Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTrans 2013-07-23 COMPLETE AGENDA PACKETCity of Tukwila Transportation Committee ❖ Kate Kruller, Chair ❖ Joe Duffie ❖ Dennis Robertson Distribution: K. Kruller J. Duffle K. Hougardy D. Robertson Mayor Haggerton D. Cline K. Matej L. Humphrey B. Giberson F. Iriarte R. Tischmak G. Labanara P. Brodin S. Kerslake Clerk File Copy 2 Extra e -mail pkt pdf to A. Le e -mail cover to: C. O'Flaherty, D. Almberg, B. Saxton, S. Norris, M. Hart, A. Le AGENDA TUESDAY, JULY 23, 2013 Time: 5:15 PM Place: Conference Room #1 (6300 Building) Item Recommended Action Page 1. PRESENTATION(S) 2. BUSINESS AGENDA a) Surface Water Lift Station No. 15 a) Forward to the 8/05/13 Pg. 1 Bid Award Regular Consent Agenda b) Surface Water Lift Station No. 15 b) Forward to the 8/05/13 Pg. 5 Purchase of Backup Generator Regular Consent Agenda c) 42nd Ave S /Allentown Roadside Barrier c) Information only. Pg. 7 Warrant Analysis d) Update on Allentown area relating to the Burlington d) Information only. Pg. 27 Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railroad e) Commute Trip Reduction Program e) Forward to the 8/12/13 Pg. 41 WSDOT Funding Agreement Committee of the Whole f) South County Area Transportation Board (SCATBd) f) Forward to the 8/05/13 Pg. 55 Agreement Regular Consent Agenda 3. SCATBd g) SCATBd June 18, 2013 Meeting Summary g) Information only. Pg. 69 SCATBd July 16, 2013 Meeting Agenda 4. MISCELLANEOUS 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS Future Agendas: TUC Pedestrian /Bicycle Bridge Grant Acceptance & Park Impact Fees Next Scheduled Meeting: Tuesday, August 13, 2013 t> The City of Tukwila strives to accommodate individuals with disabilities. Please contact the Public Works Department at 206- 433 -0179 for assistance. TO: Cit of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM Mayor Haggerton Transportation Committee FROM: Bob Giberson, Public Works Director By: Ryan Larson, Senior Program Manager DATE: July 19, 2013 SUBJECT: Surface Water Lift Station No, 15 Project No, 91041203 Bid Award ISSUE Award the bid for construction of the Surface Water Lift Station No. 15 improvements. BACKGROUND This project will provide a back-up power generator for the Surface Water Lift Station No. 15, which drains approximately 200 acres of the northern portion of the Tukwila South Development. The station was built in 1977, has four pumps and a total capacity of 43.7 cfs. The electrical controls and pumps are located below ground and the surface water lift station currently does not have generator backup power. ANALYSIS The Surface Water Lift Station No. 15 project was advertised for bids on July 2 and 9, 2013. Four bids were received and opened on July 16, 2013. The bids were checked and tabulated and Gary Harper Construction, Inc. is the apparent low bidder with a bid of $318,568.35. Gary Harper Construction has successfully completed similar project for the City in the past. A review of the bid tabs showed that the lowest three bidders were within 10% of each other and that the individual bid amounts were similar. The engineer's estimate was $266,194.50. The engineer's estimate was lower by approximately $50,000 due to the electrical upgrade component of the project. This bid award is only for the installation of the backup generator. A second memo will propose the $200,000 purchase for the actual generator. The total construction budget is $515,000 and with the generator purchase of $200,000, this leaves only $315,000 for this award. Additional funding is available from the 2013 Small Drainage Program and it is recommended that $36,000 be transferred to allow for construction of the Surface Water Lift Station No. 15 project. BUDGET AND BID SUMMARY (All amounts include sales tax) Bid Results Estimate 2013 Budget Bid Amount $318,568.35 $266,194.50 Project Budget (CIP pg. 140) $515,000.00 Generator Purchase (see separate memo) (200,000.00) 2013 Small Drainage Project (pg. 136) 36,000.00 Contingency (10%) 31,856.83 26,619,45 0.00 Total $30,425.18 $292,813.35 $351,0.04 all RECOMMENDATION The Council is being asked to award the construction of the Surface Water Lift Station No. 15 project to Gary Harper Construction, Inc. in the amount of $318,568.35 and consider this item at the August 5, 2013 Regular Consent Agenda. attachments: Bid Tabulation EngsPROJECTS1A- DR Pro*cps1,Morm Lift Staton No 15 Improvemerrls (91041203pesogrAMo Mem F3 I Award .doc 2 BID TABULATION Owner: City of Tukwila Project; Storm Lift Station No. 15 Improvements Engineers: PACE Engineers, Inc, Bid Date: Bid Time: Job No, July 16, 2013 10:00 AM! 11372.001 Engineer's Esti TEM NO. ITEM OR TASK DESCRIPTION QUANTITY NO, UNIT UNITS UNIT PRICE COST 1 2" HMA 1/2" with 4" CSTC CSTC 3 Traffic Control Devices 4 1Plantings 5 Mobilization 2 6 7 8 9 Ternporry Water Pollution/Erosion Control Resolution of Utility Conflicts Traffic Control labor (Min. $35/hr) CMU Shelter Including Awning 10 80 SY 20 TN LS 11 EA Bollards 11 Generator Concrete Pad 12 1Generator installation 13 112" DI Pipe Supports 14 [Electrical ' 15 !Cement Concrete Sidewalk 40 2 1 16 !Reduced Pressure Backflow Assembly with Hot Box II 1 1 EA LS LS I LS Subtotal 9.5% STATE SALES TAX TOTAL BID $55.00 530,00 $1,000.00 $181.82 $25,000.00 $1,000.00 $5,000.00 $35.00 $90,000.00 5150.00 53,000.00 $15,000.00 5300.00 $90,000.00 $500.00 $3,000,00 54,400.00 $600.00 $1,000,00 , 52,000.024 525,000.00 IF $1,000.00 55,000.00 51,400.00 $90,000.00 $300.00 53,000.00 515,000.001 5900.00 590,000.00 $500.00 53,000.00 $243,100.02 $23,094.50 $266,194.52 Gary Harper Construction UNIT PRICE 549.00, $55.00, $500.00 5150.00 $30,600.00 51,700.00 55,000.00 548.00 574,600.00 5720.001 $6,800.00 59,500.00 5900.00 5143,200.00 51,400.00, 54,900.00 COST $3,920.00_ 51,100,00 5500.00 51,650.00 $30,600.00 51,700.00 McClure and Sons Inc. UNIT PRICE $50.00 5.00 $500.00 $120.00 $5,000.00 $1,920.00 ' 574,600.00 51,440.00 56,800.00 59,500.00 $2,700.00 $143,200.00 $1,400.00 $4,900.00 5290,930.00 527,638.35 $318,568.35 0,000,00 $2,500.00 $5,000.00 $55,00 88,128.00 $1,000.00 $6,000.00 COST 4,000.00 700.0 $500.00 $1,320.00 0,000.00 $2.500.00 $5,000.00 $2,200.00 Nordic Construciton, Inc. UNIT PRICE 538.00 $40.00 52,400.00 5250.00. 57,600.00 51,800.00 $5,000.00 544.00 28.00'. 595,000.00 $2,000.00 $6,000.00 $30,000.00 $1,000.00 $30,000.00 $3,000.00 $128,000.00 $128,000.00 ,000.00 $1,000.00 5,000.00' $15,000.0 9,34800 $30,338.06 $349,686.06 $1,000.00 511,000.00 55,000,00, $500,00 5170,000.00 $3,300.00 57,000.00 COST 53,040.00 5800.00 52,400.00 52,750.00 $7,600.00 $1,800.00 $5,000.00 $1,760.00, 595,000,00 52,000,00 511,000.001 $5,000.00 51,500.00 $170.000.00 $3,300.00 57,000.00 R. L. Alia Company UNIT PRICE 5188,00 $100.00 $500.00_ 8300.00 535,000.00 51,000.00 $5,000.00 535.00 COST 515,040.00 $2,000.00 I $500.00 53,300.00 $35,000.00 51,000.00 55,000,00 51,400.00 $75,000.00( 575,000.00 $3,000.00( $6,000.00 520,000.00 850,000.00 $5,000,00 $20,000.00 $50,000,00 $15,000.00 $164,000.001 5164,000.00 $1,500.00 $2,500.00 51,500.00 52,500,00 $319,950.00 $30,395.25 1 $350,345.25 $397,240.00 $37,737.80 5434,977.80 W:\PW Eng\PROJECTS‘A- DR Projects\Storm Lift Station No 15 Improvements (91041203)\Desigrffinal PDF Plans and Specs\Copy of 11372 615 Tab 20130716.xls 7/1712013 3 City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Haggerton Transportation Committee FROM: Bob Giberson, Public Works Director By: Ryan Larson, Senior Program Manager DATE: July 19, 2013 SUBJECT: Surface Water Lift Station No. 15 Project No. 91041203 Generator Purchase ISSUE Approve purchase of a 600KW generator from Cummings NW for the Surface Water Lift Station No. 15 project. BACKGROUND This project will provide a back-up power generator for the Surface Water Lift Station No. 15, which drains approximately 200 acres of the northern portion of the Tukwila South Development. The project calls for a contractor to install electrical upgrades to the existing pump station, construct a modular concrete wall enclosure, and install a City provided 600KW generator (see memo for contractor's bid award). The City is required to purchase the 600KW generator and provide it to the contractor for installation. ANALYSIS Cummings NW is a listed vendor on the Houston-Galveston Area Council (H-GAC) purchasing cooperative, The City of Tukwila has a Council approved purchasing agreement with H-GAC. Cummings is the staff recommended generator for City facilities and the manufacturer of the majority of the City's standby generators. Maintenance staff is trained in maintenance and repair of Cummings generators and are satisfied with the reliability and serviceability of these units. BUDGET AND BID SUMMARY (All amounts include sales tax.) Generator Bid Results 2013 Budget Generator Purchase $ 200,000.00 $200,000.00 Construction Bid (see separate memo) $318,568.35 Project Budget (pg. 140) 315,000.00 2013 Small Drainage Project (pg. 136) 36,000.00 Contingency (10%) 0.00 31,856.84 0.00 Total $200,000.00 $350,425.19 $551,000.00 RECOMMENDATION The Council is being asked to purchase the Standby Generator in the amount of $200,000 for the Surface Water Lift Station No. 15 Project and consider this item at the August 5, 2013 Regular Consent Agenda. WAPW Enrj'PROJECTSA- OR PrctsStorrn Liftl Saw n No 15 Vmprovegnerras (91041203pesi]ghgrao Memo GenerWor Purchase rOcloc 5 6 City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Haggerton Transportation Committee FROM: Bob Giberson, Public Works Director DATE: July 19, 2013 SUBJECT: 42nd Ave South /Allentown Roadside Barrier Project No. 91310301 Warrant Analysis ISSUE Discuss draft barrier warrant analysis for 42 ''d Ave South in Allentown. BACKGROUND The Transportation Committee requested a study regarding guardrail and /or barrier warrants along 42nd Ave South in Allentown. As existing concrete barriers wrap around onto S 115th St from 42nd Ave S, this additional area was also included in the study area and then extends to the 42nd Ave S Bridge. ANALYSIS The goal of the study was to identify applicable design and safety standards, identify roadside barrier needs, and identify any upgrades or modifications to existing guard rail and concrete barriers. Based on Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) and American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) standards, several areas of the river bank along 42nd Ave S and S 115th St are being recommended for guardrail or barrier installation and /or upgrades and modifications (see pages 4 and 5 of the report and the plans in Appendix A). The estimated construction cost for all recommended guardrail and barrier installations is $271,460, and with preliminary engineering (20 %) and construction management (15 %), the total project cost estimate is $366,480. Additional funding will be needed for the Small Roadway and Safety Improvements CIP Residential Street Program. Funds could be spread over the next 6 years to minimize the impact to the Residential Street Fund (103 Fund). RECOMMENDATION For discussion only. Attachments: Draft 42nd Ave S Barrier Warrant Analysis Draft 2014 CIP page for Small Roadway & Safety Improvements 7 W;h�'VY Er g1PROJIECTSA- PW a IFS Proiec1s142nd Ave S Nieraeuwn (Roadside (Herne( (9134G304'l1tFn o 42nd Ave S Bander draft raped glidecx Technical Memorandum To: Bob Giberson, P.E. Public Works Director, City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 CC: Nelson Davis, P.E. From: Andrew Merges, P.E. Date: 6/19/2013 Re: 42nd Ave S — Roadside Barrier Warrant Analysis Project No: City # 91310301.1000.100 (KPG # 13093) This technical memorandum consists of providing a roadside barrier warrant analysis and recommendations for barrier placement on the south side of S 115th Street (adjacent to the fire station) and the west side of 42nd Ave S from S 115 Street to S 124th Street), see vicinity map attached. Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) and American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) guidelines have been utilized to determine applicable barrier warrants, however due to the low volume and speed of the roadway, 25 miles per hour, the analysis can be subjective in nature. The three primary goals of the analysis are: • Identify applicable industry design standards o form a baseline for barrier warrant within the project limi • Identify roadside barrier needs within the project limits. • Identify modification or upgrades to existing roadside barriers. Project Description The project study area along S 115th Street and 42nd Ave S is adjacent to the Duwamish River, bordering both on the south and west sides of the roadway. The roadway is generally flat with no substantial grades and is located vertically fifteen to twenty plus feet above the water surface present during site reconnaissance on June 7th, 2013. Existing grades of the river bank range from 4'H:l'V and steeper with the majority of the grades exceeding 1.5'H:l'V based on visual inspection. It should be noted that there is typically two slopes that constitute the river bank, the first being steep from the surface of the water to an assumed seasonally high water mark, and then one less steep to the edge of roadway. In a few isolated locations, there also appears to be circular arc failure of the river bank. 753 9th Avenue North, Seattle, WA 98109 P: 206.286.1640 F: 206.286.1639 www.kpg.com 8 KP'G Existing roadway channelization is present along S 115th Street that delineates edge lines and centerline raised pavement markings. Existing channelization along 42nd Ave S consists of center line raised pavement markings and curb and gutter on the east side of the roadway. No channelization currently exists on the west side of 42nd Ave S. There is also no established roadway shoulder along the roadway(s), only informal gravel parking areas where adequate width is available. It appears that there have been recent sidewalk and curb and gutter improvements along the east side of 42nd Ave S, terminating at the beginning point of curvature as the roadway transitions to S 115th Street. It appears that the centerline at this location is inconsistent, introducing an offset of the southbound traffic as they exit the curve onto 42nd Ave S. Existing roadside barriers are present in some locations along both S 115th Street and 42nd Ave S. The utilization of semi- ridged beam guardrail and rigid unrestrained concrete barriers are located at tee - intersections, adjacent to roadway curves, adjacent to selected fixed objects (trees), and selected locations of steep river bank where no shoulder exists. No rigid anchored barriers or impact barrier were observed. Roadside Barrier Design Warrants and Limitations Roadside barriers are designed to restrain and/or redirect vehicles that leave the delineated traveled way with the assumption that the systems implemented are not guarantees of their performance in all situations. The WSDOT Design Manual and AASHTO Roadside Design Guide have been used to develop site specific criteria due to the low posted speed of 25 MPH on 42nd Ave S and S 115th Street. While there are a few roadside obstacles such as trees and utilities that impose a safety concern for motorists, the primary focus is on the proximity of the Duwamish River as a permanent body of water. In this instance, AASHTO recommends that the placement of barriers is warranted based on "judgment decision based on location and depth of water and likelihood of encroachment" (AASHTO, 5-5). After site review of the project area, the following criteria for barrier analysis are determined to be applicable: • Duwamish River bank considered non - recoverable. • Clear zone /shoulder assuming a relatively flat slope (6'H:1'V or flatter) from edge of pavement and /or traveled way to top of river bank is 10' for roadways less than 35 miles per hour (WSDOT, 1600 -15) While AASHTO's clear zone ranges from 12' -14' for speeds 40 mph or less given an ADT of 1500 -6000 (AASHTO, 3 -7), WSDOT's 10' clear zone has been used due to the region's accepted general design practices. • In all cases where embankments are steeper than or equal to 3'H:1'V and the vertical height of the section exceeds 10 -feet, barriers are warranted (AASHTO, 5 -3). Within this analysis, this is applied to embankments within the clear zone where recoverable slopes may be present. • Fixed objects within the clear zone must be protected. 753 9th Avenue North, Seattle, WA 98109 P: 206.286.1640 F: 206.286.1639 www.kpg.com 9 Roadside Barrier Design Standards and Types While there are not as well developed guidelines for roadside barrier designs for roadways with speed limits of 25mph, WSDOT and AASHTO do provide basic design parameters for various types installed. In general, each barrier placement must be designed for the specific site constraints and usually one detail, especially for this project, may not be adequate. For example, there are different lengths of guardrail posts that can be used for various applications. Many factors can be considered when selecting a roadside barrier such as economics, aesthetics, performance, and maintenance. Due to the close proximity of the river banks, barrier performance characteristics in regards to longitudinal barrier deflection is considered the overriding concern. The typical barrier options reviewed per the WSDOT Design Manual with their design deflection characteristics are (WSDOT, 1610 -8): • Cable Barrier or Beam Guardrail (Type 20 21 on G -2 posts) o Type: Flexible o Deflection: Up to 12 -feet (face of barrier to object) • Beam Guardrail (Type 1, la, 2, 10, and 31) o Type: Semi -rigid o Deflection: Up to 3 -feet (face of barrier to object) • Permanent Concrete Barrier, Unanchored o Type: Rigid, Unrestrained o Deflection: Up to 2 -feet (back of barrier to object) • Precast Concrete Barrier, Anchored o Type: Rigid, Anchored o Deflection: Up to 6- inches (back of barrier to object) • Rigid Concrete Barrier' o Type: Rigid o Deflection: No Deflection A second design criterion for barrier selection is the shy distance available, or the distance from the edge of traveled way to the face of barrier. Typically, barriers should be placed as far as possible from the traveled way as possible in order to allow errant motorists opportunity to regain control of their vehicle. When site constraints limit distances from the traveled way, a 3.6 -foot shy distance is recommended. For barriers with continuous long runs, this distance may not be as critical and may not adversely affect driver speeds or lane positions. Guardrail post depth is a third barrier characteristic considered for this project. The WSDOT Design Manual figure Exhibit 1610 -11 illustrates type 31 beam guardrail post installation based on backslopes of no steeper than 1'H:1'V starting at the face of guardrail. Guardrail depths can vary from 6 feet to 11 feet. It is anticipated that post between 8 to 11 feet would be needed for all guardrail recommended. 753 9th Avenue North, Seattle, WA 98109 P: 206.286.1640 F: 206.286.1639 www.kpg.com 10 Recommendations After site review of existing conditions within the project limits as well as the above established warrants and criteria for evaluating roadside barrier need, there is the need for new barrier installation as well as barrier replacement and/or modifications. For the majority of situations, it is anticipated that beam guardrail type 31 with long posts can be utilized for the project, even in cases where there is recommended concrete barrier removal/replacement. Appendix A contains plan sheets illustrating barrier recommendations for the project site and they are summarized in the following table. BEGIN STA END STA EXISTING BARRIER TYPE ACTION PROPOSED BARRIER TYPE MEASURED LENGTH 10' CLEAR ZONE 5 +00 9 +00 - 300' YES 9 +00 11 +15 CONCRETE UNRESTRAINED REMOVE REPLACE GUARDRAIL 215' NO 11 +15 13 +30 INSTALL NEW GUARDRAIL 222' NO 13 +30 13 +70 CONCRETE UNRESTRAINED REMOVE REPLACE RESTRAINED BARRIER 40' NO 13 +70 19 +00 CONCRETE UNRESTRAINED REMOVE REPLACE GUARDRAIL 530' NO 19 +00 22 +00 GUARDRAIL CHECK POST DEPTHS REPLACE IF NEEDED 300' NO 22 +00 24 +20 - INSTALL NEW GUARDRAIL 220' NO 24 +20 29 +65 - - - 545' YES 29 +65 31 +30 INSTALL NEW GUARDRAIL 165' NO 31 +30 32 +10 - - - 80' YES 32 +10 34 +90 - INSTALL NEW GUARDRAIL 280' NO 34 +90 35 +45 - INSTALL NEW RESTRAINED BARRIER 55' NO 35 +45 38 +45 - INSTALL NEW GUARDRAIL 300' NO 38 +45 38 +75 CONCRETE UNRESTRAINED - - 30' YES 38 +75 40 +75 - INSTALL NEW GUARDRAIL 200' NO 753 9th Avenue North, Seattle, WA 98109 P: 206.286.1640 F: 206.286.1639 www.kpg.com 11 BEGIN STA END STA EXISTING BARRIER TYPE ACTION PROPOSED BARRIER TYPE MEASURED LENGTH 10' CLEAR ZONE 40 +75 45 +55 - - - 480' YES 45 +55 45 +85 CONCRETE UNRESTRAINED - - 30' NO 45 +85 46 +95 - INSTALL NEW GUARDRAIL 110' NO 46 +95 49 +30 - - 235' YES 49 +30 49 +30 GUARDRAIL REPLACE TERMINAL NEW TERMINAL - NO As shown on the plan sheets, there are situations where there is recommended concrete barrier removal and replacement. This is primarily due to the barriers being unrestrained, their proximity to the edge of pavement, and in some cases the erosion of existing material under the barrier that serves as a base. In the event of vehicular collision, there is the possibility of the barrier overturning and sliding on the adjacent slope that would create a non - recoverable condition. A geotechnical survey of existing river bank stability and associated guardrail post embedment is also recommended due to visual observations of embankment failure. Short-term roadway improvements that could also provide additional roadway safety, but not substitute for roadside barriers include: • Ensure roadway has center and edge line delineation. • Correct centerline channelization for 42nd', Ave S at the beginning point of curvature as the roadway transitions to S 115th' Street. • Add edge of pavement reflective delineation on the east side of 42nd Ave S and the south side of S 1151 Street. Profiled edge lines or flexible, reflective posts could be used. • Installation of edge of roadway rumble strips if pavement width permits. Engineer's Opinion of Probable Constriction Cost An Engineer's Opinion of Probable Construction Cost has been developed based on the barrier recommendations above and is located within Appendix B. The assumptions that have been made in order to determine the costs include: • Type 31 guardrail would be utilized with wood long posts. • Restrained barrier would be jersey type with anchors. 753 9th Avenue North, Seattle, WA 98109 P: 206.286.1640 F: 206.286.1639 www.kpg.com 12 KP'G • Existing barrier between STA 19 +00 to 22 +00 remains in place and not included for removal /replacement. If modifications are required, an additional $20,000 could be assumed for this work. It should be noted that WSDOT is transitioning to steel posts for guardrail due to variability in service life of wood posts. An economic life cycle cost study was performed by WSDOT and the resulting increase in costs to use steel is approximately 13% (Smith). For this study and project area, it was assumed that wood posts would be sufficient. 753 9th Avenue North, Seattle, WA 98109 P: 206.286.1640 F: 206.286.1639 www.kpg.com 13 Vicinity Map 753 9th Avenue North, Seattle, WA 98109 P: 206.286.1640 F: 206.286.1639 www.k,pq.corn 14 References American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). Roadside Design Guide 3rd Edition 2006, with updated Chapter 6. Washington: 2006. Smith ST. Economic evaluation of treated wood and galvanized steel guardrail posts. WSDOT; 2013. 8p. Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). Design Manual M 22- 01.08. Olympia: WSDOT Publication Services, 2011. 753 9th Avenue North, Seattle, WA 98109 P: 206.286.1640 F: 206.286.1639 www.kpg.com 15 Appendix A Plans iiiiiml:AMri dii:E CONSTRUCTION NOTES Oi REMOVE AND REPLACE GUARDRAIL TERMINAL 133HS SIHL 00 +01 tl1S 3NI1 H31VVi c z W J En N 76 0 133HS 00 +9 tlLS 3NI1 HO1VV1 Z 133HS 00 +SL 010 3NI1 H�1VV1 S.115T.ST LENS SIHI 00 +01 tl1S 3NI1 HOLM ce w cc w N 0 0 cc ui w z N WARRANT ANALYSIS BARRIER PLAN STA 6 +00 TO STA 15 +00 we 90 a uoa /a� /e w�p N�acdoegvo,rvv�A�b�w�,oAr��saoAs av o�r�eo rm aA�� iiii9:MINrl dii:E CONSTRUCTION NOTES Oi REMOVE AND REPLACE GUARDRAIL TERMINAL 133HS SIHI 05 +61 VIS 3N11 HO1VVN En iS e Le 00 tl. z 0 J Y� 1111[[[[[[.., 1011[1111111111111111111111111111111111111111[1 ilooloolool000mooli 1i1a ;1r, 1111[111111101°4111 A 133HS SIHI 05 +61 015 3NI1 HO1VVN 42ND AVE S. ROADSIDE BARRIER WARRANT ANALYSIS BARRIER PLAN STA 15 +00 TO STA 24 +00 we 90 a uoa/ eVe^ PN�aeson \v�,�wA�b�w�,oAr��saoAs �v P�ar�eos�Av��,vmAsia3roaaA �� 011111 INfl v �l l �A1d CONSTRUCTION NOTES Oi REMOVE AND REPLACE GUARDRAIL TERMINAL 133HS SIHL 09 +9Z YlS 3N11 H31VV1 z W J dillikE V 133HS 00 +55 515 3N11 H01VV1 ■ z 7 %afff7 IJ /)fi Jyl/jl ip!D➢1Jl1y 4;$2dNG 42ND AVE S. ROADSIDE BARRIER WARRANT ANALYSIS BARRIER PLAN STA 24 +00 TO STA 33 +00 Z 133HS 00 +bZ 515 3NI1 H01VVl 133HS SIH1 05 +90 Y1S 3NI1 H01511 we co a uoa/ e�/ e^ PN�aesoegvo ,��� \sb�µo,oAr��saoAs �v P�zr�eosgv��amAsia3roaeA�� CONSTRUCTION NOTES Oi REMOVE AND REPLACE GUARDRAIL TERMINAL c z W J llpiyp .o ttlf vy dmlikE S 133HS 00 +ZV V1S 3NIl H31VIN h i utfIP, 11 £ L33HS 00 +££ V1S 3NIl H01YYV ce w cc m w 0 cc ui w z N WARRANT ANALYSIS BARRIER PLAN STA 33 +00 TO STA 42 +00 INV ma/ 6Ve'^ PN�acson \v�,��� \�b�w�,o�r�tsao�s �v P�zr�eocgv�wwmAsia3roaaA �� iiii9:blrI dii:E CONSTRUCTION NOTES Oi REMOVE AND REPLACE GUARDRAIL TERMINAL 133HS SIH1 O9+94 V1S 3NI1 H01V z z 0 J 9 133HS ON3 tl1S 3NI1 FUMY 1S H16Z1'S ��`grip �ir11111�11t� �' 1 6Y/ r 1 / f/ Ay S r 111101111"" 11§:11( '0'04 if0 z 133HS 00 +Zb V1S 3NI1 HOIVV1 111X; fa f: a %l,' 133HS SIH1 0S +917 V1S 3NI1 HOIVV1 WARRANT ANALYSIS BARRIER PLAN STA 42 +00 TO STA END we ao a uoa/ z�/ ePN�acsOegvo ,��� \sb�µo,oAr��saoAs �v P�zr�eosgv��amAsia3roaeA�� Fl Appendix B Cost Estimate PROJECT COST ESTIMATE PROJECT: 42nd Ave S - Roadside Barrier Warrant Analysis DATE: 6/19/2013 All I I . • l v(,.. Description Quantity Unit Unit Cost Total 1 Mobilization 2 Construction Surveying 3 Project Temporary Traffic Control 4 Type 31 Guardrail - Long Post (Wood) 5 Restrained Barrier 6 Guardrail Terminal 7 Remove Existing Barrier 8 River Bank Stabilization 9 Pavement Markings 10 Temporary Erosion Control 1 LS $ 15,000.00 $ 15,000.00 1 LS $ 3,000.00 $ 3,000.00 1 LS $ 8,000.00 $ 8,000.00 2242 LF $ 40.00 $ 89,680.00 95 LF $ 45.00 $ 4,275.00 8 EA $ 2,500.00 $ 20,000.00 785 LF $ 20.00 $ 15,700.00 1 LS $ 60,000.00 $ 60,000.00 1 LS $ 7,500.00 $ 7,500.00 1 LS $ 3,000.00 $ 3,000.00 Subtotal Cost $ 226,160.00 30% Contingency $ 45,300.00 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST $ 271,460.00 Survey, Design, Permitting, Management $ 54,300.00 Construction Management and Inspection $ 40,720.00 TOTAL ENGINEERING & ADMINISTRATION COST $ 95,020.00 TOTAL PROJECT COST $ 366,480.00 1 of 1 24 CITY OF TUKWILA CAPITAL PROJECT SUMMARY 2014 to 2019 PROJECT: Small Roadway and Safety Improvements Project No. Varies DESCRIPTION: Programmatic approach to addressing small roadway and safety concerns through a variety of methods. Addresses needs not included in general maintenance, traffic calming, or other approaches. JUSTIFICATION: Increasing public demand on staff time. Local access ( isidential neighborhoods may need minor roadway or safety improvements that can not be addrEefi any other City program. STATUS: 42nd Ave S /Allentown Roadside Barrier i MAINT. IMPACT: Minimal. COMMENT: Full program is only feasible if Pul,; ;.�,. a "orks adds a Traffic Engineer to staff (same position as Traffic Calming). FINANCIAL in $000's) 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 BEYOND TOTAL EXPENSES Through Estimated Design Land (R/W) Const. Mgmt. Construction TOTAL EXPENSES FUND SOURCES Awarded Grant Proposed Grant Mitigation Actual Mitigation Expected City Oper. Revenue TOTAL SOURCES 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 10 50 110 110 110 10 10 50 70 70 70 10 10 10 50 70 70 70 10 50 70 70 70 10 10 50 70 70 70 10 10 50 70 70 70 0 0 0 2014 - 2019 Capital Improvement Program 100 0 60 300 460 0 0 0 0 460 460 25 26 Gail Labanara From: Bob Giberson Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 1:42 PM To: Gail Labanara Cc: Robin Tischmak Subject: FW: Meeting Follow-Up and Council Schedule Attachments: Meeting Summary 042413.pdf; 2012 BNSF FederaLpdf; 2013 BNSF Federatpdf Use e-mail and attachments for TC. Thanks, Bob From: Kimberly Matej Sent: Monday, July 15, 2013 1:10 PM To: Jim Haggerton; David Cline; Bob Giberson; Jack Pace; Allan Ekberg; Dennis Robertson; De'Sean Quinn; des_ n uinn ornail.corn; Joe Duffle; Kate Kruller; Kate Kruller (kktcc6(acrnail.com); Kathy Hougardy; kjhougardOcomcastinet; Verna Seal; vernaiseaK(i)gmail.com Cc: Laurel Humphrey; Cheryl Thompson Subject: FW: Meeting Follow-Up and Council Schedule FYI. Please see the e-mail below that I just sent to Brooke Alford and Lisa Krober, Allentown residents. Per previous Council direction, this item is coming forward to a Committee of Whole for discussion. At Friday's meeting, Brooke and Lisa also shared that they had a "steering committee" meeting of neighborhood representatives the week prior to discuss neighborhood concerns with the BNSF Intermodal Facility. They also requested that I attend their National Night Out neighborhood event similar to Terry Finn's (BNSF) attendance a few years prior. Please let me know if you have any questions. I am working on the staff report for the August 12 COW. Kimberly From: Kimberly Matej Sent: Monday, July 15, 2013 1:02 PM To: perennial.gardensqicomcast.net; bmarie2Learthlink.net Subject: Meeting Follow-Up and Council Schedule Brooke and Lisa: As promised at our meeting on Friday, below I have listed details regarding the next time that Council discussion is scheduled regarding Allentown and BNSF. Monday, August 12, 2013 Committee of the Whole Meeting begins at 7:00 p.m. 27 Council Chambers at City Hall Allentown /BNSF is scheduled to be an agenda item at this meeting. I will be presenting a staff report to the City Council that outlines information received at the last meeting with BNSF representatives which was on April 24, 2013. For reference, I have attached the meeting summary from April 24, as much of this information will be included in the staff report. Essentially, the staff report will seek Council direction on moving forward with the BNSF conversation. For background information, I have also attached the BNSF status pages from the City's past two federal legislative briefing books. It was nice to see you both on Friday. I hope you had a wonderful weekend. Please let me know if you have any questions. Kimberly Kimberly Matej Government Relations Manager 1 City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard 1 Tukwila, WA 98188 ph: (206) 433 -18341 fx, (206) 433 -1833 The City of oppor°tunity, the coo Warmly of choice 2 28 TO: City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor Department of Public Works Bob Giberson, P.E., Director Mayor Haggerton Transportation Committee FROM: Bob Giberson, Public Works Director BY: Robin Tischmak, City Engineer DATE: May 13, 2013 SUBJECT: 2013 Transportation Work Plan ISSUE Updated information includes anticipated schedules for the list of 2013 funded transportation projects and anticipated items which may be brought forward to the Transportation Committee. DISCUSSION Public Works discussed the 2013 work program at the January 15, 2013 Transportation Committee meeting. Anticipated schedules and potential committee agenda items will be presented, as well as direction from the committee regarding preferences or requests on how agenda items are included. * an asterisk indicates those items that were approved as Transportation Committee Goals Second Quarter 1. TUC Access (Klickitat) — Final LID Assessment Roll 2. Annual Bridge Inspections — Award contract(s) for inspections and repair project(s) 3. Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) — Council adoption 4. 42 "d Ave S Safety Rail Along River — Guardrail analysis Third Quarter 1. *CIP Project Review Policy 2. Boeing Access Road Bridge Rehabilitation — Approve design contract 3. Overlay & Repair - E Marginal Way — Approve design contract (Complete); award const. contract 4. ADA Improvements — Approve design contract (Complete); award construction contract 5. Safe Routes to Schools (Cascade and Thorndyke) — Approve contracts for design; award construction bid for Cascade View Elementary trail. 6. TUC Transit Center & Andover Park W (Tuk Pkwy to Strander Blvd) — Award construction bid. 7. Interurban Ave S (S 143 St to Ft Dent) — Approve design contract (Complete); award const. contract. 8. 2013 Overlay & Repair — Award construction contract; approve 2014 design contract. 9. Traffic Impact Fee Intersection Improvement Projects (5) — Approve contracts for design. i. Andover Park E/Industry Dr ii. Andover Park E/Minkler Blvd iii. W Valley Hwy /S 156 St iv. S 133 St/Sr 599 v. Macadam Rd /S 144 St 10. Tukwila Urban Center Access ( Klickitat) — Project Closeout (Complete) 11. Southcenter Parkway Extension - Project Closeout. 12. School Zone Issues 13. Traffic Impact Fees C.\ Users \gailWppData \Local \Microsoft\Windows \Temporary Internet Files \Content.Outlook\2KLE57HC \InfoMemo 2013 (Revised) TC WorkProgram Goals.docx INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 Fourth Quarter 1. *Public Safety Oriented Sidewalk Policy 2. *Tukwila International Boulevard Corridor Improvements 3. *Apprenticeship Policy 4. 42" Ave S — Phase III (Southcenter Blvd to S 160th St) — Continue /complete design; present periodic status updates and /or present issues that may need Council input or direction. 5. TUC Pedestrian /Bicycle Bridge — Finish design; submit grant applications. 6. Transportation Element of Comp Plan — Adopt Comprehensive Plan. Other Transportation Issues SCATBd Agendas (Each meeting) BNSF Freight Mobility Issues (COW Item) RECOMMENDATION Information only. CAUseusIgai Fhp pD icroso 'ondwwst'1 e map orary Vir earned IFiFVes \ContentOutlook 'IKLE5ThC \VnfoNler© 2013 (Revised) .TC, "'orkNo ram Goa s,.cloaztt City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor MEETING SUMMARY MEETING DETAILS: BNSF Follow -Up Meeting April 24, 2013 — 11:00 a.m. Tukwila City Hall Conference Room #3 ATTNENDEES: BNSF — John Hovland, Director of Marketing Facility Development; Colleen Weatherford, Director of Public Private Partnerships; and Terry Finn, Director of Government Affairs City— Councilmembers Allan Ekberg, Verna Seal, and De'Sean Quinn; Mayor Haggerton, David Cline, Kimberly Matej and Michelle Giguere (Ball Janik, LLP) Aqenda Topic — BNSF Results of Enqineerinq Options At the November 13, 2012, meeting between BNSF and City representatives, John Hovland committed to have BNSF consider engineering options for an alternative means of ingress and egress for the Intermodal Facility, in place of the current route which travels down South 124th Street. Mr. Hovland reported that as a result of consideration of these options, the best alternative would be to create a southern route into the Intermodal Facility. Mr. Hovland discussed the possibility of 30% design report for a southern route consideration. He estimated the cost for the report to be approximately $300,000 on the high -end. The report would include such things as EIS and timelines, essentially putting the project into a "shovel- ready" (30% design) position if funding were to be identified or possibly secured via grant monies. This design report would result in a total project cost that could be considered reasonably accurate. Mr. Hovland proposed a 50/50 split between BNSF and the City to pay for the report. City representatives relayed that a decision in regard to such a commitment would need to be considered by the full Council as well as the City Attorney's Office. Additionally, City representatives conveyed the importance of the City and community playing a partnership role in any such request for proposal (RFP). In response, Mr. Hovland relayed that BNSF could prepare an RFP for the design report, and inquired if the City would be interested in that preparation beginning in the meantime. City representatives concurred with his suggestion. BNSF invited the City to provide names of any contractors it would like on the bid list for consideration. If the RFP were put out for bid, bids would be returned within 45 days. The process for securing and completing a contract would take longer; however, BNSF estimated 120 days from bid to design report completion. See page 2 for potential funding options (TIGER). ACTION ITEM NO. 1: Within in three weeks, BNSF will forward a draft RFP for a 30% design report to the City of Tukwila for initial review and input. Aqenda Topic — Neighborhood Communication City representatives related the Allentown community's continued interest in open, transparent communication between the community, City and BNSF, and mentioned different concerns between and among different areas of the neighborhood (i.e.: houses located on 124th as compared to residents on other streets or businesses across the river, etc.) 31 Meeting Summary: BNSF 04/24/13 page 2 Mr. Hovland mentioned that Allentown property owners are still approaching BNSF offering to sell property, and BNFS has declined to do so. In regards to activity in the area, he communicated that there will likely be some pavement/parking lot work being done in the Intermodal Facility. BNSF expressed willingness to attend a more formal meeting within the community (as compared to National Night Out a couple years ago) as long as there is a broad agenda that includes a set discussion topic for BNSF such as the impact of intermodal facility operations. ACTION ITEM NO. 2: Follow -up with this item once the Council agrees to decision and process for how to proceed with Action Item No. 1. Agenda Topic — BNSF Interest in Consultant (Neighborhood Livability) City representatives related Allentown community concerns regarding quality of life issues as a result of the Intermodal Facility location. In response, the City would like to secure a consultant that can identify impacts, provide data - driven (empirically supported) information, and suggest potential mitigation opportunities relating to the BNSF Intermodal Facility within Allentown. The City inquired about BNSF's interest in providing financial and /or consultant selection partnership. BNSF replied that if the consultant would be looking at direct impacts of the Intermodal Facility onto the community, they will not participate. However, if the consultant were secured to conduct a cost benefit analysis of the proposed project referencing the 30% design report for a southern route alternative, they would be willing to have an internal discussion to consider participation. The City and BNSF discussed that consultant findings would have to be non - binding. BNSF stated that there are some unmitigatable circumstances. All representatives agreed that any recommendations for mitigation would simply be recommendations, and would not commit the City or BNSF to taking any specific actions. As an extension of this item, the group discussed the possibility applying for a future TIGER V or VI grant for this potential project. The latest rounds of TIGER V applications are due by June 3, 2013, so submission to this cycle of funding would not be possible. TIGER funds are awarded on a competitive basis for projects that will have a significant impact on the Nation, a metropolitan area, or a region. Successful projects depend significantly on the relational partnerships of the community /city /business affected and benefited by the project. ACTION ITEM NO. 3: Determine interest in and viability of preparing for TIGER VI grant funding, if additional TIGER funds are provided in the 2014 FY budget. Decision to be made by Council. No specific deadline; timeliness should be considered. NOTE: All action Items are dependent on the timely advancement of agreed to tasks (i.e.: an RFP for a specific ingress /egress construction project, and another RFP that is geared to a cost - benefit analysis of various improvements), which need to be completed in order to submit a TIGER VI application next spring, if that course of action is pursued. Each RFP will need to identify specific intended outcomes as a result of consultant work. 32 Ma 2013 Federal Briefing Book Washington State Congressional Delegation WILA rs A S FI 1 iNT C The city of opportunity, the community of choice Aerial photograph of Tukwila's Allentown neighborhood and the BNSFIntermodal Facility 2 34 BNSF DESCRIPTION Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) operates an intermodal freight yard in the Allentown neighborhood of Tukwila. BNSF has recently acquired adjacent property designated by Tukwila's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code for low density residential use. BNSF applied for a Comprehensive Plan amendment and a rezone to designate the newly acquired property for manufacturing and industrial use. Upon learning that the City Administration would recommend the City Council deny this request, BNSF withdrew its application and asserted that federal law preempts the City from enforcing its land use and environmental regulations with regard to railroad activities. The location of the BNSF intermodal rail yard in Tukwila, adjacent to a residential neighborhood, has been an issue for many years. The impacts to homeowners include heavy truck traffic through the single- family neighborhood and significant noise at all hours of the day and night. Neighbors have been very vocal in their opposition to expansion of non - residential uses into their neighborhood, and have submitted petitions and letters opposing the rezone to the Tukwila City Council. The City of Tukwila recognizes the vital role that rail transport plays in the nation's economy and security. We also believe that the current regulatory scheme governing railroad operations places an unnecessary and unhealthy burden upon host communities. The issue of federal preemption related to railroads and local land use authority was addressed by the US Conference of Mayors, which in 2007 adopted a resolution urging the United States Congress to "hold hearings on existing federal law governing railroads and enact legislation clarifying that current federal law does not preempt state and local environmental and land use planning laws." CURRENT STATUS Since last May, representatives from the City of Tukwila and BNSF have met three times on the following dates: July 12, 2012, November 13, 2012 and April 24, 2013. These meetings have included discussions regarding alternate means for ingress /egress for the Intermodal Facility located in Tukwila's Allentown neighborhood. Through these meetings, two alternate routes have been eliminated, and one potential route appears worthy of additional consideration. BNSF is interested in considering an alternate access point from the southern -most portion of the Facility, and has inquired to Tukwila's interest in sharing the financial cost for a 30% Design Report in relation to this proposed access route. A Meeting with representatives from the Surface Transportation Board and City of Tukwila fo Washington, D.C. eso May 10, 2012 XO..12 Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) operates an intermodal freight yard in the Allentown neighborhood of Tukwila. BNSF has recently acquired adjacent property designated by Tukwila's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code for low density residential use. BNSF applied for a Comprehensive Plan amendment and a rezone to designate the newly acquired property for manufacturing and industrial use. Upon learning that the City Administration would recommend the City Council deny this request, BNSF withdrew its application and asserted that federal law preempts the City from enforcing its land use and environmental regulations with regard to railroad activities. The location of the BNSF intermodal rail yard in Tukwila, adjacent to a residential neighborhood, has been an issue for many years. The impacts to homeowners include heavy truck traffic through the single - family neighborhood and significant noise at all hours of the day and night Neighbors have been very vocal in their opposition to expansion of non - residential uses into their neighborhood, and have submitted petitions and letters opposing the rezone to the Tukwila City Council. The City of Tukwila recognizes the vital role that rail transport plays in the nation's economy and security. We also believe that the current regulatory scheme governing railroad operations places an unnecessary and unhealthy burden upon host communities. The issue of federal preemption related to railroads and local land use authority was addressed by the US Conference of Mayors, which in 2007 adopted a resolution urging the United States Congress to "hold hearings on existing federal law governing railroads and enact legislation clarifying that current federal law does not preempt state and local environmental and land use planning laws." 111'i��ljr,lif��rr� 1117i1'li+`'1�1777777, II�IIIII�III IIII� III III�IIIIIIIII The City has met with BNSF to explore possible compromise solutions, but the results of those discussions did not lead to a resolution of this matter. In turn, on May 16, 2011, the Tukwila City Council unanimously adopted Resolution No. 1741, petitioning the United States Congress to: 1. Hold hearings on existing law governing railroads; 2. Direct the Surface Transportation Board to immediately open an investigation into the inordinate power exercised by the railroads over local environmental and land use planning laws and to take immediate steps to remedy an imbalance of power; and 3. Enact legislation clarifying that federal law does not preempt state and local environmental and land use planning laws in terms of the expansion of rail yards in urbanized areas where such expansion is inconsistent with locally adopted Comprehensive Land Use Plans. 111111111 1m 111111111111111'f f IIIIII 1f� 11111111 �.• I ALL. On July 18, 2011, the City and BNSF met to clarify misunderstandings and work towards addressing community concerns. Representatives from several of the City's Federal Congressional Delegation were in attendance. Since that meeting, BNSF representatives have not scheduled additional meetings that they obligated themselves to on July 18 and in a letter dated August 10, 2011 (see next page). Additionally, BNSF officials have communicated that they will not meet with the community; they will only meet with specific City representatives. The last communication between the City and BNSF was in an e -mail dated January 23, 2012, from BNSF that stated a meeting would be arranged in February 2012. There has been no further communication from BNSF since that time. The City remains open to further discussions with BNSF, continues to hope for good resolution, and appreciates the assistance of our Delegation has provided to date. 37 2 Fa- II ", ;i}J City of Tukwila BNSF Rezone from LDR to MIC /L and MIC /HI /i1► IP 1;W/tic* so' IF "111°'' RA /1 i1V4 August 10, 2011 Jim Haggerton Mayor City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington, 98188-2544 Re: Expected Response Dear Mayor Haggerton: .11ohn A, Hovland EiNSF Rainaay Company Dreclor 2500 LOU Menk Dr. Marketing Facility Devadopment Ft. Wor111, Texas 76131 0173'67.6170 617 352,0005 lax lohn.hovlandebnstl.com 11 : ECTP117D 1 Auci 1 5 2011 CITY Or' 1 UK AN LA MAYOR'S OFFK':,E This letter is in response to your e-mail dated August 1st and in response to your conversation with Terry Finn on August 2nd. As you indicated in your e-mail, 1 agreed to respond to your questions from the July 18th meeting. R was our intent for Terry Finn to provide those responses at the community gathering held on August 2nd. h` ased on Terry Finn's conversation with you at that meeting, it is our understanding that you would like these responses in writing. This letter addresses that request. We believe the July 18th meeting was very productive. It was a great opportunity for the City and BNSF to clarify misunderstandings and work towards addressing the community's concerns. BNSF proposes to continue this open dialogue through periodic meetings with the City. We propose initially to meet with you and your team every six months, Then we can adjust the frequency as needed, if you are amenable to this idea, 1 will coordinate with your staff to schedule the first meeting. You asked about BNSF' s long-term expansion and property acquisition plans for the rail yard. As we discussed at the July 18th meeting, our future expansion and property acquisition plans are a product of future demand. However, at this time, BNSF has no near-term plans to expand the facility's capacity or to acquire additional residential property other than properties that are currently under negotiation. We are examining various improvements to maximize the efficiency of our existing facility footprint such as an Automated Gate System (AGS). AGS could also provide benefits to the community, which we can describe more fully at our next meeting. We are proud that we have been a part of your community for over 100 years now, Moving forward we envision our proposed meetings providing a forum to be in frequent and open dialogue regarding issues as they arise like those discussed at the July 18 meeting. The result, we hope, will be a positive joint effort with you and the community to foster greater partnership and understanding Please feel free to give me a call at any time, You can also call Terry Finn, at 206-625-6135, for a local representative. 39 4 40 TO: City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM Mayor Haggerton Transportation Committe FROM: Jack Pace, DCD Director ' By: Maggi Lubov, CTR Coordinator DATE: July 15, 2013 SUBJECT: Commute Trip Reduction Program Information ISSUE Status of Commute Trip Reduction program activities and funding for 2013 -2015. BACKGROUND Below is a history and summary of the current Commute Trip Reduction Program in Tukwila: • CTR Coordinator is primarily funded by WSDOT to manage CTR programs of employers within the City of Tukwila. • 22 Tukwila employers (including the City of Tukwila) provide CTR programs for their employees. The number of affected CTR sites is updated annually by the City based on state criteria and represents a snapshot at the time. This compares to the City of Renton with 22 affected employers, the City of Kent with 28 affected employers, Federal Way has 10 affected employers and the City of SeaTac has 15 affected employers at this time. • Employers are required to complete Annual CTR Program Reports and conduct biennial measurement surveys for progress toward goals. • CTR Program is mandated by state and operational since 1991. • The CTR Ordinance was updated and adopted in 2008 with creation of Tukwila's Local CTR Plan and Growth Transportation Efficiency Center (GTEC) adopted. The City of Tukwila provides numerous services to assist CTR- affected and non - affected employers with implementation of their CTR Programs, including the following: • Technical assistance given to all city employers including access to statewide promotions such as Wheel Options and other incentive programs such as "Bike to Work" and Rideshareonline.com. • Annual report and survey training and Employee Transportation Coordinator training provided. • Personalized assistance for coordinators and employees at all employer worksites. Additionally, the City of Tukwila works closely with local agencies such as King County, the cities of Seattle, Renton, Kent, SeaTac and Federal Way, the Washington State Department of Transportation, the Puget Sound Regional Council, and others to coordinate, implement, and promote trip reduction activities and provide policy direction. 41 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 The City has provided lead agency direction for a state funded Trip Reduction project from March 2012 through August 2013. The City of Tukwila is an affected employer and is required to meet the requirements of the CTR law. Of special note, the City reached CTR goals in the 2013 survey goals for the first time with a 14.6% reduction in the drive alone rate from the 2007 baseline to a 64.7% rate. Highline Specialty Center and Department of Homeland Security also reached state goals of 10% reductions. The CTR Efficiency Act required tasks for the City of Tukwila: • Update in 2013 of the Local CTR Plan for submission to Puget Sound Regional Council for approval. This included review of Comprehensive Plan additions as outlined in Local CTR Plan. The updated plan was incorporated in the Regional Plan and submitted to the Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) Board for review and approved at the end of June. This is a one page document that continued the targets of reductions of 10% drive alone and 13% vehicle miles traveled. Grant project: • WSDOT awarded grant funding for a thirteen month Rideshareonline.com project that focused on South King County cities with Tukwila acting as the lead agency. The $121,370.00 in funding covered the costs for full time staff to implement the project. DISCUSSION WSDOT has provided the funding source for the CTR program through an allocation process since 1993. The GCB -1549 contract for 2013 -2015 is essentially a renewal of previous allocation contracts and is in the amount of $74,205.00. This funds Maggi Lubov's position. This biennium, the contract allows for the implementation of a pilot program to enhance trip reduction efforts in the Tukwila Urban Center and the Manufacturing Industrial Center (MIC) to see if results can be improved. The program stays the same for affected employers. RECOMMENDATION Council is being asked to approve the WSDOT funding contract for the CTR Program in the amount of $74,206.00 and consider this item at the Committee of the Whole meeting on August 12th and subsequent Regular Meeting on August 19th Attachments: GCB -1549 Grant for the CTR Program W :\ Long Range Projec TR „ GIFEC\2013 -2O1 5 \.k ifo Memo CTR Update GCB••• 101492013 -20 5,adocx 42 Wash7m Trans 310 Ma PO o1y 1 Trans IJ i rtation 11„11 gton State Dem■ a tment of ort tion le Park Avenue SE ox 47387 ia, WA 98504-7387 1,111 1 e e 1111 II 11 a d Manage e tation Agree ent Contact Person: Alexandra DeMoss 360-705.-7906 Project Costs: State Funds $74,206 Contractor Funds $0 Total Project Cost $74,206 Agreement Nu GCB1549 Term of Project: July 1, 2013 through June 30, 2015 1'111 e Pil t Contractor city of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Uvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 Federal ID #: 91-6001519 Contact Person: Margaret Lubov 206.433-7142 Scope of Project: Carry out the Project as described in Exhibit 1, Project Scope of Work Service Area: Tukwila This AGREEMENT is entered into by the Washington State Depart ent of Transportation, hereinafter referred to as "WSDOT" and the Contractor identified above, hereinafter referred to as "CONTRACTOR", and/or individually referred to as the "PARTY" and collectively referred to as the "PARTIES." WHEREAS, RCW 70.94.521 through RCW 70.94.555 directs the State, local gove ents d ajor e ployers to reduce air pollution, fuel use, and traffic congestion through co ute trip reduction pro a s; d 111,11 WHEREAS, the Co Illlute Trip Reduction 70.94_537 is authorized to create a state co oard (CTR Board) established under RCW 11111, ute trip reduction p1 ; WHEREAS, RCW 47.06.050 re, uires that when planning capacity and operational prove ents, the State's first priority is to assess strategies to e efficiency of the existing system, and states that strategies to e efficiencies include, but are not li ited to, access anagement, anage ent, and de .11 d management ("Strate "es"); and ce the operational ce the operational transportation syste WHEREAS, RCW 47.01°078 directs the State to develop strategies to reduce the per capita vehicle iles traveled, to consider efficiency tools including commute trip reduction and other de and m.1 age ent tools, and to pro ote the integration of ulti odal p1 ing in support of the tr sportation system policy goals described in RCW 47.04280; and WHEREAS, the Le °s a transportation .1 d the hi pia ing, and to ax 11 re has directed the State to increase the integration of public way syste , to facilitate coordination of tr. I sit services .1 d ze oppo In:11111es to use public transportation to 1 prove the 4 efficiency of tr sportation corridors (RCW 47. 1.330); and WHEREAS, RCW 47.80.010 encourages the State and local jurisdictions to identify oppo nities for cooperation to achieve statewide d local tr sportation goals; .1 d 1111 GCAI549 0111 Page 1 of 12 43 WHEREAS, the State established rules at WAC 468-63 for commute trip reduction (CTR) plans, and is authorized under RCW 35.05.310 and .313 to engage in pilot rulemaking to test and identify alternative CTR plans to achieve the goals of WAC 468- 63; and WHEREAS, the State of Washington in its Sessions Laws of 2013, chapter 306, Section 220(6), (7) and (8), authorizes funding for Public Transportation and Co ute Trip Reduction programs and other special proviso funding through the multi-modal transportation account as identified in the budget through its 2013-2015 biennial appropriations to WSDOT; and WHEREAS the WSDOT Public Transportation Division is responsible for administering funds on behalf of the Washington State Legislature; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of terms, conditions, performances and mutual covenants herein set forth and the attached Exhibit 1, "Project Scope of Work" and Exhibit 2, "Project Progress Reports", which are both incorporated and made a part of this AGREEMENT, IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: Section 1 Purpose of Agreement The purpose of this AGREEMENT is for WSDOT to provide funding to the CONTRACTOR to be used solely for activities undertaken to implement a pilot alternate plan (hereinafter "alternate plan") which will field-test the feasibility of a CTR Board- approved experimental approach to accomplish the policy purposes of RCW 70.94.521, hereinafter known as the "Project." Section 2 Scope of Work The CONTRACTOR agrees to perform all designated tasks of the Project under this AGREEMENT as described in Exhibit 1, "Project Scope of Work," which by this reference is incorporated into this AGREEMENT as if fully set forth herein. Section 3 Term of Project The CONT • CTOR shall commence, perform and complete the Project within the time defined in the caption space header above titled "Te of Project" of this AGREEMENT regardless of the date of execution of this AGREEMENT, unless terminated as provided herein. The caption space header above entitled' "Term of Project" and all caption space headers above are by this reference incorporated into this AGREEMENT as if fully set forth herein. Section 4 Project Costs The total reimbursable cost to accomplish the Project Scope of Work shall not exceed the "State Funds" detailed in the caption space header above titled "Project Costs." The CONTRACTOR agrees to expend eligible "State Funds" together with any "Contractor Funds" identified above in the caption space header "Project Costs," in an amount sufficient to complete the Project as detailed in Exhibit 1, "Project Scope of Work." If at any time the CONTRACTOR becomes aware that the cost which it expects to incur in the performance of this AGREEMENT will differ from the . ount indicated in the GCA1549 Page 2 of 12 44 caption space titled "Project Costs" above, the CONT " CTOR shall notify WSDOT in writing within three (3) business days of making that dete ination. Section 5 Reimbursement and Payment A. Payment will be made with State Funds by WSDOT on a reimbursable basis for actual costs and expenditures incurred while perfo ing eligible direct and related indirect Project work during the Project period provided that payment is subject to the submission to and approval by WSDOT of properly prepared invoices that substantiate the costs and expenses submitted by CONT " CTOR for reimbursement and that are accompanied by progress reports and financial su aries as required in Section 7 — Progress Reports. The CONT" CTOR must submit an invoice using either State of Washington Fo A- 19 (Invoice Voucher), a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 3 and by this reference incorporated into this AGREEMENT or a fo at approved by WSDOT. Such invoices may be submitted no more than once per month and no less than once per year, during the course of this AGREEMENT. If approved by WSDOT, said invoices shall be paid by WSDOT within thirty (30) days of receipt of the invoice. B. The CONTRACTOR shall submit an invoice by July 15, 2014, for any unreimbursed eligible expenditures incurred between July 1, 2013, and June 30, 2014. If the CONTRACTOR is unable to provide an invoice by this date, the CONT " CTOR shall provide an estimate of the charges to be billed so WSDOT may accrue the expenditures in the proper fiscal period. Any subsequent reimbursement request submitted will be limited to the amount accrued as set forth in this section. The CONTRACTOR shall submit a final invoice to WSDOT no later than July 15, 2015. Any invoice received after July 15, 2015 will not be eligible for reimbursement. Section 6 Project Records The CONT CTOR agrees to establish and maintain for the Project, either a separate set of accounts or, accounts within the fr. ework of an established accounting system in order to sufficiently and properly reflect all eligible direct and related indirect Project costs incurred in the perfo ance of this AGREEMENT. Such accounts are referred to herein collectively as the "Project Account." All costs claimed against the Project Account must be supported by properly executed payrolls, time records, invoices, contracts, and payment vouchers evidencing in sufficient detail the nature and propriety of the costs claimed. Section 7 Progress Reports The CONT " CTOR shall submit quarterly progress reports to WSDOT so that WSDOT may adequately and accurately assess the progress made under the te s of this AGREEMENT. The progress reports shall be prepared as prescribed by WSDOT on the fo s provided in Exhibit 2, "Project Progress Report" and/or as provided and modified by WSDOT staff. The CONT " CTOR shall provide a final progress report, as provided by WSDOT staff. Progress reports shall be submitted to WSDOT no later than forty-five (45) days from the end of each calendar quarter. GCA1549 Page 3 of 12 45 Section 8 Audits, Inspections, and Records Retention WSDOT, the State Auditor, and any of their representatives, shall have full access to and the right to examine, during normal business hours and as often as they deem necessary, all of the CONTRACTOR's records with respect to all matters covered by this AGREEMENT. Such representatives shall be permitted to audit, examine and make excerpts or transcripts from such records, and to make audits of all contracts, invoices, materials, payrolls, and other matters covered by this AGREEMENT. In order to facilitate any audits and inspections, the CONTRACTOR shall retain all documents, papers, accounting records, and other materials pertaining to this AGREEMENT for six (6) years from the date of completion of the Project or the Project final payment date. However, in case of audit or litigation extending past that six (6) years period, then the CONT* CTOR must retain all records until the audit or litigation is completed. The CONTRACTOR shall be responsible to assure that the CONTRACTOR and any subcontractors of CONT • CTOR comply with the provisions of this section and provide, WSDOT, the State Auditor, and any of their representatives, access to such records within the scope of this AGREEMENT. Section 9 Agreement Modifications A. Either PARTY may request changes to this AGREEMENT, including changes in the Scope of Project. Such changes that are mutually agreed upon shall be incorporated as written amendments to this AGREEMENT. No variation or alteration of the te s of this AGREEMENT shall be valid unless made in writing and signed by authorized representatives of the PARTIES hereto. B. If an increase in funding by the funding source augments the CONTRACTOR's allocation of funding under this AGREEMENT, the CONTRACTOR and WSDOT agree to enter into an . endment to this AGREEMENT, providing for an appropriate change in the Scope of Project and/or the Project Cost in order to reflect any such increase in funding. C. If a reduction of funding by the funding source reduces the CONTRACTOR's allocation of funding under this AGREEMENT, the CONT* CTOR and WSDOT agree to enter into an amendment to this AGREEMENT providing for an appropriate change in the Scope of Project and/or the Project Cost in order to reflect any such reduction of funding. Section 10 Recapture Provision In the event that the CONT* CTOR fails to expend State Funds in accordance with state law and/or the provisions of this AGREEMENT, WSDOT reserves the right to recapture State Funds in an amount equivalent to the extent of noncompliance. Such right of recapture shall exist for a period not to exceed three (3) years following termination or expiration of this AGREEMENT. The CONT* CTOR agrees to repay such State Funds under this recapture provision within thirty (30) days of demand. GCA1549 Page 4 of 12 46 Section 11 Disputes A. If the PARTIES cannot resolve by mutual agreement, a dispute arising from the performance of this AGREEMENT the CONTRACTOR may submit a written detailed description of the dispute to the Public Transportation Division's Statewide Transportation Demand Management Programs Manager or the Statewide Transportation Demand Management Progr. s Manager's designee who will issue a written decision within ten calendar (10) days of receipt of the written description of the dispute. This decision shall be final and conclusive unless within ten (10) days from the date of CONTRACTOR's receipt of WSDOT's written decision, the CONTRACTOR mails or otherwise furnishes a written appeal to the Director of the Public Transportation Division or the Director's designee. In co ection with any such appeal the CONTRACTOR shall be afforded an opportunity to offer material in support of its position. The CONTRACTOR's appeal shall be decided in writing within thirty (30) days of receipt of the appeal by the Director of the Public Transportation Division or the Director's designee. The decision shall be binding upon the CONTRACTOR and the CONTRACTOR shall abide by the decision. B. Performance During Dispute. Unless otherwise directed by WSDOT, the CONTRACTOR shall continue perfo ance under this AGREEMENT while matters in dispute are being resolved. Section 12 Ter ation WSDOT, at its sole discretion, may suspend or terminate this AGREEMENT in whole, or in part, for the reasons following: A. The CONT • CTOR materially breaches, or fails to perform any of the requirements of this AGREEMENT and after fourteen (14) days written notice, has failed to cure the condition(s) causing that breach. Conditions of breach may include, but are not limited to: 1. Any action taken by the CONTRACTOR without WSDOT approval, which under the provisions of this AGREEMENT, required WSDOT approval; 2. Failure to perform in the manner called for under this AGREEMENT; or 3. Failure to comply with any provision of this AGREEMENT; B. The CONT • CTOR is prevented from proceeding with this AGREEMENT by reason of a temporary, preliminary, special, or permanent restraining order or injunction of a court of competent jurisdiction where the issuance of such order or injunction is primarily caused by the acts or omissions of persons or agencies other than the CONTRACTOR; C. The requisite State funding is reduced or becomes unavailable through failure of appropriation or otherwise; D. WSDOT dete ines that the continuation of the Project would not produce beneficial results commensurate with the further expenditure of funds; or E. WSDOT determines that suspension or termination is in the best interests of the State. The CONTRACTOR may suspend or terminate this AGREEMENT, in whole or in part, at any time by written notice to WSDOT. Written notification must set forth the reasons for such termination, the effective date, and in case of partial termination, the portion to be terminated. However, in the case of partial termination, if WSDOT determines that the GCA1549 Page 5 of 12 47 remaining portion of the award will not accomplish the purposes for which the award was made WSDOT may terminate the award in its entirety. If this AGREEMENT is terminated by the CONT • CTOR, or by WSDOT under subsections B, C, D, and/or E of this Section, the CONT* CTOR may be reimbursed only for actual, eligible direct and related indirect expenses incurred prior to the date of termination, and then only to the extent of awarded funds. If this AGREEMENT is terminated under subsection A of this Section, the WSDOT shall not be obligated to provide any additional reimbursement, and WSDOT shall retain all rights to seek recapture or damages from the CONTRACTOR. Section 13 Forbearance by WSDOT Not a Waiver Any forbearance by WSDOT in exercising any right or remedy hereunder, or otherwise afforded by applicable law, shall not be a waiver of or preclude the exercise of any such right or remedy. Section 14 Waiver In no event shall any WSDOT payment of grant funds to the CONTRACTOR constitute or be construed as a waiver by WSDOT of any CONT • CTOR breach, or default, and shall in no way impair or prejudice any right or remedy available to WSDOT with respect to any breach or default. In no event shall acceptance of any WSDOT payment of grant funds by the CONTRACTOR constitute or be construed as a waiver by CONTRACTOR of any WSDOT breach, or default which shall in no way impair or prejudice any right or remedy available to CONTRACTOR with respect to any breach or default. Section 15 WSDOT Advice The CONTRACTOR bears complete responsibility for the administration and success of the work as it is defined in this AGREEMENT and any . endments thereto. Although the CONTRACTOR may seek the advice of WSDOT, the offering of WSDOT advice shall not modify the CONTRACTOR's rights and obligations under this AGREEMENT and WSDOT shall not be held liable for any advice offered to the CONTRACTOR. Section 16 Li 'tation of Liability and Inde ification A. The CONT • CTOR shall indemnify and hold harmless WSDOT, its agents, employees, and officers and process and defend at its own expense any and all claims, demands, suits at law or equity, actions, penalties, losses, damages, or costs (hereinafter referred to collectively as "claims"), of whatsoever kind or nature brought against WSDOT arising out of, in connection with or incident to this AGREEMENT and/or the CONTRACTOR's performance or failure to perform any aspect of this AGREEMENT. This indemnity provision applies to all claims against WSDOT, its agents, employees and officers arising out of, in co ection with or incident to the negligent acts or omissions of the CONTRACTOR, its agents, employees and officers. Provided, however, that nothing herein shall require the CONTRACTOR to indemnify and hold harmless or defend WSDOT, its agents, employees or officers to the extent that claims are caused by the GCA1549 Page 6 of 12 48 negligent acts or omissions of WSDOT, its agents, employees or officers. The indemnification and hold harmless provision shall survive termination of this AGREEMENT. B. The CONT • CTOR shall be deemed an independent contractor for all purposes, and the employees of the CONTRACTOR or its subcontractors and the employees thereof, shall not in any m er be deemed to be the employees of WSDOT. C. The CONTRACTOR specifically assumes potential liability for actions brought by CONTRACTOR's employees and/or subcontractors and solely for the purposes of this indemnification and defense, the CONTRACTOR specifically waives any immunity under the State Industrial Insurance Law, Title 51 Revised Code of Washington. D. In the event either the CONTRACTOR or WSDOT incurs attorney's fees, costs or other legal expenses to enforce the provisions of this section of this AGREEMENT against the other PARTY, all such fees, costs and expenses shall be recoverable by the prevailing PARTY. Section 17 Governing Law, Venue, and Process This AGREEMENT shall be construed and enforced in accordance with, and the validity and performance thereof shall be governed by the laws of the State of Washington. In the event that either PARTY deems it necessary to institute legal action or proceedings to enforce any right or obligation under this AGREEMENT, the PARTIES hereto agree that any such action shall be initiated in the Superior Court of the State of Washington situated in Thurston County. Section 18 Compliance with Laws and Regulations The CONTRACTOR agrees to abide by all applicable State and Federal laws and regulations, including, but not limited to, those concerning employment, equal opportunity employment, nondiscrimination assurances, Project record keeping necessary to evidence AGREEMENT compliance, and retention of all such records. The CONTRACTOR will adhere to all of the nondiscrimination provisions in Chapter 49.60 RCW. The CONT* CTOR will also comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), Public Law 101-336, including any . endments thereto which provides comprehensive civil rights protection to individuals with disabilities in the areas of employment public acco odations, state and local government services and telecommunication. Section 19 Severability If any covenant or provision of this AGREEMENT shall be adjudged void, such adjudication shall not affect the validity or obligation of performance of any other covenant or provision, or part thereof, that in itself is valid if such remainder conforms to the terms and requirements of applicable law and the intent of this AGREEMENT. No controversy concerning any covenant or provision shall delay the performance of any other covenant or provision except as herein allowed. GCA1.549 Page 7 of 12 49 Section 20 Counterparts This AGREEMENT may be executed in several counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original having identical legal effect. The CONT* CTOR does hereby ratify and adopt all statements, representations, warranties, covenants, and agreements and their supporting materials contained and/or mentioned in such executed counterpart, and does hereby accept State Funds and agrees to all of the terms and conditions thereof. Section 21 Execution This AGREEMENT is executed by the Director of the Public Transportation Division, State of Washington, Department of Transportation, or the Director's designee, not as an individual incurring personal obligation and liability, but solely by, for, and on behalf of the State of Washington, Department of Transportation, in his/her capacity as Director of the Public Transportation Division. Section 22 Binding Agreement The undersigned acknowledges that they are authorized to execute the AGREEMENT and bind their respective agency(ies) and/or entitity(ies) to the obligations set forth herein. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the PARTIES hereto have executed this AGREEMENT the day and year last signed below. WASHINGTON STATE CONT DEPARTMENT OF T "PORTATION By: Brian Lagerberg Director, Public Transportation Date: Approved as to form: y: Sus Assis 41 II Cruise 41 I I t Attorney General Date: June 13, 20113 GCA1549 CTOR Qn( By: Print Name: Title: o certifies proper authority to execute this AGREEMENT on behalf of the CONT CTOR Date: Page 8 of 12 50 E IBIT 1 Project Scope of Work ute Trip Reduction (CTR) Alternate Plan 1. Scope of Work A. Ad • istrative Work Plan The CONTRACTOR agrees to submit to WSDOT an administrative work plan by the end of the first quarter of this agreement or when the CONTRACTOR submits its first invoice, whichever is sooner. 1. The work plan shall identify the deliverables, schedule, expected outcomes, performance measures and the budget specific to strategies associated with this AGREEMENT and other strategies as defined in the CTR Board approved alternate plan. 2. The administrative work plan budget shall identify how the CONT A CTOR will use the state funds provided in this AGREEMENT for each task. The work plan shall also provide an estimate of the other financial resources not provided in this AGREEMENT that will be used to complete each task. 3 The administrative work plan must be approved in writing by the WSDOT Project Manager and signed by the CONT A CTOR, and shall be incorporated as a written endment to the AGREEMENT. The work plan may be amended based on mutual written agreement between the WSDOT Project Manager and the CONTRACTOR. B. Work to be Performed The CONTRACTOR agrees to implement a CTR program based on the approved administrative work plan and the CTR Board approved alternate plan. The CONT A CTOR will not be required to perform CTR plan requirements that have been expressly waived as part of the approved alternate plan. C. Use of State Funds for Incentives The CONTRACTOR agrees to use State funds provided as part of this AGREEMENT in accordance with incentives guidance to be provided by WSDOT. D. Quarterly Progress Reports and Invoices The CONTRACTOR agrees to submit to WSDOT complete quarterly progress reports, as specified by WSDOT in Section 7 — Progress Reports of the AGREEMENT, in Exhibit 2, "Project Progress Report", and as integrated with the deliverables identified in the administrative work plan, along with all invoices in accordance with Section 5 — Reimbursement and Payment of the AGREEMENT. All invoices shall be complete and accurately reflect actual State funded expenditures. Only those activities identified in the CONTRACTOR'S approved administrative work plan will be reimbursed by WSDOT. GCA1549 Page 9 of 12 51 E. Final Progress Report The CONT' CTOR agrees to submit to WSDOT a final report, a template of which will be provided in the second fiscal year of the contract by WSDOT and incorporated as an endment to this Agreement. The final report shall provide an estimate of the other financial resources not provided in this AGREEMENT that were used to complete each task and shall provide a list of the funds provided in this AGREEMENT that were disbursed by the CONTRACTOR to its eligible contracting partner(s). F. Funding Distribution The CONT' CTOR may distribute funds to local jurisdictions to include counties, cities, transit agencies, Transportation Management Associations, and Metropolitan Pia ing Organizations or other eligible organizations authorized to enter into agreements for the purposes of implementing alternate plans as authorized by RCW 70.94.527(5), RCW 70.94.544, RCW 34.05.310 and RCW 34.05.313. G. Implementation Plans The CONT' ACTOR shall incorporate appropriate sections of the Project Scope of Work and incentives guidance, as well as the approved Work Plan, in all agreements with eligible contracting partner(s), as necessary, to coordinate the development, implementation, and administration of the alternate plans. H. Appeals and Modifications The CONTRACTOR shall maintain an appeals process for employers consistent with the Administrative Procedures section contained in the CTR Guidelines which may be obtained from WSDOT or found at htt ://www.wsdot.wa. Yovaransit/CTR/la .htm. I. Coordination with Regional Transportation Planning Organizations (RTPO) The CONT' CTOR shall coordinate the development and implementation of its alternate plan and programs with the applicable regional transportation planning organization (RTPO). The CONTRACTOR agrees to notify the RTPO of any substantial changes to its plans and programs that could impact the success of the regional CTR plan. The CONTRACTOR agrees to provide information about the progress of its alternate plan and programs to the RTPO upon request. J. Survey Coordination The CONTRACTOR agrees to coordinate with WSDOT and its contracting partners for commute trip reduction employer surveys. K. Planning Data The CONT' CTOR agrees to provide WSDOT with the program goals established for newly affected worksites when they are established by the local jurisdiction. The CONT' ACTOR agrees to provide WSDOT with updated progr. goals for affected worksites and jurisdictions as requested. These updates shall be submitted electronically in a format specified by WSDOT. GCA1549 Page 10 of 12 52 L. Database Updates The CONT" CTOR agrees to provide WSDOT and the CONTRACTOR's contracting partners with updated lists of affected or participating worksites, employee transportation coordinators, and jurisdiction contacts, as requested. These updates will be submitted in a format specified by WSDOT. GCA1549 Page 11 of 12 53 C EXHIBIT 2 Project Progress Report CT ) y jec B e nia a gets Kr y verab1es: gram work plan) ...:.......... C o reduce to meet o Dew . . . . . . . . . . . . Esti ctivities....................................................... ............................... GCA1549 Page 12 of 12 54 190a' City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Haggerton Transportation Committee FROM: Bob Giberson, Public Works Director DATE: July 19, 2013 SUBJECT: SCATBd Agreement ISSUE The South County Area Transportation Board (SCATBd) has approved the attached draft SCATBd Agreement with a minor amendment. BACKGROUND As reflected in the previous SCATBd meeting summaries, the draft SCATBd Agreement has been thoroughly vetted by the Board and is now ready for Tukwila Council approval. ANALYSIS The new agreement theme was to get the transportation board agreements into alignment and allow specific differences to be placed into the Procedure document (By- laws). The new SCATBd agreement now has a procedure for adding or removing non - voting members by unanimous vote by the Board. RECOMMENDATION The Council is being asked to authorize Tukwila's SCATBd representative to sign the SCATBd agreement and consider this item on the Consent Agenda of the August 5, 2013 Regular Meeting. Attachment: South County Area Transportation Board Agreement W PW IF.mMOTHE:iiR, 01 rsomSCorresponcYenc Ink rric aCAT l dAuyreemnenad'i7,13,'13,doc 55 Attach r ent B DRAFT July 16, 2013 Draft South County Area Transportation Board Agreement South County Area Transportation Board Agreement Parties to Agreement City of Algona City of Aubum City of Black Diamond City of Burien City of Covington City of Des Moines City of Enumclaw City of Federal Way City of Kent City of Maple Valley City of Milton City of Normandy Park City of Renton City of SeaTac City of Tukwila City of Pacific Muckleshoot Indian Tribe King County Transmitted to parties for approval and signature on THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and among the CITY OF ALGONA, hereafter called "Algona"; the CITY OF AUBURN, hereafter called "Auburn"; the CITY OF BLACK DIAMOND, hereafter called "Black Diamond"; the CITY OF COVINGTON, hereafter call "Covington"; the CITY OF DES MOINES, hereafter call "Des Moines"; the CITY OF ENUMCLAW, hereafter call "Enumclaw "; the CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, hereafter called "Federal Way"; the CITY OF KENT, hereafter called "Kent "; the CITY OF MAPLE VALLEY, hereafter called "Maple Valley "; the CITY OF MILTON, hereafter called "Milton"; the CITY OF NORMANDY PARK, hereafter called "Normandy Park"; the CITY OF RENTON, hereafter called "Renton "; the CITY OF SEATAC, hereafter called "SeaTac "; the CITY OF TUKWILA, hereafter called "Tukwila "; the CITY OF PACIFIC, hereafter called "Pacific"; the MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE; and KING COUNTY, a legal subdivision of the State of Washington, hereafter called "King County" as members of the South County Area Transportation Board. WHEREAS, the parties to this agreement recognize that multi jurisdictional transportation planning and coordinated transportation plans benefit their citizens; and WHEREAS, the South County Area Transportation Board has served as the central forum for information sharing, consensus building, and coordination to develop recommendations for transportation policies, projects and programs for the south King County area; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1 56 D July 16, 2013 Draft South County Area Transportation Board Agreement 1.0 Purpose of this Agreement The purpose of this Agreement is to recognize the South County Area Transportation Board as the transportation board for the south King County area to share info ation, build consensus, and provide advice on plans, programs, policies and priorities for countywide, regional, state and federal transportation decisions. 2.0 Members and Voting M bers shall have full voting rights, Y ited voting rights or shall be non-voting members, as follows: 2.1 Members with Full Voting Rights: Only jurisdictions which are signatories to this agreement shall have full voting rights on all of the following issues before the South County Area Transportation Board, unless othe ise noted, including: 1. Ad i 'nistrative issues, such additional members and use of dues 2. Reco endations to Sound Transit on policies and capital and service plans and implementation. 3. Reco endations to King County on Metro Transit pia 'ng, development and ' pl entation of products and services. 4. Identification of projects for the regional competition, if prescribed by the process approved by the ° g County caucus of the Transportation Policy Board, 5. Reco endations to WSDOT on policies, progr s and projects. 6. Reco endations to the PSRC on plans, policies, progr s and projects such as Transportation 2040 updates and regional funding policies, strategies or programs. 7. Input to the State Legislature and co 'ttees and co *ssions established by the Legislature on transportation policy, budget and priorities and legislative proposals and studies. 8. Reco endations to the federal delegation on federal legislation including reauthorization and funding priorities and other transportation-related progr s. 2.2 Members with L' *ted Voting Rights: The South County Area Transportation Board may add members with 'ted voting rights on the issues such as those listed below by una ous vote of the parties to this agreement in attendance at a regular meeting. I. Reco endations to WSDOT on policies, progr s and projects. 2. Reco endations to the PSRC on plans, policies, progr s and projects such as the Transportation 2040 updates and regional funding policies, strategies or progr s. 3. Input to the State Legislature and co 'ttees and co 'ssions established by the Legislature on transportation policy, budget and priorities and legislative proposals and studies. 4. Reco endations to the federal delegation on federal legislation including reauthorization and funding priorities and other transportation-related programs. 2.2(a) Such members and voting rights, if any, shall be listed in operating procedures to be adopted by the South Co ty Area Transportation Board. 2.3 Non-Voting Members: The South County Area Transportation Board may add non-voting members by una ous vote of the parties to this agreement in attendance at a regular meeting. The 2 57 DRAFT July 16, 2013 Draft South County Area Transportation Board Agreement South County Area Transportation Board may remove non - voting members by a unanimous vote of the parties to the agreement at a regular meeting. 2.3(a) Such members shall be included in operating procedures to be adopted by the South County Area Transportation Board. 3.0 Representation and Conduct 3.1 Representation of cii Intl ount et members shall be as follows: Full Voting Members Number of Re resentatives City of Algona of Aubum City of Black Diamond City of Burien City of Covington of Des Moines City of Enumclaw City of Federal Way City of Kent City of Maple Valley City of Milton City of Normandy Park City of Renton City of SeaTac City of Tukwila City of Pacific Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Kin Coun 3.2 Elected officials shall be appointed to the South County Area Transportation Board by their cities and counties for a one -year term. King County representation shall be a maximum of two Councilmembers and the King County Executive. 3.3 Each city or county participating member may appoint an alternate for a one -year term. Designated alternates may vote in place of designated voting representatives in the absence of the designated representative. 4.0 Operating Procedures The South County Area Transportation Board shall adopt operating procedures to specify limited voting members and non - voting members, if any, dues for limited and non - voting members, if any, and operational issues such as election of officers, formation of subcommittees and rules of order. A chair and vice -chair shall be elected per the operating procedures and shall be responsible for setting meeting agenda, running meetings and any other activities identified in the operating procedures. 5.0 Lead Agency 5.1 King County will be the Lead Agency for receipt and disbursement of funds collected through annual dues, and general administrative and program support for the South County Area Transportation 3 58 DRAFT July 16, 2013 Draft South County Area Transportation Board Agreement Board. King County assumes wage and benefit costs of its staff performing Lead Agency responsibilities to the extent that King County appropriates such funds. The Lead Agency, in its sole discretion, shall determine the level of staffing available based upon funding. 5.2 Lead Agency responsibilities may be limited to: maintaining the South County Area Transportation Board membership rosters and distribution lists; arranging for Board meetings, including scheduling, agendas and rooms; collecting, administering and disbursing Board dues; providing Board meeting support to the chair and vice chair; attending Board meetings; and preparing Board meeting summaries. 6.0 Financing and Cost Sharing Guidelines 6.1 Yearly Dues: The South County Area Transportation Board members shall pay a minimum of $100 per full voting mreFritative member in annual dues to remain members in good standing. The Lead Agency will bill annually at the end of each year, and dues are to be paid within ninety days after receipt of the invoice. Members not in good standing shall lose voting rights until the required dues are paid. Additional dues above $100, and any dues required by limited or non - voting members, will be determined by the South County Area Transportation Board s prescribed d in the operating procedures. Revenue from dues shall be used for special events, public education, or other expenses authorized by the South County Area Transportation Board. The designated Lead Agency shall not be required to pay yearly dues. 6.2 Annual Review of Financing: The South County Area Transportation Board shall determine by June 30 of each year whether additional annual dues above $100 per voting representative membef will be required of the South County Area Transportation Board member jurisdictions for the following year. 6.3 Additional financial contributions: If additional financial contributions beyond an increase in dues are determined to be necessary, costs shall be shared among all voting members, with an option for King County to recuse itself from further financial obligations. Recused members may not vote on determining the additional financial contribution or uses for the additional funds. 6.4 Modification to Agreement Required: If additional funds are determined to be necessary, a modification to this agreement specifying cost - sharing, purpose, scope of work, administration, collection and disbursement of funds and other details is required in order to obligate a member jurisdiction to funding participation. 7.0 Withdrawal of a Party from this Agreement Each party, for its convenience and without cause or for any reason whatsoever, may withdraw from participation in this Agreement by providing written notice, sent certified mail, return receipt required, to the chair of the South County Area Transportation Board at least thirty (30) days in advance of the effective date of the withdrawal. A withdrawing party shall not be entitled to a refund of any payments to the South County Area Transportation Board and shall pay any dues required to be paid under this Agreement for costs which had been obligated prior to the effective date of the withdrawal. All obligations other than dues cease upon withdrawal. 4 59 T July 16, 2013 Draft South County Area Transportation Board Agreement Each party's funding to perfo its obligations under the Agreement, beyond the current appropriation year, is conditional upon appropriation by the party's governing body of sufficient funds. Should such an appropriation not be approved for a future year, a party may exercise its right to withdraw from the Agreement. 8.0 Duration This Agreement shall take effect upon being duly adopted by the gove ng bodies of all parties and executed by the authorized representatives of all parties. This Agreement shall remain in effect until Dec ber 31, 2015, provided that unless te ated earlier in accordance with Section 9.0, this Agreement shall be automatically extended upon the same te s or conditions for another te co encing January I, 2016 and ending no later than December 31, 2017. 9.0 Termination All parties to this Agreement must agree to te inate this Agree ent in order for such te nation to be effective. If all parties desire to te inate this Agreement, they shall execute a Statement of Te ation. Upon te ination, no party shall be required to make any additional contributions. Any remaining funds shall be refunded to the parties to this Agreement according to Section 11.0. 10.0 Real and Personal Pr perty The acquisition of real property is not anticipated under this Agreement. Any personal property acquired pursuant to this Agreement shall be held by the Lead Agency. In the event this Agreement expires or is te 'rimed in accordance with Section 8.0 or 9.0, any personal property other than cash shall remain with the Lead Agency. 11.0 Return of Funds At such f e as this Agreement expires without being extended or revised, or is te nated in accordance with Section 9.0, any unexpended and unco 'tted funds shall be distributed proportionately to those p. 'es to this Agreement at the time of te ation based on each party's percentage share of the total balance at the time of te ation. 12.0 Filing This Agreement shall be filed with the King Co ty Depa ent of Records and Elections. 13.0 Legal Relations 13.1 The parties shall comply with all applicable state and federal laws and regulations. 13.2 This Agreement is solely for the benefit of the parties hereto and gives no right to any other party. No joint venture or partnership is fo ed as a result of this Agreement. No employees or agents of one party or any of its contractors or subcontractors shall be deemed, or represent themselves to be, employees of any other party. 60 DRAFT July 16, 2013 Draft South County Area Transportation Board Agreement 13.3 Each party shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the other party and all of its officials, employees, principals and agents from all claims, demands, suits, actions, and liability of any kind whatsoever which arise out of, are connected with, or are incident to any negligent acts of the first party, its contractor, and/or employees, agents, and representatives in performing the first party's obligations under this Agreement. The parties agree that their obligations under this paragraph extend to claims made against one party by the other party's own employees. For this purpose, the parties, by mutual negotiation, hereby waive any immunity that, as respects the other party only, would otherwise be available against such claims under the industrial insurance provisions of RCW Title 51. In the event either party incurs attorney's fees, costs or other legal expenses to enforce the provisions of this section, against the other party, all such fees, costs and expenses shall be recoverable by the prevailing party. 13.4 The provisions of this Section shall survive and remain applicable to each of the parties notwithstanding any termination or expiration of this Agreement and notwithstanding a party's withdrawal from this Agreement. 14.0 Entirety and Modifications 14.1 This Agreement merges and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations and agreements between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof and constitutes the entire agreement between the parties. 14.2 This Agreement may be modified or extended only by written instrument signed by all the parties hereto. 15.0 Counterparts The signature pages of this Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which p hi, . lA .uy _ csi . shall be an original. �"���r � , a�sp� �.�f thus A ar��rp�tx a drnj �� auto �l�red eB.ea,tron�ic �� n�aur� constitute an iginal i mane:. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Agreement to be signed and delivered by its duly authorized officer or representative as of the date set forth below its signature. 61 DRAFT July 16, 2013 Note to SCATBd members: This is a first cut at revising the SCATBd Procedures/By -laws. SCATBd members will have ample time to review, discuss and revise this Procedures document. SOUTH COUNTY AREA TRANSPORTATION BOARD (SCATBd) OPERATING PROCEDURES (Adopted March 21, 1995) Revised February 18, 2003 R.evised 2013 The purpose of these procedures is to guide the conduct of business of the South County Area Transportation Board (SCATBd) and it's Technical Advisory Committee (TAC). These procedures shall be reviewed and revised a wally as needed. I. SOUTH COUNTY AREA TRANSPORTATION BOARD (SCATBd) A. Mission: The Board shall serve as a South County forum for information sharing, consensus building, and coordination to resolve transportation issues, identify priorities, and promote transportation plans and programs that benefit the South County area. (Mission Statement adopted January 16, 1996) B. Goals: (Goals adopted July 19th, 1994, and subsequently amended) Goal 1: Develop and promote a transportation system that will provide personal mobility choices for South County residents consistent with the transportation goals of the Growth Management Act and; Goal 2 Develop and promote transportation and related actions that accommodate economic development, through efficient movement of people, freight and goods, within the South County and contiguous areas. C. Role: The SCATBd is the forum established for the South subarea -ef King County area at which elected officials may provide input into the following decisions, and such other transportation - related issues as the members determine= pfejeet-seleetien 62 DRAFT July 16, 2013 planning -effeFt D. Membership and Voting: Membership shall be extended to the following local jurisdictions and agencies. The Board shall operate by consensus whenever possible, but in those matters requiring a vote, voting shall be assigned as indicated below: Yoting Members Algona Auburn Non Votin ort f Scattic Puget Sound Regional Council : - - Covington Des-N4eines Enumclaw Federal Way Icein Maple Valley Milton Muekleshoet-TFibe Nefmandy-Per-k Pacific Renton EeaTae Tukwila Sound Transit 7,11.51„„Y„.„„Prif tibriglights shall 11P...0,„ f91119vv,„1, Full Voting IVIlendmrs. ,Num F and Dues iSound Transit' 911:11 Transit/ i§„sialcs .suct! agOipn:01.11Nrrullsrl,.:40,4 alscjzf BK92illinilVdttifir11,9 andpi i1.4114., • rY:ict Recommendnons toK!n CounjMctro irano 91111PliciesagitCiRbiliPEO§SEYICPiritlPsARLIEIRknileinaTigii !cf th ryon ornith1ok fr rnd h ces 19,Y.S.414 Trrispgirliatisayolica_ka.rd 02,riday,t Rgutpri scuithpf the, cedsiir,,Riven gther reconynendationa, includim Rd t cs to WSDOT orogralos act ig„5c.„9ririRlSaC!4tI■P5,1q.thC„„„PSR,,g„„gtLWA!ll.PPliciqs_rt.m'io,FP„§.„„mc!..reig,q5„„,E4s,h„,,z!§„„„! Itar "Lionel fending :pollicilijirgalu 2 63 DRAFT July 16, 2013 City of Aleona Cat itApburn C." I Black Dunond C` urien oCovn ofDes Mones Cot of Enumclaw o Te era Cty Kent e Ye. Yes Yes Yes Yes Milton ormanth Park ESTac Yes es Yes Ys Ye. Y s Yes Yes Ycs Yes City of Pacific Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Kin Coon Y s Thciinii.t..94,Y049EANITIts_gs of ElrnitcslYelina Milnbers Numbsumg 113g2L. hc SIPP7YettiPli. bPir§ 0.15 AT Voting ighis in hts shall be as foil ws: Yes Yes nd Dues No .592tiryt Transi shall„be as follows:, Non N tin ember N mber of JUe resentattives 1 Pisrsssit l P tt f 'Seattle 1 a 1 —1 IPII2et Sound Rcv.na Council _ ' h ound Charnses f Commerce Coalition Sound Transit -ton State D ont o 400 or (Note: The Transportation Improvement Board and the Washington State Transportation Commission has requested to drop their membership in SCATBd) Corr "c n Other lij. d voting and non-voting members may be added later as the Board determines. Each limited v ting an la- n-voting member should appoint one representative and one alternate to the Board. ine fin 'ted sting ne ber designated alternate may v te in lace of esi. lated liHted voting representatives in the absence of the uesgnated limited v ting represent tive. For the citie3, - ; - : : ; ; ; : : • 11.0,4.1.2111,q SIPIPL ..ls1011411;aa221111114.1celi...P.,0 .train!.911.4401129111c1. Ptl.0 e!..91r4119„0,1l9s arl4 Recommendations to the f ea i delsotion on federral le WatioRancludilayeauthorization apt fundot fizijes and 64 DRAFT July 16, 2013 E. Officers 1. Chair: Responsible for 1) conducting and ensuring fair opportunity for discussion, 2) signing correspondence and speaking on behalf of SCATBd, 3) providing direction on agenda. 2. Vice - Chair: Responsible to act as chain in his/her absence. 3. Term of Office: One year from January. Elections in December F. Meeting Schedule: The regular meeting date for SCATBd shall be the third Tuesday of the month, from 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. in Kent. The meet Ong I ' c! ti n shall be hel at an .ppr priatew l ion ith.n S , .th King County. The agenda package shall -.. .._. f` the meeting (the be distributed • �� �dvan�� o . Adjustments to the regular meeting schedule and meeting location shall occur as needed. H. Board Actions Require a Quorum of RI il Voting Members :(A quorum is 40 aggspLpiquipliyoting members),, ernefgpney- 1. Type of Actions Board Can Take: The Board may undertake activities consistent with its purpose and shall prepare an annual work program for the following year for submittal to its member jurisdictions by January 31 of each year. 2. Type of Actions Board Cannot Take: The Board cannot take action to approve/disapprove or adopt any position on behalf of member jurisdictions/agencies without authorization to do so from those jurisdictions. In issuing communication or statements, it should be made clear that the Board is not acting on behalf of its member jurisdictions/agencies. 3. Schedule for Action Items: Action items will be presented at one meeting and acted on at a second meeting unless three- quarters of the voting Board members . present agree that the circumstances require action to be taken at that time PROVIDED that there is a quorum of voting members (at least 50 percent plus one). 4. Minority Statements: Any individual full voti' Board member or ii mited . vctiniLmemberjufisdietieniagectey shall have the right at the time of the vote to request that a statement of a minority position be included in Board communications or otherwise distributed with an approved Board statement. 4 65 DRAFT July 16, 2013 I. Subcommittees of the Board: Subcommittees of the Board shall be established as needed. II. TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE A. Purpose: The TAC shall provide technical assistance as requested by the Board and shall advise the Board on emergent transportation issues for the Board's consideration includijairmipnal_prpiect _identification and opuntywidroiect selection. B. Membership: Each ScATBd member (fulL limited, or non Notimmembed shall appoint an appropriate iivie§entatiye department . . tt ; to the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC). Other D. Chair: ; t t III. OTHER A. Standard Agenda: The SCATBd agenda shall follow this standard format unless unusual circumstances require a different arrangement. 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of Minutes 3. Report of the Chair 4. Communications and Citizens' Requests to Comment 5. Major Agenda Topics 5 66 D • T July 16, 2013 B. Audience Co ents during Meetings: At the Chair's discretion, co ents may be taken from the audience. The Chair should call on audience members wishing to make co ents. SCATBd members can ask to have audience members speak. Audience co ents should be li 'ted to two n,utes. C. Distribution of Materials: Letters and doci ents may be distributed with the agenda at the direction of the Chair as authorized by the policies and procedures of the jurisdiction providing staff support. D. Citizen Involvement: Interested citizen groups shall be placed on the distribution list for Board meetings to ensure that those groups are kept info ed of Board activities. : :j4 . - : • :** " • ; " : ^ • ; 6 67 D T July 16, 2013 7 68 SOUTH COUNTY AREA T NSPORTATION BO June 18, 2013 MEETING S Members Councilmember Marcie Palmer (Vice-Chair Councilmember Jea e Burbidge Councilmember Bill Peloza Joe Ti ons Councilmember Elizabeth Albertson Chris Arkills Mayor Dave Hill Councilmember Kate Iler Councilmember Stacia Jenkins Councilmember Wayne Snoey Co cilmember Victoria Laise Jonas Tom Gut Elizabeth Leavitt Co cilmember Jeanette Burrage Kelly McGourty Evette Mason I. Open Meeting '1 Att C hment A (SCATBd) City of Renton City of Federal Way City of Auburn (Alternate) King County Council (Alternate) City of Kent King County Executive (Alternate) City of Algona City of Tukwila City of No andy Park City of Covington City of Maple Valley City of SeaTac (Alternate) Port of Seattle City of Des Moines PSRC Port of Tacoma (Alternate) Vice Chair Marcie Palmer chaired the meeting, and after introductions the Board approved the May 21, 2013 SCATBd meeting su aries. II. Reports Vice-Chair Palmer reviewed the SHB 1954 support letter that was sent to South King County legislators last month, a copy of the letter was handed out to Board Members. She also reported that Kelly Hayden, SCATBd's Pierce Transit representative was leaving his post at Pierce Transit. She said Mr. Hayden wanted to give his thanks to all of the members of SCATBd for allowing Pierce Transit to be part of the group. He said he has le ed a lot from you and hopefully he was able to contribute to their knowledge of transit and the challenges we face. Kelly said that he will ask Pierce Transit to no 'nate a new representative for the Board. As of July 1st, the Chair position for the South Sound Chambers of Co erce Legislative Coalition (SSCCLC) Chair will change. Ms. Shelly Cook is the new chair and is the new SSCCLC representative on SCATBd. She said thanks to Terry Davis who very ably represented the Coalition last year. III. Legislative Update Monica tman, Sound Cities Association, briefed the Board on the Second Special Legislative Session, she reported that there was not a lot of optimism about the passage of a 69 transportation bill, but reported that there was some momentum. She briefly discussed the differences between the House and Senate versions of the transportation bill and passed out a side-by-side comparison doc ent that she got from the Port of Tacoma's website. Ms. tman reported that Representative Clibborn has made some amendments to her bill to compliment Senator King's Bill. She also said that the Sound Cities Association has voted to support the House transportation bill. IV. Federal Way Safety Projects Update Rick Perez briefed the Board on the City of Federal Way's traffic safety improvement projects and their impacts on the collision rates in his city. He said that the data shows that their safety projects have reduced the a ual collision rates and the associated societal cost of collisions. Mr. Perez said that his city has brought about this reduction in collision rates through engineering, education and enforcement. He focused engineering which included access management, roundabouts, flashing yellow arrows, traffic cal •ng, rectangular rapid flashing beacons, and capacity improvements. He said that rectangular rapid flashing beacons was especially effective in reducing collision rates and said that within 100 feet of the beacons there as a 43% reduction in collisions; 8% reduction in injuries; a 19% reduction in property damage, and a 11% reduction in severity of collisions. Mr. Perez said that there was a high correlation between capacity improvements a reduction in collision rates, a 34% reduction in total collisions at improved intersections, and a $1,512,000 reduction in societal costs. V. Report and Discussion on the 2013-2016 Draft SCATBd Agreement, Annual Dues Report, and Possible SCATBd Meeting Time Change Dues Report: Paul Taka ne briefed the Board on the current status of SCATBd dues. He said a report on SCATBd's dues is made in June of each year so that financial contributions from members for the upco ' g year can be adjusted if needed. This also provides an opportunity for the Board to discuss its priorities for spending the remaining dues for the rest of the year. He reported that in 2013 the dues generated a total of $1600, SCATBd's current dues balance (June, 2013) was $9,287.80. SCATBd Agreement Discussion: Vice-chair Palmer began the Agreement discussion by reviewing the draft SCATBd Agreement that was included in the agenda packet. Chris Arkills reported Agreement discussions by the chairs and vice-chairs on the three transportation boards went well. He said the goal of the Agreement discussions was to put the co on elements of all three groups into Agreement and allow differences to be reflected in Procedure (By-laws). Mr. Arkills reported that there was not a lot of substantive changes to the core agreement and said that the Procedures will allow flexibility among the three boards. Wayne Snoey said he agreed with the draft version of the SCATBd Agreement and said he has already reviewed the Agreement with city attorneys. Mr. Snoey did say that it would be useful to see a draft of the SCATBd By-laws along with the draft Agreement. Mayor Hill also said that they have been working on the Agreement revision and was satisfied with the draft version. Board Members asked if a draft Procedures 70 document is available for review. Mr. Takamine said that he was working revising the current SCATBd Procedures/By-laws, and would send of a preli 'nary draft of the SCATBd Procedures with the next agenda packet. The Board was info ed that the Procedures would contain language to would allow the Board, by a unanimous vote, to add or remove limited voting and non-voting members. At the July SCATBd meeting, the Board will be asked to approve Agreement, once approved the Agreement will be fo ally transmitted to the City Councils for their approval and then each city or will have to sign the Agreement. Possible SCATBd Meeting Time Change: Vice Chair Palmer discussed a possible SCATBd change in the SCATBd meeting start time. She said an on-line Doodle Poll was conducted on moving up the SCATBd meeting time to 10 a.m., starting the meeting time one hour earlier at 8 a.m., or having the meeting start at 9 a.m. She said 13 members responded and there were 9 votes for starting the meet 1 hour earlier at 8 a.m., 3 votes for keeping the current starting time; and 2 votes for moving the start time to 10 a.m. If SCATBd chooses to move the start time to 8 a.m., the City of SeaTac would be able to open the Council Chambers at 7:30 a.m. to acco odate am 8 a.m. meeting t e. Vice Chair Palmer said the SeaTac has been providing the coffee, and suggested with the earlier meeting time the Board 'ght want to consider using its dues to buy coffee. The Board agreed to use its dues to pay for the coffee. The Board agreed to take the Doodle Poll under advisement and make a final decision on the meeting time in September, if there is a change to the meeting time, the Board agreed to make it effective in January. VI. Comprehensive Approach to Regional Tolling Monica tman briefed the Board on the Sound Cities Association support for a more comprehensive approach to regional tolling implementation, through the development of a comprehensive study that would include all tolling projects within 5 'T Corridors (as identified by the Puget Sound Regional Co cil Transportation 2040. Ms. 'tman said the SCA worked closely with King County who was a signator to a letter, sent to the PSRC and WSDOT, requesting PSRC convene a special task force to advance the review of a system-wide approach to tolling our region's major highway facilities as an alternative to the current path of implementing tolling on a corridor by corridor basis. She reported that ETP and Sea Shore transportation boards had sent letters supporting this comprehensive approach to tolling. Kelly McGourty reported that the PSRC has just begun a discussion on a preli 'nary scoping on the study and how to fund the study. She said this issue was going to the PSRC Boards for discussion sometime this su er. She also said that this study 'ght info the work on balancing the financial strategy of Transportation 2040 as part of the Plan's 2014 update. Other Attendees: Brandon Carver, Des Moines Dennis Dowdy, Auburn Rick Perez, Federal Way Samantha Casne, King County 71 M Ica hitinan, SCA Lob Giberson, Tukwila Paul Tak ine, Kin Cot ty 4 Cathy Mooney, Ken Jii Seitz, Rent 72 2. 3. 4. 5. SOUTH COUNTY AREA T • NSPORTATION BO MEETING Tuesday, July 16, 2013 9:00 — 11:00 a.m. SeaTac City Hall 4800 South 188th Street SeaTac AGENDA Open Meeting • Introductions • Approve su ary of June 18, 2013 SCATBd Meeting (Attachment A) Reports, Co unications and Citizen Requests to Comment • Chair or Vice Chair 9 Participant Updates from RTC and Other Regional Co 'ttees • 2013 Legislative Wrap-Up and Next Steps — Andrew Glass-Hastings, King County Gove ent Relations • Citizen Co ent Approve SCATBd Draft Agreement for Jurisdiction Review (Attachment B) • Preli 'nary Review of the Draft SCATBd Agreement/By-Laws (Attachment C) Metro F Line Report - Jana Demas, King County Metro T4 erica, a coalition to re o how we spend transportation dollars at the federal, state and local level - Chris Rall Action Reports and Discussion Discussion and Action Report and Discussion Report and Discussion 11 (SCATBd) 9:00 a.m. 9:05 a.m. 9:30 a.m. 10:00 a.m. 10:30 a.m. 73 74