignments and existing and future land uses on a scale vicinity map. Comparative tables shall be prepared to aid in understanding 86 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 16 of 41 Project impacts and mitigation. A draft report will be submitted to the City for review. Based upon the comments, LAI will revise the report and a WSDOT-review draft copy will be delivered to WSDOT. We will respond to WSDOT comments to prepare the final report. The traffic noise analysis will be summarized in a technical report. 4.10 Permit Applications LAI will prepare a Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application (JARPA) form and documentation as required by the TMC for a shoreline substantial development permit. The JARPA form will be submitted to WDFW for Hydraulic Project Approval, to the USACE for Section 404/Section 10 permitting, to Ecology for Section 401 Certification, US Coast Guard for bridge permit, and DNR in support of aquatic lands lease, and to the City for shoreline permitting. LAI will complete the City’s Shoreline Permit application and associated documentation a figure for property owners within 500 ft of the project area. Mailing list labels and other administrative tasks will be coordinated by the City. Information required as part of the application also includes five copies of the following: • Description of project consistency with decision criteria • Vicinity map • Shoreline site plans (top of bank, landward catch point toe of levee, riverbank toe, mean high water mark, and 100-year base flood elevation, appropriate setbacks, maintenance easements, limits of construction) • Sensitive area study documentation and plans • Cross sections • Landscape plans • Civil plans (stamped, signed, and dated by licensed professional engineer). LAI will prepare the City of Tukwila Tree Clearing Permit application, which will be included with the Shoreline Permit application package. The “description of project consistency with decision criteria” listed above will include reference to the City’s tree regulations. 4.11 Mitigation/Landscape Plan Support This task consists of the design support services necessary to prepare and complete design drawings that will be required for impacting the shoreline buffer of the Duwamish River. LAI will provide comments to TranTech for incorporation of buffer mitigation into the landscape plans relevant to the mitigation plan at the 60 percent, 90 percent, and 100 percent levels. 4.12 Agency Coordination LAI will help TranTech and the City respond to agency comments on application submittals and provide support with inquiries on agency status of reviews. 87 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 17 of 41 The agencies may require additional data about potential environmental impacts and their mitigation. Support will be provided via teleconference and email. Assumptions: • The proposed project will receive funding from the FHWA administered through WSDOT Highways and Local Programs. • The NEPA CE form will only be prepared for the selected bridge alignment. • NEPA documentation prepared in association with federal funding will be adopted as the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) environmental analysis pursuant to WAC 197- 11-630 and Chapter 21.04.230 of the Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC). • The City will provide access permissions if needed. • Wetland/waterway boundary flagging will be placed only in accessible parts of the project area. • Permit matrix will be limited to environmental permits related to SEPA and NEPA compliance, and will not include construction permits, building permits, or stormwater permits. • A Hazardous Materials Discipline Report to address hazardous and problem waste may be required by WSDOT based on its review of the preliminary NEPA CE form. Preparation of a Hazardous Materials Discipline Report is not included in this scope of services. The level of detail and report format for a Hazardous Materials Discipline Report is dependent on the project activities, and type and number of potential hazardous material impacts identified. A scope and cost estimate to complete a Hazardous Materials Discipline Report, if required by WSDOT, will be provided following receipt of review comments from WSDOT regarding the preliminary NEPA CE form. • The hazardous materials corridor screen technical memorandum will not meet the requirements of a Phase I environmental site assessment under ASTM E1527-13. • Building interiors will not be accessed as part of the site reconnaissance. • LAI assumed that 10 hours of historical environmental document review will be sufficient to come to general conclusions about the recognized environmental conditions that affect the subject properties. If additional review time is required, LAI will bring this to your attention in advance of continuing the review. • File reviews at the agency level are experiencing extensive delays due to COVID 19 limitations and may require 6 months or more to complete. • Conditions at immediately adjoining properties may not be observable from public access areas and, as a result, may not be identified during the site reconnaissance. • The BA will be drafted using the current WSDOT template. • A 30% to 60% level of design will be sufficient for preparation of the BA and EFH Evaluation report. 88 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 18 of 41 • The project will have a NE or NLAA determination on listed species and/or their designated critical habitat and a formal Biological Opinion will not be required. The project will have no adverse impact to EFH. • WSDOT BA procedures for calculating the extent of in-water impacts will be used; however, this task does not include water quality modeling using CORMIX modeling software. • This task does not include meetings with agency staff from the US Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) or National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries. • Design and construction details required for permit applications that are not directly related to a critical areas determination will be provided to the LAI biologist. Such elements include, but are not limited to, a stormwater drainage report; a temporary sediment and erosion control plan; proposed construction timing, sequencing and duration; and primary types and duration of construction equipment to be used. • This task does not include efforts to conduct a 6-month update review of species listings. • The scope of work does not include monitoring of any federally listed or state listed species during construction activities. Should any monitoring of these species be required, an addendum to this scope and budget can be prepared. • This task will be limited to preparation of the APE and coordination with the WSDOT archeologist. • For this task, LAI will be provided with a detailed project description of the project, project area including areas of ground disturbance and known staging areas, and conceptual plans showing the scope of work and cross-sections. • Cost for professional archaeological investigation and/or historic property inventory are not included in this scope of services. • SEPA checklist will not be required as part of the project applications. NEPA documentation prepared in association with federal funding will be adopted as the SEPA environmental analysis pursuant to WAC 197-11-630 and Chapter 21.04.230 of the Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC). • The City will pay all the applicable permit application fees. • LAI staff attendance at a Hearing Examiner meeting is included in this scope of services. • A tree size and location survey (the results of which are required to be shown on the plans) will be completed by others and incorporated into the plans in support of City shoreline permitting. • The plan set will include the required Landscape Plan, Site Plan and Sensitive Area Plan, and will be compiled by TranTech. • Construction will begin within 2 years of permit approval and be completed within 5 years. • USCG will not require navigation study in support of bridge permitting. 89 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 19 of 41 • The 30% design plans will be suitable for the shoreline permit application, and the City will waive the requirement that civil plans be stamped, signed, and dated by a licensed professional engineer as part of the permit application. • TranTech will incorporate mitigation in landscape plans and specifications as required by the City’s Shoreline Master Plan (SMP). • Irrigation design is not included in this task. • Grading design and grading plans are not included in this task. • A Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control (TESC) Plan is not included in this scope. Some erosion control design is anticipated, but any erosion control elements are expected to be minor and be coordinated with Trantech for incorporation into the TESC plan(s) prepared by others. • Impacts to the Green River Trail associated with the project meet the requirements of a Section 4(f) de minimis impact. • A concurrence letter from the agency with jurisdiction over the Section 4(f) resource will be provided to LAI by the City. • LAI will conduct noise modeling for no more than 10 receptor locations. • Peak hour Existing Year, No Build and Build Year traffic volumes will be provided to LAI. • LAI will provide a letter for the City to distribute to noise sensitive receptor locations (i.e., residences, businesses, etc.) seeking permission to complete noise field measurements. • Efforts to collect noise measurements from building interiors or balconies is not included in this scope of services. Deliverables: • An electronic (Adobe PDF) copy of the preliminary and final NEPA CE form • An electronic (Adobe PDF) copy of the draft and final Wetland and Waterway Delineation Technical Memorandum. • An electronic (Adobe PDF) copy of the permit matrix • An electronic (MS Word) copy of the draft Screening-Level Hazardous Materials Linear Corridor Report • An electronic (Adobe PDF) copy of the final Screening-Level Hazardous Materials Linear Corridor Report. • An electronic (Adobe PDF) copy of the draft BA and EFH Evaluation report. • An electronic (Adobe PDF) of the final BA and EFH Evaluation report. • An electronic (Adobe PDF) copy of the draft APE. • An electronic (Adobe PDF) copy of the final APE. • An electronic (Adobe PDF) copy of the draft Shoreline Permit application submittal(s). 90 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 20 of 41 • An electronic (Adobe PDF) and required paper copies of the final Shoreline Permit application submittal(s). • E-mail and/or telephone correspondence providing information needed for project landscape plans for the purpose of fulfilling project mitigation requirements related to shorelines • An electronic (Adobe PDF) copy of the draft Section 4(f) De Minimis Impact Determination form • An electronic (Adobe PDF) copy of the final Section 4(f) De Minimis Impact Determination form. • An electronic (MS Word) copy of the city-review draft noise technical report. • An electronic (MS Word) copy of the WSDOT-review draft noise technical report. • An electronic (Adobe PDF) copy of the final Noise technical report. 91 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 21 of 41 WORK ELEMENT 5 BRIDGE AESTHETICS This Work Element is performed by Makers to provide Bridge Aesthetics and Landscaping design. The following outlines the tasks associated with this work: 5.1 Concept Design for Urban Design Elements a. Review engineering work, site constraints, existing City policies and activ ities relevant to the project. Assist as requested regarding street configuration and relationship to adjacent properties. Meet with City Staff and Consultant Team to discuss opportunities, constraints and ideas. (Follow-up with selected Staff and team members may be necessary b. Sketch preliminary concepts c. Review with staff (one meeting) and engineering team and refine the concepts. d. Assist Enviro-issues with public open house. (Event time only) e. Review results of the open house with the Staff/Consultant team. f. Work up preferred ideas at 30%, 60%, 90%, 100% design level for aesthetic and landscaping features. Provide drawings in a format compatible with the engineering documents. (Format provided by the engineering team.) Provide narrative description of urban design and/or outline g. Prepare 30%, 60%, 90% and 100% design level quantity estimate and opinion of cost estimate for the selected aesthetic and landscaping features. Assumptions: • City and Enviro-issues will organize the open house and publicize and arrange for the meetings and presentations. Makers will assist in conducting the sessions. • Makers will not be involved in lighting, electrical or utilities work. • The budget assumes 6 meetings or conferences with the engineering/City team and one public event (open house). • The engineering team will provide Makers with CAD layouts, templates and numbering to meet the requirements of the final bid document formatting. Deliverables: • Concept sketches for the open house • 30%, 60%, 90%, and 100% documents of urban design (Aesthetic) and Landscaping elements of the project in digital format (CAD) as provided by the engineering team. 92 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 22 of 41 WORK ELEMENT 6 UTILITY COORDINATION This Work Element is performed by TranTech to provide utility coordination and potentially design for the project. 6.1 Utility Coordination Utilities owned and operated by other agencies/entities, other than the City, that are within the project corridor of the bridge improvements will be identified. TranTech will acquire and review record drawings of existing utilities within the project limits and define potential utility conflicts. For the purpose of preparing this scope of work, it is anticipated that up to four (4) utilities are located in the project corridor. Known utilities within the project limits include Puget Sound Energy (PSE) Gas and Electric, Comcast, King County Wastewater Treatment Services and Seattle City Light (SCL). TranTech will schedule meetings with utility owners to discuss the project and define utility needs and design criteria if the utility is impacted by the proposed bridge improvements. A total of four (4) meetings are anticipated under this subtask. Meeting will be conducted by, and minutes will be prepared by TranTech. Prepare Memorandum - Prepare a short technical memorandum to outline all the findings on the utilities at and around the project site. Assumptions: • No utility design is part of this Work Element Deliverables: • Utility coordination memorandum 93 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 23 of 41 WORK ELEMENT 7 CONSTRUCTABILITY REVIEW, CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE AND ESTIMATION: This work element is performed by Ott-Sakai Construction Consultants (OS), to provide constructability review, construction schedule, and construction estimation services. The work element includes the following activities: 7.1 Constructability Review and Cost Estimation OS will provide Constructability Review and Cost Estimation of the design team’s prepared TS&L Report and Plans, & Estimate (P&E) package at 30% design level. OS will also provide Constructability Review, Construction Schedule and Cost Estimation of the design team’s prepared Plans, Specifications & Estimate (PS&E) package at 60% and 90% design level. Deliverables: • Constructability Review and Estimation for TS&L Report. • Constructability Review and Estimation for 30% P&E design level. • Constructability Review, Construction Schedule and Cost Estimation for 60% and 90% PS&E Levels 94 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 24 of 41 WORK ELEMENT 8 - TRAFFIC CONTROL AND TRAFFIC SIGNAL: This work element is performed by Transpo Group, Inc. (Transpo) to provide traffic analysis, traffic control, detour, and traffic signal plans for the Contractor’s use in constructing the proposed bridge and roadway improvements. 8.1 Traffic Analysis Transpo will evaluate existing and future traffic conditions as described within this subsection at the following intersections: • 42nd Ave S/Interurban Ave S • 42nd Ave S/S 124th St • Interurban Ave S/S 124th St • Interurban Ave S/Access Roadway Transpo will coordinate with the City to identify appropriate evaluation criteria for comparing and analyzing potential improvement options. Future Demand It is assumed that the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) travel demand model will be used to develop future year traffic projections at the study intersections identified above. The Consultant will coordinate with the Client to identify an appropriate existing year and design year for analysis. Traffic Operations and Level-of-Service Synchro (Traffic Signals) and aaSidra (Roundabouts) software will be utilized to analyze existing and future traffic operations, queue lengths, and levels-of-service at the study intersections. The purpose of this analysis will be to establish baseline and future no-build conditions for vehicle delay, level-of-service, and travel times through the intersection for vehicles, transit vehicles, and non-motorized users. Evaluate Options It is assumed that the following improvement options will be evaluated: • Option 1 – S 124th St Bridge – Traffic Signal o S 124th St is connected to Interurban Ave S with a new bridge across th e Duwamish River. o A new traffic signal is installed at the S 124th St/Interurban Ave S intersection. o The north leg at the 42nd Ave S/Interurban Ave S intersection is removed. o The existing signal at 42nd Ave S/Interurban Ave S is modified as needed and the Interurban Ave S/Access Roadway intersection is signalized, if warrants are met. • Option 2 – S 124th St Bridge – Roundabout 95 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 25 of 41 o S 124th St is connected to Interurban Ave S with a new bridge across the Duwamish River. o A new roundabout is installed at the S 124th St/Interurban Ave S intersection. o The north leg at the 42nd Ave S/Interurban Ave S intersection is removed. o The existing signal at 42nd Ave S/Interurban Ave S is modified as needed and the Interurban Ave S/Access Roadway intersection is signalized, if warrants are met. • Option 3 – 42nd Ave S Bridge – Existing Condition The options will be evaluated against previously established evaluation criteria to help refine and prioritize the potential improvement options for each intersection. In cooperation with the Client and project team, a scoring matrix will be developed with appropriately weighted evaluation criteria for the purpose of rating and prioritizing improvement options. Conceptual Drawings of Improvements The Consultant will develop conceptual drawings of Options 1, 2, and 3 utilizing survey data (if available) and/or readily available aerial imagery. The conceptual drawings will represent an approximately 10 percent design level. Summary Report The Consultant will prepare a final report that summarizes the results of the traffic analysis, evaluation of alternatives, and the Project Team’s recommendations. Following one round of comments from the Client, the report will be finalized. Deliverables: • Concept drawings • Summary traffic analysis report 8.2 Traffic Control The Consultant will prepare traffic control plans, special provisions, and engineer’s opinion of cost for constructing the proposed bridge and roadway improvements. Attend a total of 3 team meetings to discuss what type and duration of closures are needed for which phase of the bridge reconstruction. Attend up to 2 neighborhood meetings to present and discuss closure plans. The exact limits of the traffic control will be determined jointly between the CITY and the Consultant; however, the initial scope and fee are based on the listed assumptions below. The plans will conform with MUTCD and/or WSDOT/City procedures and standard plans. 96 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 26 of 41 Assumptions: • The traffic control design deliverables/fee is based on Option 1 from sub-task 8.1. • Traffic control plans are anticipated to include: o TCP 1: Short term plan – full closure of S 124th St/42nd Ave S intersection o TCP 2: Short term plan – full closure of S 124th St/Interurban Ave S intersection o TCP 3: Short term plan – full closure of Green River Trail plan, including detour plan o TCP 4: Short term plan – closure of southwest corner of Interurban Ave S/42nd Ave S intersection o TCP 5: Short term plan – Westbound Interurban Avenue S right turn lane closure at 42nd Avenue S o TCP 6: Short term plan – Interurban Avenue S left/center lane closure at 42nd Ave S o TCP 7: Short term plan – Westbound Interurban Avenue S right lane closure at Access Roadway o TCP 8: Short term plan – Eastbound Interurban Avenue S right lane closure at Access Roadway o TCP 9: Short term plan – Interurban Avenue S center lane closure at Access Roadway o TCP 10: Short term plan – Westbound Interurban Avenue S right lane closure at S 124th St o TCP 11: Short term plan – Eastbound Interurban Avenue S right lane closure at S 124th St o TCP 12: Short term plan – Northbound Macadam Rd S right lane/slip-lane closure at Interurban Avenue S o TCP 13: Short term plan – Northbound Macadam Rd S left lane closure at Interurban Avenue S o TCP 14: Short term plan – Westbound S 124th St right lane closure at 42nd Avenue S o TCP 15: Long term plan – temporary staging (channelization and signing) plans for bridge work zone setup on the west side of 42nd Ave S o TCP 16: Long term plan – temporary staging (channelization and signing) plans for bridge work zone setup on the east side of Interurban Ave S • It is assumed that others will prepare all civil-related plans for temporary traffic control. This includes, but is not limited to, the design of temporary curbs, sidewalks, paving, grading, utilities, drainage, structures, geotechnical design, and related work. • Standard traffic control plans will be used to the extent feasible. • Traffic analysis is not included in task 8.2. Deliverables: • Traffic Control packages for TS&L, 30% (assumed to be the same as TS&L), 60%, 90%, and 100%/bid-ready design level. 97 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 27 of 41 8.3 Traffic Signal Design The Consultant will prepare traffic signal plans, and engineer’s opinion of cost for constructing traffic signal improvements/modifications for the project. Assumptions: • The traffic signal design deliverables/fee is based on Option 1 from sub-task 8.1. • The existing traffic signal at the 42nd Ave S/Interurban Ave S intersection will continue to operate during construction and temporary signal modifications will not be required. • Temporary traffic signals will not be required during construction at the S 124th St/Interurban Ave S, 42nd Ave S/S 124th St, and/or Interurban Ave S/Access Roadway intersections. • Permanent signal improvements at the 42nd Ave S/Interurban Ave S intersection are anticipated to primarily include: o Removing the existing mast arm and traffic signals for southbound 42nd Ave S traffic o Modifying the existing phasing and traffic signals for northbound 42nd Ave S traffic to be left turn signal heads only o Removing pedestrian signal heads and pushbuttons for crossing the north leg of the intersection • Permanent signal improvements at the Interurban Ave S/Access Roadway intersection are anticipated to primarily include: o Fully signalizing the intersection to be tied into the existing traffic signal system at the 42nd Ave S/Interurban Ave S intersection • Permanent signal improvements at the S 124th St/Interurban Ave S intersection are anticipated to primarily include: o Fully signalizing the intersection • Existing traffic signal controller and service cabinets will not be impacted by the project and will remain in operation as-is • Special signal pole foundation design is not anticipated • Transformer and/or electrical service connection design is not anticipated • It is assumed that others will prepare all civil-related plans for temporary traffic control. This includes, but is not limited to, the design of curbs, sidewalks, paving, grading, utilities, drainage, structures, geotechnical design, and related work Deliverables: • Traffic Signal packages for TS&L, 30% (assumed to be the same as TS&L), 60%, 90 %, and 100%/bid-ready design levels. 98 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 28 of 41 WORK ELEMENT 9 ILLUMINATION, AND SIGNAGE: This work element is performed by TranTech, to provide illumination, and permanent signage design services. TranTech team will prepare for illumination and signing preliminary design for 30% P&E design level. Based on the City’s selected Alternative, TranTech will provide design services associated with illumination, and permanent signing design. The illumination design is intended for the Bridge and its immediate approaches. TranTech team will prepare PS&E for this work element which includes the following tasks: 9.1 Illumination The design team will discuss guidelines and criteria with the City. The team will develop a design basis report outlining the lighting design approach, AGi32 software, design criteria, target luminance and luminance levels, power densities, wiring schematics, sources (discuss with the PUD service types and locations), color temperature and control intent. Following the input from the City, the lighting engineer will develop illumination PS&E, lighting schedules and provide required fixture catalog cuts. 9.2 Permanent Signing The design team will prepare final permanent signing sheets to reflect the final signing conditions when the project is completed. This effort will include an inventory of existing signs, upgrading sign messages as necessary, preparation of signing plans, sign specification sheets, and sign details for non-standard signs. The final signing plans will include signs for motorists, bicycles, and pedestrians. Signing will be based on the current MUTCD, and the WSDOT Sign Fabrication Manual. Assumptions: • The bridge will have full illumination for bicycles, pedestrians and vehicles. • The approaches will have full illumination and transition to existing conditions as required. • The signing will include wayfinding signs to the community center. Deliverables: • Illumination P&E at 30% design levels. • Illumination and Permanent Signing PS&E at 60%, 90%, 100% and Bid-ready design levels. 99 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 29 of 41 WORK ELEMENT 10 COMMUNITY OUTREACH: This work element is performed by EnviroIssues and TranTech to provide Community Outreach services in the TS&L Phase. Community outreach will be broken into three phases: Phase 1: Early engagement and coordination (at project initiation) During Phase 1, EnviroIssues will focus on building relationships with key stakeholders, establish local avenues for project communications and develop a plan for outreach. EnviroIssues will also develop initial project messaging and materials. Outreach will include interviews and briefings with key stakeholders and community organizations to gather initial feedback about the project, potential solutions, decision criteria and tradeoffs and outreach approach. Phase 2: Technical options and tradeoffs (with draft TS&L/pre 30% design) During Phase 2, EnviroIssues will focus outreach efforts on broader public engagement to gather feedback on the technical options, potential tradeoffs and impacts, and decision criteria to identify a preferred solution. Outreach will include stakeholder briefings, an online open house, an in-person public event and broad public notification. Phase 3: Preferred solution (pre 60% design) During Phase 3, EnviroIssues will reach back out to key stakeholders and the broader public to share details about how community input from Phase 1 and 2 was used by the City and project team to identify a preferred solution, the preferred solution and associated impacts and potential detour routes. Outreach will include stakeholder outreach and an online open house. 10.1 Community outreach plans Objectives Through collaboration with the project team, City and the surrounding community, EnviroIssues will create an overall community outreach plan and phase-specific plans that set outreach goals, methods and messaging. Activities/Approach • EnviroIssues will do initial research into the community, including previous and current engagement and a demographic analysis to help guide the outreach approach. • EnviroIssues will create a general community outreach plan that sets the overall project goals, messaging, etc. • EnviroIssues will develop outreach plans for phase 1, 2 and 3, outlining goals and strategies specific to each phase that allows us to build in flexibility as the project team learns more about community needs. 100 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 30 of 41 Task Assumptions • EnviroIssues will lead development of community outreach plans and update consistently as community needs are better understood. Task Deliverables • General community outreach plan, assumes 2 rounds of review, to be updated up to 2 times • Phase 1 community outreach plan, assumes 2 rounds of review, to be updated up to 2 times • Phase 2 community outreach plan, assumes 2 rounds of review, to be updated up to 2 times • Phase 3 community outreach plan, assumes 2 rounds of review, to be updated up to 2 times 10.2 Stakeholder interviews, briefings and phone calls Objectives In partnership with the project team, EnviroIssues will support City staff to schedule, develop questions and materials for, conduct, and document stakeholder interviews through website and webinar facilitations and/or phone briefings for Phases 1, 2, and 3. Outreach to stakeholders will include area residents, businesses, community and cultural organizations, and others. The purpose of the initial interviews and follow-up briefings will be to further understand community interests, concerns and priorities related to the bridge replacement and how the community would like to stay informed and engaged during this and future phases of the project, including pre-construction and construction phases. The interviews, briefings and phone calls provide an opportunity for key stakeholders to share their unique perspectives on the project issues and potential solutions prior to broader community outreach. The interviews, briefings and phone calls also provide an opportunity for the City to get ahead of and/or proactively address stakeholder concerns and questions prior to outreach to the broader public and share how stakeholder input has been used to inform City decisions. Activities/Approach • EnviroIssues, with the support of the project team, will identify project stakeholders and tailor an engagement approach that best suits individual stakeholder needs. • A phased approach to direct engagement will be used starting with 1) interview, 2) briefings and gather feedback, 3) briefings and correspondence to close the loop with stakeholders. • Stay Home, Stay Safe orders will be considered when determining which engagement approach to use. 101 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 31 of 41 Task Assumptions • Representatives from the City and consultant team will attend both in-person and online interviews and briefings. • EnviroIssues will facilitate scheduling interviews and briefings, either in person or via online platforms. • EnviroIssues will draft meeting minutes and additional notes. • Time billed to attending in-person activities includes up to 30 minutes of travel each way. • EnviroIssues will record feedback received during these outreach activities in Task 10.3. Task Deliverables • Assume up to 10 stakeholder interviews and summaries • Assume up to 10 briefings and summaries • Assume up to 10 emails • Assume up to 10 phone calls and associated summaries 10.3 Online engagement Objectives Online engagement will be robust as measures to address the COVID pandemic limit in-person activities. Online engagement tools will include an online open house, project website, email correspondence and an online webinar. EnviroIssues will develop an online open house website to share project information and interact with the public. An online open house tool is particularly helpful to solicit broader public input from those who are unable to attend the in-person meeting yet still have a desire to provide their input on the project. The online open house includes use of a custom sub-domain website that will be seamlessly linked from the City’s website, have a project-specific customized layout, station tabs to match in-person meeting station materials, fully responsive design (i.e. for smart phones, tablets, etc.), integration social share, and a full report of comments submitted. Activities/Approach • Develop online open house to share project information and solicit community feedback • Plan and implement an online workshop to engage with community stakeholders. • Develop up-to-date content and coordinate with City to update the project website. • Correspond and share information with public via email. Task Assumptions • EnviroIssues will coordinate with the consultant team and City to develop content and graphics for an online open house. • EnviroIssues will use the Participate. Online platform to develop the online open house. 102 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 32 of 41 • EnviroIssues will lead online open house development and online open house updates. • EnviroIssues will coordinate translation of online open house in up to 4 additional languages. The City will be responsible for directs related to translation services. • EnviroIssues will lead planning and implementation of an online webinar to coincide with the online open house. Assume 1 preparation meeting with all participating staff. • Consultant team and City staff will attend the online webinar to provide technical and expert information. • Community comments and feedback will be collected and tracked for the duration of the online open house. Task Deliverables • Participate online open house, content updated up to 1 time. • Online open house look and feel. • Presentation for online webinar, assumes 1 round of review. • Webinar plan assumes 1 round of review. • Webinar agenda and annotation agenda assumes 1 round of review. • Webinar summary assumes 1 round of review. • Spreadsheet tracking all communications, comments, and feedback collected in this Task and task 11.2. 10.4 Outreach materials Objectives EnviroIssues will develop a suite of materials and notifications to encourage stakeholders to engage with the project and share project information. Activities/Approach • EnviroIssues will develop a project look-and-feel, including branding (standards for project material color, font, etc.) and document templates, utilizing any City-established guidelines as a starting point where they are available. • EnviroIssues will develop content for the City’s project website to provide details about the project including a schedule and engagement timeline. EnviroIssues will collaborate with the City to post website content for Phase 1 and 2, and one update for Phase 3 to share the preferred solution. • EnviroIssues will develop content and graphics for project fact sheet/FAQs, to provide an overview of the project during Phase 1 and 2 outreach phases. The fact sheet/FAQ will be updated for Phase 3 outreach. EnviroIssues will also collaborate with the City to provide needed materials translation/transcreation. 103 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 33 of 41 • EnviroIssues will develop an overview presentation to be used during Phase 1 at the stakeholder interviews and an updated presentation to be used during Phase 2 for stakeholder briefings and the in-person public event. • Materials will be translated into languages identified by the project team. • Materials will present project information, including existing conditions, an outline of ways the public can provide feedback, information about design options, and project contact information. • An adaptable presentation will be developed to allow the project team flexibility when sharing project information to different stakeholders. • EnviroIssues will develop notifications for the project, including: o Content and graphics for a postcard to notify the local community about the project and upcoming Phase 2 online engagement opportunities. o Content and graphics for up to two (2) different sized display ads during Phase 2 outreach. o Content for up to three (3) email updates for the City to share with interested stakeholders. o Content and graphics for one (1) yard sign to share the online engagement site. o Content and images for up to two (2) rounds of social media content for Phase 2 and Phase 3 outreach. Task Assumptions • EnviroIssues will work with the project team and City to develop content for materials. • EnviroIssues will circulate drafts of materials with the project team and City for approval before distributing to the public. • EnviroIssues will assist the project team in developing graphics, including maps, and format materials. • The City will be responsible for covering the direct costs associated with printing and mailing materials. • EnviroIssues will coordinate translations, the City will be responsible for direct costs. • The City will coordinate the posting of social media content on City social media accounts. • EnviroIssues will assist in developing project website updates in coordination with the project team. • The City will be responsible for updating the project website. • EnviroIssues will draft project updates to be sent via City listserv. Task Deliverables • Look and Feel of outreach material in full collaboration with the City Fact sheet, assumes 1 round of review, up to 2 updates 104 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 34 of 41 • FAQ, assumes 1 round of review, up to 2 updates • Tailorable presentation for interviews and briefings, assumes 2 rounds of review • Mailed postcards, assumes 1 round of review • Up to 2 display ads, assumes 1 round of review • Yard signs, assumes 1 round of review • Social media content, assumes 1 round of review, up to 2 updates • City-provided translated versions of final materials listed above • Draft up to 5 project website updates, assumes 1 round of review • Draft up to 4 email listserv updates, assumes 1 round of review 10.5 Outreach summaries Objectives EnviroIssues will summarize feedback heard through the three phases of community engagement activities including online engagement, interviews, briefings and phone calls, to communicate the engagement process and how community feedback was incorporated into the final design. Activities/Approach • Outline community engagement activities and objectives. • Summarize feedback. • Show how feedback was used. • Reflect on success and lessons learned of engagement activities. Task Assumptions • The summaries will be shared with the public and partner agencies. Task Deliverables • Phase 1 community outreach summary, assumes 1 round of review • Phase 2 community outreach summary, assumes 1 round of review • Phase 3 community outreach summary, assumes 1 round of review 105 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 35 of 41 Work Element 11 Type, Size, Location (TS&L) Report: Based on the City’s input and based on the results from the engineering activities associated with work elements 1 through 11 , TranTech will provide structural, civil, roadway, and drainage engineering services with the goal of preparing a TS&L Report that satisfies current WSDOT BDM Section 2.1.5 requirements and will study up to four bridge replacement alternatives. Two alignment alternatives will be studied; one alternative will look at replacing the bridge in its existing location and one alternative will look at replacing the bridge back to its historical location between Interurban Ave S and S 124th St. Evaluation criteria for comparing different alternatives will be developed and scoping level engineering designs and cost estimates for each alternative will be provided. All activities associated with this task will be closely coordinated with the City and the design team will work as an extension of the City staff for recommending a preferred bridge replacement alternative. The following describes the design subtasks associated with this work element: 11.1 – Civil/ Roadway Design a. Alignment and Right-of-Way Plans Consultant will prepare the preliminary alignment and ROW plan to include proposed right-of-way acquisitions, proposed preliminary permanent easements layout, and proposed preliminary temporary construction easements (TCEs) layout, for each studied alternative. b. Site Preparation and Demolition Plans A preliminary Site Preparation and Demolition plan will be prepared for each of the studied alternatives. These plans will show topography, existing utilities, existing surface features and items for demolition, removal, or salvage. c. Roadway Plans & Profiles A preliminary Plan and Profile plan will be prepared for each of the studied alternatives in accordance with City and AASHTO design standards as appropriate for the projected 20- year ADT level of traffic. The City shall provide all current and historical traffic count data available to assist in determining an approximate 20-year ADT projection. It is assumed a formal traffic count will be conducted as part of this scope of work for 42nd Ave, 124th Street and Interurban Ave. For the alignment option at S 124th Street traffic modeling will be completed by the Transpo Group as described in work element 8. The modeling will be utilized to determine if a roundabout (single lane or two lane) or a signal is the best intersection option for the S 124th Street and Interurban Avenue S location. The modeling, coordination with the City and King County (for trail connectivity) and estimates for each option will be utilized for arriving at the recommended S 124th Street and Interurban Avenue S intersection option. Feasible connection options to the Green River Trail will be included. For the TS&L phase it is assumed the intersection at 42nd Ave S and S 124th Street will be a stop controlled intersection similar to other intersections along 124th Street, such as 43rd to 49th Ave S. and this will not be modeled or designed for during the TS&L portion of the project. If the 124th Street location is selected, the intersection of 124th Street and 42nd Ave intersection will be designed in a future phase. 106 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 36 of 41 d. Coordination with Districts, Utilities, and Stakeholders Construction of this project will affect multiple parties. Coordination will occur as part of Work Element 11. Additional coordination with outside utilities will occur as part of Work Element 6. Coordination with City utilities will occur with this Work Element. This element will include implementing results of Work Element 11 into the TS&L. e. Conceptual stormwater management plan Construction of a new bridge and approaches will require pavement replacement. A conceptual stormwater management approach will be developed for each project alternative to identify whether stormwater runoff treatment and/or stormwater flow control thresholds will be exceeded. For each alternative the Low Impact Development Performance Standard will be evaluated and possible scenarios for meeting this requirement will be explored. 11.2 TS&L Report Consultant will prepare horizontal and vertical alignment alternatives for the project to support the analysis of up to four bridge alignment alternatives. The horizontal alignment for the project has been determined by the existing roadway alignment. However, the exact alignment remains to be fixed based on detailed survey information. An opinion of cost will be prepared based on the alternatives. The opinion of cost will be based on unit prices and incorporate about a 30% contingency to account for the level of completeness of plan preparation, and to reflect experience on similar projects within the region. An evaluation matrix will be developed for purpose of comparing the costs, construction feasibility, staged construction flexibility, and other criteria as may be developed during the work. Selection of the preferred alternative will be made by the City stakeholders, and the preferred alternative will be carried forward in the design as described in work element 12. Deliverables: • Up to four alternative roadway/bridge plans and profiles • Opinion of Cost for each alternative • Evaluation matrix Design Criteria for Civil, Roadway, Stormwater, and Traffic Control Elements: Reports, plans, and estimates, to the extent feasible, shall be developed in accordance with the latest edition and amendments of the following: • City Standards and Specifications. • AASHTO 2011, “A Policy of Geometric Design of Highways and Streets; 6th Edition”; • AASHTO 2004, “A Guide for Achieving Flexibility in Highway Design of Highways; 1st Edition”; • Washington State Department of Transportation, “Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction”; • Washington State Department of Transportation, “Design Manual”; 107 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 37 of 41 • Washington State Department of Transportation, “Standard Plans” • Washington State Department of Transportation, “Materials Laboratory Outline”; • Washington State Department of Transportation, “Construction Manual”; • Washington State Department of Transportation, “Local Agency Guidelines”; • Highway Research Board’s Manual entitled “Highway Capacity”; • FHWA and USDOT, “Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways”; • WSDOT Highway Runoff Manual; • WSDOT Hydraulics Manual; • King County – 2016 Edition of the King County Surface Water Design Manual 11.3 Structural Design Based on input from the City and engineering activities associated with work elements 1 through 11 , TranTech’s structural team will perform preliminary structural design associated with up to four viable bridge replacement alternatives for each of the aforementioned alignments (i.e., existing and S124th). The design will follow most current WSDOT Bridge Design Manual (BDM), AASHTO, and City requirements. Throughout the structural design activities, special care will be given to incorporate low impact design approaches like noise reduction, minimization of traffic impacts, Life Cost Analysis based on City-desired parameters, and environmental protection. Our bridge design activities start with a review of the gathered data provided by team members including survey, geotechnical, hydrology, traffic, civil, etc. Throughout our preliminary structural assessment/design of the studied alternatives, we will be in continuous communication with the City for consultations on parameters like structure location, length and vertical clearance. Also, required roadway elevations would be addressed. Our approach will be to work together with the City and our design team to address all engineering aspects of this bridge replacement project to optimally assess up to four viable bridge replacement alternatives for each of the aforementioned alignments. The team will recommend one alternative for a preferred alignment that possesses most of the City-desired attributes to advance to full design stage. All engineering work will be done per AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications - sixth Edition, WSDOT Standard Specifications 2020 M41-10, WSDOT Bridge Design Manual M 23- 50, June 2019 and current City Standards. All data and final products will become the property of City upon project completion. All data will be provided in a mutually agreeable format. Deliverables: • Draft TS&L Report • Final TS&L Report 108 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 38 of 41 WORK ELEMENT 12 PS&E This work element is performed by TranTech to provide 30%, 60%, 90%, 100% and Bid-ready PS&E documentation in accordance with WSDOT LAG Manual. 12.1 30% Plans and Estimate (P&E) This work element item encompasses all the activities associated with the preparation of the 30% Plans and engineer’s opinion of construction cost Estimate (P&E) documents. Constructability Review and QA/QC activities are an inherent part of this element. Deliverables: • Two 11x17 (half size) copies of Plans and Opinion of Cost. • Electronically delivered plan sheets in pdf format. • Electronic copy of the estimate’s quantities opinion of construction cost. • Electronic PDF copies of the Plans and opinion of construction cost in both PDF and Excel. 12.2 60% Plans, Specifications, & Estimate (PS&E) This work element item encompasses all the activities associated with the preparation of the 60% Plans, Technical Information Report (TIR), Special provisions, and engineer’s opinion of construction cost Estimate (PS&E) documents. Full specifications will not be provided only special provisions for review will be provided at the 60% submittal. A contingency will be incorporated into the estimate to account for the level of completeness. Constructability Review and QA/QC activities are an inherent part of this element. Deliverables: • Two 11x17 (half size) copies of Plans and Opinion of Cost. • Electronically delivered plan sheets in pdf format. • Electronic copy of the estimate’s quantities opinion of construction cost. • Electronic copy of preliminary Special provisions anticipated. • Electronic copy of the preliminary TIR. 12.3 90% PS&E This task encompasses all the activities associated with the preparation of the 90% Plans, TIR, Special Provisions and engineer’s opinion of construction cost Estimate (PS&E). Constructability Review and QA/QC activities are an inherent part of this element. Deliverables: • Two 11x17 (half size) copies of Plans and Opinion of Cost. • Electronically delivered plan sheets in pdf format. • Electronic copy of the estimate’s quantities opinion of construction cost. • Electronic copy of Special provisions. • Electronic copy of the updated TIR. 109 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 39 of 41 12.3 100% PS&E This task encompasses all the activities associated with the preparation of the 100% Plans, TIR, Special Provisions and engineer’s opinion of construction cost Estimate (PS&E). Constructability Review and QA/QC activities are an inherent part of this elem ent. This task affords the City to review the draft final construction complete construction documents one last time. Deliverables: • Two 11x17 (half size) copies of Plans and Opinion of Cost. • Electronically delivered plan sheets in pdf format. • Electronic copy of the estimate’s quantities opinion of construction cost. • Electronic copy of Special provisions. • Electronic copy of the updated TIR. 12.4 Bid-ready PS&E This work element item encompasses all the activities associated with the preparation of the Bid- ready Plans, TIR, Special Provisions and engineer’s opinion of construction cost Estimate (PS&E). Constructability Review and QA/QC activities are an inherent part of this element. Deliverables: • One half size electronic copy of the Bid-ready set of Plans • One full size originally signed copy of the Bid-ready set of Plans • Electronic copy of the Specification Manual at 100% level document per LAG, WSDOT and City templates, in MS Word format. • One electronic copy of the quantities Estimate and opinion of construction cost nd a signed original of the opinion of construction costs. • AutoCAD and/ or Civil 3D complete electronic drawing files • Electronic copy of the TIR – stamped and signed. Assumptions: City to provide: • Title block and CAD standards The Following table presents the anticipated Ad-ready plan sheets for the S 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement Project: Sheet Name PS&E Assumed Number of Sheets TS&L Assumed PS&E Submittal Phase Number of Sheets 30% 60% 90% & 100% Cover Sheet 1 X X X Index Legend and Abbreviations 2 X X Civil and Structural Demo Plans 4 X X Site Prep and TESC 4 X X Roadway Plan & Profile 8 4 X X X Striping & Paving 8 X X Roadway Typical Sections and Details 3 1 X X X ROW 2 2 X X X 110 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 40 of 41 Drainage 3 1 X X Utilities 2 X X Illumination 5 X X Construction Detour Plan 6 1 X X Traffic Control 6 1 X X Roadside Restoration 2 X X Bridge Plan & Elevation 2 4 X X X Bridge Demo 4 X X General Notes 1 X X Bridge Construction Sequencing 5 X X X Temporary Shoring 2 X X X Bridge Foundation Layout 2 4 X X X Shaft Details – Pier 1 and 4 2 X X Shaft Details – Piers 2 and 3 2 X X Pier 1 Layout (Plan & Elevation) 1 X X X Pier 1 Details 2 X X Pier 2 Layout (Plan & Elevation) 1 X X X Pier 2 Details 2 X X Pier 3 Layout (Plan & Elevation) 1 X X X Pier 3 Details 2 X X Pier 4 Layout (Plan & Elevation) 1 X X X Pier 4 Details 2 X X Framing Plan 2 X X Bridge Typical Sections 2 X X X Girder Details 8 X X Diaphragms Details 4 X X Deck Reinforcing 6 X X Bearing Details 3 X X Expansion Joint Details 3 X X Bridge Drainage Details 3 X X Utility Support Details 2 X X Bridge Barrier Details 3 X X Bridge Railing Details 2 X X Throw Fence Details 3 X X X Bridge Approach Slabs 2 X X Retaining Wall Layouts 4 X X X Retaining Wall Details 2 X X Bar Bending Sheets 4 X Guardrail 3 X X Perm. Signage and Attachments 2 X X 111 City of Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Page 41 of 41 WORK ELEMENT 13 - PHASE 2 SUPPLEMENT - CONSTRUCTION PHASE SERVICES: At the discretion of the City construction phase services may be added as a supplement to this contract. The following presents the envisioned tasks associated with this work element. 14.1 Engineering Support During Construction In this task TranTech’s team will provide on-call engineering support services to the City during the construction period of the Project. This task encompasses review of and responses to Contractor RFIs; Submittals during the construction phase and preparation of As-built drawings and inventory load rating of the new bridge. Deliverables: • As-built drawings • Load Rating Analysis and Summary 14.2 Optional Construction Management Services TranTech’s team possess a highly experienced and qualified CM team. In case the City desires, TranTech staff can augment City’s team to provide CM services for this project. The following are the categorized activities associated with this Task: Pre-con Meeting; Providing Full-time Construction Project Manager for all aspects of construction activity including oversight of contractors and subcontractors, quality control, safety compliance, managing project changes, budget, and schedule. Provide continuous project management throughout the construction duration. This includes management of staff, subconsultants, and preparation for monthly invoices and progress reports; provide full-time senior inspectors (except when City Inspector is on team) to track quantities, daily inspection reports, etc.; Provide Full- time/part-time assistant inspector, as workload requires.; Review and respond to unanticipated conditions that occur during construction; Review requests to change or modify the work shown in the plans and specifications. Also provide recommendations to resolve the issue; prepare as- built drawings; and material testing Deliverables: • Progress Reports; Inspection Daily Reports; Submittal Reviews; RFI Reviews; Monthly Pay Estimates; Change Management; Record of Materials; Pre-con and Construction Photos; Testing and Lab Reports where necessary; Red-line As-built; Close-out 112 Exhibit D - Prime Consultant Cost Computations SummaryCity of Tukwila - 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement TRANTECH TEAM BUDGET BREAKDOWNTranTech 1,493,566$ 1 Alliance89,614$ Landau- Geotechnical104,902$ Landau- Environmental100,594$ Makers71,536$ Ott-Sakai70,380$ Transpo124,464$ EnviroIssues63,569$ TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET2,118,626$ MANAGEMENT RESERVE211,863$ TOTAL CONTRACT BUDGET2,330,488$ 113 2020 STATE LEGISLATIVE AGENDA City of Tukwila, Washington Advancing Equity ▶ Develop and implement a racial equity toolkit for legislation, policies and programs to advance racial equity in Washington. Education ▶ Implement needs-based funding for allocation of social/ emotional student support resources, and expand funding for learning opportunities for summer school students. ▶ Increase funding for homeless students and secondary ELL students. ▶ Incorporate early learning for low-income students as a part of Basic Education. Revenue Reform ▶ Allow cities the authority and flexibility to address the fact that growth in the cost of providing services continues to outstrip revenues. ▶ The State should amend the law that limits annual property tax growth to 1%, and work with cities to authorize additional funding flexibility and opportunities at the local level. Preparing for our Future ▶ Enact policies to prepare to combat climate change, including adequately budgeting for its effects, and providing tools for cities to prepare and address the ramifications of flooding, pollution and other key factors. ▶ Continue to invest in workforce education and job training to ensure Washingtonians have access to high- quality career and technical education opportunities. ▶ Develop sufficient consumer privacy legislation to ensure that residents have access to their own personal data, and enact certain restrictions to technology that allow Washingtonians a right to privacy. Transportation & Infrastructure ▶ Provide funding for critical local infrastructure, including the Allentown Bridge, which is structurally deficient and functionally obsolete. ▶ Create stable, reliable infrastructure assistance funding for cities to assist in repairing roads, bridges and other public infrastructure that support economic development. Housing & Human Services ▶ Create new and expand existing local options to generate revenue for housing and human services, and for capital construction of affordable housing. ▶ We strongly encourage the State to adequately fund human services programs for the health of the safety net. Shared Revenue ▶ The State must continue its role as a partner with cities, including reinstating funding for the Public Works Assistance Account and Community Economic Revitalization Board. ▶ Ensure funding for Streamlined Sales Tax Mitigation payments brought back in the 2019 session; remain funded and identify a longer-term funding strategy beyond the 2020/2021 biennium. ▶ In addition, the State must retain the local share of liquor taxes to allow jurisdictions to address impacts – such as public safety – of privatized liquor in our cities. ▶ Continued support for the Department of Revenue’s Business Licensing System that has coordinated business licenses at the local and State levels. Preserve Lodging Tax Flexibility ▶ Ensure the definition of “tourist” in Washington State remains flexible to allow jurisdictions and Lodging Tax Advisory Committees to distribute lodging tax dollars in a manner that best serves each individual community. 114 https://tukwilawa.sharepoint.com/sites/publicworks/engineering/pw drop box/01 tic agenda/2020 agenda items/tic 09-21-2020/05. akana consultant amendment/info memo - dev review sup ag #1 akana 9-18-20.docx INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Transportation and Infrastructure Committee FROM: Hari Ponnekanti, Interim Public Works Director BY: Cyndy Knighton, Senior Program Manager CC: Mayor Ekberg DATE: September 18, 2020 SUBJECT: Development Review Support Project No. 12001302, Contract 20-060 Amendment No. 1 ISSUE Approval of an amendment to consultant agreement No. 20-060 with Cooper Zietz Engineers, dba Akana, for ongoing review and approval of development permits in Public Works/Department of Community Development. BACKGROUND The Public Works Development section currently only has one development review engineer after a recent retirement of a long-time employee at the end of 2019. In the past, up to three development review engineers have been employed full time. Akana was retained to assist with development review earlier this year with a contract of up to $39,000. Review work was paid on a “time and material” basis as individual permits were assigned to the consultant staff for review. Approximately half of the original contract has been expended to date. DISCUSSION Public Works is experiencing staffing shortages for review and inspections and requires outside assistance to complete the work associated with new and re-development activities. Prologis is currently a very large development that is beginning to submit for development permits through both Public Works and Community Development. To pay for the permit and inspection fees, Prologis has established an account with Tukwila for $55,000, which will be drawn down by the City as needed. This supplemental agreement with Akana is necessary to provide additional engineering review support that is anticipated to be assigned, including work on Prologis permits. FINANCIAL IMPACT The attached supplemental agreement is for a maximum of $100,000, an increase of $61,000 from the original contract. Prologis-associated work will be charged against the $55,000 balance account and the remaining $45,000 will come from other development permit fees. All costs are pass-through expenses covered by permit fees and will not impact the General Fund. As the contract is now over $40,000, Council approval is needed. RECOMMENDATION Council is being asked to approve Supplement No. 1 for $60,000 to Contract 20-060 with Akana and to consider this item at the October 5, 2020 Regular Meeting Consent Agenda. Attachments: Akana Supplement No. 1 115 CONTRACT FOR SERVICES Amendment #1 Between the City of Tukwila and Cooper Zietz Dba Akana That portion of Contract No. 20-060 between the City of Tukwila and Cooper Zietz Dba Akana is hereby amended as follows: Section 2: 2. Scope of Services. The Consultant agrees to perform the services, identified on Exhibit “A-1” attached hereto, including the provision of all labor, materials, equipment and supplies. Section 4: 4. Payment. The Consultant shall be paid by the City for completed work and for services rendered under this Agreement as follows: A. Payment for the work provided by the Consultant shall be made as provided on Exhibit “A-1” using the billing voucher on Exhibit “B-1” attached hereto, provided that the total amount of payment to the Consultant shall not exceed $100,000 without express written modification of the Agreement signed by the City. B. The Consultant may submit vouchers to the City once per month during the progress of the work for partial payment for that portion of the project completed to date. Such vouchers will be checked by the City and, upon approval thereof, payment shall be made to the Consultant in the amount approved. C. Final payment of any balance due the Consultant of the total contract price earned will be made promptly upon its ascertainment and verification by the City after the completion of the work under this Agreement and its acceptance by the City. D. Payment as provided in this section shall be full compensation for work performed, services rendered, and for all materials, supplies, equipment and incidentals necessary to complete the work. E. The Consultant’s records and accounts pertaining to this Agreement are to be kept available for inspection by representatives of the City and the state of Washington for a period of three (3) years after final payments. Copies shall be made available upon request. 116 All other provisions of the contract shall remain in full force and effect. Dated this ________ day of ___________________________, 20________________. CITY OF TUKWILA CONTRACTOR Allan Ekberg, Mayor Printed Name:______________________ ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED APPROVED AS TO FORM Christy O’Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk Office of the City Attorney 117 Scope of Services The purpose of this on-call contract is to support the City of Tukwila with review and inspection services associated with franchise utility permit applications, general development review, and inspections. This work will be conducted on as-needed basis up to the budget allowances assigned for this project. The Consultant will not proceed with a task until authorized by the City. The anticipated scope of services includes, but is not limited to: • Review and approval of franchise utility permit application to ensure compliance with City standards • Obtain training and City laptop for use of Trakit software input • Inspection of work done by franchise utilities after permit application is issued • Close out of franchise utility permit applications after verifying that all permit conditions comply with the City standards • Review of general development permit applications • Other review and inspection services as directed by the City Work on on-call contracts will be on as-needed basis, and the Consultant understands the City does not guarantee any minimum amount of work. The Consultant will be authorized to perform work under this contract by issuance of a written task order executed between the City and Consultant. Each task order will identify the Scope of Work to be performed, the period of performance, and the not-to-exceed amount. Budget The Consultant will perform the work described herein on a direct labor costs and material basis at a not-to-exceed budget of $100,000 which 39,000 has already been contracted in accordance with the direct hourly rates shown below: Project Manager/Resident Engineer $250/hour Resident Engineer $190/hour Assistant Resident Engineer $132/hour Inspector $133/hour Project Assistant $120/hour Reimbursables will be billed at actual costs. Mileage billed at the current approved IRS mileage rate. Staffing will be determined by the Consultant based on specific project needs. The Consultant shall provide notification and receive written approval prior to exceeding the approved project budget. Expenses and sub-consultants will be paid by invoice with no mark-up. 118 Billing Voucher To: City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 Contractor: ______________________________ Telephone: ____________________________ Mailing Address: __________________________________________________________________ Specific Program: _________________________________________________________________ Contract Period: __________________________ Reporting Period: _______________________ Amount Requested This Invoice: $___________ Invoice Number: __________________________ Date of Invoice: _________________________ ________________________________________ Authorized Signature Budget Summary: Total Contract Amount: $____________ Previous Payments: $____________ Current Request: $____________ Total Requested This Contract to Date $____________ Total Contract Amount: $____________ 119 120 https://tukwilawa.sharepoint.com/sites/publicworks/engineering/PW Drop Box/01 TIC Agenda/2020 Agenda Items/TIC 09 -21-2020/06. Concurrency Mgmt Ord & Res/INFORMATION MEMO - Concurrency Management Update 2020.docx INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM To: Transportation and Infrastructure Committee From: Hari Ponnekanti, Interim Public Works Director By: Cyndy Knighton, Senior Program Manager CC: Mayor Ekberg Date: August 14, 2020, UPDATED September 18, 2020 Subject: Concurrency Updates: Public Works Fee Resolution for Water, Sewer, and Surface Water Rates and Ordinance Modifying TMC 9.50 – Concurrency Management ISSUE Adopt updates to the City’s Concurrency Management system via a resolution establishing a new Public Works Fee Schedule for 2020 and an ordinance amending certain sections of the Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Chapter 9.50 – Concurrency Management. Concurrency Management is the method used to ensure that necessary facilities are available concurrent with new development within the City. BACKGROUND In December 2005, the City established a concurrency management system, adopted via ordinance 2110 and codified in TMC Chapter 9.50, and implemented a concurrency test fee adopted via resolution as part of the Public Works Fee Schedule. Passing a concurrency test and obtaining a concurrency certificate are required of all new development and redevelopment. This test and certificate both verify that the necessary concurrency capacity is available and reserves it for the proposed development. The Public Works Fee Schedule has been updated on a routine basis to establish the amounts for certain fees and charges incurred during the development review and permit approval process. The Public Works Fee Schedule was last updated in 2018 with Resolution 1945. Fees were updated for water, sewer and surface water fees for 2019 and 2020 rates. Transportation Concurrency Test Fees were not updated at that time. The concurrency test fee is charged to offset the costs incurred by Tukwila for maintaining the City’s traffic model, periodic short-term updates to the model, and major model updates required for the Transportation Element updates. DISCUSSION The City has been administering the Concurrency Management system since January 2006 and daily practices of implementation have been well established. Upon reviewing the code language in TMC 9.50 and comparing it to actual implementation, it was found that the best practice for Tukwila was not reflected in the codified language. The original language was modeled after a much larger city’s program and included more steps than have been found to be necessary for Tukwila’s permit process. The proposed changes simplify Tukwila’s Concurrency Management system to better reflect the current practice. As part of the effort updating the Traffic Impact Fees and verification that the City’s street network remains in compliance with the established Level of Service Standards in 2019 (often referred to as “concurrency”), Transportation Concurrency Test Fees were analyzed. The fees were established in 2007 and have not been updated since. Revisions to the fees were recommended to ensure adequate funding is maintained. Additionally, clarification to the fees to include more land use types was included as well as addressing instances where the fees were not reflective of the general impacts to the roadway infrastructure. The new fees more equitably charge developments based on their impacts to the 121 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Concurrency Page 2 https://tukwilawa.sharepoint.com/sites/publicworks/engineering/PW Drop Box/01 TIC Agenda/2020 Agenda Items/TIC 09 -21-2020/06. Concurrency Mgmt Ord & Res/INFORMATION MEMO - Concurrency Management Update 2020.docx transportation network and are based on a median trip generation rate for each land use group, adjusted for size of development, multiplied by $250 per generated trip (rounded). Councilmembers discussed this topic at the August 17, 2020 Transportation and Infrastructure Committee (TIC). Comments were received prior to the TIC meeting from Segale Properties, LLC, asking for additional explanation on how the fees were developed and if they were being applied equitably. Staff presented background on the proposed change to a $250 per trip, regardless of development type, at the TIC meeting. A separate discussion was held between City and Segale Properties staff after the committee meeting. The attached charts visually show the changes between the current and proposed fees. Research was done regarding how (or if) other jurisdictions charge for Concurrency tests or certificates. Some cities do charge a separate fee for transportation concurrency approval, but it is more common that an administrative fee is added as a percentage of the Traffic Impact Fee (TIF). A typical surcharge fee ranges from 1% to 3% of the TIF. This could be problematic for Tukwila as the City has four TIF zones with different rates for each zone. Some other jurisdictions include a charge for the concurrency approvals but are included as part of the larger permit fees instead of being a stand-alone fee. Staff is still researching how many of these jurisdictions still require a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) to be prepared by an engineering firm as part of the submittal process. Research is proving more challenging during COVID. Tukwila rarely requires TIAs to be prepared, which is a cost and time savings for the developer. TIAs are only required of proposed developments that would be of such a nature that the City’s most recent model update, whether done for a 20-year horizon window or a mid-term six-year horizon, did not account for such an impact. Concurrency reports, studying the mid-term horizon, can be conducted as frequently as once a year, depending on City-wide development trends. RECOMMENDATION Council is being asked to consider the City’s 2020 concurrency test fee increases in accordance with the Public Works Fee Schedule Resolution and proposed modifications to TMC 9.50 in accordance with the attached Ordinance at a public hearing on the October 12, 2020 Committee of the Whole and the October 19, 2020 Regular Meeting Consent Agenda. ATTACHMENTS • Draft Ordinance • Draft Public Works Fee Schedule Resolution • Concurrency Comparison Charts 122 W: Legislative Development\Concurrency Mgmt-TMC amendments 8-3-20 CK:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 1 of 11 DRAFT AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, REPEALING ORDINANCE NOS. 2110 AND 2155, AS CODIFIED AS CHAPTER 9.50, “CONCURRENCY MANAGEMENT;” REENACTING TMC CHAPTER 9.50 TO AMEND REGULATIONS RELATING TO CONCURRENCY TESTING; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE WHEREAS, the City established concurrency management in 2005 to ensure that concurrency infrastructure was in place prior to approval of new development permits; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend information relating to concurrency testing to better reflect actual processes used; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Repealer. Ordinance Nos. 2155 and 2110, as codified as Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Chapter 9.50, “Concurrency Management,” are hereby repealed. Section 2. TMC Chapter 9.50 Reenacted. TMC Chapter 9.50 is hereby re-enacted to read as follows: CHAPTER 9.50 CONCURRENCY MANAGEMENT Sections: 9.50.010 Purpose 9.50.020 Definitions 9.50.030 Concurrency Test 9.50.040 Test Criteria 9.50.050 Concurrency for Phased Development 9.50.060 Public Notice of Concurrency Test 9.50.070060 Exemptions 123 W: Legislative Development\Concurrency Mgmt-TMC amendments 8-3-20 CK:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 2 of 11 9.50.080070 Vesting 9.50.090080 Improvements to Concurrency Facilities 9.50.100090 Capital Facilities Plan and Capital Improvement Program 9.50.110100 Intergovernmental Coordination 9.50.120110 Administrative Rules and Procedures 9.50.130120 Appeals 9.50.140130 SEPA Exemption Section 3. TMC Section 9.50.010 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 9.50.010 Purpose A. Pursuant to the State Growth Management Act, RCW 36.70A, after the adoption of its Comprehensive Plan, the City of Tukwila is required by RCW 36.70A.070(6)I(b) to ensure that transportation improvements or strategies to accommodate the impacts of development are provided concurrent with the development. Further, the City is bound by the planning goals of RCW 36.70A.020 to ensure that public facilities and services necessary to support development shall be adequate to serve the development at the time the development is available for occupancy and use without decreasing current service levels below locally established minimum standards, hereinafter “concurrency.” B. The intent of this chapter is to establish a concurrency management system to ensure that concurrency facilities and services needed to maintain minimum level of service standards can be provided simultaneous to, or within a reasonable time after, development occupancy or use. Concurrency facilities adopted by the City’s Comprehensive Plan are roads, potable water, sanitary sewer, and storm water management. This chapter furthers the goals, policies and implementation strategies and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. C. The concurrency management system provides the necessary regulatory mechanism for evaluating requests for development to ensure that adequate concurrency facilities can be provided within a reasonable time of the development impact. The concurrency management system also provides a framework for determining facilities and services needs and provides a basis for meeting those needs through capital facilities planning. D. For water, sewer, and surface water, the facilities must be in place at the time of development impact approval; and for roads, the facilities must be in place within six years of the time of the development impactapproval. Applicants with developments that would cause the level of service on concurrency facilities to decline below City standard s can have their developments approved by implementing measures that offset their impacts and would maintain the City’s standard for level of service. Section 4. TMC Section 9.50.020 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 9.50.020 Definitions. The definitions contained in TMC 9.50.020 apply throughout this chapter unless, from the context, another meaning is clearly intended. 124 W: Legislative Development\Concurrency Mgmt-TMC amendments 8-3-20 CK:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 3 of 11 1. "Adequate" means equal to or better than the level of service standards specified in the current adopted capital facilities element. 2. “Applicant” means a person who applies for any certificate of concurrency under this chapter and who is the owner of the subject property or the authorized agent of the property. 3. “Available water, sewer, and surface water capacity” means there is adequate capacity, based on adopted level of service standards, for water, sewer, and surface water facilities currently existing without requiring facility construction, expansion, or modification. 4. “Building permit” refers to any permit issued under the Uniform Building Code. 5. “Certificate of concurrency” means the statement accompanying the Public Works Department’s development standards that are issued with an approved development permit or the Public Works Department’s conditions of approval that are issued with an approved building permit. The statement shall state that a certificate of concurrency is issued and indicate: a. For water, sewer, and surface water, the capacity of the concurrency facilities that are available and reserved for the specific uses, densities and intensities as described in the development permit or building permit; and b. For road facilities assigned to the development for the specific uses, densities and intensities as described in the development permit or building permit; and c. Conditions of approval, if applicable; and d. An effective date; and e. An expiration date. 6. “Concurrency” means facilities or strategies that achieve the City’s level of service standards and that: a. For water, sewer, surface water, and roads: facilities that exist at the time development is approved by the Public Works Department; or b. For roads: (1) Are included in the City’s Capital Improvement Plan at the time development is approved by the Public Works Department; or (2) Will be available and complete no later than six years after completion of the development, and the applicant and/or the City provides a financial commitment which is in place at the time the development is approved by the Public Works Department. 7. “Concurrency facilities” means facilities for which concurrency is required in accordance with the provision of this chapter. They are roads, water, sanitary sewer, and surface water facilities. 8. “Concurrency test” means: a. For water, sewer, and surface water, the comparison of a development’s demand to the available capacity of each concurrency facility; and 125 W: Legislative Development\Concurrency Mgmt-TMC amendments 8-3-20 CK:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 4 of 11 b. For roads, the comparison of the development’s impact on the level of service standards of each effected subarea. A concurrency test must be passed for water, sewer, surface water, and roads, and a notice issued by the Public Works Department in order to obtain a certificate of concurrency. The concurrency test notice shall be valid for one year. 9. “Development permit” means a land use permit and includes short plat, preliminary or final rezone/reclassification, zoning permit, master plan, shoreline substantial development permit/conditional use permit, planned unit development, or any other permit or approval under the Zoning Code or Subdivision Code or Shoreline Master Program. 10. “Financial commitment” means: a. Revenue sources anticipated to be available and designated for facilities in the Comprehensive Plan; b. Unanticipated revenue from federal and state grants for which the City has received notice of approval; c. Funding that is assured by the applicant in a form approved by the Public Works Department. 11. “Level of service standard” means those standards specified in the adopted transportation element of the Comprehensive Plan. For water, sewer, and surface water, “level of service standard” also means those standards defined in TMC Title 14. 12. “Non-City managed facilities” include any non-city provider of water or sewer. 13. “Planned capacity” means road facilities that do not exist but for which the necessary facility construction, expansion, or modification project is contained in the current capital facilities element of the Comprehensive Plan. The improvements must be scheduled to be completed within six years and the financial commitment must be in place at the time of approval of the certificate of concurrency to complete the improvements within six years. 14. “Public Works Department” means the Public Works Director or his/her designee will perform the concurrency test. 15. “Transportation strategies” means transportation demand management strategies and other techniques or programs that reduce single occupant vehicle travel. 16. “Vested” means the right to develop or continue development in accordance with the laws, rules, and other regulations in effect at the time the building permit application is deemed complete. Section 5. TMC Section 9.50.030 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 9.50.030 Concurrency Test A. Timing. All applicants must apply for the transportation concurrency test and receive notice of passing the test before the City will consider approve an application for any development permit or building permit to be complete. An application for a concurrency test may be submitted with other development submit tals. 126 W: Legislative Development\Concurrency Mgmt-TMC amendments 8-3-20 CK:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 5 of 11 B. Procedures. 1. Applications for a concurrency test shall be submitted on forms provided by the Public Works Department. The concurrency test shall be done in order of “first in, first out,” once the Public Works Department determines the application is complete. 2. The applicant shall be responsible to provide to the Public Works Department a certificate of availability for water and sewer with the concurrency application submittal if the property is serviced by a non-City managed utility. For City managed utilities, a determination will be made on availability and a certificate of availability shall be issued. This certificate of availability shall suffice as meeting the concurrency test for water and sewer utilities. 3. The applicant shall submit a detailed project description of the development, including location, vehicular circulation, and gross floor area by use, as part of the concurrency application and shall pay the concurrency test fee as adopted by motion or resolution of the Tukwila City Council. 4. A concurrency test shall be performed only for specific property, uses, densities and intensities based on the information provided by the applicant. The applicant shall specify densities and intensities that are consistent with the uses allowed for the property. If the concurrency test is being requested in conjunction with an application for rezone, the applicant shall specify densities and intensities that are consistent with the proposed zoning for the property. Changes to the uses, densities and intensities that create additional impacts on concurrency facilities shall be subject to an additional concurrency test. 5. The Public Works Director or designee shall perform the concurrency test. The project must receive a passing grade pass the concurrency test prior to approval of the development permit or building permit. 6. The Public Works Director or his designees shall notify the applicant of the test results in writing and shall notify other City departments of the test results. The date of written notification to the applicant shall be the date of issuance of the concurrency test notice certificate. 7. The concurrency test notice certificate shall expire within 90 calendar days one year of its issuance unless the applicant submits a building permit application, a SEPA environmental checklist and all required documentation pursuant to TMC Chapter 21.04, or an extension is granted within one year from the date of issuance of the concurrency certificate. together with the site plan, the traffic impact analysis prepared in accordance with the City’s traffic impact analysis guidelines and containing the traffic information derived from the concurrency test outcome, and the SEPA review fee. No extensions may be granted for submittal of a complete SEPA environmental checklist and all required documentation. 8. If the deadline for submittal of a complete building permit application, SEPA environmental checklist and all required documentation is met as described in TMC Section 9.50.030.B.7, or other submittal as determined by the Public Works Director or designee, the concurrency test notice certificate shall be valid for one two years from the date of issuance of the concurrency test notice building permit, SEPA Determination, or 127 W: Legislative Development\Concurrency Mgmt-TMC amendments 8-3-20 CK:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 6 of 11 other City-issued approval. If the building permit, SEPA environmental checklist, or other submittal is withdrawn by the applicant prior to approval by the City or expires, the concurrency certificate shall expire one year after the date of issuance. 9. The concurrency test notice shall expire unless a certificate of concurrency is issued or an extension of the notice is granted within one year from the date of issuance of the concurrency test notice. 109. An applicant must apply for a new concurrency test if the notice certificate expires or an extension is not granted. 1110. The Public Works Director may approve an extension of up to one year if: a. The applicant submits a letter in writing requesting the extension before the expiration date. The applicant must show that he/she isthey are not responsible for the delay in issuing the certificate of concurrency obtaining a building permit, SEPA approval, or other City-issued approval, and has acted in good faith to obtain a certificate the permit or approval; and b. If the property is serviced by a non-City managed utility, then the applicant must submit a letter from the utility approving the extension before the expiration date. 12. Once the associated development permit or building permit is approved, the Public Works Department shall issue a final certificate of concurrency. The concurrency certificate is valid for a period of 2 years or as long as the developer possesses a valid building permit for the development. 1311. The Public Works Department shall be responsible for accumulating the impacts created by each application and removing any impacts from the City’s concurrency records for an expired concurrency test notice certificate, an expired development permit or building permit, a discontinued certificate or other action resulting in an applicant no longer causing impacts which that have been accounted for in the City records. 1412. The Public Works Department shall be responsible to coordinate with applicable non-City managed utility operators for maintenance and monitoring of available and planned capacity for these utilities. 1513. A certificate of concurrency shall apply only to the specific land use, density and intensity described in the application for a development permit or building permit. No development shall be required to obtain more than one certificate of concurrency for each building, unless the applicant or subsequent owner proposes changes or modifications to the property location, density, intensity, or land use that creates additional impacts on concurrency facilities. 14. A certificate of concurrency is not transferable to other land but may be transferred to new owners of the original land. 128 W: Legislative Development\Concurrency Mgmt-TMC amendments 8-3-20 CK:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 7 of 11 Section 6. TMC Section 9.50.040 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 9.50.040 Test Criteria Development applications that would result in a level of service reduction below the established adopted standard shall not be approved. For potable water and sanitary sewer, available system capacity will be used in conducting the concurrency test. For surface water, the water quality, amount of detention needed, and the system’s conveyance capacity will be used in conducting the concurrency test. 1. For water, and sanitary sewer, and the surface water conveyance systems, a certificate of availability must be issued to pass the concurrency test. if the capacity of the concurrency facilities with the development application added is equal to or better than the capacity required to maintain the established level of service standard, then the concurrency test is passed. In addition, for For surface water conveyance systems, the water quality and detention standards described in the 1998 currently-adopted King County Surface Water Design Manual must be met to pass the concurrency test. 2. For roads, the concurrency test compares level of service at intersections or corridors, as defined in the transportation element, both with and without the development at a time 6 years after the estimated occupancy of the development. If the level of service is equal to or better than the level of service standard, the concurrency test is passed. 3. If the concurrency test is not passed for water, sewer, surface water, or roads, then the applicant may retest for concurrency after doing one or both of the following: a. Modifying the application to reduce the need for the non-existent concurrency facilities. Reduction of need can be through the reduction of the size of the development, reduction of trips generated by original proposed development, or phasing of the development to match future concurrency facility construction; or b. Arranging to fund the improvements for the additional capacity required for the concurrency facilities, as approved by the Public Works Director. Section 7. TMC Section 9.50.050 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 9.50.050 Concurrency for Phased Development A. An applicant may request concurrency for a phased development if the Public Works Director determines that the two criteria described in TMC Section 9.50.050.B are met. The application for concurrency must be accompanied by a schedule for construction of the buildings, parking and other improvements and by a written request for the development to be considered in phases. B. The Public Works Director or his designee may approve concurrency for phased development if both of the following criteria are met: 1. No associated development permit is required before building permit applications can be submitted; and 2. The application is for an integrated development site plan with multiple buildings that are interdependent for vehicular and pedestrian access and parking. 129 W: Legislative Development\Concurrency Mgmt-TMC amendments 8-3-20 CK:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 8 of 11 C. A concurrency application for phased development shall follow the same timing and procedure as set forth in this chapter, except that: 1. Only one concurrency test notice certificate shall be issued for all buildings proposed for phased development; 2. Each building approved for phased development shall be issued a certificate of concurrency at the same time as the building permit; 3. The concurrency test notice certificate for an approved phased development shall be valid for five years from the date of its issuance; provided that a certificate of concurrency building permit is issued for a building within one year of the date of issuance of the concurrency test notice certificate or within two years if an extension is timely requested and the request is granted. D. The Public Works Director or his designee may approve an extension of up to one year for obtaining of the first concurrency certificate and the final certificate of concurrency for the phased development, consistent with the terms of this chapter. E. In no case shall the concurrency test notice certificate be valid for more than six years from the date of issuance of the notice certificate. The applicant must apply for a new concurrency test for any building approved for phased development that has not been issued a building permit within six years from the date of issuance of the concurrency test notice certificate. Section 8. The Tukwila Municipal Code section entitled, “Public Notice of Concurrency Test,” as codified at TMC Section 9.50.060, is hereby deleted in its entirety. Public Notice of Concurrency Test A. The Public Works Director or his designee shall cause notice of issuance of the concurrency test notice to be given in the same manner and at the same time as the SEPA public notice of TMC 21.04. B. The notice shall include the name of the applicant, the City file number, the address and description of the development and the procedures for filing an appeal. Section 9. TMC Section 9.50.060 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 9.50.070060 Exemptions The requirement for a concurrency test shall not apply to Applications for single-family dwelling unit building permits, multi-family building permits for projects containing four or fewer units, short plats, or any non-residential project that is categorically exempt from SEPA pursuant to TMC Section 21.04.080, .100, or .110., or any other project that will generate less than 30 net new P.M. peak hour trips shall be considered as exempt from meeting concurrency requirements and shall be automatically granted a concurrency certificate. The applicant is required to submit for a concurrency certificate, along with the associated fee, but is not subject to receiving a passing grade in order to obtain other development approvals. The Public Works Department shall also waive compliance for a traffic 130 W: Legislative Development\Concurrency Mgmt-TMC amendments 8-3-20 CK:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 9 of 11 concurrency test for other projects which will not generate more than 30 net new "p.m. peak hour" traffic trips. Section 10. TMC Section 9.50.070 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 9.50.080070 Vesting Applicants shall be vested under the laws, rules and other regulations in effect prior to the effective date of this chapter if they have, prior to the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter: 1. Submitted a building permit application that the City has deemed complete; or 2. Entered into formal negotiations with the City for a development agreement in accordance with RCW 36.70B.170 through 36.70B.210; or 3. Have a signed agreement with the City that is still in effect. Section 11. TMC Section 9.50.080 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 9.50.090080 Improvements to Concurrency Facilities A. The City shall provide, or arrange for others to provide, adequate facilities through construction of needed capital improvements in implementing strategies which do the following: 1. Achieve level of service standards for anticipated future development and redevelopment caused by previously issued and new development and building permits; and 2. Repair or replace obsolete or deteriorating facilities. B. Improvements to the facilities shall be consistent with the Transportation Element, Utilities Element and Capital Improvement Program of the Comprehensive Plan. Section 12. TMC Section 9.50.090 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 9.50.100090 Capital Facilities Plan and Capital Improvement Program The City shall include in the capital appropriations of its budget for expenditure during the appropriate fiscal year financial commitments for all capital improvement projects required for adopted level of service standards, except the City may omit from its budget any capital improvements for which a binding agreement has been executed with another party to provide the same project in the same fiscal year. 131 W: Legislative Development\Concurrency Mgmt-TMC amendments 8-3-20 CK:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 10 of 11 Section 13. TMC Section 9.50.100 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 9.50.110100 Intergovernmental Coordination A. The City may enter into agreements with other local governments, applicable non- City managed utilities, King County, the state of Washington, and other facility providers to coordinate the imposition of level of service standards and other mitigations for concurrency. B. The City may apply standards and mitigations to development in the City that impacts other local jurisdictions. The City may agree to accept and implement conditions and mitigations that are imposed by other jurisdictions on development in their jurisdiction that impact the City. Section 14. TMC Section 9.50.110 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 9.50.120110 Administrative Rules and Procedures The Public Works Department shall be authorized to establish administrative rules and procedures for administering the concurrency test system. The administrative rules and procedures shall include but not be limited to application forms, necessary submittal information, processing times, and issuance of the concurrency test notice and the certificate of concurrency. Section 15. TMC Section 9.50.120 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 9.50.130120 Appeals A. Procedures. The applicant may appeal the results of the concurrency test based on three grounds: 1. A technical error; 2. The applicant provided alternative data or a traffic mitigation plan that was rejected by the City; or 3. Delay in review and approval caused solely by the City that allowed capacity to be given to another applicant. The applicant must file a notice of appeal with the Public Works Department within 15 days of the notification of the test results. The notice of appeal must specify the grounds thereof, and must be submitted on the form authorized by the Public Works Department. Each appeal must be submitted with the appeal fee set forth in TMC Section 18.108.02018.90.010. B. Hearing Schedule and Notification. When the appeal has been filed within the time prescribed, in proper form, with the appropriate data and payment of the required fee, the Public Works Department shall transmit the appeal to the hearing examiner for scheduling. Notice of the public hearing shall be given to the applicant at least 15 days prior to the hearing date. 132 W: Legislative Development\Concurrency Mgmt-TMC amendments 8-3-20 CK:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 11 of 11 C. Record. The Public Works Department shall transmit to the Hearing Examiner all papers, calculations, plans and other materials constituting the record of the concurrency test, at least 7 days prior to the scheduled hearing date. The Examiner shall consider the appeal upon the record transmitted, supplemented by any additional competent evidence, which the parties in interest may desire to submit. D. Burden of Proof. The burden of proof shall be on the appellant to show by a preponderance of the evidence that the Public Works Director was in error. Section 16. TMC Section 9.50.130 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 9.50.140130 SEPA Exemption A determination of concurrency shall be an administrative action of the City of Tukwila that is categorically exempt from the State Environmental Policy Act. Section 17. Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser Authorized. Upon approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the correction of clerical errors; references to other local, state or federal laws, codes, rules, or regula tions; or ordinance numbering and section/subsection numbering. Section 18. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation. Section 19. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force five days after passage and publication as provided by law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Special Meeting thereof this _______ day of ____________________, 2020. ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk Allan Ekberg, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Published: Effective Date: Ordinance Number: Office of the City Attorney 133 W:\Word Processing\Resolutions\PW fee sched-utility and transp fees-Concurrency 8-5-20 CK:bjs Page 1 of 5 DRAFT A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, TO UPDATE THE TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY TEST FEE SCHEDULE AND CLARIFY THE APPLICATION OF CERTAIN FEES; AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 1945. WHEREAS, the City may update its traffic model and analyze the transportation network on an annual basis to ensure continued compliance with the Growth Management Act and the City’s adopted Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, during the 2019 update to the traffic model, the City evaluated the Concurrency Test Fees charged to developers as part of the permitting process; and WHEREAS, during said evaluation, the City determined the Concurrency Test Fee Schedule required modification in order to collect the necessary funds for the City to maintain and update the traffic model; and WHEREAS, the City is authorized to impose fees to recoup the costs of services rendered; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Public Works fees will be charged according to the following schedule, which shall supersede any previously adopted Public Works Fee Schedule and take effect as of October 1, 2020: PUBLIC WORKS FEE SCHEDULE WATER RATES FEE Water Meter Installation .75 inch 1 inch 1.5 inch 2 inch 3 inch 4 inch 6 inch $ 600.00 $ 1,100.00 $ 2,400.00 $ 2,800.00 $ 4,400.00 $ 7,800.00 $12,500.00 134 W:\Word Processing\Resolutions\PW fee sched-utility and transp fees-Concurrency 8-5-20 CK:bjs Page 2 of 5 Water Meter Deduct $25.00 WATER RATES (CONT.) FEE Water Base Charge (Monthly) Single Family (one dwelling unit) Multi-Family (more than one dwelling unit, each dwelling is charged the base charge) Commercial/Industrial Customers: 3/4 inch Service 1 inch Service 1-1/2 inch Service 2 inch Service 3 inch Service 4 inch Service 6 inch Service 8 inch Service 10 inch Service 12 inch Service In addition to the monthly water base charge, each 100 cubic feet of water used will be charged as shown in “Water Rates (Monthly).” $ 19.00 $ 19.00 2019 2020 $ 47.00 $ 49.00 $ 58.00 $ 61.00 $ 84.00 $ 88.00 $110.00 $115.00 $157.00 $165.00 $210.00 $220.00 $315.00 $331.00 $420.00 $441.00 $525.00 $551.00 $630.00 $661.00 Water Rates (Monthly) Single Family Residence (Oct-May) Single Family Residence (Jun-Sept) Multi-Family (Oct-May) Multi-Family (Jun-Sept) Commercial/Industrial (Oct-May) Commercial/Industrial (Jun-Sept) In addition to the monthly water base charge listed above, each 100 cubic feet of water will be charged at the following rates: $2.80 $3.90 $3.40 $4.70 $5.10 $6.90 Fire Protection Service Charges (Monthly) 2 inch Service 3 inch Service 4 inch Service 6 inch Service 8 inch Service 10 inch Service 12 inch Service Per month based on size of service. $ 10.00 $ 22.00 $ 39.00 $ 88.00 $132.00 $220.00 $287.00 WATER SERVICES FEE Water Turn On $ 50.00 After-Hour Water Turn On – additional fee for customer requested after-hours water turn on $100.00 Unauthorized Water Usage – after shut-off for non-payment $100.00 Special Meter Read – customer requested meter read outside normal read schedule $ 30.00 135 W:\Word Processing\Resolutions\PW fee sched-utility and transp fees-Concurrency 8-5-20 CK:bjs Page 3 of 5 WATER SERVICES (CONT.) FEE Shut-off notice $ 30.00 Change in owner, tenant, and/or third party paying agent $ 20.00 Emergency Conservation Sanction $100.00 Temporary Water Meter Deposit .75” and 1” water meter 2.5” water meter Temporary Water Meter Rental per minimum 60 days expiration .75” and 1” water meter 2.5” water meter $ 300.00 $1,500.00 $ 75.00 $ 150.00 WATER INTEREST CHARGE RATE On all water accounts 30 days in arrears from the date of delinquency until paid 8% per annum computed on a monthly basis SEWER RATES FEES Residential Sewer Service (single dwelling unit) Flat rate of $30.00 per month [TMC 14.16.030 (1)] Residential Sewer Service (multiple dwelling unit, permanent type) Flat rate of $30.00 per month for each dwelling unit [TMC 14.16.030 (2)]. Commercial and Industrial Sewage Service Flat rate of $55.36 per month and, in addition, any usage over 750 cubic feet of water per month shall be at the rate of $55.36 per 750 cubic feet [TMC 14.16.030 (4)]. SEWER INTEREST CHARGE RATE On all sewer accounts 30 days in arrears from the date of delinquency until paid 8% per annum computed on a monthly basis SURFACE WATER RATES FEE PER YEAR Surface Water Utility Rates Per Year Category: 1. Natural 2. 0 - 20% Developed Surface 3. 21 - 50% Developed Surface 4. 51 - 70% Developed Surface 5. 71 - 85% Developed Surface 6. 86 - 100% Developed Surface 7. Single-Family Residential Parcels (flat rate per residential parcel) Service Charge Per Acre 2019 2020 $ 222.86 $ 229.54 $ 484.62 $ 499.16 $ 888.24 $ 914.88 $1,325.42 $1,365.18 $1,596.74 $1,644.64 $1,862.62 $1,918.50 $ 185.00 $ 190.00 SURFACE WATER INTEREST CHARGE RATE On all surface water accounts 30 days in arrears from the date of delinquency until paid 8% per annum computed on a monthly basis 136 W:\Word Processing\Resolutions\PW fee sched-utility and transp fees-Concurrency 8-5-20 CK:bjs Page 4 of 5 TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY TEST FEE SCHEDULE Fees for Residential and Lodging Use UNIT ALL TYPES OF RESIDENTIAL 1 ROOMS2 HOTEL/MOTEL Between 1 and 3 $300.00 $400 40 and under $3,000 Between 4 and 5 $600.00 $500 Between 41 and 60 $4,800 Between 6 and 10 $1,200.00 $900 Between 61 and 80 $6,800 Between 11 and 15 $2,000.00 $1,500 Between 81 and 100 $8,500 Between 16 and 20 $3,500.00 $2,100 Between 101 and 120 $10,500 Between 21 and 25 $5,000.00 $2,600 Between 121 and 150 $12,800 Between 26 and 30 $6,500.00 $3,200 Between 151 and 180 $24,800 Between 31 and 40 $8,000.00 $4,000 Between 181 and 220 $30,000 Between 41 and 60 $10,000.00 $5,700 Between 220 and 260 $36,000 Greater than 60 $12,000.00 $6,800 Between 261 and 300 $46,000 Greater than 300 $49,800 1 All residential uses defined by the ITE Trip Generation Manual Land Use Codes 200-299, including single family, multi-family, mobile home parks, and shared housing. 2 All lodging uses defined by the ITE Trip Generation Manual Land Use Codes 300 -399, including all hotels and motels. Fees for Non-Residential Use GROSS FLOOR AREA INDUSTRIAL 3 OFFICE4 RETAIL5 EATERY6 INSTITU- TIONAL & PORT7 ALL OTHER USES Less than 5,000 $ 1,000 $ 800 $ 1,800 $ 800 $ 2,700 $ 4,500 $ 5,400 $ 3,500 $ 500 $ 300 $1,500 Between 5,001 and 10,000 $ 1,500 $ 2,700 $ 2,200 $ 4,050 $10,000 $ 8,100 $10,500 $ 1,000 $ 800 $2,000 Between 10,001 and 20 ,000 $ 2,000 $ 2,500 $ 3,600 $ 4,300 $ 5,400 $16,700 $10,800 $20,900 $ 1,500 $ 1,600 $2,500 Between 20,001 and 30,000 $ 3,000 $ 3,500 $ 5,400 $ 6,900 $ 8,100 $24,400 $10,800 $21,000 $ 2,000 $ 2,600 $2,500 Between 30 ,001 and 40,000 $ 4,000 $ 8,300 $ 7,200 $ 9,500 $10,800 $31,300 $10,800 $21,000 $ 2,500 $ 3,600 $2,500 Between 40,001 and 50 ,000 $ 5,000 $ 7,000 $ 9,000 $12,000 $13,500 $37,700 $10,800 $21,000 $ 3,000 $ 4,700 $2,500 Between 50,001 and 70 ,000 $ 6,000 $ 9,500 $10,800 $15,800 $16,200 $46,600 $10,800 $21,000 $ 4,000 $ 6,200 $2,500 Between 70,001 and 90,000 $ 7,000 $12,500 $12,600 $20,800 $18,900 $57,600 $10,800 $21,000 $ 5,000 $ 8,200 $2,500 Between 90,001 and 150,000 $8,000 $19,000 $14,400 $32,900 $21,600 $77,800 $10,800 $21,000 $ 6,000 $13,400 $2,500 137 W:\Word Processing\Resolutions\PW fee sched-utility and transp fees-Concurrency 8-5-20 CK:bjs Page 5 of 5 Between 150,001 and 200,000 $ 9,000 $27,500 $16,200 $43,600 $24,300 $85,000 $10,800 $21,000 $ 7,000 $18,000 $2,500 Greater than 200,000 $10,000 $31,500 $18,000 $49,500 $24,300 $95,000 $10,800 $21,000 $ 8,000 $20,500 $2,500 All other uses are charged a $250 per PM peak hour trip. 3 All industrial/agricultural uses defined by the ITE Trip Generation Manual Land Use Codes 100-199, including light and heavy industrial, manufacturing, and warehousing 4 All office, medical, and service-related uses defined by the ITE Trip Generation Manual Land Use Codes 600-699, 700-799, and 900-999, including general office, medical facilities, and banks 5 All retail and recreation uses defined by the ITE Trip Generati on Manual Land Use Codes 400-499, 800-830 and 837-899, including retail sales, rental sales, athletic clubs, and theaters 6 All food service uses defined by the ITE Trip Generation Manual Land Use Codes 831-836 930-940, excluding accessory (stand-alone) drive-through espresso stands (or similar) under 250 sq. ft., which are assessed $300 $400 7 All institutional and transportation uses defined by the ITE Trip Generation Manual Land Use Codes 000 -099 and 500-599, including schools, places of worship, day care, terminals, and transit POLE ATTACHMENT FEES FEE PER YEAR Pole Attachment (per pole) Natural ..................... Pole revisions to allow for attachments ............... Conduit Rental..................................................... City Dark Fiber Rental ......................................... Installation fees ................................................... $100.00 per year Actual costs (engineering, labor, inspections, etc.) $1.00 per foot per year $+200.00 per strand per mile per year Actual costs (engineering, labor, inspections, etc.) Section 2. Repealer. Resolution No. 1945 is hereby repealed. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Special Meeting thereof this _________ day of ____________________, 2020. ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk De’Sean Quinn, Council President APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Resolution Number: Office of the City Attorney 138 $- $2,000 $4,000 $6,000 $8,000 $10,000 $12,000 $14,000 Between 1 and 3 Between 4 and 5 Between 6 and 10 Between 11 and 15 Between 16 and 20 Between 21 and 25 Between 26 and 30 Between 31 and 40 Between 41 and 60 Greater than 60AmountConcurrency Test Fees Residential Residential Existing Residential Proposed 139 $0 $10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000 $60,000 $70,000 $80,000 $90,000 $100,000 Existing Proposed Existing Proposed Existing Proposed Existing Proposed Existing Proposed Industrial Office Retail Eatery Institutional & PortAmountConcurrency Test Fees Commercial Less than 5,000 Between 5,001 and 10,000 Between 10,001 and 20,000 Between 20,001 and 30,000 Between 30,001 and 40,000 Between 40,001 and 50,000 Between 50,001 and 70,000 Between 70,001 and 90,000 Between 90,001 and 150,000 Between 150,001 and 200,000 Greater than 200,000 140 $0 $10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000 $60,000 Rooms 40 and under Between 41 and 60 Between 61 and 80 Between 81 and 100 Between 101 and 120 Between 121 and 150 Between 151 and 180 Between 181 and 220 Between 220 and 260 Between 261 and 300 Greater than 300AmountConcurrency Test Fees Lodging Lodging 141 142 53rd Ave S. –Re -route Public Safety Initiative 143 Situation: 53rd Ave S is of narrow width – 18’ at it’s narrowest. This existing two- way street has no sidewalk at its narrowest point. Pedestrians are at risk. Target: Provide for pedestrian safety with minimal infrastructure cost. Proposal: Make 53rd Ave S a Southbound one-way street and provide bicycle/pedestrian lane 144 How: •Sign 53rd Ave S. with “One-Way” signs going Southbound.1 •Sign the Southend of 53rd Ave S. with ‘Do Not Enter’ signs.2 •Retain 52nd PL S. as one-way Northbound.3 •Place Speed Cushions on northend of 52nd PL S and 2/3rds way further down the street.4 •Remove Westbound STOP sign on S. 137th ST at Intersection of 52nd AVE S to allow free turn onto 52nd AVE S.5 •Place STOP Sign on 52nd AVE S. at intersection with S. 137th ST enabling for the free right- hand and left-hand turn off S. 137th ST.6 6 5 4 4 3 2 1 1 145 1 From:Cynthia Delostrinos Johnson Sent:Friday, September 11, 2020 5:58 PM To:Laurel Humphrey Subject:Fwd: 53rd Street ( north of 137th) road project. Hi Laurel- when we talk about the 53rd st project at TIC can we include this email as well as any emails we’ve received recently both in support and against? Thanks! Cynthia Delostrinos Johnson Tukwila City Council Email: C.DelostrinosJohnson@TukwilaWa.gov Phone: 206-595-5469 The linked image cannot be displayed. The file may have been mov ed, renamed, or deleted. Verify that the link points to the correct file and location. TUKWILA - The City of Opportunity, the Community of Choice **My incoming and outgoing email messages are subject to public disclosure requirements per RCW 42.56 ** Begin forwarded message: From: Scott Malone <scottyzeppelin@gmail.com> Date: September 11, 2020 at 2:40:21 PM PDT To: Cynthia Delostrinos Johnson <C.DelostrinosJohnson@TukwilaWA.gov> Subject: 53rd Street ( north of 137th) road project. Hi Cynthia, I have been informed that you had received e-mails that oppose the work that is to be done on 53rd Street (north of 137th Ave south). This stretch of road is the main pedestrian access for hundreds of people that live in our neighborhood to reach the Metro bus stops on Interurban Ave. The Terrace Apartments, some Foster Green Residents and all of the homes in that area use that stretch of road to walk to and from the bus stops. The road from between 137th Ave So and 136th Ave So has no sidewalk and is too narrow for two cars and a pedestrian to use simultaneously. I believe it is under 18 feet across at 136th Ave So between two telephone poles. Last year I expressed my concern to Mayor Ekberg, Kate Kruller and Thomas McLeod on various occasions. This roadway is not currently safe for pedestrian traffic as it is. The answer is limiting vehicle traffic to one way and installing a sidewalk. There are people with strollers and at least one lady in a wheelchair that use this road daily. In my opinion this is currently the most dangerous stretch of road in Tukwila and is within your scope to resolve it. Please continue to move forward in this project and let me go on record as 100% in favor of this vital Public Safety action. Thank you, Scott Malone 146 2 13720 56th Ave So Tukwila, Wa (206)276-1550 Sent from my iPhone CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO NOT open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. 147 1 From:Emily Sarah Gendler Zisette <ezisette@yahoo.com> Sent:Wednesday, August 12, 2020 5:45 AM To:CityCouncil Subject:53rd Ave S Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Flagged Good Morning, I've written you so many times about this issue over the years and don't even believe I've gotten a response. I don't have time to explain the issue again this morning, but you need to continue to be alerted to the dangers of this issue. Since my last email to you about this I have again had many conversations with pedestrians expressing how dangerous it is to walk and how many times they have almost been hit by a car, especially for disabled people. I mentioned how I continue to contact the city council, and I encourage these people to contact you as well. I thought maybe you should also know every single person I talk to has no faith in you. They say you won't listen to them, that there is no point in saying anything. I still encourage them to contact you, but I definitely understand and can't deny their feelings, considering that has been my experience. I have been communicating this issue for years, as have my neighbors. One of my neighbors found documents her parents sent to the city about the safety of this street dating back to the 1970s. I find it even more ridiculous, and even enraging, that as I homeowner I have to pay outrageous permitting fees and adhere to some of the strictest codes in the county (Tukwila is famous for it's permitting dysfunction and bureaucracy by the way) and yet you as a city don't hold yourself even close to a similar standard for what you expect of your residents. I feel like we should issue you a code violation for not maintaining a safe street and sidewalk. Same goes for the excuses you make about covid and the budget...we are still required to pay our rent, mortgage and bills. We have to figure it out, so do you. I have an elderly friend who needs a place was going to move in with me, but until the sidewalk is completed it is not safe for him to stay here. He does not drive and uses a cane and it is not safe for him to walk up and down 53rd, which he would need to in order to get to the bus, which he uses for transportation. CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO NOT open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. 148 1 From:James Felker <jafelker9@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, August 26, 2020 11:57 PM To:CityCouncil Subject:STOPPING UNWARRANTED/UNAPPROVED CHANGES TO 53RD AVENUE SOUTH ROADWAY Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Flagged I am writing this letter in an appeal to you in the City Council, to terminate this expensive project concocted to wastefully spend urgently needed taxpayer dollars, especially in this medical & economic crisis situation. I received a postcard notification of this “safety project” over the weekend, and have only had a few days to research what I can do to prevent this mistake from happening. The city’s Public Works Department has overstepped its authority by not following procedures documented in the city's Resolution 1955, and by not getting approval from the area residents affected by these rash, unthought out actions. I live in the neighborhood, walk, ride, and drive these streets without problems, and have done so for over 40 years. My neighbors and I have the experience and knowledge of the area that no one in the Public Works Department can equal, but there has been no invitation by the Interim Director or the Public Works office to discuss or debate any safety issues & actions to be taken, if needed. Why this has been sprung on us without our input is beyond comprehension, but it makes me extremely angry that we haven’t been included in the planning or evaluation of this “safety plan”! Without warning, Interim Public Works Director Ponnekanti is trying to illegally railroad this project through, before anyone has time to stop it. This current plan will cause multiple traffic choke points and bottlenecks, block emergency responders & service and delivery vehicles, and create accidents. City of Tukwila Resolution 1955 mandates that multiple evaluations, studies and analysis must be performed, and criteria met before even Level I treatments can be implemented. In my email conversation with Traffic Engineering Project Manager Scott Bates, he did not provide me with ANY evaluation or studies reporting or conclusions. Either he was withholding information, or the Public Works Department did not actually do any preliminary investigating and evaluations, thereby voiding this entire project. He only sent a memo of a proposal, by engineering firm KPG Interdisciplinary Design, which should never have been contacted about the project until it was approved for go-ahead by my fellow neighborhood residents and myself! Community support is vital to the project (with a 2/3 supermajority required), as well as requiring approval from the city police & fire departments and City Council. Without this information, Level II treatments, such as the actions now being proposed by the Public Works Dept., should NOT be in the planning stages, let alone ready for implementation in the next week! There are many problems with their “improvement” plan, such as:  Bottlenecking traffic on 52nd Ave. due to parked vehicles on both sides of the road, leaving only one lane of traffic getting through  Traffic volume leading to choke points at intersections of 52nd Ave. & 52nd Pl., 52nd Pl. & S. 137th St., and S. 137th St. & 53rd Ave.  52nd Pl. too narrow to allow large vehicles (Fire & EMT responders, service vehicles, delivery trucks, etc.) from 52nd Ave.  52nd Pl. also too narrow to safely accommodate traffic + a pedestrian walkway  52nd Pl. between S. 137th St. & 52nd Ave. roadway not long enough to need ANY speed bumps Winter problems (FROST/ICE/SNOW from Nov-April) include:  Cars forced down 53rd Ave. sliding, causing accidents incurring possible injury, deaths, & lawsuits  Cars forced to use S. 137th as alternate route sliding off road into yard/house, causing accidents incurring possible injury, deaths, & lawsuits  Ice/frost/snow on 52nd Pl. causing cars to slide backward, causing accidents incurring possible injury, deaths, & lawsuits 149 2  53rd Ave. being closed due to weather traps residents on 53rd Ave., S. 136th St., and 54th Ave. S., OR criminalizes them if they drive to S. 137th St.  53rd Ave. being closed due to weather criminalizes drivers that must use 52nd Pl. to safely navigate to Interurban  Cost to de-ice added roads (S. 137th St., 52nd Pl., and 52nd Ave.), as well as 53rd Ave., daily from Nov-April ** In the winter months, ice, frost, and snow make 52nd Pl. the ONLY safe route down the hill to Interurban Ave. (my knowledge from 35+ winters' driving experience) While I agree with having a safe way to walk down 53 rd Avenue toward Interurban Avenue, this unnecessary road change isn’t the way to do it, and costs too much to both the residents and the city treasury, and the real solution is much simpler and cost effective for everyone. 53rd Ave. already has a sidewalk half way up the hill , and there is plenty of room on the west side of the road to build a sidewalk, with a crosswalk connector, to complete the pedestrian access to Interurban Avenue and the Metro bus stops. Without a public hearing, we cannot debate and discuss these challenges, or come up with a real solution that everyone in the neighborhood can endorse. Since the public has not been informed, we need time to take a good, solid, comprehensive look at the Public Works Department proposal, but we need your help. The Tukwila City Council needs to put this on hold, and quickly, before any more money is needlessly spent. If you have any more information, I’d love to see it. I am also making records, evaluation, & studies inquiries to the Public Works Office, but don’t have any confidence that they will honor my requests now, since they haven’t been honest about what they’ve been up to this year… James A. Felker Lifelong Tukwila resident 13935 56th Place South CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO NOT open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. 150 1 From:Emily Sarah Gendler Zisette <ezisette@yahoo.com> Sent:Monday, October 7, 2019 5:32 AM To:inmotion@kingcounty.gov Cc:CityCouncil Subject:Tukwila Metro Improvements Attachments:Metro Improvements.png Hello, My name is Emily, I live in Tukwila and received the note on my door about King County Metro In Motion. Thanks for reaching out. I have some feedback that could greatly improve transit riders experience in Tukwila that is also a public safety issue. I live on 53rd Ave S between 52nd Ave S and S 137th St. This is just up the steep hill from the Interurban Park and Ride. Facing 53rd Ave S I witness the flow of bus riders as they walk to and from the bus stop at the Park and Ride. There are many!!! So many in fact, I see more pedestrians on this strip of 53rd Ave S, than the area of 53rd Ave S south of here next to Foster Park that the City just spent a year improving, yet neglected this northern section of 53rd near the Park and Ride. Many bus riders are walking to and from the Terrace Apartments and other apartment complexes around S 137th St. There are serious street safety and accessibility issues on this section of 53rd Ave S between 52nd Ave S and S 137th St. I have brought this to the attention of the City of Tukwila many times, as has at least one of my neighbors and a friend who was living with me who is a wheelchair user. We have either been ignored or dismissed. Because this is such an important street in relation to Metro and bus riders, I really hope you take the time to hear and address these concerns. There needs to be improved pedestrian safety and access on this part of 53rd Ave S . The hill on this street is so steep it is a 'blind' hill, meaning when you are driving on it you can't see people walking on the street. There are no sidewalks on this street except for a small area at the bottom of this hill towards 52nd Ave S. People are forced to walk in the street with cars zooming by in both directions. There is also no line to distinguish lanes, and it is too narrow to safely fit cars going both ways. Like I said when we've reached out to the city we got no response. I spent a lot of time tracking down the City Engineer by phone, and when we spoke he said there are setback issues that supposedly prevent them from putting in a sidewalk or even a line to mark of pedestrian area. A line! When I look across the street from me, I see where the neighbors property line was marked by a surveyor, and there is a good distance from their property line to where the asphalt starts for the road. I don't see why there can't be a sidewalk there. (You can even see the stop sign on 53rd Ave S and S 137th street is setback from the road.) If necessary, this could even be made a one way street. In the photo below and attached see the red lines. There are many elders and disabled folks who need access to this bus stop. I see many struggling up the extremely steep hill without sidewalks. Even able-bodied folks struggle! Many have to take a break half way up. Having lived with a wheelchair user bus rider I became aware of the safety and access issues here. Over the weekend I spoke with a man who is almost blind who said he's almost been hit by cars many times, and feels safer once he gets onto the sidewalk. There is an empty lot on the west side of 53rd Ave S from 52nd Ave S up to about S 136th St. It would be of extreme value to turn this lot into a switch-back path that could ease the incline of the hill thus making the bus stop more accessible to especially elderly and disabled folks. On the picture attached you can get a visual of what I'm trying to describe: see the blue lines. Incorporated into this project could be habitat preservation and restoration. There are some very well established and beneficial native trees, along with invasive plants like knotweed, etc. What a powerful and beneficial project this could be 151 2 for the Tukwila community and Metro Bus Riders. What about a community orchard of fruit trees planted between the switch-backs? See the green in the photo attached. I really hope you consider these issues and I encourage people to actually come out to the empty lot and this street to really see what I'm talking about. You won't get the full experience since you don't live here, but please trust this is a serious issue. It is not a matter of if someone gets hurt or killed on this street, it is a matter of when. I don't think it will be a good look for the city when that happens, especially since multiple people have brought this up over the years. When I talk with the pedestrians who face this danger daily, everyone agrees it is a problem but nobody thinks the city cares or will do anything about it. There is so much apathy and distrust that they don't feel it's worth it to say anything. When I reach out to you it is not just for me, it is to advocate for all these people who feel unsafe. The fact that the city spent so much time and money putting sidewalks in the section of 53rd Ave S next to the park, but neglected this part of 53rd I think really demonstrates a lack of accountability and just kind of showed me no one on that project must actually live in this area of Tukwila. Because if they did they would see the need to continue improvements up 53rd Ave S to the bus stop on Interurban. With such a major commuting area with the extremely popular bus stop and Park and Ride, I hope Metro also takes this seriously. Thank you for your time in reading this message. Emily 152