Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW 2003-03-24 COMPLETE AGENDA PACKET&7 .t c r %1Vise i5' rim O 441.1 ar isae March 24, 2003; 7 p.m. Tukwila City Hall; Council Chambers 1. CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS 3. CITIZEN COMMENTS/ CORRESPONDENCE 4. SPECIAL ISSUES 5. REPORTS Tukwila City Council Agenda Steven M. Mullet, Mayor John McFarland, City Administrator Pam Carter, Council President COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE Financial Planning Model Update (with explanation of the long -term debt schedule). At this time, you are invited to comment on items that are not included on this agenda. If you wish to comment on an item listed on this agenda, please save your comments until the issue is presented for discussion. a. b. c. d. a. b. 6. MISCELLANEOUS 7. EXECUTIVE SESSION 8. ADJOURN TO SPECIAL MEETING 1. CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL 2. CONSENT a. Approval of vouchers. AGENDA Bid award for construction of the 2003 Infiltration and Inflow Manhole Repairs. Review of Mayor's salary. Freedman, Tung Bottomley Design Review contract (Tukwila Urban Center). A resolution increasing the Parks Recreation Dept.'s Change Fund. Mayor c. Staff City Council d. City Attorney SPECIAL MEETING Councilmembers: Joe Duffle Dave Fenton Jim Haggerton Joan Hernandez Pamela Linder Richard Simpson e. Intergovernmental Ord #2016 Res #1520 b. Authorize Mayor to sign Freedman, Tung Bottomley Design Review contract in the amount of $49,405.00 (Tukwila Urban Center) (see item 4.c. above). c. A resolution increasing the Parks Recreation Dept.'s Change Fund (see item 4.d. above). 3. BID Award a contract to Pivetta Brothers Construction, Inc. in the amount of AWARD $37,829.76 for the 2003 Infiltration and Inflow Manhole Repairs project (see item 4.a. above). 4. ADJOURNMENT This notice is available in alternate formats for individuals with disabilities upon advance request. Reasonable accommodations at public hearings are available with advance notice. Tukwila City Hall is wheelchair accessible. Please call the City Clerk's office 433 1800/TOD 248 2933 if you require assistance. Agenda is also available at City of Tukwila's website: http: /www.ci.tukwila.wa.us Please be advised that all Tukwila Council Meetings are audio taped. Pg. 3 Pg. 9 Pg. 15 Pg. 21 Pg. 39 't 9 o s S%`O 1 9 o t ie N 2, 1908 CAS Number: 03-038 Agenda Item Title: Original Sponsor: I Timeline: Sponsor's Summary: Recommendations: Sponsor: Committee: Administration: I Cost Impact (if known): I Fund Source (if known): Meeting Date 3/24/03 1 Meeting Date 3/24/03 3/24/03 3/24/03 COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Meeting Date I 3/24/03 Prepared by ARD Present update Finance Safety Present Update Finance Safety Present Update N/A N/A 1 Mayor's review 1 Council review 1 0,•:to/' %iii: Initials Original Agenda Date: 3/24/03 Financial Planning Model update (along with Long Term Debt Schedule). Council Admin. X Present at March 24, 2003 meeting. Provide update to current status of Planning Model (Attachment A) and integrate the Long Term Debt Schedule in for discussion. r i�i��� Action Attachments Staff Report dated March 19, 2003 Revised Attachment A Financial Planning Model Long -Term Debt Sdhedule as of December 31, 2002 ITEM Na Aritiffiletir To: Mayor Steve Mullet 86 City Council From: Alan R. Doerschel, Finance Director Date: March 19, 2003 Subject: Financial Planning Model Update and Long -Term Debt Schedule Financial Plannine Model Update: The revised March 24, 2003 Attachment A for the 2003 -2008 Six -year planning period reflects very little change from the Adopted Model passed in December. The actual cash carryover from 2002 forward to 2003 was $372,000 less than anticipated when the plan was adopted last December. This is a combination of several smaller revenue and expenditure changes along with a $200,000 shortfall in property tax collections for 2002. Also, the estimate for carryover cash was reduced by $100,000 for each year 2004 -2008 to reflect the tighter budgets, which generate smaller unspent totals. The earlier estimated balance in 2008 of $1.9 million is now estimated at $1.0 million. This could easily be a negative amount with just a slightly less favorable sales tax growth rate. Essentially we are in about the same financial position as when the Budget and Financial Plan were adopted. However, as pointed out by the State's Chief Economist on March 19, 2003, we will continue to see negative growth during the near term. Lone -Term Debt Schedule The attached Debt Schedule as of December 31, 2002 has a balance of $21,005,000. This does not include the $11,000,000 we will issue in June /July, 2003 for the Clubhouse, South Park Bridge and Tukwila Village. The debt service requirements for the long -term debt identified above is accounted for in the Planning Model. The City has authority to issue a larger amount of debt than the above totals. However, the impact on our ability to pay the additional debt service would require new revenue sources or reducing current services and /or the Capital Plan. REVENUES General Revenues Sales Tax Property Tax Utility Tax (New) Franchise Contract -SCL (New) Charges /Fees for Service Trans. In -Other Funds Intergovernmental Revenue Other Taxes /Misc. Beginning Fund Balance Subtotal Dedicated Revenues (Capital) Real Estate Taxes Motor Vehicle Taxes Interest Income Property Tax Parking Tax Repayment from Utilities Subtotal TOTAL AVAILABLE (See Attachment A -1) EXPENDITURES Operations Maintenance: (See Attachment B) Subtotal Available Capital Attachment C Neighborhood Revitalization Residential Streets Parks Trails General Govemment Facilities General Government Economic Development Bridges Arterial Streets Debt Service 1994 Debt Service -1999 2000 New Bond Issue 2003 Leased Space Tukwila Village Admin /Engineering Overhead Subtotal Capital /Overhead Balance by Year 1 Accumulated Totals ATTACHMENT A CITY OF TUKWILA TOTAL REVENUES EXPENDITURES 2003 -2008 Preliminary Analysis in 000's 2003 2004 2005 2006 14,700 15,288 15,900 16,536 17,200 9,800 9,996 10,196 10,450 10,712 1,630 1,720 2,666 2,799 3,527 600 630 980 1,029 1,296 2,681 2,839 2,986 3,140 3,302 1,840 1,913 1,990 2,070 2,152 1,498 622 654 686 721 2,673 2,806 2,964 3,111 3,274 15,969 200 200 300 300 51,391 36,014 38,536 40,121 42,484 43,933 252,479 600 650 650 650 700 330 350 450 450 450 204 212 250 250 250 130 130 130 130 130 85 250 250 250 250 250 200 0 0 0 1,599 1,792 1,730 1,730 1,780 1,780 10,411 52,990 37,806 40,266 41,851 44,264 45,713 262,890 33,532 33,814 35,000 36,573 38,214 19,458 3,992 5,266 5,278 6,050 170 370 485 570 70 1,283 734 108 238 208 (710) 0 0 0 0 800 860 860 860 960 1,124 587 100 100 100 3,527 2,260 2,390 2,832 2,070 515 515 515 515 515 1,085 1,085 1,085 1,085 1,085 0 0 395 395 395 0 0 110 120 130 934 1.018 1.069 1.122 1.172 8,728 7,429 7,117 7,837 6,705 10,730 (3,437) (1,851) (2,559) (655) 10,730 7,293 5,442 2,883 2,228 IV Updated: 03/20/03 2007 2008 Totals 1 17,688 97,312 10,980 62,134 3,704 16,046 1,361 5,896 3,467 18,415 2,239 12,204 758 4,939 3,436 18,264 300 17,269 700 3,950 450 2,480 250 1,416 130 780 250 1,335 0 450 39,930 217,063 5,783 45,827 70 1,735 88 2,659 0 (710) 960 5,300 100 2,111 2,395 15,474 515 3,090 1,085 6,510 395 1,580 150 510 1.218 6.533 6,976 44,792 (1,193) 1,035 1,035 General Government G.O. Bonds: 1994 Maturing 2014 Community Center Fire Sta. #53 1999 Maturing 2015 6300 Bldg. Tuk. Village 2000 Maturing 2015 Valley Com. Center Totals General Government Water /Sewer Bonds 1993 Maturing 2006 1995 Maturing 2015 Total Water/ Sewer NOTES: City of Tukwila Long -Term Debt Schedule As of December 31, 2002 Original $6,000,000 10,000,000 2,551,000 $18,551,000 $2,704,000 $15,847,000 $2,925,000 4,500,000 $7,425,000 12/31/02 Redeemed Balance $1,560,000 $4,440,000 920,000 9,080,000 224,000 2,327,000 $1,850,000 990,000 $2,840,000 $1,075,000 3,510,000 $4,585,000 Public Works Trust Fund Loans Water, Sewer, Surface Water $1,553,000 $980,000 $573,000 Totals All Long -Term Debt $27,529,000 $6,524,000 $21,005,000 There will be an $11 million plus bond issue in 2003 for the Golf Clubhouse $5 million, South Park Bridge $3 million and Tukwila Village $3 million. Any funding for connectivity bonding is not included in the Planning Model. All other bonding including the $11 million in 2003 is included. CAS Number: 03-039 I Original Sponsor: I Timeline: Sponsor's Summary: Recommendations: Sponsor: Committee: Administration: Cost Impact (if known): Fund Source (if known): Meeting Date 3/24/03 COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Meeting Date 3/24/03 SWI M NFORMAI,ANII 1 03 O 3°1 I Original Agenda Date: March 24, 2003 Agenda Item Title: Bid Award for construction of the 2003 Infiltration and Inflow Manhole Repairs Council This project will repair /install four manholes throughout the city. The project received twelve bids to perform the work. The low bid of $36,622.08 was from Gary Harper Construction Company, yet they requested that their bid be withdrawn. The second lowest bidder was Pivetta Brothers for $37,829.76. References show that Pivetta Brothers perform quality work in a timely fashion and has completed similar projects in size and scope. Award contract to the second lowest bidder, Pivetta Brothers Construction, Inc. Forward to COW and then Consent Agenda at Special Meeting following. Same as Sponsor. $37,829.76 (includes sales tax) 403/02 Sewer Construction Fund (2003 CIP pg. 101) Attachments Information memo dated February 28, 2003 Bid tabulation Utilities Committee Minutes from March 18, 2003 tt Meeting Date 1 3/24/03 Initials Prepared by 1 Mayor's review 1 Council review 1 AA/1 MC A/1i/t—(ii— I CPL U1 1 Admin. Action Public Works ITEM No. 4 a INFORMATION MEMO To: Mayor Mullet From: Public Works Director Date: February 28, 2003 Subject I I Repairs Project Bid Award Project No. 97 -SW03 ISSUE Award the bid for the 2003 I I Repairs Project. BACKGROUND Twelve contractors submitted quotes on the 2003 I I Repairs Project. The low bidder was Gary Harper Construction, Inc., of Redmond, Washington, with a quote of $36,622.08. On February 11, 2003, Mr. Harper requested his quote be withdrawn from the project due to items missed in their quote. No bid bond was required on this project due to the limited scope of the project. The second low bidder was Pivetta Bros. Construction, Inc., of Sumner, Washington. Pivetta Bros. quote was $37,829.76. No engineer's estimate was prepared, but engineering and maintenance staff reviewed the 12 quotes and found the low bid in line with the scope of work for the project. The funds for the 2003 I I Repairs Project are from: ANALYSIS MC:Iw attachment: Bid Tabulation (P:Pyxu1A -SW P,gaa)97SWO318id Maud Memo 03370) Fund 2003 CIP Maintenance Operations 2003 CIP APW Overflow Proiect TOTAL 2003 1 1 Repairs Proiect Bid Amount WSST Contingency TOTAL Bid Results $34,770.00 3,059.76 3,783.00 $41,612.76 Amount $30,000.00 3,000.00 8,612.76 $41,612.76 All bids were checked and tabulated and no errors were found. Pivetta Bros. Construction, Inc., provided references for jobs of similar scope and size of work. References were checked and found to be satisfactory. Budget $41,612.76 $41,612.76 RECOMMENDATION Award the 2003 I I Repairs Project to Pivetta Bros. Construction, Inc., in the amount of $37,829.76. Bidder Specialized Landscaping, Inc. Nordic Construction, Inc. 1 Gary Harper Construction, Inc. C. A. Goodman Construction Co., Inc. R. L. Alia Co. Dennis R. Craig Construction, Inc. Ron's Earthworks, Inc. Construct Co. Finishing Edge Curb Sidewalk LLC Frank Coluccio Construction Co. Pivetta Bros. Construction, Ina. Americon, Inc., dba TAB Enterprises Responsible staff person on project: Dated this 28th day of January, 2003. (P:ala1200318,1 Manhole Repairs Bid Results) CITY OF TUKWILA BID TABULATION 2003 18r, I Manhole Repairs Bids Due: Monday, January 27, 2003, 5:00 p.m. anhole; 1 .Manhole 2 I Manhole 3 Manhole 4 Total 13,464.001 14,862.08 13,464.001 16,211.20 58,001.28 19,177.091 19,177.09 19,177.091 24,203.65 81,734.92 10,053.12 8,247.04 8,268.801 10,053.12 36,622.08 13,056.44 12,732.63 12,894.541 13,955.54 52,639.15 18,496.00 18,496.00 16,320.00 26,112.00 79,424.00 25,003.93 25,003.93 25,003.93 41,591.85 116,603.64 10,575.36 10,210.88 10,297.92 31,312.64 62,396.80 18, 978.961 17, 890.23 17,181.43 22, 837.69 76, 888.31 No Bid 25,024.001 14,144.00 17,408.001 38,896.00 95,472.00 8,660:481 8,595.20 8;660.481 11,913 60 37,829.76 23,876.531 Mike Cusick 16 257 33 15,378.411 21,683.99 77,196.26 Present: Pam Linder, Chair; Joan Hernandez, Dave Fenton Brian Shelton, Frank Iriarte, Gail Labanara, Mike Cusick, Pat Brodin, Lucy Lauterbach 1. Inflow and Infiltration R Il Bid Award The Public Works budget has funds for repairing sewer lines and manhole cover repairs, both of which are needed each year. This year there are four repairs needed, included leaking manholes and one new manhole. Though no engineer's budget was prepared, the City received 12 bids for the projects. After one bidder withdrew, the lowest bidder was Pivetta Brothers Construction, whose bid was considerably lower than the others. Mike said he was comfortable with the bid, as he has worked with the company in the past, and their references checked out. The budget will be taken from the $30,000 CIP budget, plus funds from a CIP project(Andover West overflow project) to cover the $41,612.76 cost including sales tax and contingency. Recommend bid award to Pivetta Bros for $37. 829.76 to COW and Special Meeting March 24. 2. Cascade Water Alliance Pat said he wanted to keep the Council updated on the CWA situation. CWA has completed their SEPA Checklist, and has filled out a Mitigated Determination of Non Significance (DNS). They have done everything according to the rules, so Pat thought the Muckleshoot tactic of filing a complaint was a delaying tactic and did not have standing legally. The tribe wanted CWA to do a full EIS Pat thought the more serious issue was contract negotiations with Seattle. There has been no movement in the quest to get water from Seattle until CWA water comes on line. Their current demand is for a 50 -year contract rather than a 25- year contract. Dave asked how long the water in Lake Tapps would last. Pat thought it would last maybe 50 years. The Committee asked how difficult it was to use lake water from a recreational lake, and were told it is a common practice and shouldn't pose a problem. Information. Committee chair approval Utilities Committee March 18, 2003 COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Initials ITEM NO. Meeting Date I Prepared by I Mayor's review I Council review 1 March 24, 2003 1!'m 1 14.4 1.1 C I I I I I I 1 I I 1 1 I ITEM INFORMATION CAS Number: 03-040 I Original Agenda Date: March 24, 2003 Agenda Item Title: Review of Mayor's Salary Original Sponsor: Council Admin X Timeline: Sponsor's Summary: The Mayor's Office has proposed a modification to the existing salary schedule for the Mayor. The proposal would allow for an increase to $80k per year, effective 2004 with CPI increases consistent with that provided to the non represented employee group. Recommendations: Sponsor: Committee: Other alternatives were identified, but the Committee reached no consensus. Administration: Cost Impact (if known): Fund Source (if known): Meeting Date 1 Meeting Date 3/24/03 RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION Action APPENDICES Attachments Memo from Mayor's Office dated 3/18/03 Finance Safety Omte. minutes (3/17/03) and information packet (including draft ordinance) v, TO: City Council FROM:. John McFarland RE: Mayor's Salary DATE: March 18, 2003 Background: The Council identified the Mayor's Salary as an item of interest during the last retreat. In reviewing the TMC it appeared that the salary progression ended with the rate in effect in 2003. The ordinance, which provides more detail, actually allows for annual cost of living increases (set at 90% of the CPI) after 2003, with a minimum of 3% and a maximum of 5 At the time the ordinance was written, it was reasonable to assume that this "floor and ceiling for COLA increases would be well within the range of the actual rate of inflation. As we know now, this is not the case. The 2003 CPI increase for non- represented employees was 1.71 Mayor' Recommendation: The Mayor has suggested a new ordinance that would bring the salary to $80,000 per year effective 2004, with cost -of- living increases equal to that provided to non- represented thereafter. Under the existing ordinance the salary would automatically increase to $80,340 in 2004. Committee Recommendation: The Finance and Safety Committee considered the proposal from the Mayor's office at the March 17 meeting. While no consensus was reached, two additional options were discussed: 1. Freeze the salary at the existing level to deter unqualified candidates filing for the position of Mayor, and in recognition of the current economic situation. 2. Allow the existing ordinance to stand (annual minimum 3% maximum 5% COLA increases beginning in 2004). The Committee asked that the three options be forwarded to the full council for further discussion. Finance and Safety Committee March 17, 2003 Present: Joe Duffle, Chair; Jim Haggerton, Pam Carter Alan Doerschel, John McFarland, Steve Lancaster, Rhonda Berry, Lucy Lauterbach; Dennis Robertson 1. Mayor's Salary One of the Council goals from their retreat was to look at the mayor's salary, and the administration had responded by drafting an ordinance to give a slight increase to the salary for one year. John said the Mayor was comfortable with receiving annual 90% of the cost of living (COLA) increases similar to those given non- represented employees. He said Steve has been busy going to meetings both day and night for four or five nights a week. Jim said he wanted to separate the person from the office. He said he didn't want the salary to attract people to run just for the money. With the recently passed utility tax, he said people want the utility tax to be used for basic government services, not for increases in elected officials' salaries. Jim had looked up the ordinance goveming the current mayor's salary, and it runs through 2004, giving a small increase in that year. He did not want an increase in the current salary. Pam said a COLA increase should not be an issue. She said the job has grown over the past years, and now deserves a higher pay. John likened the position to that of the CEO of a $38 million corporation. He agreed he did not want the salary to attract candidates who were not qualified for the office. Of the three other cities with strong mayors, all were getting COLAs after 2003, and all had much larger salaries. Pam said she wanted to do something with future salaries before the filing period this summer. Joe said in light of the bad economy and with so many unemployed people he thought the mayor shouldn't get an increase. Pam favored the draft ordinance, which raised the salary from $78,000 to $80,000 in 2004, with COLAs in years after. Jim did not support any increase in the salary. They agreed that three options could be given to the COW: no increase; the "old" ordinance with an increase and a floor /ceiling; or an increase, and then COLA's. Refer issue to COW with a split Committee decision. 2. Increase in Change Fund Currently the pool and community center share a "bank" of change money. Because the fund is small, it involves many extra trips to the bank. Alan recommended increasing their change funds. If it is increased to $300, the pool can have $125 and the community center $175 in change. That should satisfy the needs of both facilities. Alan noted the change funds need to be updated regularly. Recommend resolution to Regular Meeting. 3. Electronic Sign Moratorium At the last meeting of Community and Parks, DCD had raised the issue of using a moratorium to get time to address the changing technology of the sign business. One business has bought an expensive sign that is capable of the flashing and moving signs that annoy people on I -5 near Fife, though this sign is smaller than that billboard. The current City language in the sign code has not stopped businesses for wanting signs that flash and dance with changing scenes every few minutes. Sign companies all want to sell the more expensive flashy signs. A moratorium will give the staff time to research various approaches to regulating the newest kinds of signs. Recommend moratorium ordinance to that evening's Regular Meeting. To: Finance Safety Committee From: Mayor's Office RE: Mayor's Salary Date: March 20, 2003 As you may recall, the salary schedule for the Mayor expires in December 2003. The attached ordinance has been drafted to establish a new rate effective January 1, 2004. The existing rate of compensation would remain unchanged for the remainder of 2003. Because the existing ordinance is currently in effect, it is necessary to repeal it to create a successor ordinance. The ordinance proposed that the Mayor's salary be raised from its current level of $78,000 per year to $80,000 in 2004 (2.5% increase). Thereafter, the salary would be increased automatically at the rate identical to that which is provided for the non- represented employees. This would preclude from having to routinely review the salary in the future. For comparison purposes listed below are the 2003 salaries for the elected Mayors in South King County: Auburn $101,619 with annual COLAs after 2003 Renton $108,270 plus a 2% annual deferred company and COLAs after 2003 Kent $101,376 (increase to $125,000 has been proposed and is under review) Tukwila $78,000 mo in ha s been up dated to. reflectadditional fonnat z` oncermng K ent May salary (see p a r enthetica l text) and D AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, SETTING THE MAYOR'S COMPENSATION; REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 1919, AS CODIFIED AT TMC 2.08; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, RCW 35A.12.070 provides that elective officers' salaries are to be set by ordinance; WHEREAS, the City is continuously impacted by regional and statewide issues as a full-service urban area, requiring the full attention of the Mayor; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to set the Mayor's salary at a level that fairly compensates the Mayor for work that is performed for hours and efforts approximating those of a full-time position; and WHEREAS, the current salary for Tukwila's Mayor was set in 2000, and reflected only increases in salary between then and 2003; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Compensation. Pursuant to the provisions of RCW 35A.12.070, the person holding the position of Mayor shall be compensated at a yearly rate set forth by ordinance, payable in equal monthly installments. Section 2. Salary. Beginning January 1, 2003, the °diary for the Tukwila Mayor shall be set at $78,000 per year. Beginning January 1, 2004, that salary will be increased to $80,000 per year. Beginning January 1, 2005, the salary will be adjusted annually at the same rate of inflation as determined by the current method prescribed for the non-represented employees. Section 3. Benefits. Subject to any applicable restrictions, the Mayor shall be eligible to receive the same or an equivalent benefit package as is given to department heads in the City of Tukwila and established from time to time by resolution. Section 4. Repealer. Ordinance No. 1919, as codified at Tukwila Municipal Code 2.08, is hereby repealed. 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. 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 and effect five (5) days after passage and publication as provided by law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of .2003 ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Jane E. Cantu, CMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Office of the City Attorney Mayor's comp '03.doc Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Published: Effective Date: Ordinance Number Steven M. Mullet, Mayor CAS Number: 03-041 Meeting Date COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Initials ITEM NO. Meeting Date Prepared 1 Mayor's review 1 Council review 3/24/03 mcb /4/I,/vtik I I I I I I ITEM INFORMATION d '1 0 I Original Agenda Date 24 March 2003 Agenda Item Title: Freedman, Tung Bottomley Design Review Contract Original Sponsor: Council Admin. x I Timeline: Approximately 12 months Sponsor's Summary: Recommendations: Sponsor: Committee: Community Affairs and Parks reviewed and forwarded from their 10 March 2003 meeting Administration: Approve Cost Impact (if known): $49, 405 from the DCD Professional Services account Fund Source (if known): RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION Action APPENDICES m l ,Appendix Appendix Description �I A I Memo from Community Development Director (March 19, 2003) rol B I Community Affairs and Parks March 10, 2003 Meeting Minutes mj C I Contract and Scope of Services with Attachments A and B City of Tukwila Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director MEMORANDUM Steven M. Mullet, Mayor To: Communitee of the Whole From. Steve Lancaster, Director Date: March 19, 2003 Subject: Freedman Tung Bottomley Design Review Contract Several significant redevelopments in the urban center have been proposed the existing J.C. Penney's warehouse at 17200 Southcenter PY and the Westfield Shoppingtown Southcenter (The Mall.) These major proposals could create approximately 300,000 square feet of new commercial space at each of the sites, which are 14 acres and 83 acres respectively. Concurrent with this proposed development is the City's effort to create a plan for Tukwila's urban center. This subarea planning effort will be creating design parameters and development performance principles, thereby modifying existing rules, for the urban center where these two major redevelopments are located. A concern exists that this significant new redevelopment will not be in keeping with the direction the City is heading in the Tukwila urban center plan. Therefore in order to coordinate the development with the urban center plan, staff is recommending approval of a design review contract with Freedman Tung Bottomly. Discussion with the developers, ARBA and Westfield Shoppingtown, indicate that they are in favor of this early design review that would occur concurrent with the environmental review of their projects. The benefits to the City of utilizing Freedman Tung Bottemley (FTB) in a coordinated design review and urban center planning effort are opportunities: to test urban center plan ideas on real projects; to modify ideas based upon discussions with the developers; and to influence developments in a timely manner. Page 1 of 2 APPENDIX A 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Phone: 206 431 -3670 Fax: 206- 431 -3665 The proposed contract with FTB is a time and materials contract with the proposed contract amount of $49,405 as a not to exceed figure. The DCD budget has a professional services account to cover the cost of this contract. It's important to note the difficulty in estimating the amount of time it will take to conduct a successful design review due to the uncertain quality of an applicant's proposal and the number of meetings and revisions needed. We anticipate that there will be two to four meetings between the developer's design team and FTB, the rest of the work would be review and redlining of plans submitted by ARBA and Westfield and memos that outline design expectations and needed corrections. Because each of these projects is closely aligned time wise, we expect to gain some economy in the consultant's travel costs. The Community Affairs and Parks Committee reviewed the proposed contract at their March 10, 2003 meeting and forwarded it to the Committee of the Whole. Minutes of the presentation and discussion are attached. (Attachment B) Requested Action Forward the attached contract to a Regular Council meeting for approval. Attachment C:\mcbUlb \03capmemo325.doc Page 2 of 2 Community and Parks Committee March 10, 2003 Present: Joan Hernandez, Chair; Joe Duffle, Pam Linder Rhonda Berry, Bruce Fletcher, Nora Gierloff, Steve Lancaster, Lucy Lauterbach; Dennis Robertson 1. Freedman. Tung and Bottomlev Design Review Contract A contract similar to this one was at the committee's last meeting. The Freedman, Tung and Bottomley firm will most likely be awarded the contract to study the Tukwila Urban Center and Transit Oriented Development. This contract at committee this week is a separate contract in the amount of $49,405 that would include design review of the Westfield Mall at.Southcenter and Penney's Warehouse developments. Steve said adding these major projects will give the City the best chance of coordinating the total development of the TUC. It will create some efficiencies to work on both of these contracts, as they can talk to the Mall and Penney's site developers at the same time they're up here talking to other land owners. It is a time and materials contract. Funding will come from DCD's 2003 professional services budget. The TUC /TOD study is being funded by a grant. One of the things that will be studied is the best use of land in particular areas of the CBD. Transportation will be a part of decisions about uses. Steve talked about possible restrictions on the large -scale plans at the Mall and Penney's. The largest problem may be the wetlands that are on a part of the Penney's 19 -acre site. Circulations through the TUC will be part of the study. Joan asked how the Mall and Penney's could affect the TUC redevelopment plans. Steve pointed to several corners of the Mall site, saying what was developed at the Mall could affect the intersections and adjoining spaces. The committee also asked if Michael Freedman will have enough time for both contracts. Steve thought he would, especially by working on the two contracts together. Recommend contract to Regular Meeting for discussion and adoption. 2. Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments Nora and Steve led the committee through the five draft amendments being proposed. The first was to increase the allowed height for public facilities in Low Density Residential (LDR) zones. Nora said public buildings from the community center to.Thomdyke school have had problems meeting the current 30' height limit. Staff proposed allowing taller buildings if the public building had larger setbacks from their property lines. The current issue is that Starfire wants the grandstand at Fort Dent with a roof covering, to be larger than 30'. Thus far buildings that need to be higher have gone through the variance procedure, but that decision is made by the hearing examiner, and is generally not favored as an ongoing way to do business. Examples of the types of buildings that would be allowed higher rooftops were given as public facilities such as community centers, schools, and recreation centers. The committee wanted to know what else could be included if they approved the height increase in LDR, and if any undesirable uses could benefit from this. Because Starfire has said this is one deal maker they really need, the question was raised whether Starfire is a public or private facility and whether they could benefit from this even if the height change were made to the code. APPENDIX B CONTRACT FO12 SERVICES Contract No. This Agreement is entered into by and between the City of Tukwila, Washington, a noncharter optional municipal code city hereinafter referred to as "the City and Freedman, Tung Bottomley, hereinafter referred to as "the Contractor whose principal office is located at 47 Kearny Street, Suite 500, San Fransisco, CA 94108- 5522 WHEREAS, the City has determined the need to have certain services performed for its citizens but does not have the personnel or expertise to perform such services; and WHEREAS, the City desires to have the Contractor perform such services pursuant to certain terms and conditions; now, therefore, IN CONSIDERATION OF the mutual benefits and conditions hereinafter contained, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Scone and Schedule of Services to be Performed by Contractor, The Contractor shall perform those services described on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as if fully set forth. In performing such services, the Contractor shall at all times comply with all Federal, State, and local statutes, rules and ordinances applicable to the performance of such services and the handling of any funds used in connection therewith. The Contractor shall request and obtain prior written approval from the City if the scope or schedule is to be modified in any way. 2. Comnensation and Method of Payment. The City shall pay the Contractor for services rendered according to the rate and method set forth on Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. The total amount to be paid shall not exceed it lg. 4o5.06 3. Contractor Budget. The Contractor shall apply the funds received under this Agreementwithin the maximum limits set forth in this Agreement. The Contractor shall request prior approval from the City whenever the Contractor desires to amend its budget in any way. 4. Duration of Agreement. This Agreement shall be in full force and effect for a period commencing January 21, 2003 and ending December 31, 2003 unless sooner terminated under the provisions hereinafter specified. 5. Independent Contractor. Contractor and City agree that Contractor is an independent contractor with respect to the services provided pursuant to this Agreement. Nothing in this Agreement shall be considered to create the relationship of employer and employee between the parties hereto. Neither Contractor nor any employee of Contractor shall be entitled to any benefits accorded City employees by virtue of the services provided under this Agreement. The City shall not be responsible for withholding or otherwise deducting federal income tax or social security or contributing to the State Industrial Insurance Program, or otherwise assuming the duties of an employer with respect to the Contractor, or any employee of the Contractor. 6. Indemnification. The Contractor shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents and employees, from and against any and all claims, losses or liability, including attorneys fees, arising from injury or death to persona or damage to property occasioned by any negligent act, omission or failure of the Contractor, its officers, agents and employees, in performing the work required by this Agreement. With respect to the performance of this Agreement and as to claims against the City, its officers, agents and employees, the Contractor expressly waives its immunity under Title 51 of the Revised Code of Washington, the Industrial; Insurance Act, for injuries to its employees, and agrees that the obligation to indemnify, defend hold harmless provided for in this paragraph extends to any claim brought by or on behalf of any employee of the Contractor. This waiver is mutually negotiated by the parties. This paragraph shall not apply to any damage resulting from the sole negligence of the City, its agents and employees. To the extent any of the damages referenced by this paragraph were caused by or resulted from the concurrent negligence of the City, its agents or employees, this obligation to indemnify, defend and hold harmless is valid and enforceable only to the extent of the negligence of the Contractor, its officers, agents, and employees. 7. Record Keening and Rcnortiug. A. The Contractor shall maintain accounts and records, including personnel, property, financial and programmatic records which sufficiently and properly reflect all direct and indirect costs of any nature expended and services performed in the performance of this Agreement and other such records as may be deemed necessary by the City to ensure the performance of this Agreement. B. These records shall be maintained for a period of seven (7) years after termination hereof unless permission to destroy them is granted by the office of the archivist in accordance with RCW Chapter 40.14 and by the City. pp END'X C 8. Audits and Insnections. The records and documents with respect to all matters covered by this Agreement shall by appointment be subject to inspection, review or audit by law during the performance of this Agreement. 9. Termination. This Agreement may at any time be terminated by either party giving the other party thirty (30) days written notice of intention to terminate the same. Failure to provide products on schedule may result in contract termination. 10: Discrimination Prohibited. The Contractor shall not discriminate against any employee, applicant for employment, or any person seeking the services of the Contractor to be provided under this Agreement on the basis of race, color, religion, creed, sex, age, national origin, marital status or presence of any sensory, mental or physical handicap. 11. Assienment and Subcontract. The Contractor shall not assign or subcontract any portion of the services contemplated by this Agreement without the written consent of the City. 12. Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire Agreement between the parties hereto and no other Agreements, oral or otherwise, regarding the subject matter of this Agreement, shall be deemed to exist or bind any of the parties hereto. Either party may request changes in the agreement. Proposed changes which are mutually agreed upon shall be incorporated by written amendments to this Agreement. 13. Notices. Notices to the City of Tukwila shall be sent to the following address: City Clerk City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Washington 98188 Notices to the Contractor shall be sent to the address provided by the Contractor upon the signature line below. 14. Annlicnble Law; Venue: Attorney's Fees. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. In the event any suit, arbitration, or other, proceeding is instituted .to enforce any term of this Agreement, the parties specifically understand and agree that venue shall be properly Laid in King County, Washington. The prevailing party in any such action shall be entitled to its attorney's fees and costs of suit. DATED this day of 20 CITY OF TUKWILA CONTRACTOR: Freedman Tung Bottomley_ 13Y: rib 00. .1 Mayor, Steven M. Mullet Title: Principal ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED: Printed Mam ichael I L ,..P Jane E. Cantu, CMC, City Clerk ADDRESS: 47 Kea S APPROVED AS TO FORM: Office of the City Attorney I3Y: C:pncbtab Vibdesignrcvicwcumracl.doc Street, Suit CA 94 ne's 500 08 B. Penny's: EXHIBIT A CITY OF TUKWILA DESIGN REVIEW SERVICES Mall Expansion and J.C. Penny Expansion Proposals Scone of Services (Version 3: February 18, 2003) Protect Overview Assist City Staff with the review and evaluation of development proposals for two major projects in the Tukwila Urban Center area of the City. Engage in a streamlined review process designed to minimize applicant frustration and overall review process inefficiency by limiting the first review sessions to site planning and massing, and proceeding on to architectural design (and signage) only after the site plan and massing are approved. Begin by requesting very conceptual sketches that increase in precision and complexity after each round of review. Given that zoning regulations will be under review and subject to likely modification (as part of the Tukwila Urban Center Subarea Plan project) simultaneously with the review of these two development proposals, consultants•will coordinate closely with City Staff to affirm assumptions about the design and development performance principles (in the absence of "standards" which will be under development in the parallel project) to be applied to the review of proposed developments. To that end, consultants working simultaneously on these design review projects as well as the Tukwila Urban Center (TUC) Subarea Plan will endeavor to bring the most up to date understanding of the community's intent with regard to development in the TUC area, into the review of these significant development projects within TUC. Task Descrintions Orientation. The following task list provides our recommendations as to how the City can proceed most effectively toward the development of plans designs to address the problems and opportunities at hand. The tasks are listed in the chronological order that we expect to proceed. It is important to note, however, that since the task list is prepared prior to opportunities for community discussion, as well as prior to the development of recommendations, it is entirely possible that either the nature of the problem or the priorities of the community will require both chronological adjustments as well as task substitutions to refine the effectiveness of the services performed. Once the final task list is approved by the City, the most basic purpose of this task list is to provide both a preview of the likely type and order of work to be performed as well as a contractual basis for a certain number of meetings, drawings, workshops and tasks to be delivered for the corresponding project budget. Task 1. Start -up A. Mall Expansion: 1. Receive/review site /context existing conditions basemaps Note: All original existing conditions base information to be used in the performance of this scope of services will be provided by the City. For the purposes of this study, FTB will assume that the information contained in such City provided basemaps is accurate, or at least that City Staff is satisfied that it is sufficiently accurate for the purposes of this project. 2. Receive /review background information correspondence Scope of Services, Page 2 1. Receive /review site /context existing conditions basemaps 2. Receive /review background information correspondence C. General: I. Discuss review approval process; review staff memo to owners. The design review process outlined in this Scope of Services requires that the City/Consultant review team make the review process very clear to the applicant developer /architect teams right from the outset of the review process. This task allows for discussion of that process between FTB and City Staff, and then for FTB to review the Staff memo (to the developer teams) that describes that process at the outset, and that specifies the level of detail the City will require at each stage of the review. 2. Discuss role of existing zoning code in review process. Perhaps the most confusing aspect of this review process we will be the requirement to review major development proposals prior to the completion of new policies for Tukwila Urban Center (TUC) are developed. Since we know land use policies for TUC will be changing, we assume that we will not be holding the developers to the current zoning code, but rather attempting to apply what we know about the direction of TUC land use policy (as it develops within the TUC Subarea Plan project) as we go. Besides needing to be very clear (in writing) with the developer team about the status of the zoning code, we will need to check these assumptions with City Staff regularly to make sure we are applying (and enforcing) design parameters that everyone agrees to. Our scope features regular telephone and occasional written coordination with staff on those issues. This specific task is meant to start that discussion. Task 2. Site Plan and Massing Review Preliminary A. Mall Expansion: 1. Receive/log/check initial proposal concept plan 2. Review proposal; prepare issues list 3. Discussion, Q &A with owner (teleconference) 4. Prepare redlines and design review recommendations 5. Pre meeting with City Staff 6. Working Session with Developer Team 7. Follow -up: Receive /review meeting notes from City B. Penny's: 1. Receive/log/check initial proposal concept plan 2. Review proposal; prepare issues list 3. Discussion, Q &A with owner (teleconference) Scope of Services, Page 3 4. Prepare redlines and design review recommendations 5. Pre meeting with City Staff 6. Working Session with Developer Team 7. Follow -up: Receive/review meeting notes from City C. General: 1. Travel to /fr Tukwila (assumes all Task Meetings same trip) Task 3. Site Plan and Massing Modifications A. Mall Expansion: 1. Receive/log/check modified submital 2. Review proposal; prepare prelim redlines issues list 3. Q &A w/ owner /architect 4. Discuss with City Staff (teleconference) 5. Prepare recommendations memo; transmit w/ redlines to City Staff 6. Respond to developer questions (teleconference) B. Penny's: 1. Receive/log/check modified submital 2. Review proposal; prepare prelim redlines issues list 3. Q&A w/ owner /architect 4. Discuss with City Staff (teleconference) 5. Prepare recommendations memo; transmit w/ redlines to City Staff 6. Respond to developer questions (teleconference) Task 4. Site Plan and Massing Refine and Finalize A. Mall Expansion: 1. Receive/log/check revised proposal 2. Review proposal; prepare issues list 3. Discussion, Q&A with owner (teleconference) Scope of Services, Page 4 4. Prepare redlines and design review recommendations 5. Pre meeting with City Staff 6. Working Session with Developer Team 7. Follow -up: Receive /review meeting notes from City B. Penny's: 1. Receive/log/check revised proposal 2. Review proposal; prepare issues list 3. Discussion, Q &A with owner (teleconference) 4. Prepare redlines and design review recommendations 5. Pre meeting with City Staff 6. Working Session with Developer Team 7. Follow -up: Receive /review meeting notes from City C. General: 1. Travel to /fr Tukwila (assumes all Task Meetings same trip) Task 5. Architectural design and signage start up A. Mall Expansion: 1. Receive/log /check proposal 2. Review proposal; prepare issues list 3. Discussion, Q &A with owner (teleconference) 4. Prepare redlines and design review recommendations 5. Pre- meeting with City Staff 6. Working Session with Developer Team 7. Follow -up: Receive /review meeting notes from City B. Penny's: 1. Receive/log/check revised proposal 2. Review proposal; prepare issues list 3. Discussion, Q &A with owner (teleconference) Scope of Services, Page 5 4. Prepare redlines and design review recommendations 5. Pre meeting with City Staff 6. Working Session with Developer Team 7. Follow -up: Receive /review meeting notes from City C. General: D. Travel to /fr Tukwila (assumes all Task Meetings same trip) Task 6. Architectural design and signage refinements A. Mall Expansion: 1. Receive/log/check proposal 2. Review proposal; prepare issues list 3. Discussion, Q&A with owner (teleconference) 4. Prepare redlines and design review recommendations 5. Pre meeting with City Staff 6. Working Session with Developer Team 7. Follow -up: Receive /review meeting notes from City B. Penny's: 1. Receive/log /check revised proposal 2. Review proposal; prepare issues list 3. Discussion, Q &A with owner (teleconference) 4. Prepare redlines and design review recommendations 5. Pre meeting with City Staff 6. Working Session with Developer Team 7. Follow -up: Receive /review meeting notes from City Note: It is assumed that travel time and expenses corresponding to this Task's meetings in Tukwila will be borne by the TUC Subarea plan project. That is, it is assumed that these particular sessions will be scheduled by City Staff to occur as part of a trip taken for the TUC project, and therefore will not require separate time and travel expense allowances within this Scope of Services. Scope of Services, Page 6 Staffing Budget Spreadsheet: Detailed staffing budget information for professional services to be provided by Freedman Tung Bottomley is attached the attached staffing and budget spreadsheet details estimated charges for each task and sub -task, as well as estimated hours for all levels of staff working on the project. The order and content of tasks and sub -tasks contained within the spreadsheet corresponds precisely to the order and content of tasks contained in the detailed Task Descriptions above. Terms: This is a time and materials project with a guaranteed maximum fee for completion of the Work Tasks outlined above. Invoicing shall be monthly, based on time and materials costs accrued during the preceding month. The list of task -by -task costs on the Staffing Budget spreadsheets (attached) is provided to indicate the relative proportion of budgeted resources that each task is likely to require. It is provided for informational purposes only and is not intended as a basis for task -by -task contract provisions or invoicing. Fee Schedule: Project Costs. Staffing Budget Principal I 185 per hour Principal II 150 per hour Construction Methods Specialist 140 per hour Senior Associate 110 per hour Associate 85 per hour Graphic Artist 80 per hour Project Landscape Designer 70 per hour Project Urban Designer 70 per hour GIS Operator I 75 per hour AutoCAD Operator I 75 per hour AutoCAD Operator II 65 per hour Draftsman 55 per hour Document Publishing Technician 55 per hour Database Operator 50 per hour Project Assistant I 50 per hour Project Assistant II 45 per hour Technical Secretary 40 per hour Office Assistant 25 per hour In addition to the hourly rate charged, the following shall be charged as PROJECT COSTS: Document duplication, messenger services, postage and handling, long distance telephone calls, travel expenses for out -of- office services, special equipment charges, desktop publishing, office archives and database, governmental plan and other inspection fees, expenses for renderings, models and mock -ups requested by CLIENT, expenses for additional insurance coverage or limits, including professional liability insurance, requested by the CLIENT in excess of that normally carried by the CONSULTANT, and /or associated with contracts to sub consultants, plus other out -of- pocket expenses reasonably required in performance of services for the Project. EXHIBIT B CONSULTANT FEE AND COMPENSATION SCHEDULE 1) BASIC FEES. CONSULTANT fee shall be based on the performance of each of the tasks set forth in EXHIBIT "A not to exceed the total sum of $49,405.00 including PROJECT COSTS as set forth in this Schedule. Billing and payment shall be based on hourly rates and PROJECT COSTS as set forth in Exhibit A. 2) INVOICING. CONSULTANT shall submit monthly invoices for services performed and PROJECT COSTS incurred. Each invoice is due and payable by the CLIENT on presentation and is past due thirty (30) days from invoice date. Any billing disputes shall be brought to the attention of CONSULTANT within fourteen (14) days of billing presentation. If CLIENT fails to timely bring a billing dispute to the attention of CONSULTANT, CLIENT waives the right to dispute the amount billed. An interest charge of 10% annual percentage rate may be added to overdue accounts. Interest charges will not be added to amounts that were inaccurately calculated by the CONSULTANT. If accounts are unpaid forty- five (45) days from the date of billing, work may be halted at the discretion of CONSULTANT until payments are made current. In addition, the CONSULTANT reserves the right to withhold delivery of work product or extend time limits applicable to the performance of this AGREEMENT in the event of delinquent receivables. The CONSULTANT shall not be held responsible for any damages due to halting work or withholding work product. 3) ADDITIONAT. SERVICES. Additional services shall be compensated at CONSULTANTS hourly rates as set forth in EXHIBIT A. CLIENT shall not be obligated to make payments for ADDITIONAL SERVICE pursuant to this AGREEMENT unless such service and the price therefore is set forth in an executed work order or authorized in writing by CLIENT. 4) TERMINATION OF SERVICES, In the event services are terminated, through no fault of CONSULTANT, by either party CLIENT shall compensate the CONSULTANT for all outstanding fees and PROJECT EXPENSES incurred for work completed prior to CONSULTANTs receipt of notice of termination. CONSULTANT shall also be entitled to recover its costs of preparing documents and files for delivery to CLIENT on the basis of billing rates established in this EXHIBIT. CONSULTANT shall maintain adequate logs, timesheets and records to verify fees and PROJECT COSTS incurred. [Use this provision with Prime Agreement only when similar language is not included in the Prime Agreement.] 5) ST JRCONST JT.TANTS Fees of subconsultants retained by CONSULTANT shall be paid by CONSULTANT from its basic fee as set forth in Paragraph One (1) of this EXHIBIT. EXHIBIT B City of Tukwila: Design Review Services - Mall Expansion & J.C. Penny's Proposals Staffing & Budget Spreadsheet (v.3) Tasks: FTB Only Principal Associate Autocad Op. 1 Autocad Op. II Project Assist II Total hours fees hours fees hours fees hours fees hrs (md) fees Fees 1. Start-up $0 $0 $0 $0 ` 0 $0 $0 Mall Expansion: $0 $0 - $0 $0. 0 $0 $0 $0 1 $85 $0 $0 0 $13 $98 A. Receive /review site/context existing conditions basemaps B. Receive/review background Information & correspondence. $0 2 $170 $0 $0 1 $26 $196 Penny's: $0 $0 $0 $0 0 $0 $0 A. Receive /review site/context existing conditions basemaps $0 1 $85 $0 $0 0 $13 $98 B. Receive/review background information & correspondence $0 2 $170 $0 $0 1 $26 $196 General: $0 $0 $0 $0 0 $0 $0 A. Discuss review & approval process; review staff memo to owners 2 $370 $0 $0 $0 1 $56 $426 B. Discuss role of existing zoning code in review process 1 $185 $0 $0 $0 1 $28 $213 2. Site Plan and Massing Review - Preliminary $0 $0 $0 $0 0 $0 $0 Mall Expansion: $0 $0 $0 $0 0 $0 $0 A. Receive/log/check initial proposal - concept plan $0 1 $85 $0 $0 0 $13 $98 B. Review proposal; prepare issues list 1 $185 3 $255 $0 $0 1 $66 $506 C. Discussion, Q&A with owner (teleconf) 1 $185 1 $85 $0 $0 1 $41 $311 D. Prepare redlines and design review recommendations 2 $370 6 $510 $0 $0 3 $132 $1,012 E. Pre - meeting with City Staff 3 $555 3 $255 $0 $0 3 $122 $932 F. Working Session with Developer Team 3 $555 3 $255 $0 $0 3 $122 - $932 G. Follow -up: Receive /review meeting notes from City $0 1 $85 $0 $0 0 $13 $98 Penny's: $0 $0 $0 ' $0 0 $0 $0 A. Receive/log /check Initial proposal - concept plan $0 1 $85 $0 $0 0 $13 $98 B. Review proposal; prepare issues list 1 $185 2 $170 - $0 $0 1 $53 $408 C. Discussion, Q &A with owner (teleconf) 1 $185 1 $85 $0 $0 ` 1 $41 $311 D. Prepare redlines and design review recommendations 2 $370 4 $340 $0 $0 2 $107 $817 E. Pre - meeting with City Staff 2 $370 2 $170 $0 $0 2 $81 $621 F. Working Session with Developer Team 3 $555 3 $255 $0 $0 3 $122 $932 G. Follow -up: Receive/review meeting notes from City $0 1 $85 $0 $0 0 $13 $98 General: $0 $0 $0 $0 0 $0 $0 A. Travel to /fr Tukwila (assumes all Task Mtgs same trip) 7 $1,295 7 $595 $0 $0 6 $284 52,174 3. Site Plan and Massing - Modifications $0 $0 $0 - $0 0 $0 $0 Mall Expansion: $0 $0 $0 $0 0 $0 $0 A. Receive/log/check modified submittal $0 1 $85 $0 $0 0 $13 $98 B. Review proposal; prepare prelim redlines & issues list 1 $185 4 5340 $0 $0 2 $79 $604 C. Q &Aw /owner /architect 1 $185 1 $85 $0 $0 1 $41 $311 D. Discuss with City Staff (teleconf) 1 $185 $0 $0 $0 1 $28 $213 E. Prepare recommendations memo; transmit w/ redlines to City Staff 2 $370 5 $425 $0 $0 3 $119 5914 F. Respond to developer questions (teleconf) 1 $185 1 $85 $0 $0 1 $41 $311 Penny's: $0 $0 $0 $0 0 $0 $0 Staffing and Budget Spreadsheet, Page 1 City of Tukwila: Design Review Services - Mall Expansion & J.C. Penny's Proposals Staffing & Budget Spreadsheet (v.3) Tasks: FTB Only Principal Associate Autocad Op. 1 Autocad Op. II Project Assist 11 Total hours fees hours fees hours fees hours fees irs (md'I fees Fees A. Receive/log/check modified submittal $0 1 $85 $0 $0 0 $13 $98 B. Review proposal; prepare prelim redlines & issues list 1 $185 3 $255 $0 $0 1 $66 $506 C. Q&A w/ owner /architect 0.5 $93 0.5 $43 $0 $0 0 $20 $155 D. Discuss with City Staff ( teleconf) 0.5 $93 0.5 $43 $0 $0 0 $20 $155 E. Prepare recommendations memo; transmit w/ redlines to City Staff 1 $185 6 $510 $0 $0 2 $104 $799 F. Respond to developer questions ( telecont) 1 $185 1 $85 $0 $0 1 $41 $311 4. Site Plan and Massing - Refine and Finalize $0 $0 $0 $0 - 0 $0 $0 Mall Expansion: $0 $0 $0 $0 0 $0 $0 A. Receivefloq /check revised proposal $0 1 $85 $0 $0 '0 $13 '. $98 B. Review proposal; prepare issues list - 1 $185 3 $255 $0 $0 1 $66 $506 C. Discussion, Q&A with owner ( teleconf) $0 1 $85 $0 $0 0 $13 $98 D. Prepare redlines and design review recommendations 2 $370 4 $340 $0 $0 2 $107 $817 E. Pre - meeting with City Staff 3 $555 3 $255 $0 $0 3 $122 $932 F. .Worklng Session with Developer Team 3 $555 3 $255 $0 $0 3 $122 $932. G. Follow -up: Receive/review meeting notes from City $0 1 $85 $0 $0 0 $13 $98 Penny's: $0 $0 $0 $0 0 $0 $0 A. Receive/Ioq /check revised proposal $0 1 $85 $0 $0 0 $13 $98 B. Review proposal; prepare issues list 1 $185 3 $255 $0 $0 1 $66 $506 C. Discussion, Q&A with owner ( teleconf) 1 $185 $0 $0 $0 1 $28 $213 D. Prepare redlines and design review recommendations 1 $185 4 $340 $0 $0 2 $79 $604 E. Pre - meeting with City Staff 2 $370 2 $170 $0 $0 2 $81 $621 F. Working Session with Developer Team 3 $555 3 $255 $0 $0 3 $122 $932 G. Follow -up: Receive /review meeting notes from City $0 1 $85 $0 $0 0 $13 $98 General: - $0 $0 $0 $0 0 $0 $0 A. Travel to/Ir Tukwila (assumes all Task Mtgs same trip) 7 $1,295 7 $595 $0 $0 6 $284 $2,174 5. Architectural design and signage - start up $0 $0 $0 $0 0 $0 $0 Mall Expansion: $0 $0 $0 $0 0 $0 $0 A. Receive/log/check proposal $0 1 $85 $0 $0 0 $13 $98 B. Review proposal; prepare Issues list 2 $370 3 $255 $0 $0 2 $94 $719 C. Discussion, Q&A with owner (teleconf) . 1 $185 1 $85 $0 $0 1 $41 $311 D. Prepare redlines and design review recommendations 2 $370 6 $510 $0 $0 3 $132 $1,012 E. Pre - meeting with City Staff 3 $555 3 $255 $0 $0 3 $122 $932 F. Working Session with Developer Team 3 $555 3 $255 $0 $0 3 $122 $932 G. Follow -up: Receive /review meeting notes from City $0 1 $85 $0 $0 0 $13 $98 Penny's: $0 $0 $0 $0 0 $0 $0 A. Receive /log/check revised proposal $0 1 $85 $0 $0 0 $13 $98 B. Review proposal; prepare issues list 1 $185 3 $255 $0 $0 1 $66 $506 C. Discussion, Q &A with owner ( teleconf) 1 $185 $0 $0 $0 1 $28 $213 Staffing and Budget Spreadsheet, Page 2 City of Tukwila: Design Review Services - Mall Expansion & J.C. Penny's Proposals Staffing & Budget Spreadsheet (v.3) Tasks: FTB Only Principal Associate Autocad Op. 1 Autocad Op. II Project Assist II Total hours fees hours fees hours fees hours fees hrs (md) fees Fees D. Prepare redlines and design review recommendations 2 ' $370 6 $510 $0 $0 3 $132 $1,012 E. Pre- meeting with City Staff 2 $370 2 $170 $0 $0 2 $81 $621 F. Working Session with Developer Team 8 $1,480 8 $680 $0 $0 7 $324 $2,484 G. Follow -up: Receive/review meeting notes from City $0 1 $85 $0 $0 0 $13 $98 General: $0 $0 $0 $0 0 $0 $0 A. Travel to /fr Tukwila (assumes all Task Mtgs same trip) 7 $1,295 7 $595 $0 $0 6 $284 $2,174 6. Architectural design and signage - refinements $0 $0 $0 $0 0 $0 $0 Mall Expansion: $0 $0 $0 $0 0 $0 $0 A. Receive/log/check proposal $0 1 $85 $0 $0 0 $13 $98 B. Review proposal; prepare issues list. 1 $185 3 $255 $0 $0 1 $66 $506 C. Discussion, Q&A with owner (teleconf) 0.5 $93 0.5 $43 $0 $0 0 $20 $155 D. Prepare redlines and design review recommendations 2 $370 6 $510 $0 $0 3 $132 $1,012 E. Pre - meeting with City Staff 2 $370 2 $170 $0 $0 2 $81 $621 F. Working Session with Developer Team 3 $555 3 $255 $0 $0 3 $122 $932 G. Follow -up: Receive /review meeting notes from City $0 1 $85 $0 $0 0 $13 $98 Penny's: $0 $0 $0 $0 0 $0 $0 A. Receive /log /check revised proposal $0 1 $85 $0 $0 0 $13 $98 B. Review proposal; prepare issues list 1 $185 3 $255 $0 $0 1 $66 $506 C. Discussion, Q &A with owner (teleconf) 0.5 $93 0.5 $43 $0 $0 0 $20 $155 D. Prepare redlines and design review recommendations 1 $185 5 $425 $0 $0 2 $92 $702 E. Pre - meeting with City Staff 2 $370 2 $170 $0 $0 2 $81 $621 F. Working Session with Developer Team 3 $555 3 $255 $0 $0 3 $122 $932 G. Follow -up: Receive/review meeting notes from City $0 1 $85 $0 $0 0 $13 $98 Total Professional Services - FTB: $41,601 Reimbursable Expenses: $3,744 Travel Allowance: $4,060 TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET: $49,405 Staffing and Budget Spreadsheet, Page 3 CAS Number: 03-042 1 Agenda Item Title: 1 Original Sponsor: Timeline: Sponsor's Summary: Recommendations: Sponsor: Committee: Administration: Cost Impact (if known): Fund Source (if known): Meeting Date 1 3/24/03 Meeting Date 3/24/03 3/24/03 3/24/03 COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Meetinz Date 3/24/03 Prepared by ARD Initials 1 Mayor's review 1 Council review 1 /w 1 icrL 1 %7:4x04:0: Original Agenda Date: 3/24/03 Approve as submitted Finance Safety Approved at March 17, 2003 meeting. Same as Sponsor N/A N/A Action Attachments Staff report dated March 12, 2003 Proposed Resolution Finance Safety March 17, 2003 minutes ITEM No. Resolution increasing Recreation Change Fund. Council Admin. X Approve at April 7, 2003 Regular Meeting Increase the change fund at the Tukwila Pool/Community Center to account for increased demand. To: Finance Safety Committee From: Alan R. Doerschel ai ep Date: March 12, 2003 Subject: Increase in Recreation Change Fund There is a problem involving the need for Tukwila Pool and Community Center personnel making periodic trips to the bank for change each week. The activity levels require an increase of $100.00 in additional cash on hand to meet this need. The attached Resolution will provide this increase in cash to be used by both locations. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, INCREASING THE PARKS AND RECREATION CHANGE FUND, AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 1511. WHEREAS, the Tukwila City Council previously established Change Funds and Petty Cash Fund levels, most recently by Resolution No. 1511; and WHEREAS, there is a need to increase the Change Fund to $300.00 in Parks and Recreation for operational efficiency; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Change Fund levels are hereby set as follows: I Finance Department !Municipal Court 1 Parks and Recreation Golf Course Section 2. The Petty Cash Fund levels are hereby set as follows: I Finance Department 1 General Fund 1 Police Investigation /Tukwila !General Fund Fire Department 1 General Fund Parks and Recreation 1 General Fund Public Works Div. II 1 General Fund Municipal Court (General Fund Public Works Div. I 1 General Fund Petty Cash 1 VNET Police Investigation (VNET) 1 VNET Section 3. Resolution No. 1511 is hereby repealed. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of 2003. ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED: Jane E. Cantu, CMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Office of the City Attorney Parks Rec Change Fund 3/20/03 n U 1 Water Fund 1 General Fund I General Fund Foster Golf Course Fund Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council. Resolution Number 0001 100.00 1 000 1 150.00 1 000 1 300.00 I 411 1 1,200.00 (or less as needed) 0001 800.00 000 1 5,000.00 000 1 200.00 000 1 500.00 000 1 350.00 000 1 300.00 0001 200.00 102 I 300.00 102 1 15,000.00 Pam Carter, Council President Finance and Safety Committee March 17, 2003 Present: Joe Duffle, Chair; Jim Haggerton, Pam Carter Alan Doerschel, John McFarland, Steve Lancaster, Rhonda Berry, Lucy Lauterbach; Dennis Robertson 1. Mayor's Salary One of the Council goals from their retreat was to look at the mayor's salary, and the administration had responded by drafting an ordinance to give a slight increase to the salary for one year. John said the Mayor was comfortable with receiving annual 90% of the cost of living (COLA) increases similar to those given non represented employees. He said Steve has been busy going to meetings both day and night for four or five nights a week. Jim said he wanted to separate the person from the office. He said he didn't want the salary to attract people to run just for the money. With the recently passed utility tax, he said people want the utility tax to be used for basic government services, not for increases in elected officials' salaries. Jim had looked up the ordinance governing the current mayor's salary, and it runs through 2004, giving a small increase in that year. He did not want an increase in the current salary. Pam said a COLA increase should not be an issue. She said the job has grown over the past years, and now deserves a higher pay. John likened the position to that of the CEO of a $38 million corporation. He agreed he did not want the salary to attract candidates who were not qualified for the office. Of the three other cities with strong mayors, all were getting COLAs after 2003, and all had much larger salaries. Pam said she wanted to do something with future salaries before the filing period this summer. Joe said in light of the bad economy and with so many unemployed people he thought the mayor shouldn't get an increase. Pam favored the draft ordinance, which raised the salary from $78,000 to $80,000 in 2004, with COLAs in years after. Jim did not support any increase in the salary. They agreed that three options could be given to the COW: no increase; the `old" ordinance with an increase and a floor /ceiling; or an increase, and then COLA's. Refer issue to COW with a split Committee decision. 2. Increase in Change Fund Currently the pool and community center share a "bank" of change money. Because the fund is small, it involves many extra trips to the bank. Alan recommended increasing their change funds. If it is increased to $300, the pool can have $125 and the community center $175 in change. That should satisfy the needs of both facilities. Alan noted the change funds need to be updated regularly. Recommend resolution to Regular Meeting. 3. Electronic Sign Moratorium At the last meeting of Community and Parks, DCD had raised the issue of using a moratorium to get time to address the changing technology of the sign business. One business has bought an expensive sign that is capable of the flashing and moving signs that annoy people on I -5 near Fife, though this sign is smaller than that billboard. The current City language in the sign code has not stopped businesses for wanting signs that flash and dance with changing scenes every few minutes. Sign companies all want to sell the more expensive flashy signs. A moratorium will give the staff time to research various approaches to regulating the newest kinds of signs. Recommend moratorium ordinance to that eveninn's Regular Meeting.