Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW 2012-10-08 COMPLETE AGENDA PACKETTukwila City Council Agenda COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE Jim Haggerton, Mayor Counci /members: Joe Duffie Dennis Robertson David Cline, City Administrator Allan Ekberg Kathy Hougardy V Sea l, Cou n c il Pr D e'Sea n Q K ate Kr e.+ To be followed by a Special Meeting Monday, October 8, 2012, 7:00 PM Tukwila City Hall Council Chambers 1. CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. SPECIAL Recognition of the City of Tukwila as a 2012 Best Workplace for Waste Prevention PRESENTATIONS and Recycling. Rebecca Fox, Tukwila Recycling Coordinator. 3. CITIZEN COMMENT At this time, you are invited to comment on items not included on this agenda (please limit your comments to five minutes per citizen). To comment on an item listed on this agenda, please save your comments until the issue is presented for discussion. 4. SPECIAL a. Authorize the submittal of a grant application to the Washington State Pg.1 ISSUES Department of Transportation Regional Mobility Program in the amount of $6,870,000, committing a 20% match from City operating revenues and park impact fees, for the Tukwila Urban Center Pedestrian /Bicycle Bridge. b. Acceptance of a grant from the Washington State Department of Pg.31 Transportation for the Cascade View "Safe Routes to School" project. c. Utility undergrounding for the 42nd Avenue South Phase III Project Pg.45 (Southcenter Boulevard to South 160th Street). d. A resolution fixing the time for a public hearing for vacation of right- Pg.53 of -way within the City of Tukwila dedicated for street purposes, generally described as portions of South 200th Street and Frager Road. e. Review and discussion of the City Facilities Plan. (Please bring the Pg.71 Seismic Study binder distributed under separate cover.) 5. REPORTS a. Mayor b. City Council c. Staff d. City Attorney e. Intergovernmental 6. MISCELLANEOUS 7. EXECUTIVE SESSION S. ADJOURN TO SPECIAL MEETING (continued...) p COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING Monday, October 8, 2012 Page 2 SPECIAL MEETING Ord #2383 Res #1776 1. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL 2. UNFINISHED a. Authorize the submittal of a grant application to the Washington State Pg.1 BUSINESS Department of Transportation Regional Mobility Program in the amount of $6,870,000, committing a 20% match from City operating revenues and park impact fees, for the Tukwila Urban Center Pedestrian /Bicycle Bridge. b. A resolution fixing the time for a public hearing for vacation of right- Pg.53 of -way within the City of Tukwila dedicated for street purposes, generally described as portions of South 200th Street and Frager Road. 3. ADJOURNMENT Tukwila City Hall is wheelchair accessible. Reasonable accommodations are available at public hearings with advance notice to the City Clerk's Office (206- 433 -1800 or TukwilaCityClerk @TukwilaWA.gov). This notice is available at www.tukwilawa.aov and in alternate formats with advance notice for those with disabilities. Tukwila Council meetings are audio taped. HOW TO TESTIFY If you would like to address the Council, please go to the podium and state your name and address clearly for the record. Please observe the basic riles of courtesy when speaking and limit your comments to five minutes. The Council appreciates hearing from citizens but may not be able to take immediate action on comments received until they are referred to a Committee or discussed under New Business. COUNCIL MEETINGS No Council meetings are scheduled on the 5th Monday of the month unless prior public notification is given. Regular Meetings The Mayor, elected by the people to a four -year term, presides at all Regular Council Meetings held on the 1st and 3rd Mondays of each month at 7:00 p.m. Official Council action in the form of formal motions, adopting of resolutions and passing of ordinances can only be taken at Regular Council meetings. Committee of the Whole Meetings Council members are elected for a four -year term. The Council President is elected by the Council members to preside at all Committee of the Whole meetings for a one -year term. Committee of the Whole meetings are held the 2nd and 4th Mondays at 7:00 p.m. Issues discussed are forwarded to the Regular Council meeting for official action. GENERAL INFORMATION At each Council meeting citizens are given the opportunity to address the Council on items that are not included on the agenda during CITIZENS COMMENTS. Please limit your comments to 5 minutes. Special Meetings may be called at any time with proper public notice. Procedures followed are the same as those used in Regular Council meetings. Executive Sessions may be called to inform the Council of pending legal action, financial, or personnel matters. PUBLIC HEARINGS Public Hearings are required by law before the Council can take action on matters affecting the public interest such as land -use laws, annexations, rezone requests, public safety issues, etc. Section 2.04.150 of the Tukwila Municipal Code states the following guidelines for Public Hearings: The proponent shall speak first and is allowed 15 minutes for a presentation. 2. The opponent is then allowed 15 minutes to make a presentation. Each side is then allowed 5 minutes for rebuttal. 4. Citizens who wish to address the Council may speak for 5 minutes each. No one may speak a second time until everyone wishing to speak has spoken. 5. After each speaker has spoken, the Council may question the speaker. Each speaker can respond to the question, but may not engage in further debate at this time. 6. After the Public Hearing is closed and during the Council meeting, the Council may choose to discuss the issue among themselves, or defer the discussion to a future Council meeting, without further public testimony. Council action may only be taken during Regular or Special Meetings. COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Initials Meeting Date Prepared b M r Council review 08/27/12 BG Resolution Mtg Date Ordinance Mtg Date 10/08/12 BG Other Mtg Date SPONSOR Council Mayor Adm Svcs DCD Finance Fire Legal P &R Police PWW SPONSOR'S Council is being asked to approve a grant application to the WSDOT Regional Mobility SUMMARY Grant Program for the Tukwila Urban Center Pedestrian/ Bicycle Bridge. Staff proposes applying for a grant of $6,870,000 and committing a 20% match from city operating revenues and park impact fees. REVIEWED BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm. DATE: 08/20/12 COMMITTEE CHAIR: ALLAN EKBERG RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR /ADMIN. Public Works COMMITTEE Forward to Committee of the Whole for discussion. COST IMPACT FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Fund Source: 104 ARTERIAL STREET FUND AND 301 PARK IMPACT FEES (PAGE 12, PROPOSED 2013 CIP) Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 08/27/12 ITEM INFORMATION ITEMNO. I Special 2.A. CAS NUMBER: STAFF SPONSOR: BOB GIBERSON ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 08/27/12 AGENDA ITEM TITLE Tukwila Urban Center Pedestrian/ Bicycle Bridge Submit WSDOT Regional Grant Program Application CATEGORY Discussion Mtg Date 08127112 Motion Mt g Date 10/08/12 Resolution Mtg Date Ordinance Mtg Date BidAxard Mtg Date Public Hearing Mtg Date Other Mtg Date SPONSOR Council Mayor Adm Svcs DCD Finance Fire Legal P &R Police PWW SPONSOR'S Council is being asked to approve a grant application to the WSDOT Regional Mobility SUMMARY Grant Program for the Tukwila Urban Center Pedestrian/ Bicycle Bridge. Staff proposes applying for a grant of $6,870,000 and committing a 20% match from city operating revenues and park impact fees. REVIEWED BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm. DATE: 08/20/12 COMMITTEE CHAIR: ALLAN EKBERG RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR /ADMIN. Public Works COMMITTEE Forward to Committee of the Whole for discussion. COST IMPACT FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Fund Source: 104 ARTERIAL STREET FUND AND 301 PARK IMPACT FEES (PAGE 12, PROPOSED 2013 CIP) Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 08/27/12 Forward to the 10/8/12 Council meeting. 10/08/12 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 08/27/12 Informational Memorandum dated August 17, 2012 Page 12, Proposed 2013 CIP Minutes from the Transportation Committee meeting of 08/20/12 10/08/12 Informational Memorandum dated October 3, 2012 with attachments p City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Haggerton City Council FROM: Bob Giberson, Public Works Director Derek Speck, Economic Development Administrator DATE: October 3, 2012 SUBJECT: Tukwila Urban Center Pedestrian Bicycle Bridge T►���1? At the City Council's Committee of the Whole meeting on August 27, the Council requested additional information related to the City's opportunity to apply for a State grant to purchase land and construct the Tukwila Urban Center pedestrian bicycle bridge. This memo is intended to provide that information. BACKGROUND The Tukwila Urban Center (TUC) Pedestrian Bicycle Bridge project was first identified as one of the key catalyst projects for the TUC during six public workshops held in 2003. The Tukwila Urban Center chapter of the Comprehensive Plan calls for "high- quality transit and pedestrian facilities, focusing on creating strong connections between the TUC core and the Sounder commuter rail /Amtrak station." The bridge would enhance the Mall to Station link, leveraging the Mall, Tukwila Transit Center and Sounder Station investments to promote higher intensity redevelopment. The bridge project has been included in the City's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) since 2006. In 2011 the City completed the Type, Size, and Location study and the City Council approved the conceptual design and location. Design is well underway and fully funded and should reach 30% completion in January 2013 and final design in late 2013. If funding were available, land acquisition could start in 2013, construction could start in 2014, and the project could be completed as early as 2015. A project budget is attached for the proposed 2013 -2018 CIP. The current expenditures are estimated at $10.218 million. Of that, approximately $1.6 million is for design, $1.1 million is for land acquisition, and $7.485 million is for construction. It is possible that the construction contingency cost estimates could be reduced as more design work is completed. In terms of project funding, the proposed 2013 -18 CIP reflects a grant of $1.496 million which the City was already awarded from Federal funds. The proposed budget also anticipates $1,042,000 to come from City operating revenue, $810,000 from the parks impact fees, and $6.87 million from additional grants. The City has an opportunity to apply for a WSDOT Regional Mobility Grant toward the $8.585 million in land acquisition and construction phases shown in the proposed CIP in 2014 -15. K, INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 Because this is a State funding source, the City could count part of the $1.496 million federal fund grant toward meeting the grant matching requirement; however, in staff's opinion the application would not be competitive without a higher match contribution. In order to be competitive for the grant, the City would need to provide a match of greater than 20% of the total needed funds. For the $8.585 million of funds needed, staff recommends the City commit $1,715,000 of local funds and apply for a grant of $6.87 million. Even if we apply for and receive this grant, we will continue to monitor for additional grant opportunities which can be used to reduce the City's general fund contribution to the match. The grant application is due on October 10, 2012. The City needs to decide whether to apply for the grant and, if so, for what amount. If the City is awarded and accepts the grant, the City would need to decide on the source of the matching funds. DISCUSSION Benefits The main purpose of the proposed pedestrian bicycle bridge is to enable people to walk between Baker Boulevard and West Valley Highway, resulting in a 15 minute walk from the Sounder commuter rail station to Baker Boulevard. This pedestrian friendly distance is critical if the City wants to have new condominiums, apartments, and offices between the Green River and Westfield Southcenter. With the bridge, an office based business located on Baker Boulevard could market itself as walkable to the commuter rail station and tap into the employment base between Tukwila and Tacoma. A similarly located condominium or apartment building could market itself as walkable to the commuter rail station for a 15 minute train ride and walk to the office buildings in downtown Seattle. In addition to the pure pedestrian functionality, the bridge provides a credible connection to the commuter rail station which creates a positive perception and represents the Tukwila Urban Center core as a special place. Although the King County Metro bus service and future transit center on Andover Park West provide good transit connections, without a short walk to the commuter rail station, it is challenging to effectively market the area as transit oriented. The public perception of a transit oriented neighborhood is much stronger with a commuter rail station than bus service alone. In addition of increasing the marketability of a neighborhood, the walkability and amount of transit in a neighborhood can reduce the development costs by reducing the amount of parking necessary for new projects. The cost savings is especially important if we want compact development using structured or underground parking since that style of development is so expensive. The currently vacant Circuit City site is one example of these potential benefits. The retail building has sat vacant since Circuit City went bankrupt in 2009. The current owner of the property has a choice of re- tenanting the existing building or constructing something new. He is currently evaluating the feasibility of constructing a 450 unit building comprising short stay hotel rooms, extended stay hotel rooms, and apartments. As shown in the attached analysis, the new development would generate over $60 million of construction and property value more than simply re- tenanting the space. As compared to re- tenanting the space with a retailer, the development would generate at least $2 million of additional one time permit fees, impact fees, and taxes and $100,000 of additional annual tax for the City of Tukwila. The bridge itself is not a guarantee that this particular development will proceed; however, it makes the development much more feasible, particularly the residential component. If the property is re- tenanted as 4 W: \Derek \TUC Ped Bike Bridge \TUC Ped Bridge Memo V4.docx INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 3 retail, it will likely be tied up as that use for fifteen years or more. If the City borrowed against the annual taxes due to the additional development for fifteen years, it could generate approximately $1.2 million in debt issuance capacity, which is more than the City's proposed $1.042 million of matching general funds. It is important to note that at this time we do not know if the Circuit City re- development will move forward and whether the bridge is the determining factor. We also do not, and probably will not, have a commitment that if the bridge is constructed, that the Circuit City site, or any other site, will redevelop. However, staff believes the bridge will significantly increase the probability and quality of future development between the commuter rail station and the mall. The Circuit City site is just one example. A few other examples are: (1) During the Circuit City bankruptcy and prior to the property being purchased by the current owner, Economic Development staff worked with a senior housing developer who put an offer on the property. That developer expressed strong interest in the bridge. (2) Prior to the 2009 recession, Economic Development staff had spoken with other multi- family housing developers who expressed strong interest in the TUC core and the bridge. (3) Currently, a multi family housing developer has expressed strong interest with Washington Federal, the owner of part of the vacant property north of the commuter rail station (on the north side of Longacres Boulevard) to build new apartments. If that developer sees a commitment and certainty to complete the bridge in a timeframe that makes their property more attractive to higher income tenants, the developer would be better able to increase the lease rates and construct a higher quality project. (4) The former Texaco station on Andover Park East at Tukwila Parkway is vacant property and the bridge could affect the desirability and quality of future development of that property. (5) The Helen Nelsen Trust property has some underutilized property between the historic house and the river which could be developed with townhouses, condos, or senior apartments. The bridge would enable that development to offer a walkable experience to the Green River trail, transit center on Andover Park West, Baker Boulevard, and the mall. There are some additional benefits. Based on Public Works staff analysis, the bridge can reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) by approximately 667,192 in the first year after completing the bridge. Fewer vehicle trips may also improve the level of service on surrounding streets. In short, the pedestrian -bike bridge is critical if the City wants to encourage high quality, new multi family or multi -story "class A" office development in the TUC core. It is the most significant remaining public infrastructure project necessary to enable the TUC core to function as a transit oriented, walkable neighborhood. Until this project has certainty, new development will be likely to be more of the same that is in place today. Parks Impact Fees The Parks Impact Fee program (Ordinance 2366) projects $8 million of funding for four projects, including $2 million for the TUC bridge project. Of the $8 million, 20% is budgeted to come from city general funds and 80 which equals $6.4 million, from fees on new development. Thus, of the $2 million for the TUC bridge shown in the Parks Impact Fee program, $1.6 million is projected to come from fees on new development. Only $810,000 of that is currently reflected W: \Derek \TUC Ped Bike Bridge \TUC Ped Bridge Memo V4.docx 5 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 4 in the proposed 2013 -18 CIP due to uncertainty over the availability of funds. When it was adopted, those funds were projected to be collected over a twelve year period. Since the program's inception in 2009, the economy and development have been slow such that just over $220,000 of the $6.4 million has been received. That $220,000 has been spent for the Duwamish Hill Preserve. At this time, due to the economy, staff does not have a high degree of confidence that the impact fees planned for the identified projects will be received by the time the projects are ready to go. For all of the projects in the Parks Impact Fee program, the City will need to decide whether to borrow funds to be repaid later when impact fees are received. If the City does not want to issue debt to be repaid from the impact fees, then it will need to prioritize which project can draw upon the impact fees. Property Assessment District Cities have the legal authority to create property assessment districts to fund portions of public infrastructure projects. The City recently did this for the Southcenter Access Project (Klickitat). We would need to perform additional research to determine if this project would be eligible and cost effective to implement a property assessment district. Financing If the City accepts the grant, we would need to determine the best way to provide the City matching funds for both the City general operating revenue and the parks impact fees. It is possible the City would have sufficient capacity in available fund balance. The City could also borrow the funds. If the City issued general obligation bonds, the annual interest rate would be approximately 3% based on a recent quote for a fifteen year bond for the Metropolitan Park District. If the City were to apply and be approved for a loan from the State's Public Works Trust Fund, the interest rate would be approximately 1 We believe this project would be likely to be approved for a Public Works Trust Fund loan, however, we won't know until early 2013 if the State legislature appropriates money for the program. The City currently has sufficient debt limit capacity to issue the debt, especially as we are scheduled to pay off existing bonds over the next few years. Opportunity Costs Unless the City is awarded additional grants, receives full parks impact fees for this project, or implements an alternative source of matching funds such as an assessment district, in order to meet the matching fund requirement for the grant, the City would have to contribute approximately $1 million of general funds and possibly interest. If not for this project, those funds could be used for other city purposes such as other capital improvement projects or operating costs. Typically with capital projects of a regional significance, the city's funds are matched 4:1 and thus "leverage" federal or state funds. For example, $800,000 of State or Federal funds can be matched to $200,000 of local funds for a $1 million project. Some capital projects, such as residential sidewalks, are unlikely to receive State or Federal matching funds since they do not offer regional transportation benefits. The cost of constructing new residential sidewalks depends on many factors such as how much land is acquired, topography, pavement condition, undergrounding of utilities, and other factors. $1 million would typically pay for 500 to 800 feet of new residential sidewalks. 6 W: \Derek \TUC Ped Bike Bridge \TUC Ped Bridge Memo V4.docx INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 5 Other Considerations Even if the City applies for and is awarded the grant, it is not required to accept the grant. If the City is awarded the grant it could decide whether to accept it. Not accepting it, however, could affect the City's ability to get future grants. Staff recommends that we should only apply for the grant if we are willing to accept it and commit the matching funds. It is important to note that it is difficult to predict whether there will be future grant funding opportunities for projects of this type. WSDOT received the funding from the Federal government. If in the future the Federal government sees less need to provide infrastructure stimulus funds, greater need to fund maintenance and replacement of existing infrastructure, or reduces total infrastructure funding in order to reduce the Federal debt, this funding may not be available. Decision Options The City's basic choices are to: (1) Not submit the grant request. (2) Submit the grant request and, if awarded the grant, then decide whether to accept it. (3) Submit the grant request at a reduced level, such as for property acquisition. (4) Submit the grant request for the full amount needed ($6.87 million). In choices 3 and 4, the implication is that if the grant is awarded, the City would accept it. At that time the City can make the specific decision on how to provide financing. Staff supports the vision of a transit oriented, walkable community in the core of the Tukwila Urban Center and sees this as a key project. Although initially there are opportunity costs to providing the matching funds for the grant, we believe the bridge will speed up the pace of development and the revenues from future new development will more than offset the costs. We recommend option #4. RECOMMENDATION The Council is being asked to approve submittal of the WSDOT Regional Mobility grant for $6,870,000 million and consider this item at the October 8 2012 Committee of the Whole meeting and October 8, 2012 Special Meeting. ATTACHMENTS Informational Memorandum Dated August 17, 2012 Page 12, Proposed 2013 -2018 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Minutes from the Transportation Committee meeting of 8/20/12 Parks Impact Fee Ordinance #2366 Circuit City Site Development Revenue Analysis Letter of Support from Embassy Suites Catalyst Map of the Tukwila Urban Center W: \Derek \TUC Ped Bike Bridge \TUC Ped Bridge Memo V4.docx 7 N City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Haggerton Transportation Committee FROM: Bob Giberson, Public Works Director BY: Cyndy Knighton, Senior Engineer DATE: August 17, 2012 SUBJECT: Tukwila Urban Center PedestrianlBicycle Bridge Project No. 90510403 WSDOT Regional Mobility Grant Program Application ISSUE Submit grant application to the WSDOT Regional Mobility Program for the TUC Pedestrian /Bicycle Bridge. BACKGROUND The WSDOT Regional Mobility Grant Program has a current call for applications, which are due on October 10, 2012 but the process includes early review and approval of a section of the grant which is due September 14, 2012. The early submittal of the complex Vehicle Mile Travel (VMT) reduction and Vehicle Time (VT) reduction calculations require that work on the grant application must begin earlier than normal. Staff is proposing submitting for R.O.W. and construction phases on the TUC Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridge project. Tukwila was successfully awarded a Regional Mobility Grant for the Tukwila Transit Center and remains in good standing with the granting agency. Staff submitted a grant application through the WSDOT Pedestrian and Bicycle program for the R.O.W. phase in June, 2012. There were 170 applications received for the approximate $8 million available state -wide and it is not yet known if Tukwila will be successful in this highly competitive program. The Regional Mobility Grant Program is expected to have about $40 million available state -wide. DISCUSSION Design is underway for the TUC Pedestrian Bridge and a new cost estimate based on 30% engineering will be available in October. The CIP currently shows the need for $7,485,000 in construction funding, which is based on information from the Type, Size, and Location Report, finalized in 2011. The new 2013 CIP sheet will be updated once the most recent information is received and the final grant request will be updated to reflect the more current cost estimate prior to submittal. The TUC Pedestrian Bridge requires acquisition of one full property (Nelsen property) and a partial acquisition, including 27 parking stalls, of a second property (Riverview Plaza). Permanent easements from Seattle Public Utilities are also expected. Estimated cost for acquiring this R.O.W. is $1,100,000. The 2012 CIP sheet has only $100,000.00 for R.O.W., which was a placeholder until more information was known on the actual needs. Match is required for these grants, with the minimum of 20 Unlike most grant sources, previous expenditures and staff salaries can be used as match. If the two grant requests are successful, the funds cannot be used as match to each other, but other federal grant funds already awarded for the design can. If successful, funds would be available in June, 2013. Phase City Responsibility Park Impact Fees Awarded Grants Grant Request Total Amount Design 102,000 35,000 $1,496,000 0 1,633,000 ROW 230,000 870,000 1,100,000 Construction 710,000 775,000 6,000,000 7,485,000 Total $1,042,000 810,000 $1,496,000 $6,870,000 $10,218,000 Match Percentage 10% 8% 15% 67% 100% RECOMMENDATION Council is being asked to approve the submission of a grant application to the WSDOT Regional Mobility Grant Program for the TUC Pedestrian /Bicycle Bridge in the amount of $6,870,000 with a minimum 20% local match, and consider this item at the August 27, 2012 Committee of the Whole and subsequent September 4, 2012 Regular meeting. Attachment: CIP sheet W:\PW Eng \PROJECTSIA- RW RS ProjectMTUC Ped Bicycle Bridge (90510403) \Grants\INFO MEMO WSDOT Regional Mobility Grant App 8 -24 -12 bg.docx 01 CITY OF TUKWILA CAPITAL PROJECT SUMMARY 2013 to 2018 PROJECT: DESCRIPTION: JUSTIFICATION: STATUS: MAINT. IMPACT: Tukwila Urban Center Pedestrian /Bicycle Bridge Project No. 90510403 Construct a new pedestrian /bicycle bridge over the Green River. Pedestrian /bicycle connection between Tukwila's Urban Center and co rail/ r t&enter. Supports local and regional goals and policies regarding land u rtati n Pedestrian System Report identified the optimal locati fo to be south of the Best Western Hotel. Type, Size, and Location Report was c e ;nt711. Council approved a design of a twin -tied arch bridge with no accommodation for a fututi 'bridge crossing over West Valley Highway. To be determined. State Enhancement design grant for $190k and Transit Oriented Development (TOD) planning grant of $55k COMMENT: State Enhancement grant of $500k and Federal CMAQ grant of $750,833 for final design. Project is on Park Impact Fee list with funding of $2 million with an 80 %/20% split. FINANCIAL Through Estimated iin 4nnn'cl 2111 2n12 2n1s 2n1a 2n15 2016 2017 2018 BEYOND TOTAL EXPENSES Design 267 984 382 1,633 Land (R/W) 1,100 1,100 Const. Mgmt. 1,000 1,000 Construction 6,485 6,485 TOTAL EXPENSES 267 984 382 1,100 7,485 0 0 0 0 10,218 FUND SOURCES Awarded Grant 245 930 321 1,496 Proposed Grant 870 6,000 6,870 Mitigation Actual 0 Park Impact Fees Expected 35 90 685 810 City Oper. Revenue 1 22 54 26 140 800 0 0 0 0 1,042 TOTAL SOURCES 267 984 382 1,100 7,485 0 0 0 0 10,218 2013 2018 Capital Improvement Program 12 Gn TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE Meeting Minutes August 20, 2012 5:15 p.m. Conference Room #1 PRESENT Councilmembers: Allan Ekberg, Chair; Kathy Hougardy and De'Sean Quinn Staff: David Cline, Bob Giberson, Frank Iriarte and Robin Tischmak Guest: Chuck Parrish CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 5:15 p.m. I. PRESENTATIONS No presentations. II. BUSINESS AGENDA A. WSDOT Regional Mobility Grant: TUC PedestrianBicycle Bridge Staff is seeking Committee approval to apply for the Washington State Department of Transportation WSDOT) Regional Mobility Grant for right -of -way and construction phases of the Tukwila Urban Center Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridge project. The total grant request would be in the amount of $6,870,000, and requires a minimum 20% City match. The Committee discussed concerns regarding the amount of City matching funds for the grant, and the amount of effort required to calculate the Vehicel Mile Travel (VMT) and Vehicel Time (VT) reduction calculations. Without concerns this application would usually be approved for submission by the Committee; however, the Committee would like to move this forward to full Council for discussion due to the concerns above. FORWARD TO AUGUST 27 COW FOR DISCUSSION. B. TUC Transit Center Supplemental Agreement No. 15 Staff is seeking Council approval for the Supplemental Agreement No. 15 with IBI Group for a new scope and fee that addresses additional utility conflict resolution potholing, minor re- design for conflict resolution, additional right -of -way acquisition services and additional survey work for the Transit Center in the amount of $65,970. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO AUGUST 27 COW FOR DISCUSSION. C. Andover Park West Street Widening Supplemental Agreement No. 16 Staff is seeking Council approval for the Supplemental Agreement No. 16 with 113I Group for a new scope and fee that addresses additional utility conflict resolution potholing, minor re- design for conflict resolution, additional right -of -way acquisition services and additional survey work for the Andover Park West Street Widening in the amount of $86,450. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO AUGUST 27 COW FOR DISCUSSION. III. SCATBd No discussion held. INFORMATION ONLY. IV. MISCELLANEOUS Committee Chair Ekberg mentioned that the brush in the median on northbound SR -599 just north of the bridge over I -5 appears to be a hindrance to the sight distance for northbound vehicles. Bob Giberson will forward this on to the WSDOT maintenance office for review and response. 11 12 City of u la Washington Ordinance No. D3 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 2220, AS CODIFIED IN TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE (TMC) CHAPTER 16.28; REENACTING TMC CHAPTER 16.28, "PARKS IMPACT FEES," TO AMEND THE PROCESS FOR IMPOSING AND ADMINISTERING PARKS IMPACT FEES TO BETTER ADDRESS THE NATURE OF DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY IN TUKWILA; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2220 on December 15, 2008; and WHEREAS, after implementation of Ordinance No. 2220, certain refinements have been identified based on the unique nature of the development activity in Tukwila; and WHEREAS, the City desires to simplify the process of imposing and administering parks impact fees; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. TMC Chapter 16.28 Reenacted. Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Chapter 16.28 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Parks Impact Fee Ord amended final 2 -28 -12 DTBSK:bjs Page 1 of 9 13 CHAPTER 16.28 PARKS IMPACT FEES Sections: 16.28.010 Authority and Purpose 16.28.020 Findings 16.28.030 Definitions 16.28.040 Parks Impact Fee Assessment 16.28.050 Use of Parks Impact Fees 16.28.060 Parks Impact Fee Capital Facilities Plan 16.28.070 Parks Impact Fee Formula 16.28.080 Parks Impact Fee Adjustments 16.28.090 Credits W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Parks Impact Fee Ord amended final 2 -28 -12 DTBSK:bjs Page 1 of 9 13 16.28.100 Appeals 16.28.110 Refunds 16.28.120 Exemptions 16.28.130 Authority Unimpaired 16.28.010 Authority and Purpose. A. Authority. The City of Tukwila's impact fee financing program has been developed pursuant to the City of Tukwila's policy powers, the Growth Management Act as codified in Chapter 36.70A of the Revised Code of Washington (RCW). B. Purpose. The purpose of the financing plan is to: 1. Develop a program consistent with Tukwila's Parks and Recreation Department Capital Facilities Plan for joint public and private financing of public parks facilities and services necessitated in whole or in part by development within the City of Tukwila; 2. Create a mechanism to charge and collect fees to ensure that development bears its proportionate share of the capital costs of public parks facilities necessitated by development; and 3. Ensure fair collection and administration of such parks impact fees. 16.28.020 Findings. The City Council finds and determines that growth and development in the City create additional demand and need for public parks facilities in the City, and the City Council finds that growth and development should pay its proportionate share of the costs of the facilities needed to serve the growth and development in the City. Therefore, pursuant to RCW 36.70A and RCW 82.02.050 through 82.02.100, which authorize the City to impose and collect impact fees to fund public facilities that serve growth, the City Council adopts this ordinance to impose parks impact fees for parks services. It is the Council's intent that the provisions of this ordinance be liberally construed in establishing the parks impact fee program. 16.28.030 Definitions. Terms or words not defined herein shall be defined pursuant to RCW 82.02.090 when given their usual and customary meaning. For the purposes of this ordinance, unless the context or subject matter clearly requires otherwise, the words or phrases defined in this section shall have the following meanings: 1. "Building permit" means an official document or certification of the City of Tukwila issued by the City's building official which authorizes the construction, alteration, enlargement, conversion, reconstruction, remodeling, rehabilitation, erection, placement, demolition, moving, or repair of a building or structure. 2. "City" means the City of Tukwila, Washington, County of King. 3. "Development activity" means any construction, reconstruction, or expansion of a building, structure, or use, or any changes in use of a building or structure, or any changes in the use of land, requiring development approval. W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Parks Impact Fee Ord amended final 2 -28 -12 DTBSK:bjs Page 2 of 9 Will 4. "Development approval" means any written authorization from the City, which authorizes the commencement of the "development activity." 5. "Encumber" means to reserve, set aside, or earmark the parks impact fees in order to pay for commitments, contractual obligations, or other liabilities incurred for the provision of parks services. 6. "Fee payer" is a person, corporation, partnership, an incorporated association or governmental agency, municipality, or similar entity commencing a land development activity that requires a building permit and creates a demand for additional parks capital facilities. 7. "Impact fee" means the payment of money imposed by the City on development activity pursuant to this ordinance as a condition of granting development approval in order to pay for the parks facilities needed to serve growth and development that is a proportionate share of the cost of parks capital facilities used for facilities that reasonably benefit development. Impact fees do not include reasonable permit fees, application fees, administrative fees for collecting and handling parks impact fees, or the cost of reviewing independent fee calculations. 8. "Owner" means the owner of record of real property, as found in the records of King County, Washington, or a person with an unrestricted written option to purchase property; provided, that if the real property is being purchased under a recorded real estate contract, the purchaser shall be considered the owner of the property. 9. "Proportionate share" means that portion of the cost for parks facility improvements that are reasonably related to the service demands and needs of development. 10. "Parks facilities" means those capital facilities identified as park and recreational facilities in the City's Capital Facilities Plan. 16.28.040 Parks Impact Fee Assessment. A. The City shall collect parks impact fees from applicants seeking development approvals from the City for any development activity in the City for which building permits are required, effective January 1, 2009, consistent with the provisions of this ordinance. B. Parks impact fees shall be assessed at the time of a technically complete building permit application that complies with the City's zoning ordinances and building and development codes. Parks impact fees shall be collected from the fee payer at the time the building permit is issued. C. Except if otherwise exempt, the City shall not issue the required building permit unless or until the parks impact fees are paid. W: Word Processing\Ordinances \Parks Impact Fee Ord amended final 2 -28 -12 DTBSK:bjs Page 3 of 9 15 16.28.050 Use of Parks Impact Fees. A. Pursuant to this ordinance, parks impact fees shall be used for parks facilities that will reasonably benefit growth and development, and only for park facilities addressed by the City's Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan. B. Fees shall not be used to make up deficiencies in City facilities serving an existing development. C. Fees shall not be used for maintenance and operations, including personnel. D. Parks impact fees shall be used for but not limited to land acquisition, site improvements, engineering and architectural services, permitting, financing, administrative expenses and applicable mitigation costs, and capital equipment pertaining to parks facilities. E. Parks impact fees may also be used to recoup public improvement costs incurred by the City to the extent that growth and development will be served by the previously constructed improvement. F. In the event bonds or similar debt instruments are or have been issued for parks facility improvements, impact fees may be used to pay the principal on such bonds. 16.28.060 Parks Impact Fee Capital Facilities Plan. In order to collect parks impact fees, the City must first adopt a parks capital facilities plan as an element of the City's Comprehensive Plan. The City's capital facilities plan for parks services shall consist of the following elements: 1. The City's capacity over the next six years, based on an inventory of the City's parks facilities both existing and under construction; 2. The forecast of future needs for parks facilities based upon the City's population projections; 3. A six -year financial plan component, updated as necessary, to maintain at least a six -year forecast for financing needed within projected funding levels; 4. Application of the formula set forth in this ordinance based upon the information in the capital facilities plan; and 5. City Council Action. No new or revised impact fee shall be effective until adopted by the City Council following a duly advertised public hearing to consider the City's capital facilities plan or plan update. W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Parks Impact Fee Ord amended final 2 -28 -12 DTBSK:bjs Page 4 of 9 im 16.28 .070 Parks Impact Fee Formula. A. The impact fee formula is based on the assumptions found in Tukwila Parks Impact Fees, 2008, Exhibit A, and Tukwila Parks Capital Facilities List, Exhibit B, both attached hereto and by this reference fully incorporated herein. PARKS IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS B. Each development shall mitigate its impacts on the City's parks facilities by payment of a fee that is based on the type of land use and square footage of the development, and proportionate to the cost of the parks facility improvements necessary to serve the needs of growth. C. Applications for a change of use shall receive credit based on the existing use. This credit is calculated by deducting the fee amount of the existing use from the fee of the proposed use. 16.28.080 Parks Impact Fee Adjustments. A. The City may adjust a parks impact fee at the time the fee is imposed in order to consider unusual circumstances in specific cases to ensure that impact fees are imposed fairly. B. In calculating the fee imposed on a particular development, the City shall permit consideration of studies and data submitted by a developer in order to adjust the amount of the fee. The developer shall submit an independent fee calculation study to the Director of Parks and Recreation, who shall review the study to determine that the study: 1. Is based on accepted impact fee assessment practices and methodologies; 2. Uses acceptable data sources and the data used is comparable with the uses and intensities planned for the proposed development activity; 3. Complies with the applicable state laws governing impact fees; 4. Is prepared and documented by professionals who are mutually agreeable to the City and the developer and who are qualified in their respective fields; and 5. Shows the basis upon which the independent fee calculation was made. W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Parks Impact Fee Ord amended final 2 -28 -12 OT &SK:bjs Page 5 of 9 17 impact Fee Land Use Per Residential Unit Per 1,000 S Ft. GFA Single Family $1,426 Multi-Family $1,398 Office $837 Retail $419 Industrial $262 B. Each development shall mitigate its impacts on the City's parks facilities by payment of a fee that is based on the type of land use and square footage of the development, and proportionate to the cost of the parks facility improvements necessary to serve the needs of growth. C. Applications for a change of use shall receive credit based on the existing use. This credit is calculated by deducting the fee amount of the existing use from the fee of the proposed use. 16.28.080 Parks Impact Fee Adjustments. A. The City may adjust a parks impact fee at the time the fee is imposed in order to consider unusual circumstances in specific cases to ensure that impact fees are imposed fairly. B. In calculating the fee imposed on a particular development, the City shall permit consideration of studies and data submitted by a developer in order to adjust the amount of the fee. The developer shall submit an independent fee calculation study to the Director of Parks and Recreation, who shall review the study to determine that the study: 1. Is based on accepted impact fee assessment practices and methodologies; 2. Uses acceptable data sources and the data used is comparable with the uses and intensities planned for the proposed development activity; 3. Complies with the applicable state laws governing impact fees; 4. Is prepared and documented by professionals who are mutually agreeable to the City and the developer and who are qualified in their respective fields; and 5. Shows the basis upon which the independent fee calculation was made. W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Parks Impact Fee Ord amended final 2 -28 -12 OT &SK:bjs Page 5 of 9 17 C. In reviewing the study, the Director of Parks and Recreation "Director may require the developer to submit additional or different documentation. If an acceptable study is presented, the Director of Parks and Recreation may adjust the fee for the particular development activity. The Director shall consider the documentation submitted by the applicant, but is not required to accept such documentation that the Director reasonably deems to be inaccurate or unreliable. D. A developer requesting an adjustment or independent fee calculation may pay the impact fees imposed by this ordinance in order to obtain a building permit while the City determines whether to partially reimburse the developer by making an adjustment or by accepting the independent fee calculation. 16.28.090 Credits. In computing the fee applicable to a given development, credit shall be given for the fair market value measured at the time of dedication, for any dedication of land for improvements to, or new construction of, any parks facilities that are identified in the Capital Facilities Element and that are required by the City as a condition of approving the development activity. 16.28.100 Appeals. A. Any fee payer may pay the impact fees imposed by this ordinance under protest in order to obtain a building permit. B. Appeals regarding parks impact fees imposed on any development activity may only be submitted by the fee payer of the property where such development activity will occur. No appeal shall be permitted unless and until the impact fee at issue has been paid. C. Determinations by the City staff with respect to the applicability of parks impact fees to a given development activity, or the availability of a credit, can be appealed to the City's Hearing Examiner pursuant to this section. D. An appeal shall be filed within 10 working days of payment of the impact fees under protest or within 10 working days of the City's issuance of a written determination of a credit or exemption decision by filing with the City Clerk a notice of appeal giving the reasons for the appeal and paying the accompanying appeal fee as set forth in the existing fee schedule for land use decisions. 16.28.110 Refunds. A. If the City fails to expend or encumber the impact fees within 10 years from the date the fees were paid, unless extraordinary, compelling reasons exist for fees to be held longer than 10 years, the current owner of the property on which the impact fees were paid may receive a refund of such fees. Such extraordinary or compelling reasons shall be identified in written findings by the City Council. B. The City shall notify potential claimants by first class mail that they are entitled to a refund. In determining whether impact fees have been expended or encumbered, impact fees shall be considered expended or encumbered on a first -in, first -out basis. W: Word Process ing \Ordinances \Parks Impact Fee Ord amended final 2 -28 -12 DT &SK:bjs Page 6 of 9 IN C. Owners seeking a refund must submit a written request for a refund of the fees to the City within one year of the date the right to claim a refund arises or notice is given, whichever comes later. D. Any impact fees for which no application has been made within the one -year period shall be retained by the City and expended on appropriate parks facilities. E. Refunds of impact fees shall include any interest earned on the impact fees by the City. 16.28.120 Exemptions. The parks impact fees are generated from the formula for calculating the fees as set forth in this ordinance. The amount of the impact fees is determined by the information contained in the adopted parks master plan and related documents, as appended to the City's Comprehensive Plan. All development activity located within the City shall be charged a parks impact fee; provided, that the following exemptions shall apply. Any development activity or project which has submitted a technically complete building permit application prior to the effective date of this ordinance shall be exempt from the payment of parks impact fees. The following shall be exempt from parks impact fees: 1. Replacement of a structure with a new structure having the same use, at the same site, and with the same gross floor area, when such replacement is within 12 months of demolition or destruction of the previous structure. 2. Alteration, expansion, or remodeling of an existing dwelling or structure where no new units are created and the use is not changed. 3. Construction of an accessory residential structure. 4. Miscellaneous improvements including, but not limited to, fences, walls, swimming pools, and signs that do not create an increase in demand for parks services. 5. Demolition of or moving an existing structure within the City from one site to another. 6. Low income housing developed by individuals, nonprofit corporations, or a housing authority may be exempted from impact fees at the discretion of City staff subject to: a. Submittal of a fiscal impact analysis of the effect of impact fees upon low- income housing and how exempting such housing from impact fees would forward the goals for low- income housing in the City and King County; b. Submittal of adequate documentation showing that the housing will remain available for low- income persons for a 10 -year period of time at affordable rents; and W: Word Process ing\Ordinances\Parks Impact Fee Ord amended final 2 -28 -12 DT &SK:bjs Page 7 of 9 19 c. In the case of owner occupied dwellings, submittal of adequate documentation showing that such housing will be sold or leased at affordable rates to low- income households for a period of 10 years. d. The impact fee for exempt development under this subsection shall be calculated as provided by this ordinance and paid with public funds. Such payments may be made by including such amounts in the public share of the system improvements undertaken within the City for parks services and facilities. 7. Change of Use. A development permit for a change of use that has less impact than the existing use shall not be assessed a parks impact fee. 8. A fee payer required to pay for system improvements pursuant to RCW 43.21C.060 shall not be required to pay an impact fee for the same improvements under this ordinance. 16.28.130 Authority Unimpaired. Nothing in this ordinance shall preclude the City from requiring the fee payer to mitigate adverse environmental effects of a specific development pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act, Chapters 43.21C RCW and /or Chapter 58.17 RCW, governing plats and subdivisions; provided that the exercise of this authority is consistent with Chapters 43.21 C and 82.02 RCW. Section 2. Repealer. Ordinance No. 2220, as codified in TMC Chapter 16.28, "Parks Impact Fees," is hereby repealed. Section 3. Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser. Upon approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the correction of clerical errors; references to other local, state or federal laws, codes, rules, or regulations; or ordinance numbering and section /subsection numbering. Section 4. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation. Section 5. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force five days after passage and publication as provided by law. W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Parks Impact Fee Ord amended final 2 -28 -12 DT &SK:bjs Page 8 of 9 20 PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this ��C V day of 61 r 2012. ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flahe MM(;, City Clerk' APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Shelley M. Kerslake, City Attorney 2 1 aggert ?r r Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Published: Effective Date: Ordinance Nu mber: 6 Attachments: Exhibit A Tukwila Parks Impact Fees, 2008 Exhibit B Tukwila Parks Capital Facilities List W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Parks Impact Fee Ord amended final 2 -28 -12 DTBSK: bjs Page 9 of 9 21 22 EXHIBIT A Tukwila Parks Impact Fees, 2008 (80% impact fees; 20% city contribution) TABLE 1: 2008 Park Impact Fee Calc ulations (80% 20% split) Land Use 2007 2007 2007 Building 2020 Housing 2020 2020 Building Housing Employment Area -3 Units Employme Area Units -1 2 nt Single-family 3,822 2.44 3,198 4,338 $735 Multi familv Multi family 4,107 Multi- family 2.49 6,491 Office 52.06% Office 370,500 6,245 1,561,250 Retail 7,727 1,931,750 Retail 435 20 384 10 $837.29 25,220 12,610,000 Industrial 4,392 20,343 16,274,400 1 11,144 25,169 20,135,200 TOTALS 7,929 1 46,972 1 28,027,650 10,829 1 58,116 1 34,676,950 1. OFM 2. PSRC 2007 Covered Emplooyment Estimates 3. Retail: 500gsf per emp; Office: 250gsf per emp; Industrial: 800gsf per emp; X emp growth 4. 43 SF du /yr; rest is MF from 2007 Buildable Lands Report 5. 90% of Buildable Lands Report estimates, at same as 2007 employment 6. Tukwila Resident/Non- Tukwila resident breakdown based on 2000 census data In 2000, the number of residents who live and work in Tukwila is 1,502, out of a population of 17,181, or 9% Net Growth, 2008 2020 Land Use Housing Employment Building Area Employment: Employme Units 4 5 -3 Tukwila nt: Non Residents Tukwila 9%-6 Residents ot0i -6 Single-family 516 2.44 3,198 11.49% $735 Multi familv 2,384 $1 426 Multi- family 2.49 2.44 Office 52.06% 1,482 370,500 133 1,349 Retail 4 836 2,418,000 435 4,401 Industrial $837.29 4,826 3 434 4,392 TOTALS 2,900 1 11,144 6,649,300 1,003 10,141 Impact Fee Land Use Persons Use Ratio Total Use by Use by Cost Per Housing Per 1,000 Rounded per Between Land Use Land Use Allocation Unit GFA Housing Residents/ Category Category Unit Employees Single-family 2.54 2.44 3,198 11.49% $735 $1 $1 426 Multi- family 2.49 2.44 14,484 52.06% $3,331,715 $1,397.53 $1398 Office 1.00 1,349 4.85% $310,214 $837.29 $837 Retail 1.00 4,401 15.82% $1,012 $418.64 $419 Industrial 1.00 4,392 15.78% $1,010,185 $261.65 $262 TOTALS 1 27 1 100.00% 1$6,400,000 I.v ,y v, +vv,vvv w ov io vi Z0,VVV,VVV 23 Exhibit B Tukwila Parks Capital Facilities List Project List Impact Fees 2009 to 2015 Project Cost Duwamish Hill Preserve Develop Phase II $2,000 *$2,500,000 Trail Connections Green River Trail to Renton Black /Cedar River Trail $500,000 Tukwila Pond Development Phase IV $3,000,000 Cit „f T eel crc'9""° jExt nd Land le e, e .,.a feat a nd i TOD Pedestrian Bridge Sounder Connection 2,000,000 Total $8,000,000 Tukwila Pool removed from list due to the formation of the Metropolitan Park District in 2011; those funds were added to the Duwamish Hill Preserve project. NOTE: Previous version of Exhibit B (prior to strike through changes resulting from formation of the MPD) was included as an attachment to Ordinance No. 2220. Exhibit B Parks Impact Fees Revised January 2012 24 Circuit City Site City Tax and Fee Analysis Updated 10/3/12 Re- tenanted Project Assumptions (1) Square Feet Units Retail 41,500 Estimated Construction Cost Per SF Total 50 2,075,000 Total 41,500 2,075,000 New Development Project Assumptions (2) Redeveloped 2009 2012 Estimated Construction Cost Square Feet Units Per SF Total Hotel 170,000 244 183 31,042,000 Multi- family 220,000 210 153 33,638,000 Retail 5,000 134 671,000 Total 395,000 454 65,351,000 Assessed Values (3) 25 Tax Year Retenanted Redeveloped 2009 2012 Land 2,970,100 2,970,100 2,970,100 2,970,100 Building 4,986,700 379,900 4,986,700 65,351,000 Total 7,956,800 3,350,000 7,956,800 68,321,100 One Time City Revenues (4) Retenanted Redeveloped Fees Permit and Plan Review Fees Building 15,812 498,000 Mechanical TBD 59,000 Plumbing TBD 8,000 Electrical TBD 74,000 Traffic Concurrency 15,000 Subtotal 15,812 654,000 Impact Fees Traffic TBD 434,000 Fire TBD 353,000 Parks TBD 367,000 Subtotal 1,154,000 Taxes Construction Sales Tax 0.0085 17,638 555,484 Real Estate Excise Tax 0.0050 39,784 341,606 57,422 897,089 Total One Time Revenues 73,234 2,705,089 Page 1 25 Annual City Revenues (5) Property Tax Due to New Construction Sales Tax for Retail City Rate Retenanted 0.00295 14,711 0.00850 88,188 Total Annual Revenues Debt Issuance Capacity Due to Development (6) Term Interest Rate 15 3% 102,898 Retenanted $1,228,393 Redeveloped 192,785 10,625 203,410 Redeveloped $2,428,301 Notes (1) Retenanting assumes keeping the same buildings as retail use and assumes a the all -in cost of owner and tenant improvements is $50 per square foot. Current Property Stats Building square feet 41,500 Land Square Feet 148,507 (2) New development assumptions based on Omar Lee's concept dated 4/13/2011. Unit costs per square foot based on ICC building valuation table from 2/2011 and include Seattle area multiplier. (3) Assessed values for tax years 2009 and 2012 per County Assessor website 8/28/12. AV as retenanted assumes building value equal to 2009 value (highest year in last decade). AV as new development assumes building value equals construction value, although it is possible the AV will be higher than construction. (4) One time city building permit fees based on City Ordinance 2295 dated 7/28/2010. As redeveloped plumbing fee assumes 475 fixtures. Mechanical costs estimated at 10.72% of building cost. Electrical costs estimated at 16.6% of building cost. One time city traffic concurrency fee per Public Works 4/18/11. Permit and plan review fees are intended to cover permitting and plan review costs. Impact fees are dedicated to the projects identified in the impact fee programs. They have not been adjusted to take into account existing credits or exemptions, if applicable. Real estate excise tax based on City's portion of 0.5 Per RCW it must be spent on capital projects. Per City policy is it split equally for the 301 fund and arterial street fund. REET is only collected upon sale and transfer of property which does not always occur with new development so it may not be appropriate for this analysis. (5) Annual city revenues estimates additional property tax due to new construction value and sales tax based on $250 sales per square foot per year. (6) Debt service capacity estimates the amount of debt that could be issued assuming a fully amortized loan with level annual payments at the above term and interest rate, not counting issuance costs. In 2012 the City received a quote for a $1.2 million, 15 year bond at an all -in- true interest cost of 3.16 (7) This analysis estimates revenues to the City but does not relflect related costs such as for permit review, building inspection, public safety, and public infrastructure. 26 Page 2 EMBASSY SUITES HOTELS® September 5 2012 To Whom It May Concern: The Embassy Suites Seattle located at 15920 W. Valley HW, Tukwila WA is an advocate for the proposed walking bridge in our neighborhood. From an environmental and financial standpoint, my property in particular would greatly benefit from this capital project. Our property offers a complimentary 24 hour shuttle to the airport and local runs within five miles of our property daily from 9AM to 10PM. During these hours of operation, we run up to two shuttles to accommodate our guest requests. Our fleet consists of two, 10 passenger vans. Please see the attached grid that was prepared by our Front Office Manger. The data shows average local runs from the hotel by month. MONTH Shuttle Runs Approximate of Passengers January 129 387 February 131 393 March 130 390 April 135 405 May 137 479 June 140 532 July 144 576 August 145 616 September Forecast: 142 Forecast: 582 October Forecast: 129 Forecast: 387 November Forecast: 128 Forecast: 384 December Forecast: 130 Forecast: 390 Grand Total 1620 5521 YE mileage estimate 90k Local runs =18% of our mileage or 16.2k 27 Compression is a result of multiple factors including: overall hotel occupancy, transient cruise business which runs from May thru September, shopping holidays, and group performance, particularly from the Sports market. It is important to note that the hotel's priority is our airport transportation and frequently our drivers will change their route to the airport in order to accommodate a few passengers needed to go to the mall area. These guests are captured with the airport runs and are not accounted for below. Therefore, the totals below are conservative. From a mileage standpoint, our vans log over 90K miles a year. YTD mileage as of EOM, August 64k miles. Local runs equate to 18% of our overall mileage. Please contact me directly for additional information. Thank you, Maureen Maureen Huffman General Manager Embassy Suites Seattle Tacoma Intl. AP 206 219 -2140 CIL) CAI >N 0 M WIM&O 0 I i t Et CID 0 uj milli 0 EL 'M ns M Ca FMf 'a T Fl. i"'A A VO 0 E 4- t. c (M a o V) 30 COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Meeting Date Prepared b M or'.r e 'ew Council review 10/08/12 JR Resolution Mig Date Ordinance Mtg Date 10/15/12 JR Other Mtg Date SPONSOR Council Mayor HR DCD Finance .Fire IT P &R Police PW SPONSOR'S The City applied to WSDOT in 2010 for SRTS funding for Cascade View Elementary to (1) SUMMARY formalize an existing pathway used by students, (2) recruit and train volunteers to start Walking School Buses, (3) hold an event and an assembly. The school district and cemetery have indicated initial support for the project; the church has questions related to design and compensation that would be addressed during project design. The Council is being asked to consider acceptance of the $427 grant with no City match. REVIEWED BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm. DATE: 10/01/2012 COMMITTEE CHAIR: ALLAN EKBERG RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR /ADMIN. Department of Community Development; Public Works COMMITTEE Majority Approval; Forward to Committee of the Whole COST IMPACT FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $427,588.00 $427,588.00 Fund Source: 103 RESIDENTIAL STREETS (PG. 3, PROPOSED 2013 CIP) Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 10/08/12 ITEM INFORMATION ITEM NO. STAFF SPONSOR: JAIMIE REAVIS ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 10/08/12 AGENDA ITEM TITLE Acceptance of Washington State Department of Transportation WSDOT) grant for Cascade View Safe Routes to School (SRTS) CATEGORY Discussion Mtg Date 10 1081I2 Motion Mtg Date 10/15/12 Resolution Mig Date Ordinance Mtg Date Bid Award Mtg Date PublicHearin Mtg Date Other Mtg Date SPONSOR Council Mayor HR DCD Finance .Fire IT P &R Police PW SPONSOR'S The City applied to WSDOT in 2010 for SRTS funding for Cascade View Elementary to (1) SUMMARY formalize an existing pathway used by students, (2) recruit and train volunteers to start Walking School Buses, (3) hold an event and an assembly. The school district and cemetery have indicated initial support for the project; the church has questions related to design and compensation that would be addressed during project design. The Council is being asked to consider acceptance of the $427 grant with no City match. REVIEWED BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm. DATE: 10/01/2012 COMMITTEE CHAIR: ALLAN EKBERG RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR /ADMIN. Department of Community Development; Public Works COMMITTEE Majority Approval; Forward to Committee of the Whole COST IMPACT FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $427,588.00 $427,588.00 Fund Source: 103 RESIDENTIAL STREETS (PG. 3, PROPOSED 2013 CIP) Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 10/08/12 10/15/12 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 10/08/12 Informational Memorandum dated 09/28/12 Award letter from WSDOT Response to questions from Riverton Park United Methodist Church Page 3 from proposed 2013 CIP Project Area Map Minutes from the Transportation Committee Meeting of 10/01/12 10/15/12 32 City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Haggerton Transportation Committee FROM: Jack Pace, Community Development Diree Bob Giberson, Public Works DirectoG BY: Jaimie Reavis, Assistant Planner DATE: September 28, 2012 SUBJECT: Cascade View Safe Routes to School Project No. 91210301 Acceptance of WSDOT Grant ISSUE Should the City accept a Safe Routes to School Grant award from the Washington State Department of Transportation WSDOT) in the amount of $427,588.00? BACKGROUND The City of Tukwila submitted its first application for Safe Routes to School funding from the WSDOT in 2010. At that time, the City had been working with Neighbors without Borders, and staff at the Tukwila School District to initiate a Safe Routes to School pilot program at Cascade View Elementary. Formalizing the existing connection from S 140 Street to the street -end of 32 Ave S was identified as one of the high priority projects by school staff. A Walking Audit of the school zone area surrounding Cascade View Elementary School conducted by Feet First reiterated the benefits the off street connection provides for students in terms of safety and convenience. The project was ranked high enough to be added to the contingency list of competing projects, meaning it was not one of the initial projects awarded funding in May 2011 but it was added to a list of projects to be funded if additional grant funding was made available by the State Legislature. In March of 2012, the City was contacted about the possibility of a funding award, and we received a formal letter from WSDOT after revising our original application in May 2012. A stipulation of the award is that funds must be obligated by May 1, 2013. Property owners within and adjacent to the proposed asphalt trail include the Tukwila School District, Riverton Park United Methodist Church (UMC), and Riverton Crest Cemetery. Since the time the City originally submitted the grant application in May 2010, a developer received preliminary subdivision and design review approval for a cottage housing project on Church property. The design in the cottage housing project includes an eight -foot easement area for a trail through the same corridor. It was staff's assumption the Riverton Park UMC would be in favor of a partnership for the trail project because it would reduce their costs. Contact with property owners adjacent to the trail was not made until after the City received the award letter in May of this year. 33 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 DISCUSSION After receiving the award letter, staff was contacted by Pastor Jan Bolerjack of the Riverton Park UMC. She recommended City staff meet with the Riverton Park UMC Board of Trustees prior to grant acceptance in order to find out if the Church would be in favor of participating in the project. Staff has since met with the Church Board of Trustees, and has attended a follow up meeting with Pastor Jan Bolerjack, Board of Trustees Chair Linda Cles, and an attorney representing the Church. Staff has also met with the Cemetery to discuss the project. The attached list of questions and City responses represent follow -up questions and responses from the latest meeting with the Church, held on September 18, 2012. Agreement from the Church must come from the Riverton Park UMC Planning and Building Conference, with whom the City has not met. The Cemetery has initially agreed to participate in the project. Like any other City infrastructure project, it is not typical to reach an initial agreement with property owners prior to grant acceptance. Formal negotiations with property owners related to compensation and easement agreements will occur once grant acceptance is approved and design commences. If the City approves acceptance of the grant funds, staff will proceed with design and negotiations with property owners. During design, staff will work with consultants and property owners to design a trail which minimizes impacts to adjacent property owners. Work to minimize impacts to property owners may include applying to WSDOT for a deviation to allow a trail width reduction where needed, storm drainage improvements on adjacent properties associated with storm drainage design of the trail, and replacement of fences, landscaping, and driveway and parking areas. In the event one or more property owner(s) are not amenable to participating in the trail project after acceptance of grant funds, the City would be required to pursue.one of the following options: (1) proceed with eminent domain to acquire the right -of -way for the trail; (2) stop work and return any funds received to date to WSDOT. FINANCIAL IMPACT This is a reimbursement grant for costs incurred in the amount of $427,588.00. Included in the award is $29,138.00 for the Tukwila School District, for education, outreach, and encouragement activities. The remaining $398,450.00 is for design, right -of -way acquisition, and construction of the trail. There was no City match associated with this grant application. RECOMMENDATION The Council is being asked to approve acceptance of the grant award from WSDOT and consider this item at the October 8, 2012 Committee of the Whole meeting and subsequent October 15, 2012 Regular Meeting. ATTACHMENTS Award Letter from WSDOT Response to questions from Riverton Park United Methodist Church 34 W.\Grants \Safe Routes to School\2010 Application\ Meetings& Correspondence \lnfoMemo_SRTS_10- 1- 12.doc a AdNk Washington State SAY 2.-1 9 1 2 7T A W Department of Transportation�,� RILI, Paula J. Hammond, P.E. L�Q �aNKB Secretary of Transportation May 25, 2012 Mr. Bob Giberson Public Works Director City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 -2545 J ntit E- Transportation Building 310 Maple Park Avenue S.E P.O. Box 47300 Olympia, WA 98504 -7300 360- 705 -7000 TTY: 1- 800 -833 -6388 www.wsdot.wa.gov 1 &oo Geo�t N A-fvd )All We� 2012 Safe Routes to School State Funding Dear Mr. Gi 1 WSDOT is pleased to advise you that in the 2012 Supplemental Transportation Budget the following project was selected to receive state funding through the Safe Routes to School program. The state funding is limited to: Cascade View Elementary Safe Routes $427,588 Scope: The project includes multi -use path, assembly, walk to school event and walking school buses. The funds will be administered through WSDOT's Highways Local Programs (H &LP) Division on a reimbursement basis only. To authorize funding for this project, submit the H &LP State Funding Agreement, prospectus and any other items (electronic forms are available at http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/TA/ProgMGt/Pr&Mgt.htnl to your Region Local Programs Engineer. In addition, completion of Executive Order 05 -05 must occur prior to construction fund authorization. More information on Executive Order 05 -05 can be found at http://www.dahp.wa.goy/pages/EiivironmentalReview/Laws.htm In addition, the following are required: Project must be obligated by May 1, 2013, or the funds will lapse. Quarterly Project Report is required to be completed by the end of March, June, September and December, to maintain funding. The on line database can be found at the following website: http•// www. wsdot .wa_gov /TA/ProgMgt/QPR/QPR.html To access the database your account name is Tukwila and password is Tukwi785 (the password is case sensitive). Pre project counts for walking and biking must be submitted with the construction funding request. SRTS Final Report including post project counts for walking and biking. 35 Bob Giberson Public Works Director City of Tukwila 2012 Safe Routes to School State Funding May 25, 2012 After the agreement is signed, you will be notified that the funds have been authorized. Project expenditures are not eligible for reimbursement until after we provide notice that the funds are authorized. If the project includes any federal funds all FHWA requirements apply as outlined in the Local Agency Guidelines (LAG) manual. For assistance please contact Ed Conyers, your Region Local Programs Engineer, at 206.440.4734. Sincerely, Lv� Kathleen B. Davis Director Highways Local Programs KBD:st:sas cc: Ed Conyers, Northwest Region Local Programs Engineer, MS NB82 -121 Charlie Howard, Transportation Director, PSRC 36 J City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor Department of Community Development Jack Pace, Director September 25, 2012 Mr. Robert W. Ives 8906 NE 21" Avenue Vancouver, WA 98665 Re: Additional Questions from Meeting on September 18, 2012 on Safe Routes to School trail project for Cascade View Elementary Dear Mr. Ives, Thank you for summarizing follow -up questions from Riverton Park United Methodist Church from our meeting on September 18, 2012. Below the questions summarized in your September 19, 2012 letter are copied in italics, with a City response underneath in regular text. 1. The copy of the grant application previously provided to the church indicates that 440 students live within 2 miles of Cascade View Elementary. The estimated number of those students walking to school is left blank. We would like to know what the estimated usage of the existing path across church property is. Also, what is the city's estimate of usage for an improved route if the trail is improved as planned? Based on an extrapolation of the student travel tally data submitted for the grant application, approximately 1/3 of students at Cascade View walk or bike to school. A large number of children have been observed using the existing path during Walking Audits and during a recent site visit to the Riverton Crest Cemetery. The City would expect the number of students to remain the same or to increase if the trail is improved as planned. 2. We discussed the drainage problem in the church parking lot and how the improved paved trail might worsen that problem. RPUMC would like to know, as part of the city's planning for the project, what steps the city may take to improve winter- weather drainage of the parking lot to enhance the safety of trail users and allow for use of the parking lot for church purposes in the winter. This is a significant factor in motivating possible congregation support for the project. Based on our site visit on September 24, 2012, there is an opportunity to provide the Church with a connection point to the City's drainage system as part of this project. The Tukwila Surface Water Engineer suggests the new system associated with trail construction consist of the following elements: Connect the new drainage system to the existing City catch basin at the end of 32 Ave S. Install a bio -swale along the School's eastern property line between 32 Ave S. and the Church property. Install a piped system beneath the trail from the south end of the planned bio -swale to an area near the existing Church catch basin (SE corner of lot). Install a connection between the new trail system and the Church catch basin located at the SE corner of their parking lot. Consider pervious pavement with an under -drain or a piped detention facility to minimize downstream impacts. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Phone 206 431 -3670 Fax 206 431 -3665 37 3. We asked what the maintenance plan for the trail is. Once in place, what will the plan be to keep the trail safe and maintained? What will be the plan to provide seasonal trail maintenance, including snow and ice removal? The trail will become part of the City's trail system, and the City's maintenance responsibility will be outlined in the trail easement agreement. The trail will be put on a regular maintenance schedule for debris removal and vegetation management similar to the City's other trails. The City does not clear snow or ice from trails, and would rely on the public to report any maintenance needs that fall out of the regular maintenance cycle. 4. We asked if lighting will be apart of the trait' design. Because the grant for the trail is to support young students walking to and from elementary school, which may include early morning and late afternoon crossings during winter months, we feel that lighting would be important. If the improved trailpromotes increasedpedestrian traffic as it is designed to do, lighting will also serve pedestrians from the general public and RPUMC congregation members who may use the crossing. From a purely aesthetic perspective, night time lighting will also be welcome considering that the proposed trail is adjacent to a cemetery for most of its length. The City does not routinely include lighting as a trail design standard, and lighting was not included in the cost estimate for the trail upon which the grant award was based. Upon grant acceptance and selection of a consultant to design the trail, the City could request the consultant prepare a design for trail lighting for the City's consideration. The City would first need to ensure that the addition of lighting is within the scope of improvements that can be funded with the grant award. 5. We discussed a general indemnification from the city to be included in any formal easement agreement from RPUMC that supports the proposed trail. This is also essential to RPUMC's deliberations. We would ask that the city agree to indemnify the church for any injuries to people or damage to property incurred during construction of the trail or during the existence of the easement. Please let us know if this is acceptable. Per RCW 4.24.210, state law provides protection from liability for public and private property owners who allow members of the public to use their property for outdoor recreation. 6. As to any monetary compensation for the easement, RPUMC is interested in what your offer is for the planned easement. We note that the Project Schedule and Cost Summary Section of the Grant Application Form includes a budget item of $78, 000 for "Right of Way" separate from engineering and construction costs. Given that RUMC is one of two property owners who might be compensated for the acquisition of an easement, what amount is the city prepared to offer RPUMC for the easement? This is obviously an important factor in the congregation's possible support. The City is required by state law to offer fair market value of the easement area to all three property owners, based on a formal appraisal and survey of the trail easement area. We understand that there is a need for prompt consideration of this project. RPUMC will also need to consider how the proposed easement may impact its previously approved plan for the property development. Also, any final agreement for an easement must be approved by the appropriate governing committees of the UMC Pacific Northwest Conference, who may bring up other matters of concern. The original easement area for the trail included in the previously- approved plan for the property development is eight feet wide. The City may need more or less area for the trail project, depending on the final design and configuration. Changes to cottage development plans necessitated through construction of the trail could be made as a modification to the approved design review. City construction of the trail will benefit Riverton Park 38 Page 2 of 3 UMC by providing compensation to the Church for use of the easement area, as well as by offsetting the developer's costs of trail construction. We will take this issue to the Council Transportation sub committee on October 1, 2012 and we encourage Church representatives to attend. Sincerely, 1 Jaimie Reavis Assistant Planner Page 3 of 3 39 CITY OF TUKWILA CAPITAL PROJECT SUMMARY 2013 to 2018 PROJECT: Cascade View Safe Routes to School Project No. 91210301 Construct an off street, paved shared use path, sidewalks, and a traffic circle at 33rd Ave S and S 140th St. DESCRIPTION: This route is identified in the Walking Audit prepared for the Cascade View school zone. S 140th St is one of the high priority missing sidewalk areas prioritized as part of the Walk and Roll Plan. JUSTIFICATION: Enhance safety for students walking to Cascade View Elementary School and encourage transportation choices for Cascade View neighborhood residents. STATUS: Phase I is construction of an off street, paved shared use path between S 137th St and S 140th St. Phase II includes a traffic circle at 33rd Ave S/S 140th St. Also includes sidewalks on the east side of 33rd Ave S between S 140th St S 144th St and the north side of S 140th St between Military Rd S and 34th Ave S. MAINT. IMPACT: New trail, traffic circle, and sidewalks will need to be maintained. COMMENT: Applying for a WSDOT Safe Routes to School grant for $428K for Phase I in 2012 with results in June 2012. Funding for Phase ll will be part of a future grant application. FINANCIAL Through Estimated tin tnnn 2n11 2(112 2n13 2n1A 2n15 2n1R 2n17 2n18 RFYONn TOTAL EXPENSES 5 Ep 128 FMS! W* f Phase II Design S 199 �R 41 14 Z I In9 aq 5 S46 SS Sn m S p '1 d 4r, st 183 238 Land (RAN) 78 5`165 St �b�je. 78 Const Mgmt. 45 126 171 Construction 250 530 780 TOTAL EXPENSES 0 119 309 1 01 01 0 1 01 0 1 839 1 1,267 FUND SOURCES Awarded Grant 119 309 428 Proposed Grant 750 750 Mitigation Actual 0 Mitigation Expected 0 City Oper. Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 89 89 TOTAL SOURCES 0 119 309 0 0 0 0 0 839 1,267 Project Location> 5 Ep 128 FMS! W* f 6 135 S S 199 �R Z I In9 aq 5 S46 SS Sn m S p '1 d 4r, st n i L�� a 5`165 St �b�je. 160 SS 2013 2018 Capital Improvement Program 3 EN project area cascade view elementary trail corridor and property owners map tukwila school district riverton park umc riverton crest cemetery 42 City of Tukwila Transportation Committee TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE Meeting Minutes October 1, 2012 5:15 p.m. Conference Room 91 PRESENT Councilmembers: Allan Ekberg, Chair; Kathy Hougardy and De' Sean Quinn Staff: Bob Giberson, Frank Iriarte, Robin Tischmak, Jaimie Reavis, Cyndy Knighton, Jack Pace, Nora Gierloff, David Cline, Gail Labanara and Kimberly Matej Guest: Chuck Parrish, resident; and Jan Bolerjack, Riverton Park United Methodist Church; Hank Kerns, Forest Lawn (Dignity Memorial/Riverton Crest Cemetery) CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 5:15 p.m. I. PRESENTATIONS No presentations. II. BUSINESS AGENDA A. WSDOT Safe Routes to School Grant Acceptance: Cascade View Elementary School Staff is seeking Committee approval to enter into an agreement with Washington State Department of Transportation WSDOT) to receive 2012 Safe Routes to School State Funding in the amount of $427,588 for a trail project connecting to Cascade View Elementary School. Staff originally applied for this funding in 2010, and the funding was not initially awarded. However, the project was placed on the State's contingency list, and the City was notified earlier this year that grant funds are available for this project. If accepted by the City, the grant funds will be utilized to build an off street formal paved trail that provides access between Cascade View Elementary School and the neighborhood to the south. Educational opportunities and encouragement activities will also be planned emphasizing safe routes to schools and benefits of walking. Grant funds are made available on a reimbursement basis to the City, and there is no required City match. Additionally, if the City does not complete the project, WDSOT could require repayment of part or all of the grant monies. The project calls for the formal trail to pass through portions of two properties, the Riverton Park United Methodist Church and Riverton Crest Cemetery. Staff briefly discussed the need to acquire a portion of each property for the trail. Reverend Jan Bolerjack from Riverton Park United Methodist Church expressed some concerns regarding the possibility of altering or loosing church property which could ultimately result in a hardship for the Church. In contrast, Hank Kerns from Forest Lawn (Riverton Crest Cemetery) stated that the cemetery does not foresee concerns related to providing the City with an easement for the project, as compared to purchase, as long as ingress and egress to the cemetery is considered. Rev. Bolerjack commented that an easement without purchase may be an option that the Church would consider as it would not impact the future expansion needs of the property. The Committee thanked Rev. Bolerjack and Mr. Kerns for their input, and asked staff questions regarding the construction phase of the project. Staff replied that many of the details would not be known until the project design was complete. The design phase is estimated to cost $55,000. If the City decides not to proceed with the project after design, it is possible that WSDOT could ask for expended funds to be returned. The Committee agreed that this item should be forwarded to the COW for discussion. Committee Chair Ekberg and Committee Member Quinn recommend acceptance of the grant, and Committee Member Hougardy felt that it warranted full Council discussion. MAJORITY APPROVAL. FORWARD TO OCTOBER 8 COW FOR DISCUSSION. 43 p COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Initials Meeting Date Prepared b or's review Council review 10/08/12 BG Resolution Mtg Date Ordinance Mtg Date 10/15/12 BG Other Mtg Date SPONSOR Council Mayor HR DCD Finance Fire IT P&R Police PIV SPONSOR'S Council is being asked to direct staff on undergrounding of 42 Ave S Phase III, from SUMMARY Southcenter Boulevard to S 160 St. The current proposed budget does not include design or construction costs for undergrounding 42 Ave S Phase III. Staff could negotiate a project specific agreement with Seattle City Light that stipulates that utility undergrounding costs for the 42nd Ave S Phase III project be rate based. At this time, there are no other capital projects in the CIP that have undergrounding programmed. REVIEWED BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm. DATE: 10/01/12 COMMITTEE CHAIR: ALLAN E EKBERG RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR /ADMIN. Public Works COMMITTEE Committee recommends no underground; forward to C.O.W COST IMPACT FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $1,822,000.00 $0.00 $1,822,000.00 Fund Source: 103 RESIDENTIAL STREETS (PAGE 2, PROPOSED 2013 CIP) Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 10/08/12 ITEM INFORMATION ITEM NO. 4.C. -W STAFF SPONSOR: BOB GIBERSON ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 10/08/12 AGENDA ITEM TITLE 42nd Ave S Phase III Utility Undergrounding (Southcenter Blvd S 160 St) CATEGORY Discussion Mtg Date 10 /OS /IZ Motion Mtg Date 10/15/12 Resolution Mtg Date Ordinance Mtg Date .Bid Award Mtg Date Public.Heanng Mtg Date Other Mtg Date SPONSOR Council Mayor HR DCD Finance Fire IT P&R Police PIV SPONSOR'S Council is being asked to direct staff on undergrounding of 42 Ave S Phase III, from SUMMARY Southcenter Boulevard to S 160 St. The current proposed budget does not include design or construction costs for undergrounding 42 Ave S Phase III. Staff could negotiate a project specific agreement with Seattle City Light that stipulates that utility undergrounding costs for the 42nd Ave S Phase III project be rate based. At this time, there are no other capital projects in the CIP that have undergrounding programmed. REVIEWED BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm. DATE: 10/01/12 COMMITTEE CHAIR: ALLAN E EKBERG RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR /ADMIN. Public Works COMMITTEE Committee recommends no underground; forward to C.O.W COST IMPACT FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $1,822,000.00 $0.00 $1,822,000.00 Fund Source: 103 RESIDENTIAL STREETS (PAGE 2, PROPOSED 2013 CIP) Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 10/08/12 10/15/12 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 10/08/12 Informational Memorandum dated September 28, 2012 42 Ave S Phase III CIP Page 2, Proposed 2013 CIP 42 Ave S Funding Fact Sheet Minutes from the Transportation Committee meeting of 10/01/12 10/15/12 -W I ho ILM City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Haggerton Transportation Committee FROM: Bob Giberson, Public Works Director IS BY: Cyndy Knighton, Senior Engineer DATE: September 28, 2012 SUBJECT: 42 Ave S Phase III (Southcenter Blvd S 160th SO Project No. 99410303 Utility Undergrounding ISSUE Utility undergrounding as part of the 42nd Avenue S Phase III project. BACKGROUND In February 2012, CH2MHill was retained by the City to design the 42nd Avenue S Phase III project. Limits of this phase are Southcenter Boulevard south to S 160 Street (southern City limits) and the road project includes the design of a failing culvert over Gilliam Creek. The scope of work includes full design for both the roadway improvements and the culvert replacement, up to and including support during bidding. The current scope and budget do not include the costs to convert overhead power and phone lines to underground vaults. Optional tasks are included in the existing scope but additional budget will be needed to complete the underground engineering. The estimated cost for the additional design for undergrounding is estimated at $72,700.00. DISCUSSION One of the consultant's first order of work was to study the costs of the utility undergrounding so a decision could be made by the City on whether or not to pursue utility undergrounding or leave the utilities above ground on aerial lines. Approximately one -third of the project limits already have undergrounded utilities, which were completed by Sound Transit as part of the Light Rail line construction. Fiscal Impact: Design work for the roadway is budgeted in the draft 2013 CIP at $650,000.00 (pg. 2). Design for the overhead utility conversion will require additional budget. The road construction budget is currently $2.9 M (shown in 2014, including construction management). Undergrounding utilities will require additional funds. Options for funding the underground conversion include: (1) General fund; (2) Local Improvement District; (3) Citywide Utility Rate basing; and (4) Grants. If no undergrounding is pursued, the poles will still need to be relocated but at Seattle City Light's expense. Planning Level Cost Estimate Roadway Construction $2,790,000 Gilliam Creek Culvert 940,000 Sub -Total without $3,730,000 Undergroundin Utility Undergrounding $1,750,000 Total Including $5,480,000 Undergroundin An LID would affect approximately 25 parcels, whereas citywide utility rate basing would allocate the costs to all residents and businesses within Tukwila that are served by Seattle City Light. However, at this time utility rate basing is not available to Tukwila unless the current franchise agreement is amended, a new franchise is negotiated, or a project specific project agreement is negotiated. Many grant sources, such as the Transportation Improvement Board, disallow most or all of the cost of utility undergrounding. RECOMMENDATION The Council is being asked to authorize staff to negotiate a project specific agreement with Seattle City Light that stipulates that the utility undergrounding costs for the 42nd Ave S Phase III project will be rate based, and consider this item at the October 8, 2012 Committee of the Whole meeting and subsequent October 15, 2012 Regular Meeting. Attachments: Draft 2013 CIP page 2 Overhead to Underground Relocation Cost Estimate Funding Fact Sheet 47 WAPW Eng \PROJECTS\A- RW RS Projects \42nd Ave S Phase 111 (99410303 94 -RS03) \INFORMATION MEMO Undergrounding Decision 9- 18.12.docx CITY OF TUKWILA CAPITAL PROJECT SUMMARY 2013 to 2018 PROJECT: 40 -42 Ave South (S 160 St S 131 PL) Project No. 99410303 DESCRIPTION: Design and construct street improvements, drainage, undergrounding, and driveway adjustments. JUSTIFICATION: Provide pedestrian and vehicle safety, drainage, and neighborhood revitalization STATUS: (Phase III (SIC Blvd (154th) S 160 St) $3m, Design in 20 12, construction in 2014. Project No. 94 -RS03 Phase I (SIC Blvd (154) S 144 St) $3,796, Completed. Project No. 90 -RW15 Phase II (S 144 St S 139 St) $1,850, Completed. Project No. 94 -RS02 Phase IV (S 139 St S 131 PI) $1 m in beyond. Project No. 94 -RS01 MAINT. IMPACT: Reduce pavement, shoulder, and drainage work. COMMENT: Only Phase III is showing in active years. Design contract with CH2M Hill includes Surface Water's Gilliam Creek 42nd Ave S Culvert project (pg. 146). FINANCIAL Through Estimated tin 'snnn'cl 2n11 2n12 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 BEYOND TOTAL EXPENSES Phase IV Design 9 391 250 650 Land(R/W) 100 100 Const Mgmt. 400 560 960 Construction 2,400 3,800 6,200 TOTAL EXPENSES 1 91 3911 250 1 2,900 1 0 1 0 1 01 01 4,360 1 7,910 FUND SOURCES Awarded Grant 0 Proposed Grant 0 Motor Vehicle Tax 160 262 265 687 Mitigation Expected 0 City Oper. Revenue 9 231 (12) 2,635 0 0 0 0 4,360 7,223 TOTAL SOURCES 9 391 250 2,900 0 0 01 01 4,360 1 7,910 2013 2018 Capital Improvement Program 2 W 42nd Avenue S Funding Fact Sheet General Fund The general fund would be responsible for the entire $1,750,000 undergrounding costs. Local Improvement District A local improvement district could be formed for all Specially Benefitted parcels. In this case, the assumption is approximately 25 parcels would receive special benefit by the undergrounding. All parcels are zoned either for single family (LDR) or multi family (HDR). Assumptions All parcels share in bi Undergrounding cost LID Formation cost LID Bonding cost irden equally $1,750,000.00 Interest Rate 5% $105,000.00 Amortization 15 years $140,000.00 Parcels 25 $1,995,000.00 LID Cost Per Parcel $115,321.72 (estimate) LID Cost Per Parcel Per Year $7,688.11 City -wide Rate basing If an LID is formed to underground the overhead utilities, a surcharge rate is added to all electrical bills w Assumptions Residential Meters Commercial Meters Industrial Meters Large General Service Meters Annual amoritized cost Cost per kilowatt hour Average residential Total residential Average non residential Total non residential 4,748 804 16 64 $124,167 $0.00021556 Interest Rate Amortization 2013 MWH Average kWh cost 18,500 kWh per year 87,838 MWH per year 552,249 kWh per year 488,188 MWH per year Average Annual Costs Per Meter Total Residential $3.99 $18,934 Commercial $119.04 $105,233 5% 25 years 576,026 (projected) $0.06 6/11/12 i 50 Transportation Committee Minutes October 1, 2012 Page 2 B. Utility Undergrounding: 42 Avenue South Phase III This item was originally heard by the Transportation Committee in January (see Transportation Committee minutes dated January 17, 2012), when staff sought approval to award a consultant contract for design of 42nd Avenue South Phase III. Although the project design scope did not include undergrounding, the consultant analyzed the cost of conversion to undergrounding. Staff is returning to Committee with the results of this analysis, and seeking direction from Council whether or not a project specific agreement with Seattle City Light should be negotiated stipulating undergrounding costs which would be rate -based to the customer. The estimated costs to design undergrounding are $72,700, and the actual undergrounding is estimated to cost $1.75 million. This would bring the project total to $5.48 million as compared to $3.73 million without undergrounding. Staff gave an overview of options that could pay for the undergrounding, including: general fund monies, a local improvement district, or utility rate basing. Discussion ensued among the Committee Members about undergrounding utilities and the current City policy for such. In the end, the Committee determined that in consideration of all the factors of this specific project, including costs and undergrounding in the neighboring jurisdiction, it would not be prudent to underground utilities on this project. They also conveyed the importance of having full Council review the current undergrounding policies for the City in order to determine policy applicability i today's economic times. The Committee recognizes two separate issues and recommends the following: Recommends not undergrounding utilities on Phase III of the 42 n Avenue South Project Recommends conducting full Council review of current City undergrounding policies, and update and /or modify as appropriate Although the Committee is urging Council review of the current utility undergrounding policies, a full policy discussion does not necessarily need to take place at the October 8 COW. The discussion could take place as part a 2013 Council work item /plan. SEE SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS BULLETED ABOVE. FORWARD TO OCTOBER 8 COW FOR DISCUSSION. III. SCATBd Due to a scheduled Executive Session beginning at 6:30 p.m., the Committee did not have time to discuss SCATBd. INFORMATION ONLY. IV. MISCELLANEOUS Meeting adjourned at 6:25 p.m. Next meeting: Monday, October 15, 2012 5:15 p.m., Conference Room #1 Committee Chair Approval Minutes by K.AM. Reviewed by GL. 51 52 COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Meeting Date Prepared b M or's review Council review 10/08/12 BG ITEM INFORMATION ITEMNO. HI M 4 Special 2.13. �l�J STAFF SPONSOR: BOB GIBERSON ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 10/08/12 AGENDA ITEM TITLE A resolution setting a public hearing date for a street vacation amendment. Frager Road Right -of -Way CATEGORY Discussion Mt g Date 10108/12 Motion Mtg Date Resolution Mtg Date 10/08112 Ordinance Mtg Date BidAward Mtg Date Publu Heann� Mtg Date 1115112 Other Mtg Date SPONSOR Council Mayor HR DCD Finance Fire IT P&R Police PW SPONSOR'S The Council is being asked to consider a resolution setting a public hearing date on SUMMARY November 5, 2012 for a proposed amendment to the street vacation Ordinance Number 2239, that vacated the old Frager Road right -of -way. We are asking the Council to discuss the item during the C.O.W. portion of the October 8 meeting and then adopt the resolution at the Special Meeting to follow that same evening. REVIEWED BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm. DATE: COMMITTEE CHAIR: RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR /ADMIN. Public Works COMMITTEE COST IMPACT FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $0 $0 $0 Fund Source: Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 10/08/12 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 10/08/12 Informational Memorandum dated October 5, 2012 Resolution Amendment map Legal Description Ordinance Nos. 2233, 2239, 2240 �l�J 54 City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Haggerton City Council FROM: Bob Giberson, Public Works Director DATE: October 5, 2012 SUBJECT: Tukwila South Development Street Vacation Amendment Frager Road Resolution Setting Public Hearing ISSUE Approve a Resolution setting a Public Hearing date for November 5, 2012 to consider amending the street vacation ordinance for the old Frager Road. BACKGROUND The Tukwila South Development Agreement (see section 4.11 of Ordinance No. 2233) set the stage for the vacation of the old Southcenter Parkway and Frager Road right -of -way. Ordinances Number 2239 (Frager Road) and 2240 Southcenter Parkway) provided authority and details for these two street vacations. DISCUSSION Ordinance Number 2239 inadvertently failed to address that the north line of the S 200 Street right -of -way was never officially established. The City desires to amend Ordinance 2239 to provide an official legal description of the north line of S 200 Street and. The first step in the process is a Resolution setting a Public Hearing date of November 5, 2012 to consider the proposed amendment. RECOMMENDATION Council is being asked to approve the Resolution which will set a date for the Public Hearing on November 5, 2012 and consider this item at the October 8, 2012 Committee of the Whole Meeting and Special Meeting to follow that same night. Attachments: Draft Resolution setting Public Hearing for 11/5/12 Amendment Map Legal Description Ordinance Nos. 2233, 2239, 2240 wA2012 info memos- councikst vac amndmnt- frager resolution setting hearing.docx 55 56 City of TUkwila Washington Resolution No. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, FIXING THE TIME FOR A PUBLIC HEARING FOR VACATION OF RIGHT -OF -WAY WITHIN THE CITY OF TUKWILA DEDICATED FOR STREET PURPOSES, GENERALLY DESCRIBED AS PORTIONS OF SOUTH 200TH STREET AND FRAGER ROAD. WHEREAS, on June 8, 2009, the City Council of the City of Tukwila passed Ordinance No. 2239, vacating Frager Road between the then existing southerly City limits of the City of Tukwila as the City limits crossed Frager Road and the north right -of- way line of South 200th Street at its point of intersection with said Frager Road; and WHEREAS, the City subsequently discovered that the north right -of -way line of South 200th Street at its point of intersection with Frager Road has never been officially established; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to establish the north right -of -way line of South 200th Street at its point of intersection with Frager Road and to amend Ordinance No. 2239 to reflect this precise right of way line; and WHEREAS, a legal description of the area to be vacated was not included in Ordinance No. 2239 and the City wishes to clearly specify the area that is subject to vacation by inclusion of a detailed legal description; and WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 35.79.010, a public hearing on the amended street vacation must be set by resolution; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. A public hearing regarding the vacation of portions of South 200th Street and Frager Road, more particularly described on the attached map and legal description, shall be held before the Tukwila City Council in the City Council Chambers at Tukwila City Hall, 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, Washington, on November 5, 2012, which is not less than 20, nor more than 60 days from the date of passage of W: \Word Processing \Resolutions \Public hearing for vacation of ROW at S 200th Frager Rd 10 -4 -12 RT:bjs Page 1 of 2 57 this resolution, at which time all persons interested in said right -of -way vacation are invited to appear and be heard. Section 2. The City Clerk is directed to post written notice of pendency of the public hearing in three public places in the City of Tukwila and in one additional conspicuous place on the right -of -way sought to be vacated at least 20 days prior to the date set for the public hearing. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Special Meeting thereof this day of 2012. ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Verna Seal, Council President Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Resolution Number: Shelley M. Kerslake, City Attorney Attachments: Map and Legal Description W: \Word Processing \Resolutions \Public hearing for vacation of ROW at S 200th Frager Rd 10 -4 -12 RT:bjs Page 2 of 2 i frager road vacation amendment map proposed off channel habitat area LEGAL DESCRIPTION SOUTH 200 STREET RIGHT OF WAY LINE THOSE PORTIONS OF SOUTH 2O0 STREET (PER DEED RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NO. 9705281237) AND FRAGER ROAD (PER DEED RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NO. 9705281238) LYING NORTH OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LINE: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 22 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST OF THE W. M., KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; THENCE SOUTH 89° 16'29 "EAST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER A DISTANCE OF 208.20 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00° 43'31 "EAST 33.00 FEET TO THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY MARGIN OF PRESENT SOUTH 200" STREET AND THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE AFOREMENTIONED LINE; THENCE LEAVING SAID RIGHT OF WAY MARGIN SOUTH 83 41'05 "EAST 505.88 FEET; THENCE NORTH 02 13'35 "EAST 20.21 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 86 36'33 "EAST 181.67 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89 48'04 "EAST 135.96 FEET; THENCE NORTH 81 08'48 "EAST 184.31 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE EASTERLY LINE OF THE WESTERLY LEG OF THAT CERTAIN RIGHT OF WAY MARGIN FOR SOUTH 200" STREET AS DESCRIBED IN DEED RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NO. 9705281237, ALSO BEING THE TERMINUS OF THIS LINE. .1 l o;'_ \2, mil l; 1901 City of Tukwila Washington Ordinance No. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING BY REFERENCE A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF TUKWILA AND LA PIANTA LLC FOR THE TUKWILA SOUTH DEVELOPMENT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the "Tukwila South Project" comprises approximately 512 acres of real property, and La Pianta LLC owns or controls approximately 503 of those acres, which is known as the "Tukwila South Property," generally located between the boundaries of South 178th Street /South 180th Street on the north; South 204th Street on the south; Orillia Road and Interstate 5 on the west; and the Green River on the east; and WHEREAS, the Tukwila South Property is located within an Urban Growth Area and is appropriate for urban development pursuant to the Growth Management Act and the City's adopted Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, La Pianta intends to develop the Tukwila South Property consistent with the Tukwila South Master Plan, which envisions the creation of a major new employment and housing base on the Tukwila South Property; and WHEREAS, the City Council accordingly desires to enter into a Development Agreement with La Pianta LLC for the Tukwila South development; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held for this Development Agreement on May 18, 2009; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Development Agreement Adopted. The City of Tukwila hereby adopts the "Development Agreement by and between the City of Tukwila and La Pianta LLC, for the Tukwila South Development," a copy of which is attached hereto as "Exhibit A" and by this reference fully incorporated herein. Section 2. 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 3. 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 CONCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Special Meeting thereof this Tfl day of l 2009. ATTEST/ AUTHENTICATED: 1�� Ha ayor Christy O'Fla erty, CMC, City rk Filed with the City Clerk: APPROVED AS TO' BY: Passed by the City Council: Published: Effective Date: Office of the Ci z or ey Ordinance Number: .1_) Attachment: Exhibit A Development Agreement WAWord Processing\ Ord inances\Tukwila South Development Agreement.doc LV:ksn 06/05/2009 Page 1 of 1. 61 62 J sy rs 0 City of Tukwila Washington C Ordinance No. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, VACATING PORTIONS OF THE EXISTING FRAGER ROAD RIGHT -OF -WAY FROM APPROXIMATELY EXISTING CITY LIMITS, AS OF THE DATE OF ORDINANCE ADOPTION, TO SOUTH 200TH STREET, FOR THE TUKWILA SOUTH PROJECT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the "Tukwila South Project" comprises approximately 512 acres of real property, and La Pianta LLC owns or controls approximately 503 of those acres, which is known as the "Tukwila South Property," generally located between the boundaries of South 178th Street /South 180th Street on the north; South 204 Street on the south; Orillia Road and Interstate 5 on the west; and the Green River on the east; and WHEREAS, the Tukwila South Property is located within an Urban Growth Area and is appropriate for urban development pursuant to the Growth Management Act, and the City's adopted Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, La Pianta intends to develop the Tukwila South Project consistent with the Tukwila South Master Plan, which envisions the creation of a major new employment and housing base on the Tukwila South Property; and WHEREAS, the City Council accordingly entered into a Development Agreement with La Pianta LLC for the Tukwila South Project by adopting Ordinance No. 2 233 and WHEREAS, the Development Agreement calls for an extension of Southcenter Parkway in a new alignment to function as the major transportation arterial through the site; and WHEREAS, on June 1, 2009, following required public notification, the City Council conducted a public hearing on the matter and at the conclusion of such hearing determined the aforementioned right -of -way should be vacated; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Findings and Conclusions. The City Council makes the following findings and conclusions: Upon completion of the extension of Southcenter Parkway in a new alignment along the west edge of the valley floor as described in the Development Agreement, portions of Frager Road from approximately existing City limits as of the adoption of this ordinance to South 200th Street will not be needed for right -of -way and public vehicular travel as part of the City's street system and there is no remaining public use or benefit to these portions of Southcenter Parkway following the dedication of the right -of -way necessary for the new Southcenter Parkway alignment. Section 2. Street Vacated. After making the above findings regarding the proposed street vacation, the City Council finds that the easement for public vehicular travel on W:\Word Processing \OrdmancesUukwila South Frager Road Strnct Vacation.dor. SV ksn 05128/2009 Page 1 of 2 63 Frager Road from approximately existing City limits, as of the date of ordinance adoption, to South 200a' Street, as the right -of -way is more particularly described in Exhibit A, and depicted on the map attached as Exhibit B, shall be vacated upon the conditions set forth herein. Section 3. Consideration. The consideration for this vacation is La Pianta LLC's obligations to the City in the Development Agreement. Section 4. Conditions Precedent. The following conditions shall be met prior to vacation of portions of Frager Road right -of -way: 1. La Pianta LLC shall dedicate all right -of -way necessary for the realignment and construction of relocated Southcenter Parkway along the east edge of the valley as described in the Tukwila South Project Development Agreement adopted by City Council by Ordinance No. 2233 2. The construction of the relocated Southcenter Parkway in the new alignment shall be complete as described in the Tukwila South Project Development Agreement adopted by the City Council by Ordinance No. 7233 3. La Pianta LLC has delivered to escrow the deed for the donation of land for the Fire Station as described in the Tukwila South Project Development Agreement adopted by the City Council by Ordinance No. 2233 Section 5. 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 6. Effective Date. If La Pianta, LLC provides proof of compliance with all conditions precedent to this vacation, the street vacation shall be effective. Otherwise, this street vacation shall be null and void. After receipt of such proof, the City Clerk is hereby directed to record a copy of this ordinance. 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 COUN I L OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, Y at a Special Meeting thereof this 114 day of =f,' L 1 2009. ATTEST/ AUTHENTICATED: f YAJ--4? Christy O'Fla rty, CMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS FO M BY: =egal Attachment: Description Exhibit B Map JirryF�/aggertzVor Filed with the City Clerk:_ Passed by the City Council: -t� Published: r 9 Effective Date: Ordinance Nu mber: t WAWord Processing \Ordinances \Tuktivila South Prager Road Street Vacation.doe 64 SV:ksn 06/05/2009 Page 2 of 2 EXHIBIT A VACATED PORTION OF FRAGER ROAD That portion of Frager Road (also appearing of record as Southcenter Parkway and also appearing of record as 57 Avenue South) located in King County, Washington and lying between the two following described lines A and B: LINE A: The southerly city limits of the City of Tukwila as said city limits cross Frager Road. LINE B: The north right -of -way line of South 200 Street in King County, Washington, at its point of intersection with said Frager Road. W: \Word Processing \Ordinanceffukwila South Frager Road Street Vac Exhibit A.doc LV:ksn 05/21/2009 Page 1 of 1 M, TUKwo -A eourri PRO .,ECT TUKWILA SOUTH PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Exhibit B FRA 3ER ROAD RIC fT OF WAY VACATION TuKw -0. KAYO couNTY WABMNdTON. 1 City of Tukwila Washington Ordinance No. q c^ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, VACATING PORTIONS OF THE EXISTING SOUTHCENTER PARKWAY RIGHT -OF -WAY FROM APPROXIMATELY SOUTH 180th STREET TO EXISTING CITY LIMITS, AS OF THE DATE OF ORDINANCE ADOPTION, FOR THE TUKWILA SOUTH PROJECT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the "Tukwila South Project" comprises approximately 512 acres of real property, and La Pianta LLC owns or controls approximately 503 of those acres, which is known as the "Tukwila South Property" generally located between the boundaries of South 178th Street /South 180f Street on the north; South 204f Street on the south; Orillia Road and Interstate 5 on the west; and the Green River on the east; and WHEREAS, the Tukwila South Property is located within an Urban Growth Area and is appropriate for urban development pursuant to the Growth Management Act, and the City's adopted Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, La Pianta intends to develop the Tukwila South Project consistent with the Tukwila South Master Plan, which envisions the creation of a major new employment and housing base on the Tukwila South Property; and WHEREAS, the City Council accordingly entered into a Development Agreement with La Pianta LLC for the Tukwila South Project by adopting Ordinance No. 2233 and WHEREAS, the Development Agreement calls for an extension of Southcenter Parkway in a new alignment to function as the major transportation arterial through the site; and WHEREAS, on June 1, 2009, following required public notification, the City Council conducted a public hearing on the matter, and at the conclusion of such hearing determined that the aforementioned right -of -way should be vacated. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Findings and Conclusions. The City Council makes the following findings and conclusions: Upon completion of the extension of Southcenter Parkway in a new alignment along the west edge of the valley floor as described in the Development Agreement, portions of Southcenter Parkway from approximately South 180th Street to the existing City limits will not be needed for right -of -way and public vehicular travel as part of the City's street system and there is no remaining public use or benefit to these portions of Southcenter Parkway following the dedication of the right -of -way necessary for the new Southcenter Parkway alignment. W `,Word 1 \0rdinances\Tukwi1a South Southcenter Parkway Street Vacation.doc IN ksn 05/28/2009 Page 1 of 2 67 Section 2. Street Vacated. After making the above findings regarding the proposed street vacation, the City Council finds that the easement for public vehicular travel on Southcenter Parkway from approximately South 180 Street to the existing City limits, as the right -of -way is more particularly described in Exhibit A, and depicted on the map attached as Exhibit B, shall be vacated upon the conditions set forth herein. Section 3. Consideration. The consideration for this vacation is La Pianta LLC's obligations to the City in the Development Agreement. Section 4. Conditions Precedent. The following conditions shall be met prior to vacation of portions of Southcenter Parkway right -of -way: 1. La Pianta LLC shall dedicate all right -of -way necessary for the realignment and construction of relocated Southcenter Parkway along the east edge of the valley as described in the Tukwila South Project Development Agreement adopted by City Council by Ordinance No. 2. The construction of the relocated Southcenter Parkway in the new alignment shall be complete as described in the Tukwila South Project Development Agreement adopted by the City Council by Ordinance No. 2233 Section 5. 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 6. Effective Date. If La Pianta, LLC provides proof of compliance with all conditions precedent to this vacation, the street vacation shall be effective. Otherwise, this street vacation shall be null and void. After receipt of such proof, the City Clerk is hereby directed to record a copy of this ordinance. 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 COUN IL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Special Meeting thereof this 7N day of 2009. �Xf Hagger ayor Filed with the City Clerk: L y APPROVED AS ORM Y: Passed by the City Council: Published: ,_C, Effective Date: Offic ity rney Ordinance Nu mber: Attachment: xhibit A Legal Description Exhibit B Map ATTEST/ AUTHENTICATED: C4� Christy O'Flahehf, CMC, City Clerk W: \Word Processing \Ordinances \Tukw la South Southcenter Parkway Street Vacation.doc 68 LV:ksn 06/052009 Page 2 of 2 EXHIBIT A VACATED PORTION OF SOUTHCENTER PARKWAY Parcel 1: That portion of Southcenter Parkway (also appearing of record as Frager Road and also appearing of record as 57 Avenue South) located in King County, Washington and lying between the two following described lines A and B: LINE A: Beginning at the northwest corner of the southwest '/4 of the northeast '/4 of section 35, township 23 north, range 4 east, W.M.; Thence south 88 °54'46" east along the north line of said subdivision, 449.30 feet; Thence south 01'05 west 36.0 feet to the southerly margin of south 180 street; Thence continuing south 01'05'14" west 365.78 feet; Thence north 88 °54'46" west 424.89 feet; Thence south 86 °58'00" west 103.76 feet; Thence south 58 °20'50" west 74.23 feet to the easterly margin of said Southcenter Parkway and the true point of beginning; Thence proceeding northwesterly, at right angles to said easterly margin of said Southcenter Parkway, to the westerly margin of said Southcenter Parkway and the terminus of Line A. LINE B: The southerly city limits of the City of Tukwila as said city limits cross said Southcenter Parkway. Parcel 2: THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M., DESCRIBED AS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE NORTH 87 0 50'57" WEST, 243.15 FEET; THENCE.NORTH 02 °09'03" EAST 248.09 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 78 °00'27" EAST 38.15 FEET TO THE WESTERLY MARGIN OF SOUTH CENTER PARKWAY, AS CONVEYED BY DEED RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NO. 6343848; THENCE SOUTH 11 0 59'33" EAST 164.65 FEET; THENCE ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 537.14 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 00 °08'00 AN ARC DISTANCE OF 1.25 FEET; THENCE NORTH 24 °56'33" WEST 170.23 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF THE EAST HALF OF P. J. MUSIEL ROAD ABUTTING THE WEST LINE OF THE PROPERTY ABOVE DESCRIBED, AND BOUNDED ON THE WEST BY THAT PORTION VACATED UNDER CITY OF TUKWILA VACATION ORDINANCE NO. 626, ON THE SOUTH BY THE NORTH MARGIN OF THE NEW ALIGNMENT OF P. J. MUSIEL COUNTY ROAD AND ITS EXTENSION EASTERLY AND NORTHERLY (ALONG THE 50 FOOT RADIUS CURVE) TO THE INTERSECTION WITH THE WEST MARGIN OF SOUTH CENTER PARKWAY, AS CONVEYED BY DEED RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NO. 6343848, AND ON THE NORTH BY THE SOUTHWESTERLY EXTENSION OF THE NORTH LINE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED ABOVE; SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. W: \Word Processing \ordinanccffuk wily South Southcenter Parkway Street Vac Exhibit A.doc LV:ksn 05/28/2009 Pagel of 1 M pe TX GouTl Pn E TUKWILA SOUTH PROJCT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Exhibit B SOU NT THCEER PARKWAY RIGHT OF WAY VACATION n MI-A, kiNa c mUmTr. WACJ- rxjr M [L COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Initials Meetin Date Prepared b Ma is review Council review r 10/08/12 BG ITEM INFORMATION ITEM NO. 4.E. STAFF SPONSOR: BOB GIBERSON ORIGINAL AGF_NDA DATE: 10/08/12 AGENDA ITEM TITLE Facilities Plan CATEGORY Discussion Mt g Date 10/08/12 Motion Mtg Date Resolution Mtg Date Ordinance Mtg Date BidAward Mtg Date Puhhc Hearing Mtg Date [:]Other Mtg Date SPONSOR Council Mayor HR DCD Finance Fire IT P&R Police PWI SPONSOR'S Council is being asked to review and submit recommendations to the draft Facilities Plan. SUMMARY Included in the draft Facilities Plan is a funding option for a Twelve -Year Plan that outlines replacement and retrofit upgrades in two phases over 12 years. The start of the Twelve Year Funding Plan has been included in the Proposed 2013 -2014 Biennial Budget, which is also currently under review by Council. At the request of the FS Committee, this is being presented to the Council prior to the upcoming budget work sessions as information only. REVIEWED BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm. DATE: 10/02/12 COMMITTEE CHAIR: DE'SEAN QUINN RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR/ADMIN. Public Works COMMITTEE Unanimous approval; Forward to Committee of the Whole COST IMPACT FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Fund Source: 302 FACILITIES (PAGE 73 74, PROPOSED 2013 CIP) Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 10/08/12 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 10/08/12 Informational Memorandum dated September 28, 2012 Facilities Plan 2008 Seismic Study binder provided under separate cover Minutes from the Finance and Safety Committee meeting of 10/02/12 72 City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Haggerton Finance and Safety Committee FROM: Bob Giberson, Public Works Director DATE: September 28, 2012 SUBJECT: Facilities Plan Project No. 91230201 ISSUE The draft 2013 -2018 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) includes the construction of two replacement City facilities to provide a safe working environment for police, courts, city staff and other first responders among its new projects. The current City facilities for police, fire and other first responders have been identified as having serious seismic issues and are in danger of collapse during a major earthquake. Staff is seeking Finance Safety Committee review, input, and recommendation on a draft Facilities Plan which complements the facilities projects as outlined in the draft CIP. The Facilities Plan summarizes the conditions of existing facilities, future facility needs, funding options, and cost estimates for retrofit and /or replacements of existing facilities. BACKGROUND Historically, the City has budgeted for new or replacement facilities through the 303 Fund (General Government Improvements) on a case -by -case basis, without the use or guidance of a comprehensive Facilities Plan. In 2008, Reid Middleton conducted an in -depth seismic evaluation and rapid visual screening which was presented to the Finance Safety Committee and subsequently the Committee of the Whole in September 2008. Based on the information received at that time, Council requested that staff return to the Finance Safety Committee with a recommendation on a program that would entail all costs associated with the project including timelines and funding options. Shortly after this time, the City experienced significant budgetary shortfalls and cutbacks, which affected the opportunity to move forward with what is now referred to as the Facilities Plan. The Reid Middleton seismic evaluation revealed that 10 of 11 essential post earthquake City facilities failed seismic evaluation for immediate occupancy. This means that these 10 facilities would not be habitable, for customers or employees, after a substantial earthquake. Essential services performed in these buildings would not be provided during an incident or the recovery period following. Repairs for habitability are anticipated to take from 3 -12 months. The Reid Middleton evaluation laid the groundwork for identifying the need for the retrofitting of eight (8) buildings and replacement of two (2). However, it did not take into consideration system improvements due to aging facilities, provisions to provide additional capacity, or the efficiency and delivery of City services. With these considerations, justifying facility replacement over retrofit is recommended when the cost of the retrofit exceeds half the cost of replacing the building facility. WA2012 Info Memos- CouncillBuilding Facilities Plan bg 9 2812 gl KAMA= 73 INFORMATIONAL MEMO: Facilities Plan Page 2 Recognizing the need to prepare to retrofit and /or replace these facilities as soon as possible, in early 2010 City Administration approved an in -house effort utilizing Public Works and Community Development staff to analyze existing and proposed facilities resulting in the development of a comprehensive long -term Facilities Plan, including a financial plan. The intent of the Facilities Plan is to recognize the current safety, operational, and maintenance deficiencies of existing City buildings, and provide a means by which the City provide adequate facilities for the long -range future of the City. DISCUSSION The draft Facilities Plan includes four (4) sections of evaluation: existing conditions, future facility needs, options to address conditions and needs, and funding options. These sections are summarized below. Section 1: Existing Conditions Police, Court and other City employees are currently housed in the City Hall and the 6300 Building. These are aging buildings that are experiencing repetitive system failures. Repair costs and energy expenses are constantly increasing. These buildings are typically under severe stress during peak heating and cooling periods. The heating /cooling systems are antiquated and no longer have replacement parts available. The Minkler and George Long Shops are separate maintenance and operations facilities that are undersized for the current service and program workloads, which include essential City functions such as water, sewer, surface water, streets, signals, fleet, and facilities. The City's fire stations are undersized, cramped, and not structurally or seismically safe. The City does not have adequate emergency operations center, which is a hindrance to recovery in an emergency. NOTE: The Golf /Parks Maintenance Building, Foster Clubhouse, and Fire Station 53 were not included in the 2008 Seismic Program because they were constructed under the most recent seismic code and are considered to be structurally and seismically safe. Section 2: Future Facility Needs A new City Hall /Community Justice Center will replace the existing City Hall and 6300 Building with improved safety and efficiency for Police, Court and other City staff. The size and location of the facility will be determined as part of the design process. A combined City Shops facility (currently Minkler and George Longs Shops in separate locations) will improve safety and efficiency, and eliminate a leased record storage space for the City Clerk's Office. It will also allow for storage and handling of vactor waste and Police Department evidence storage (including automobile storage). The location of the new City Shops facility will be part of the initial design process. The sale of the Minkler and George Long Shops, in addition to old Fire Station 53 (currently used for police evidence storage) will significantly offset the cost of the new facility. The proposed 2013 -2018 CIP includes an unfunded relocation of Fire Station 51, that will be justified by future growth in the Tukwila South and Southcenter areas. This will trigger the relocation of Fire Station 52, which is also an unfunded CIP project. The long -range Facility Plan includes replacement of three of the four current fire station once it is determined the appropriate locations, size and the service area and model for the City. Section 3: Options for Addressing Conditions and Needs The Facilities Plan outlines the following three (3) options for responding to and addressing the existing conditions and future needs of City facilities: 74 9/27/12 2:58 PM INFORMATIONAL MEMO: Facilities Plan Page 3 Status Quo This is a basic, do- nothing approach that leaves City facilities in an as -is state. It is an option that may appear to have no immediate or long -term costs for the City; however, this option leads to significant increases in maintenance and energy costs. This option leaves the City in jeopardy and does not address the continuity of City operations when a disaster strikes. 2. Seismic and Functional Upgrades Only This option provides for seismic, functional, and energy upgrades to prevent structural collapse of City facilities. It does not provide room for increased service capacity or future growth, and does not ensure immediate occupancy post disaster. 3. Twelve -Year Plan This option outlines replacement and retrofit upgrades to City facilities in two phases over a 12 -year period. Annual costs are estimated to be between $7 -8 million. Section 4: Funding for Future Facilities Up to the present time, City funding has not been allocated to provide for any major facility upgrade, renovation, or replacement. Additionally, current and future City funds alone are not adequate to fund new and /or retrofitted facilities. However, staff has identified funding considerations that make implementation of a Facilities Plan over a two -phase 12 -year period possible. Options include: utilization of the revenue repayment to the City from Klickitat LID No. 33; rates associated with enterprise funds; and issuing bonds (sufficient debt capacity has been validated by the Finance Department). The draft Facilities Plan demonstrates how the bonds will be paid for in part by the LID repayment, and the energy and maintenance savings. RECOMMENDATION Although this item is currently presented as information only to the Finance Safety Committee, as mentioned earlier staff, is seeking Committee confirmation of the need for a Facilities Plan, and review, input, and recommendation on a draft Facilities Plan. Staff will return to Committee for additional review after incorporating comments and recommendations of the Committee. Staff is recommending the Council eventually consider Option 3 Twelve -Year Plan under Section 3 above (see page 12 of the Facilities Plan for details). This option allows for funding to be assembled over six (6) consecutive biennial budgets, and for actual funding and workload to be spread out over twelve years. The twelve -year option is realistic and achievable, as described in the Facilities Plan, and shown in the preliminary proposed budget. ATTACHMENTS Facilities Plan (without appendices) The following documents were referenced in the memo, and due to document size, will only be made available upon request: 2008 Seismic Study Facilities Plan (with appendices) 9/27/12 75 2:58 PM 76 facilities plan september 2012 W Contents Page EXECUTIVESUMMARY 2 Introduction.................................................................................... 3 AboutThis Plan 3 Section 1: Existing Facilities Condition 5 Section 2: Future Facility Needs 8 Section 3: Future Facility Options .............................11 Section 4: Funding for Future Facilities .............................15 Appendices Appendix A: Seismic Study Executive Summary Appendix B: Architectural Assessment Summary Appendix C: Cost Estimates Appendix D: Floor Plans Appendix E: Plan Schedule and Articles w JA Scope of Report This Facilities Plan is a continuation of the 2008 Seismic Program by Reid Middleton and the subsequent Architectural Assessment by Rice Fergus Miller. This report summarizes existing facilities condition, future facility needs, future facility options, future facility funding options, and cost estimates for retrofits and replacements. Summary of Findings and Recommendation In general, most city -owned building facilities need significant safety upgrades or replacement. Most City buildings except the Community Center house either first responders to emergency events (i.e., police, fire, and public works departments) or house operations critical to City disaster recovery such as building permits and human services, etc. The Community Center may house shelter- related staging, however, depending on the magnitude and location of an earthquake, the Community Center may not withstand a substantial earthquake if seismic retrofits are not accomplished. Staff recommends the 12 -Year Funding Option, spreading out the expenditures and budget impacts over time. This financial plan for two six -year plans is the result of careful analysis on what the City can afford. The fire station projects are in the 2 nd S i x year plan to provide time to address many unknown issues, such as moving headquarters Fire Station 51 into Tukwila South as a result of expected growth, the future of fires services, and a potential to go out to the voters for an emergency services facility levy. The influx of LID No. 33 repayment ($8.4 million) and surplus property revenue ($6 million) will greatly reduce the initial budget impacts. Summary of Trends In general, maintenance items are being deferred to the point that soon certain building elements cannot be repaired they will have to replaced (roofs, heating /cooling systems, etc.). There is a backlog of over $10 million in deferred maintenance and minor repairs (including HVAC upgrades, backup power, energy efficiency upgrades, carpet, paint, and structural repairs). Also, this Facilities Plan represents approximately $97 million worth of building retrofits and replacements represents in necessary safety improvement work. Next Steps The first step is to take the Facilities Plan to Committee and Council. Second, the funding of the Facilities Plan must be included into the Financial Planning Model and Capital Improvement Program. Third, the financial mechanism to stage the design and construction of the proposed retrofits and /or replacements must be approved. Plan Goals Address safety concerns of all City buildings Resolve the future status of all City buildings Achieve a long -range sustainable building facility investment strategy Balance energy efficiencies, surplus properties, deferred maintenance backlog and emerging deficiencies with retrofits and replacements -2- 81 Introduction In 2008, the City of Tukwila completed a Seismic Study of selected city facilities. The Study was completed by structural engineers Reid Middleton, Inc. This Facilities Plan includes various summary documents from the Seismic Study, including recommendations for upgrades and /or replacement, depending on the severity of the seismic restraint deficiencies. As a related task, the architectural firm of Rice Fergus Miller completed an Architectural Assessment for Seismic Program, for the same selected city facilities. About This Facilities Plan Content This document provides a consolidated list of existing city facilities, facility conditions, and future facility needs. In addition, the Facilities Plan addresses current, mid -range and future funding needs to address repairs, upgrades and replacements of city facilities. For the purpose of this plan, all references to facilities refers only to building facilities not to the broader reference that refers to all capital facilities which includes water, sewer, storm drains, roads, bridges and parks. Several facilities were not included in the above mentioned Seismic Study. Facilities not evaluated included: Golf/Parks Maintenance Building, Foster Golf Clubhouse, and Fire Station 53. These three buildings are relatively new facilities and were designed and constructed to the current seismic code. However, Public Works Facilities division does have a list of minor improvements requiring attention for these facilities, separate from any proposed seismic retrofits. -3- 82 SECTION 1 Condition of Existing Facilities -4- 83 Section 1: Existing Facilities Condition The 2008 Seismic Study (see Appendix A for the Executive Summary of the Seismic Study) recommends numerous upgrades and retrofits to existing City facilities, and in some cases replacement of City facilities where seismic and other upgrades approach the cost of a new facility. Immediate Occupancy (10) is a primary assumption of the 2008 Seismic Study. 10 provides for minimal downtime of buildings which is 1 day or less. Other categories of Performance Based Earthquake Engineering (PBEE) include Life Safety (LS) with up to 30 days of downtime, Collapse Prevention (CP) with up to 180 days of downtime, and Collapse which results in debris removal and potentially reconstruction. Refer to Appendix C of the Seismic Study for a more in- depth discussion of PBEE. The 2008 Seismic Study began with the Rapid Visual Screening Procedure revealed that 10 of 11 essential post earthquake City facilities failed seismic evaluation for immediate occupancy. This means that these 10 facilities would not be habitable, for customers or employees, after a substantial earthquake. Essential services performed in these buildings would not be provided during an incident or the recovery period following. Repairs to restore habitability are anticipated to take from 3 -12 months. Figure A -1 below shows the relative impacts of not having facilities that provide for immediate occupancy. -s- 84 There are many competing demands for not only minor repairs, but also for major improvements and upgrades. The annual Facility Improvements project in the CIP (303 fund) was originally intended for minor facility repairs and upgrades that are above and beyond in -house facility maintenance staff capabilities. The backlog of Key Considerations Safety Seismic resistance Structural condition Architectural assessment minor repairs and upgrades now goes back almost twenty years. This fund simply cannot keep up with the demand. Previously, the 303 fund was put on hold pending budget and facility decisions. However, after being on hold for three years, numerous minor projects were accomplished in 2012. The goal is to attempt not to get any further behind on critical repairs and upgrades that are beyond our facilities maintenance staff abilities and legal project limits. In general, existing facilities have five primary issues that need to be addressed: 1. Seismic Resistance (Safety) The 2008 Seismic Study (see Appendix A for the Executive Summary) recommends numerous upgrades and retrofits to existing City facilities, and in some cases replacements of City facilities where seismic and other upgrades approach the cost of a new facility. 2. Building System Failures City Hall and the 6300 Building are examples of aging buildings that have experienced 1-1 system failures, including HVAC and glazing. The City Hall's HVAC system has had several failures and an inability to keep up with peak cooling and heating demands. The 6300 Building's HVAC system has gotten to the point where heating and cooling units need to be replaced, but the systems are being repaired on a weekly or monthly basis instead. Upgrading the units at the 6300 Building would also require a roof replacement, which increases the price exponentially. 3. High Energy Consumption Most of the older city buildings could save thousands of dollars per year in energy savings with a short payback period for new windows and heating and cooling systems. 4. High Cost to Fix Deficiencies The 6300 Building is an example of complicated HVAC deficiencies with a high cost to fix, similar to City Hall. 5. Inefficient Operations The Police Department, for example, has staff split between City Hall lower level and the 2nd floor in the 6300 Building. Public Works shops are operating maintenance and operations out of two separate undersized buildings and yards (Minkler and George Long Shops). City Hall staff deal with an inefficient front counter, lack of working and storage space and a building that is not comfortable to work in. -6- 85 SECTION 2 Future Facility Needs 86 Section 2: Future Facility Needs In addition to the serious seismic /safety concerns, city facilities suffer from poor security, lack of energy efficiency, lack of space, poorly utilized or poorly designed spaces, lack of storage and wasted space. Functional storage is minimal and nearly non existent with little opportunity to expand into extra spaces. Surplus from all departments is removed to Facilities Department sites for disposal, storage or reclaiming at a later date. Many of these items are stored in less than adequate environments, which adds to the degradation of furnishings or other articles affecting value and useful life. Records Storalle Center The current records storage center is housed in a leased 6,651 square feet warehouse space on East Marginal Way S. Lighting and space currently meet needs for the City Clerk and Police Department. The lease was signed April 6, 2009 for a 5 -year period (the lease expires in 2014). The amount budgeted to cover the lease is $96,000 (budgeted in PW Facilities Maintenance). Police Department Evidence Storalle Police evidence storage is currently stored in 5 locations; the vault located in the PD storage space off of the sally port, the evidence annex located at 12026 42 Ave S (old fire station No. 53), the fenced yard located at the west side of the George Long Shops, and the Minkler Shops. The Police Department needs sufficient space to house all critical vehicle evidence storage all in one location for efficient operations. Public Works Shops The George Long and Minkler Shops need to be expanded and consolidated on a site that is large enough to house all operations and storage. Records and Evidence Storage could be incorporated into the Public Works City Maintenance facility design. The City Maintenance Facility will also need to accommodate vactor waste storage, staging, and treatment to remain in compliance with federal mandates. 6300 Building City departments in the 6300 Building lacking the most space are DCD, Public Works, and IT. The IT Department would need at least 1,000 sq. ft. minimum additional space for staging new and /or recycled computer equipment. Additionally, office space for DCD, IT, and Public Works is cramped or poorly configured and should be expanded. Both DCD and Public Works lack the kind of areas needed for viewing large plan sets, maps, and storage of critical files. City Hall Campus /Community Justice Center The current front counter layout does not allow for efficient and focused customer service. Municipal Court have files and vital records that cannot be stored in the City's archives. The City Clerk has essential file needs as well as the Mayor's office and Finance. The estimate is approximately 2,000 sq. ft. for both archival purposes and office needs for City Hall's first floor. -s- 87 The Police Department patrol, dispatch and evidence staff are also over crowded in the lower level of City Hall. In general, there needs to be a substantial upgrade to City Hall including old outdated cubicle systems, undersized and antiquated HVAC system, insufficient electrical and communication conduits and outlets and poor space utilization. Fire Stations The Fire Department needs about 40,000 to 50,000 square feet to fully accommodate operations. The 2008 Fire Study analyzed the relocation of Headquarters Fire Station 51 and recommended that an additional 27,000 square feet is needed to meet requirements. The proposed Fire Station in Tukwila South would bring the existing Fire Station 51 (currently 15,000 sq. ft.) to a 42,000 square foot station. Tukwila Community Center The Community Center suffers from lack of storage space for the various programs as well as Parks and .Recreation administrative staff. -9- 88 Section 3 Future Facility Options 10- 89 Section 3: Future Facility Options A number of facility needs should be addressed and funded. The options available to the City are: OPTION 1— Status Quo This option would have significant increased maintenance costs to keep operating. However, the long term cost impact of doing nothing will have a devastating effect on the City budget. For example, if a 6.7 magnitude quake occurred on the Seattle Fault (e.g. the "Seattle Fault Scenario' studied by SERI: http:// www .eeri.org/pro1ects /earthcfuake- scenarios /seattle- fault scenario many of the buildings owned by the City of Tukwila would either collapse or be rendered useless. Further, the cost of maintaining these buildings and increasing energy bills would have helped pay for the new facility. OPTION 2 Seismic and Functional Upgrades Only This option would not construct any new facilities, but would ensure there is no structural collapse. City Hall and the 6300 Building would receive major seismic, functional and HVAC /energy upgrades. The buildings may still not be occupiable after an earthquake. This option provides no room for future growth of staff and operational areas. For maximum efficiency, a building should be totally vacated prior to an entire upgrade and retrofit is attempted. Logistically, this could be very expensive and difficult, with temporary buildings such as modular office spaces. Several options exist at this time, including potential 1 or 2 year leases of the former King County Housing Section 8 offices on 65 Ave S (only 11,473 square feet) and the Xerox sales building at 6400 Southcenter Boulevard (35,500 square feet). tiR I' City Hall $3,000,000 $5 0 00,000 $1,000,000 $9,000,000 6300 Building $4,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $9,000,000 Fire Station 51 $200,000 $1,000 300,000 $1,500,000 Fire Station 52 $100,000 $500,000 $400,000 $1,000,000 Fire Station 53 50,000 $0 $0 $50,000 Fire Station 54 $250,000 $1,000,00 250,000 $1,500,000 Minkler Shops $1,000,000 $2,500,000 $500,000 $4,000,000 Geo. Long S hops $2,000,000 $3,000, $200,000 5,200,000 Community Center $1,000,000 $1,500,000 $500,000 $2,000,000 Old FS 53 front office /vac. $50,000 $50,00 $100,000 $200,000 Old FS 53 rear garage /PD $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $1 50,000 Parks Golf M aint. $0 $0 $0 $0 Foster Golf Clubhouse $0 $0 0 $0 TOTALS: $11,700, 17,600,000 $5,300,000 $33,600,000 tiR I' OPTION 3 Twelve Year Plan This option splits the replacement and upgrades into two phases. Phase 1 includes a new City Hall Campus and a combined City Maintenance Facility. The City Hall Campus concept envisions a new facility to be constructed in between Southcenter Boulevard and the existing City Hall. The new City Hall Campus would have to be four to six stories tall, depending on setbacks, building footprint, soils, and structural limitations. 91 Permits $100,000 Construction $1,000,000 $5,500,000 C $500,000 $1,500,000 $9,100,000' New FS 52 Design $750,000 $400,000 Permits $200,000 $300,000 Construction $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $1,5 00,000 j CM $200,000 $300,000 $550,000 $7,200,000 Emergency Operations Center Design $2,000,000 Permits $1,000,000 Construction $3,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 CM $600,000 $1,000,000 $800,000 $13,400,000 F S 54 Upgrad Design $50 0,000 Permits $650,000 Construction $1,500, CM $500,000 $3,150,000 TOTAL $15,000 $15,000,000 $15,000,000 While Option 1 may seem to be the least cost option, it would only be temporary. If the "big one" hits, the cost of replacing all facilities at once could be devastating, even with partial FEMA and other reimbursement. Option 2 may provide the quickest results, but the City would still not have any room for future growth. Option 3 is the most realistic solution that spreads the nearly $100 million need over twelve years for an approximate average annual impact to the General Fund in the range of $2 million to $4 million per year. -13- 92 Section 4 Funding for Future Facilities 93 Section 4: Funding for Future Facilities Currently, no funds have been allocated to any major facility upgrade, renovation or replacement. Several funding options are available to filly fund future facility needs, including: City funds Energy Savings Surplus Properties Bond funds Grant funds Maintenance Savings Levy Lid Lift Tax Increment Financing City Funds Current and future City funds are not adequate to fund the estimated $85 million in needs for new and renovated City Facilities. However, energy and budget savings in the general fund could pay all or part of the debt service for bonds. Half of the new City Maintenance Facility could be paid for by the utility funds (water, sewer and surface water), the other half by the general fund (streets, facilities and equipment rental). Grant Funds Grants are not typically available for building facilities. Occasionally there are opportunities for emergency facilities, however, most of these grants go to larger agencies that serve smaller cities. -I5- Energy Savings New buildings will save a minimum of $200,000 per year in utilities costs. See the following tables with forecasts of savings (Building Utility Expenditures and Facility Utility Expenses). The new buildings should be built to LEED standards that require a high level of energy efficiency. The savings over a twelve year design and construction cycle can be estimated conservatively at $2.4 million. The $200,000 savings per year could be used for bonded improvements worth up to $2.5 million per year. Maintenance Savings New buildings will save the city over $100,000 per year in deferred maintenance. For example, the annual cost to maintain/repair the City Hall and 6300 Building HVAC systems averages $50,000 in labor, equipment and material costs. Surplus Properties Construction of a new Maintenance Facility will allow the surplus sale of the Minkler Shops, George Long Shop, and Old Fire Station 53. The new Maintenance Facility will require sufficient land area (more than 6 acres) to accommodate records and evidence storage, as well as normal operations and vactor waste staging. This will also save the cost of leased storage, currently budgeted at $96,000 per year. The surplus properties could net about $6 million, and the twelve year savings for leased records storage would amount to over $1 million. The City's current bonding capacity would allow for an incremental bond issuance with careful analysis. The current estimate for annual debt service is 7 to 9% on a 15 -year or 20 -year pay off (20 -year is lower interest than 15- year). For example, a $1,000,000 bond would have about $80,000 in annual debt service for a 15 -year pay off. The Tukwila Urban Center Access (Kliekitat) L.I.D. No. 33 will pay the City of Tukwila back $8,400,000, which could be used in part to pay some of the debt service over time. -16- W, Lease /Lease Bum Authorized by RCW 35.42.010 -220, the City could solicit for developers on City owned property by means of a lease leaseback Request For Proposals (RFP). This statute provides that the leaseback to the City "shall contain terms as agreed upon by the parties and sets forth a public private partnership. This lease method has been used by the City of Redmond (City Hall Campus) and King County (Goat Hill Properties), and many more. This is commonly referred to as "63 -20 financing based on the IRS Revenue Ruling 63 -20. Ref.: http: /ww w.tre.wa.gov /documents /sfe 63- 20Study.p Levy Lid Lift A levy increase would require voter approval to increase the amount of property tax levied. Ref.: http /wwNv.nirsc.or� /subjects /finance, /levylidlift.aspx Tax Increment Financing Tax increment financing has specific limitations and requirements by RCW: Ref: http: /vvww.mrsc.org/ subjects /econ /ed- revitalization.aspx Creative Financing Ref.: http: /NA,- ww.mrse.org/ subjects /econ/pda- pfclfinancing_pdf -17- W City of Tukwila Finance and Safety Committee FINANCE AND SAFETY COMMITTEE Meeting Minutes October 2, 2012 5:15p.m.; Conference Room #3 PRESENT Councilmembers: De'Sean Quinn, Chair; Dennis Robertson and Kate Kruller Staff: David Cline, Peggy McCarthy, Vicky Carlsen, Chris Flores, Bob Giberson, Bob Benedicto, Gail Labanara and Kimberly Matej CALL TO ORDER: Committee Chair Quinn called the meeting to order at 5:15 p.m. I. PRESENTATIONS No presentations. II. BUSINESS AGENDA A. Resolution: Annual Cancellation of Accounts Receivable (Past Due and Returned Checks) Staff is seeking Council approval of an annual resolution to cancel (write -off) account receivables deemed uncollectible. This year's annual account receivable write -off totals $8,777.89. Staff reviewed the process by which Accounts Receivable determines items as uncollectible. This year's write -offs are lower than last year's which can be attributed to: less accidents caused by unknown or uninsured motorists, and a change to the Tukwila Municipal Code which withholds business licenses and /or renewals until such debts are paid to the City. The City is also utilizing a different debt collection agency. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO OCTOBER 15 CONSENT AGENDA. B. Resolution: Annual Cancellation of Outstanding Claims and Unredeemed Property At staff request, this item has been moved to the October 16, 2012, Finance Safety Committee meeting. New information has become available that may affect the processing of this annual cancellation. RETURN TO OCTOBER 16 FINANCE SAFETY COMMITTEE MEETING. C. Proposed Facilities Plan Staff is seeking Committee confirmation of the need for a Facilities Plan for the City, as well as input on the proposed Facilities Plan included in the Committee agenda packet. Staff utilized a PowerPoint presentation to provide the Committee with an overview and summary of a proposed Facilities Plan, which outlines options for the replacement and /or retrofit of City buildings. After the presentation, and a brief discussion, the Committee confirmed that there is a need for the City to have a Facilities Plan. Additional comments from the Committee Members are bulleted below: Committee Member Robertson: Believes that a Facilities Plan is the right thing to do; however, it appears to be more logical to wait for the conclusion of the Strategic Plan to ensure the Facilities Plan is supported by the Strategic Plan outcomes. Has some inquiries about prioritization, but relates prioritization back to the conclusion of the Strategic Plan. Committee Member Kruller. Believes there may be some timing concerns in consideration of the current economy. Requested benchmarking to identify what similar and /or surrounding jurisdictions are doing in regard to facilities. 97 Finance Safety Committee Minutes October 2, 2012 Page 2 Committee Chair Quinn: Does not believe there is enough information presented to make a recommendation at this time. Expressed the need for a more detailed justification. After further discussion, the Committee determined that it is in the best interest of the full Council for this item to be heard, as information only, prior to the budget work sessions taking place next week since the draft CIP includes funding for a portion of the Facilities Plan. Per direction, staff will present this information at the October 8 COW. Attachments to the full Council will include the proposed Facilities Plan and 2008 Seismic Study that was conducted by Reid Middleton. Committee Members expressed four important factors affecting the Facilities Plan timing, financing, priorities and the Strategic Plan. FORWARD TO OCTOBER 8 COW FOR INFORMATIONAL PRESENTATION. III. MISCELLANEOUS Meeting adjourned at 6:19 p.m. Next meeting: Tuesday, October 16, 2012 5:15 p.m. Conference Room #3 00 Committee Chair Approval Minutes by KAM. Upcoming Meetings Events October 2012 8th (Monday) 9th (Tuesday) 10th (Wednesday) 11th (Thursday) 12th (Friday) 13th (Saturday) Community Utilities Cmte, City Council City Council Duwamish River Council Coffee Chat Affairs Parks 5:00 pm Special Meeting Special Meeting Shoreline 10:00 AM to Cmte, (CR 91) Budget Work Budget Work Challenge 12:00 Noos 5: 00 pm Session Session 1:00 4:00 PM (CR 93) 6:00 8:00 PM 6:00 8:00 PM (Green River Cffi (Council (Council Trail at the BECU City Council Chambers) Chambers) Campus —12770 Stop by and Special Meeting Gateway Drive) informally talk with a City Council Budget Work For additional Tukwila City Committee of Session information Councilmember about the Whole Mtg., 6:00 8:00 PM ivivii,xestorethe anything on your 7:00 Pb1 (Council mind regarding duwarnish.or•2 (Council Chambers) Tukwila. Chambers) Foster GolfLinks C.O.W to be Tukwila Pantry Clubhouse immediately Tukwila Fall Fundraiser (13500 Interurban Ave S) followed by a International 5:00 7:30 PM Special Meeting. Boulevard (SeaTac Action Cmte, Commumw 7:00 pm Center 13 73 5 Mail In (Community 24"' Ave S.) registration and Center) Spaghetti dinner address change and silent auction. deadline to be Tickets are $15.00 eligible to vote in each. November 6, For additional 2012 election. information, call the Tukwila Pantry at 206 -431 -8293. 15th (Monday) 16th (Tuesday) 17th (Wednesday) 18th (Thursday) 19th (Friday) 20th (Saturday) Transportation Finance Parks Tukwila Duwamish Alive Cmte, Safety Cmte, Commission, Historical Volunteer Work 5:15 pm 5:15 pm 5:30 pm Society, Party (CR 91) (CR 93) (Community 7:00 pm 10:00 Any 2:00 Pm Center) (Tukwila Duwamish Hill City Council Heritage Cultural Center, Preserve Regular Mtg., Library Advisory 14475 59 Ave For additional 7:00 pm Board, S.) information call (Council 7:00 PM 206 923 -0853. Chambers) (Foster Librar)) Free Paper New Tukwila Shredding Tukwila Rec and Electronic Recycling Metropolitan Garbage Service Event Park District takes effect 10:00 AAI to 1:00 PNI Board of November P. (Boeing Emplo Commissioners Recycling Credit Union, Meeting, Presentation by 12770 Gateway 8:00 PNI Waste Management Drive). (Council staff. Visit www.becu.ory Chambers) Mini- Workshop for more details. 7:00 8:00 PM Help support the (Tukwila local food bank by Community Center) bringing a donation Come learn about of non perishable the residential items. service changes and recycling do's and don'ts. City Council Committee of Whole (C.O.W.) Meeting: 2nd 4th Mon., 7:00 Pm, Council Chambers at City Hall. City Council Regular Meeting: 1st 3rd Mon., 7:00 Pm, Council Chambers at City Hall. Community Affairs Parks Committee: 2nd 4th Mon., 5:00 Pm, Conf Room #3 (A) Historical preservation services. Equity Diversity Commission: 1st Thurs., 5:15 Pm, Conf. Room #3. Contact Joyce Trantina at 206 433 -1850. Finance Safety Committee: 1st 3rd Tues., 5:15 Pm, Conf. Room #3 Library Advisory Board: 3rd Wed., 7:00 Pm, Foster Library. Contact Stephanie Gardner at 206 767 -2342. Parks Commission: 3rd Wed., 5:30 Pm, Senior Game Room at Community Center. Contact Dave Johnson at 206-767-2308. Transportation Committee: 1st 3rd Mon., 5:00 Pm, Conf. Room #1 Tukwila Historical Society: 3rd Thurs., 7:00 Pm, Tukwila Heritage Cultural Center, 14475 59` Avenue S. Contact Pat Brodin at 206 433 -1861. ➢Tukwila Int'l. Blvd. Action Cmte: 2nd Tues., 7:00 Pm, Tukwila Community Center. Contact Chief Villa at 206 -433 -1815. Utilities Committee: 2nd 4th Tues., 5:00 Pm, Conf. Room #1 (A) Proposed 2013 -2018 CIP. (B) Surface Water Comprehensive Plan. 99 Tentative Agenda Schedule MONTH MEETING 1- MEETING 2 MEETING 3 MEETING 4 REGULAR C.O.W. REGULAR C.O.W. October 1 8 15 22 See agenda packet Special Presentation: Special Presentation: Certificates of Presentation of 2013 cover sheet for this week's agenda Commendation for 3 2014 Budget. (October 8, 2012 Officers. Committee of the Whole Meeting). Meritorious Special Issues: Contribution Award to Review and discussion Trina Cook from the of the proposed International Disposition and Association of Crime Development Analysts. Agreement for Tukwila. Unfinished Business: Acceptance of a grant Unfinished Business: from the Washington Authorize the Mayor to State Department of sign the Disposition Transportation in the and Development amount of $427,588.00 Agreement with for the Cascade View Tukwila Village Safe Routes to School Development project. Associates, LLC, for Utility Tukwila Village. Undergrounding for 42�id Avenue South Phase III project. November 5 13 (Tuesday) 19 26 Special Presentation: Swearing in of Commander Jon Harrison. Public Hearing: An ordinance for the amended street vacation for Southcenter Parkway. Unfinished Business: An ordinance vacationg right of way within the City of Tukwila dedicated for street purposes generally described as portions of Southcenter Parkway between approximately South 180 Street and existing City limits. o