The URL can be used to link to this page

LUTC PKT 02-06-2017City of Federal Way City Council Land Use/Transportation Committee February 6, 2017 5:00 p.m. MEETING AGENDA 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PUBLIC COMMENT (3 minutes) 3. COMMITTEE BUSINESS Topic Title/ Description Presenter Page A. Approval of Minutes: January 9, 2017 Upton 3 B. ILA with School District for Waterworks Shilley 9 Grant Funded Curriculum Development C. Authorization to Apply for FY 2018 King Doucette 15 County Conservation Futures Funds D. Marine Hills Stormwater Conveyance Tang 19 System Repair Phase II -Bid Award E. S 356th Street (Pacific Highway South to Chandra 23 Enchanted Parkway) Improvement Project -Bid Award F. RESOLUTION: Adoption of Amended Perez 29 2017-22 Transportation Improvement Plan G. Revised Transportation CIP Prioritization Perez 37 Criteria 4. OTHER 5. FUTURE MEETINGS/AGENDA ITEMS: Action or Info Action Action Action Action Action Action Action City Halt Council Chambers Council Date N/A February 21, 2017 Consent February 21, 2017 Consent February 21, 2017 Consent February 21, 2017 Consent February 21, 2017 Business February 21, 2017 Consent Time 5 min 5 min 5 min 5 min 5 min 10 min Smin The next LUTC meeting will be Monday, March 6, 2017 at 5:00 p.m. in City Hall Council Chambers. 6. ADJOURN Committee Members Bob Ce/ski, Chair Lydia Assefa-Dawson, Member Mark Koppang, Member City Staff Ma,wan Salloum P.E, Public Works Director Shawna Upton, Administrative Assistant II 253-835-2103 This page left blank intentionally. 2 City of Federal Way City Council Land Use/Transportation Committee January 9, 2017 5:00 p.m. City Hall Council Chambers MEETING SUMMARY Committee Members in Attendance: Committee Chair Bob Celski and Committee members Lydia Assefa-Dawson and Mark Koppang. Council members in attendance: Deputy Mayor Burbidge. Staff in Attendance: Public Works Director Marwan Salloum, Deputy Public Works Director/PAEC Project Director EJ Walsh, Deputy Public Works Director/Street Systems Manager Desiree Winkler, Assistant City Attorney Mark Orthmann, Community Development Director Brian Davis, City Traffic Engineer Rick Perez, Surface Water Manager Theresa Thurlow, Senior Planner David Van De Weghe, Surface Water Management Engineer Tony Doucette, Senior Traffic Engineer Erik Preston, Engineering Plans Reviewer Kevin Peterson, Street Systems Engineer Jeff Huynh, Senior Planner Stacey Welsh, and Administrative Assistant II Shawna Upton. 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair Celski called the meeting to order at 5:02 PM. 2. PUBLIC COMMENT (3 minutes) There was no public comment. 3. COMMITTEE BUSINESS Forward to Council Topic Title/Description A. B. Approval of Minutes: December 5, 2016 Committee approved the December 5, 2016 LUTC minutes as presented. Moved: Koppang Seconded: Assefa-Dawson Passed : 2-0; Celski recused. Olympic View '16 NTS -SW 330th St (21st Ave SW to 26th Ave SW) Mr. Preston indicated a petition was submitted on May 23, 2016 by the citizens of the area over concerns of excessive speeding, cut-through traffic and pedestrian safety. The minor collector street was evaluated and met the minimum severity criteria. A community meeting was held and the attending group was interested in either three speed humps or two speed humps and a mini-roundabout. Those two options were sent out to ballot and the advisory ballot results, as well as staffs proposal, aligns with favoring three speed humps. The projected costs fit within the per-neighborhood budget. Committee forwarded Option #1 as presented. Moved: Assefa-Dawson Seconded: Koppang Passed: 3-0 N/A January 17, 2017 Consent Committee Members Bob Ce/ski, Chair Lydia Assefa-Dawson, Member Mark Koppang, Member 3 City Staff Marwan Salloum, P.£, Public Works Director Shawna Upton, Administrative Assistant II 253-835-2703 C. D. E. F. 2016 Asphalt Overlay Project-Final Acceptance Mr. Huynh stated that prior to release of retainage on a Public Works construction project, the City Council must accept the work as complete to meet State Department of Revenue and State Department of Labor and Industries requirements. Construction on the project is complete and the final construction costs came in below budget. Committee forwarded Option #1 as presented. Moved: Koppang Seconded: Assefa-Dawson Passed: 3-0 Groundwater Interceptor Trench in SW 330th at 49th Ave SW -Project Acceptance Mr. Doucette indicated and underdrain in the Stone Brook neighborhood was installed to address groundwater seepage and associated pavement concerns. Prior to closing out the project, the City Council must accept the work as complete. Final construction costs came in below budget. Mr. Doucette presented before and after pictures of the project area. Committee forwarded Option #1 as presented. Moved : Assefa-Dawson Seconded: Koppang Passed: 3-0 Resolution: Approving Eagle Manor Final Plat Mr. Van De Weghe presented the final plat for Eagle Manor. This plat is 3.11 acres and is accessed off SW 344th St by the Twin Lakes Park and Ride. There are 12 single-family lots that range in size from 7,207 to 8,244 square feet. The procedural summary was outlined as well as current pictures of the plat. The applicant has fulfilled all conditions of the preliminary plat approval, the plat meets applicable codes and policies and the construction is complete or financially secured through bonds. Committee forwarded Option #1 to the January 17, 2017 Council consent agenda. Moved: Koppang Seconded: Assefa-Dawson Passed: 3-0 Final Administrative Decision and Appeal Process Mr. Orthmann stated at the last LUTC meeting, Committee asked that staff return with a presentation to discuss some of the pros and cons of our Administrative Appeal Process and how we handle final appeals. Back in the Spring of 2014 Council passed an Ordinance to delegate authority and responsibility for making certain land use decisions, permitting decisions, and final appeals to the Hearing Examiner. This essentially put the decision making role for permitting decisions and other appeals out of the hands of the Council and into the hands of the Examiner. This was done for a few different reasons. The Hearing Examiner is a land use expert and an attorney that deals frequently with these matters. They are a third party that has an objective view which allows them to provide a decision that is not based on any outside influences. It also opened up the Council to be able to seek citizen input. One important note about switching over from the Council being the final decision maker over to the Hearing Examiner is that when the Council sits as the quasi-judicial decision maker, you can't talk about or take citizen input on land use decisions. It limits the ability for Council to interact with their constituents. January 17, 2017 Consent January 17, 2017 Consent January 17, 2017 Consent N/A Committee Members Bob Ce/ski, Chair 4 City Staff Marwan Salloum, P.£, Public Works Director Shawna Upton, Administrative Assistant II 253-835-2703 Lydia Assefa-Dawson, Member Mark Koppang, Member When you sit as a decision maker and a permit comes up, you can only consider what has been entered into the record. That is usually the applicant, the application, any formal comments that were made, the staff report and what happens during the hearing before the City Council. If a Councilmember makes a decision that is based on ariy information that wasn't contained within the record, wasn't presented or if there's any perceived bias, then it brings up an appearance of fairness issue and any decision made by Council can be overturned. Any time a body sits in a quasi-judicial capacity, not only to they have to be fair and follow all the procedures but it also has to satisfy the appearance of fairness doctrine under state law. In essence, it takes the onus away from Council to have any issues of any appearance of fairness, any bias questions and allows a third-party land use expert be able to control the process by rendering objective decisions regarding permitting issues. Councilmember Koppang shared his frustration that Council recently sat through hours of public testimony regarding the Weyerhaeuser property and having the public, who Council represents, come to the conclusion that Council doesn't matter in the process was upsetting. He further stated his understanding was that Council is not allowed to respond to the citizen input anyway and asked Mr. Orthmann for clarification. Mr. Orthmann stated that his understanding is correct with regard to specific permitting decisions because when you are working through a specific permit, you are sticking to the law that's applied to that individual application and it avoids a constituent applying a certain amount of political pressure on a Councilmember and putting them in the position of having to follow a process or follow something that may be the most politically expedient. Discussion continued regarding the former quasi-judicial decision making and current practice. Councilmember Assefa-Dawson asked at what point in the process Council would be informed of what the Hearing Examiner decision is. Mr. Orthmann explained Council will be informed when the decision gets made and clarified the roles of the Hearing Examiner and Council. He pointed out that City Council has the ability and the authority to take proactive measures to take a broader look at zoning and to set policies in the vision for the City but under the system that has been put in place since 2014, Council does not fit into the chain of events if there is an appeal or as the initial decision maker and explained what the Council role looked like prior to 20.14. Mr. Orthmann indicated that the current method of decision making is the most common and accepted way for jurisdictions of common size to Federal Way to move through their permitting process. Deputy Mayor Burbidge recollects several instances when Council sat in a quasi-judicial manner and stated it was frustrating not to be able to have any conversation and to try and explain why that was the case. She also wants to make it clear that the only time either the Council or the Hearing Examiner would have a role is if a permit decision by the staff is challenged with an appeal. Mr. Orthmann noted that it depends on which process it is and explained the differences. Councilmember Koppang wondered if there is any way to find some middle ground that would allow the Council to have an increased role. Mr. Orthmann stated he would look into other options but he is unaware of any other method being used in the State other than the ones discussed. Typically, smaller cities often utilize the quasF-judicial method whereas larger cities typically use a Hearing Examiner because it affords the Council the ability to participate with their constituents and for the elected officials to be responsive. Councilmember Koppang would like staff to report back if there are any other options so it can be discussed further. Chair Celski asked if there were any actions that IRG has initiated to go to the Hearing Examiner now that he may be unaware of. Mr. Orthmann indicated there is currently a code interpretation appeal and provided a brief explanation. Committee Members Bob Ce/ski, Chair Lydia Assefa-Dawson, Member Mark Koppang, Member 5 City Staff Marwan Salloum, P.E, Public Works Director Shawna Upton, Administra tive Assistant II 253-835-2703 G. H. Interagency Agreement with Washington State Department of Enterprise Services and Authorization to Apply for a Grant Related to the LED Street Light Conversion Project Ms. Winkler presented background information on this project noting they have a preliminary project scope and costs put together. The City has two different sets of lights; the Puget Sound Energy owned and maintained lights and then the stand alone city owned and maintained lights which include the d eco rative lights along S 320th Stre et and Pa cific Highway primarily. In order to conve rt al l current lights to LED street lights it would cost just over 3.3 million dollars. Ultimately the City will save money from reduced energy usage and maintenance costs because the LED's can last up to 20 years versus the current bulbs which only last two or three years and have other maintenance issues such as ballasts. LED's also have higher light quality and upgrade control options such as dimming which would result in further energy savings. She outlined energy savings performance contracting which is the method used to identify, construct and finance energy and utility conservation. This uses the money that is saved in energy costs and utility rebates to pay for the project costs and the consultant guarantees maximum construction cost and energy savings achieved. Staff has selected a company called Ameresco based on qualifications and local references. Washington State Department of Enterprise Services will provide project management throughout project development, construction, and post construction verification of energy savings. She further outlined a grant opportunity and other steps that will be taken moving forward. Discussion was held regarding what the grant funds cover, how Puget Sound Energy would fit into this process with the lights they own, what the City commitment will be by accepting the grant, if any studies have been done that determine how long it would take for this type of investment to pay off and the timeframe requirements for the project. Committee forwarded Option #1 as presented. Moved: Koppang Seconded: Assefa-Dawson Passed: 3-0 Resolution: Acceptance of Grant Funding for Transportation Improvement Projects -Authorization to Accept Grant Funding Ms. Winkler stated federal grants require a Resolution to accept the terms of the grant prior to obligation of funds. The City has been awarded federal grant funding for two projects through the Innovative Safety Program. Both the adaptive Traffic signal Control System and the Military Road and S 298th Street Compact Roundabout projects received grant funding. She briefly mentioned other projects that were unsuccessful in receiving grant funding. A discussion was held regarding the purpose behind the proposed roundabout on Military Rd and S 298th Street. Mr. Perez was called up and noted there were some collision patterns the city is trying to prevent at this location. The first is a sight distance restriction at S 298th Street coming from the west and the other was the lack of a northbound left turn lane which was causing drivers to take a gap that was too small or being stopping and getting rear ended. Those two collision patterns would be addressed by using the roundabout. Chair Celski asked if there will be opportunities to resubmit for the unsuccessful grants. Ms. Winkler indicated staff will be meeting with grant funding representatives to seek input and will continue to look for other grant opportunities. Committee forwarded Option #1 as presented. Moved: Assefa-Dawson Seconded: Koppang Passed: 3-0 January 17, 2017 Consent January 17, 2017 Consent Committee Members Bob Ce/ski, Chair 6 City Staff Marwan Salloum, P.£, Public Works Director Shawna Upton, Administrative Assistant II 253-835-2703 Lydia Assefa-Dawson, Member Mark Koppang, Member I. J. Asphalt Overlay -Joint Constructio n Agreement with Puget Sound Energy for the SW 330th Street Gas Ma in Replacem ent (6th Ave SW to 1st Ave S) Ms. Winkler indicated Puget Sound Energy (PSE) is completing a gas main replacement project on SW 330th Street between 6th Ave SW and 1st Ave South. PSE is required to complete a full-width asphalt overlay of the project limits. As part of the 2017 Asphalt Overlay Program, the City is scheduled to complete a full-width asphalt overlay of 10th Ave SW which is adjacent to PSE's project limits. PSE requested to add SW 330th Street to the 2017 Asphalt Overlay Program as a separate bid schedule. The Joint Construction Agreement requires PSE to pay actual costs for design, construction and construction management. Benefits of this joint agreement include the work being completed in a timely manner, it will minimize impacts to the traveling public, ensure consistent quality of the asphalt along the same corridor and there may be potential savings to PSE for being part of a larger project. PSE will still be required to complete full-width asphalt overlay on their remaining project limits in the West campus neighborhood as staff did not have the resources available to include these additional project limits. A brief discussion was held regarding potential cost savings and how the City benefits by working with PSE on this portion of the overlay. Committee forwarded Option #1 as presented . Moved : Koppang Seconded : Assefa-Dawson Passed: 3 -0 Resolution: Setting Public Hearing to Amend the 2017-22 Transportation Improvement Plan Mr. Perez noted staff is seeking the amendment to add two safety grants that were not on the current 2017-22 Transportation Improvement Plan. In order to move forward with those projects, they need to be added. Committee forwarded Option #1 as presented. Moved: Assefa-Dawson Seconded: Koppang Passed : 3-0 4. OTHER 5. FUTURE MEETINGS/AGENDA ITEMS: January 17, 2017 Consent January 17, 2017 Consent The next LUTC meeting will be Monday, February 6, 2017 at 5:00 p.m. in City Hall Council Chambers. 6. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 6:26 PM. Attest: Shawna Upton Administrative Assistant II Approved by Committee: Committee Members Bob Ce/ski~ Chair Lydia Assefa-Dawson, Member Mark Koppang, Member 7 City Staff Marwan Salloum, P.E, Public Works Director Shawna Upton, Administrative Assistant II 253-835-2703 This page left blank intentionally. 8 COUNCIL MEETING DATE: February 21, 2017 ITEM#: CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: ILA with School District for Waterworks Grant Funded Curriculum Development POLICY QUESTION: Should City Council approve an Interlocal Agreement between the City and the Federal Way School District for Waterworks Grant funded curriculum development? COMMITTEE: Land Use and Transportation Committee CATEGORY: IZJ Consent D City Council Business D Ordinance D Resolution MEETING DATE: February 6, 2017 D D Public Hearing Other STAFF REPORT BY: Hollie Shill ey, Water Quality Specialist -tJ$ DEPT: Public Works Attachments: Land Use and Transportation Committee Memorandum dated February 6, 2017 Options Considered: 1. Approve the Interlocal Agreement between the City and the Federal Way School District for Waterworks Grant funded curriculum development? 2. Reject the Interlocal Agreement with School District for Waterworks Grant Funded Curriculum Development. MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: The mayor recommends forwarding option 1 to the February 21, 2017 City Council consent agenda for approval. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Bob Cel ski , Chair Lydia Assefa-Da wson Member Mark Kopp ang , Member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "/ move to authorize the City to enter into an Interlocal Agreement with the Federal Way School District/or Waterworks Grant.funded curriculum development." (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: 0 APPROVED 0 DENIED 0 TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION 0 MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) REVISED-1/2015 9 COUNCIL BILL# 15T reading Enactment reading ORDINANCE# RESOLUTION # DATE: TO: VIA: FROM: February 6, 2017 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM Land Use and Transportation Committee Jim Ferrell, Mayor ~ \. Marwan Salloum, P.E., Public Works Director ~ Theresa Thurlow, P.E., Surface Water Manager ~ Hollie Shilley, Water Quality Specialist ~ SUBJECT: ILA with School District/or Waterworks Grant Funded Curriculum Development BACKGROUND: The Waterworks grant, awarded to the City on April 13, 2016 by the King County Natural Resources and Parks Waste Water Treatment Division, provides the City funding to expand the Storming the Sound with Salmon program into the remaining Federal Way schools not currently participating in the program. Storming the Sound with Salmon is a stormwater education program developed and implemented by the City and the School District in 2012. The Interlocal Agreement will allow the City to reimburse the School District to develop new Low Impact Development curriculum, a field trip guide, and design interactive components for the City's Town Square Park to fulfill requirements of the grant. The City may pay the District with grant proceeds up to $41,075 for cost incurred to complete tasks. The drafted Interlocal Agreement between the City and School District is attached. cc: Project File Day File 10 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY AND FEDERAL WAY SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 210 TO FACILITATE THE KING COUNTY WATERWORKS GRANT, A WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT This Interlocal Agreement ("Agreement") made and entered into this_ day of , 2017, by and between the City of Federal Way, a Washington municipal corporation ("City"), and the Federal Way School District No. 210 ("School District" or "District") to implement the City's Waterworks Grant ("Grant"). The City and the School District (together "Parties") are located and do business at the below addresses which shall be valid for any notice required under this Agreement: SCHOOL DISTRICT: Tammy Campbell Superintendent 33330 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003 253-945-2000 superintendent@fwps.org CITY OF FEDERAL WAY: Jim Ferrell Mayor 33325 8th A venue South Federal Way, WA 98003 253-835-2402 Jim.ferrell@cityoff ederal way .com WHEREAS, Chapter 39.34 RCW, the Interlocal Cooperation Act, authorizes the City and the School District to enter into interlocal agreements for joint or cooperative action; and WHEREAS, the City and the District will partner to implement King County's Waterworks Grant. The project will benefit and improve water quality and/or the regional wastewater treatment system and its ratepayers in King County and support the design, development, integration, review, and installation of curriculum and interactive elements demonstrating Low Impact Development ("LID") elements at Town Square Park ("TSP") and the Storming the Sound with Salmon ("SSS") educational program in the School District; and WHEREAS, the Grant awarded to the City on April 13, 2016 by the King County Natural Resources and Parks Waste Water Treatment Division provides the City an amount up to, but not exceeding, $104,500. There is no cash and/or in-kind match required by the City. Grant funds must be expended by February 28,2018; and WHEREAS, Grant funds will be used to expand the SSS program into the remaining Federal Way schools not currently enrolled in the program and develop and integrate LID curriculum into the existing SSS program, and WHEREAS, This Agreement will allow the City to reimburse the School District, an amount up to, but not exceeding, $41,075 to develop the LID curriculum, field trip guide, and potential interactive components for TSP. All work by the District shall be completed, and invoices submitted, to the City no later than February 28 , 2018; and 11 WHEREAS, the SSS is a stormwater education program implemented and designed by the City and the School District in 2012 that is aligned with Washington State Learning Standards and can be implemented by other municipalities and schools throughout King County and the Puget Sound region; and WHEREAS, the City and the District recognize that stormwater plays a critical role in the health and recovery of the Puget Sound and that education is a critical component of effecting positive change. The SSS program provides an exciting opportunity for stormwater education expansion in the region by combining classroom curriculum with the school-wide stewardship experience of raising and caring for salmon; and WHEREAS, the City, the District, King County, and the Puget Sound Region will mutually benefit from the development and implementation of a stormwater education program involving educational displays arid classroom curriculums; NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties agree to the following terms and conditions: 1. Purpose. This Agreement will allow the City to reimburse the School District to develop the LID curriculum, field trip guide, and design of interactive components for TSP to fulfill requirements of the Waterworks Grant. 2. Term. The duration of this Agreement shall be for the term of the Grant, but shall expire no later than February 28, 2018. 3. Responsibilities. 3.1 City Responsibilities. A) Provide a scope of work to the School District for the development of the LID curriculum, field trip guide, and design of interactive components for TSP. B) Reimburse the District with Grant proceeds up to $41,075 for cost incurred to complete tasks. C) Manage and be the fiscal agent for the Grant. 3.2 District Responsibilities. A) Develop three LID related lessons sequenced across multiple grade levels. B) Design three interactive components to be integrated in TSP. C) Develop field trip guide for TSP. D) Gain pre-approval of expenditures from the City's grant manager. E) Provide invoices and documentation to the City for reimbursement. 4. Termination. Either party may terminate this Agreement for any reason with 30 days prior written notice to the other party. All work product produced prior to notice of termination shall be provided to the City and all equipment acquired with grant funds shall be returned to the City. 12 5. Hold Harmless. Each Party agrees to protect, defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the other Party, and its respective officers, officials, employees, agents, subcontractors, and volunteers from any and all claims, demands suits, penalties, losses, damages, judgments, attorney's fees, and/or costs of any kind whatsoever, arising from, resulting from, or connected with this Agreement to the extent caused by the negligent acts, errors, or omissions of that Party, its respective officers, officials, employees, agents, subcontractors, and volunteers, or by the Party's breach of the Agreement. The provisions of this section shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement with respect to any event occurring prior to such expiration or termination. 6. Posting. Each Party shall either file or post this agreement in compliance with RCW 39.34.040. 7. Administrator. The City shall serve as the administrator of this Agreement. 8. Agency. This agreement shall not result in a separate agency, entity, or partnership being created. 9. General Provisions. This Agreement contains all of the agreements of the Parties with respect to any matter covered or mentioned in this Agreement. No provision of this Agreement may be amended or modified except by written agreement signed by the Parties. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Parties' successors in interest, heirs, and assigns. Any provision of this Agreement which is declared invalid or illegal shall in no way affect or invalidate any other provision. In the event either of the Parties default on the performance of any terms of this Agreement or either Party places the enforcement of this Agreement in the hands of an attorney, or files a lawsuit, each Party shall pay its own attorney's fees, costs, and expenses. The venue for any dispute related to this Agreement shall be King County, Washington. Failure of the City to declare any breach or default immediately upon the occurrence thereof, or delay in taking any action in connection with, shall not waive such breach or default. Time is of the essence for this Agreement and each and all of its provisions in which performance is a factor. [Signature Page Follows] 13 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the above and foregoing Agreement has been executed by the Parties hereto and made effective on the day and year first above written. CITY OF FEDERAL WAY FEDERAL WAY SCHOOL DISTRICT Jim Ferrell, Mayor Tammy Campbell, Superintendent Date: Date: ------------ Attest: Stephanie Courtney, City Clerk Approved as to Form: Mark Orthmann, Acting City A~omey 14 COUNCIL MEETING DATE: February 21, 2017 ITEM#: CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: Authorization to apply for FY 2018 King County Conservation Futures Funds POLICY QUESTION: Should the City Council authorize SWM staff to apply for the FY 2018 King County Conservation Futures Funds? COMMITTEE: Land Use and Transportation Committee MEETING DATE: February 6, 2017 CATEGORY: 0 Consent O Ordinance D Public Hearing 0 City Council Business D Resolution D Other STAFF REPORT BY: Tony Doucette, P.E., SWM Project Engineer 1't> DEPT: Public Works Attachments: Land Use and Transportation Committee memorandum dated February 6, 2017. Options Considered: 1. Authorize SWM staff to apply for FY 2018 King County Conservation Futures Funds. 2. Do not authorize SWM staff to apply for FY 2018 King County Conservation Futures Funds and provide direction to staff. MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: The Mayor recommends forwarding option 1 to the February 21, 2017 Council Consent Agenda for approval. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: I move to forward Option 1 to the February 21, 2017 consent agenda for approval. Bob Celski , Committee Chair Lydia Assefa-Dawson, Member Mark Koppang , Member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "/ move to authorize staff to proceed with the application for FY 2018 King County Conservation Futures Funds. (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: 0 APPROVED 0 DENIED 0 TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION 0 MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) REVISED-1/2015 15 COUNCIL BILL # 15T reading Enactment reading ORDINANCE# RESOLUTION # DATE: TO: VIA: FROM: SUBJECT: February 6, 2017 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM Land Use and Transportation Committee Jim Ferrell, Mayor Tony Doucette, P.E., Surface Water Management Project Engineer 11> Theresa Thurlow, P.E., Swface Water Manage,;_ \'f7""'" __. Marwan Salloum, P.E., Public Works Director ~ Authorization to apply for FY 2018 King County Conservation Futures Funds BACKGROUND: Conservation Futures Tax levy (CFT) funds are available annually through King County's Conservation Futures Program for financial assistance purchasing land to be preserved as open space. The City's Surface Water Management (SWM) Division has successfully applied for funds to acquire high value riparian and aquatic habitat in the West Hylebos watershed and intends to continue conservation property acquisition .in the East Hylebos watershed. Target properties for acquisition are identified on the attached map as areas X, Y and Z. SWM staff are requesting authorization to apply for $1,000,000 in CFT funds for the purpose of acquiring some or all of the identified parcels in areas X, Y and/or Z on the attached map. These funds are available for both the sale price and for use in performing due diligence on the properties. A 100% match is required for all funds received so the total purchase amount plus due diligence could be up to $2,000,000. SWM currently has two capital projects for conservation property acquisitions in the West Hylebos Basin and will present to Council to amend the approved 2017 CIP to create a project for property acquisition in the East Hylebos Basin and move the needed funds to the to this project. Matching funds will be partially re-allocated from the West Hylebos Basin land acquisition project and from revisions to the delivery timing of other capital projects that have not commenced. SWM staff are evaluating revisions to the capital improvement plan and will present to committee and council at a later date with any proposed project revisions. CFT grant applications are due March 8, 2017. cc: Project File Day File 16 jcity of Federal Way !Preliminary North Lake Property MllpD11le:flkwember2016 I CityofFeder11IW1y, GISDivlslon ffl2581hAv,s fader.al Way, WA 98003 (253)835-7000 -.c:ityolt'edertt...ymrn ) ~ 0 z Q) rn (II Q) a: ) Ac1ual boundaries are subject of field velificatfon ADDITIONAL CRJTICA.L AREAS MAY 6Jt1ST.1he City or FedcralW !f lhilll not be llable for an ydlmagr• dUi! to thC ua:o ormisus-oot tnelrnfonnatior, 1epre1~1ed on th is map. WeUandl. 11rn only ,hown In F od«al Way and !tt Potential Annu11tion Areti Conlacl the City for an explanation of these areas and the regulations that govern lhem , Source: City of Federal Way, King County Map Notes: Wetfands and streams were identified in a 1998 City of Federal Way survey~ Critical area h'.a form13U I North Scale: 0 ovldad for illustrative purposes ONLY, Parcels Critical Areas /'../ Streams National Wetlands Inventory 60%0padty Wetlands (1998 City Survey) LJ Associated Wetland Buffer j Reguleled Area, 30% Opacity LJ Shoreline Managment Plan E:::)AreaAaeege 1 in I 500 feet 500 Federal Way This page left blank intentionally. 18 COUNCIL MEETING DATE: February 21, 2017 ITEM#: CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: Marine Hills Stormwater Conveyance System Repair Phase II -BID A WARD POLICY QUESTION: Should City Council award the Marine Hills Stormwater Conveyance System Repair Phase II Project to the lowest responsive, responsible bidder? COMMITTEE: Land Use and Transportation Committee CATEGORY: IZ! Consent D City Council Business D Ordinance D Resolution STAFF REPORT BY: Fei Tang, P.E. SWM Project Engineer ~ MEETING DATE: February 6, 2017 D D Public Hearing Other DEPT: Public Works Attachments: Land Use and Transportation Committee Memorandum dated February 6, 2017. Options Considered: 1. Award the Marine Hills Stormwater Conveyance System Repair Phase II Project to Insituform Technologies, LLC, the lowest responsive, responsible bidder, in the amount of $ l, 132,441.50 and approve a 10% contingency of $113,244.15 for a total amount of$1,245,685.65 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract. 2. Reject all bids for the Marine Hills Stormwater Conveyance System Repair Phase II Project and direct staff to rebid the project and return to Committee for further action. MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: The mayor recommends forwarding option 1 to the February 21, 2017 City Council consent agenda for pproval. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Bob Celski, Chair Lydia Assefa-Dawson, Member Mark Koppang, Member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "I move to authorize staff to award the Marine Hills Stormwater Conveyance System Repair Phase II Project to Insituform Technologies LLC, the lowest responsive, responsible bidder, in the amount of $1,132,441.50, and approve a 10% contingency of $113,244.15, for a total amount of $1,245,685.65, and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract." (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: D APPROVED D DENIED D TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION D MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) REVISED-1/2015 19 COUNCIL BILL # 15T reading Enactment reading ORDINANCE# RESOLUTION# CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM DATE: February 6, 2017 TO: VIA: Land Use and Transportation Committee Jim Ferrell, Mayor ~ ~ ___, Marwan Salloum, P.E., Public Works Director~ FROM: Fei Tang, P.E., SWM Project Engineer -P, ( SUBJECT: Marine Hills Stormwater Conveyance System Repair Phase II -Bid Award BACKGROUND: Four bids were received and opened on January 17, 2017 for the Marine Hills Storm water Conveyance System Repair Phase II Project; please see attached Bid Tabulation Summary. The lowest responsive, responsible bidder is Insituforrn Technologies, LLC, with a total bid of $1,132,441.50. AVAILABLE FUNDING: Budgeted City Funds KCFCD Opportunity Fund KC FCD Flood Reduction Grant 2016 TOTAL AVAILABLE BUDGET PROJECT ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES: Phase I Project Cost Phase II In house Design Phase II Consultant Assistance Services Phase II 2017 Construction Cost (low bid) Phase II 10% Construction Contingency Phase II In house Construction Management TOTAL PROJECT COSTS Project Funding Balance cc: Project File Day File 20 $1,635,000.00 $350,195.00 $400,000.00 $2,385,195.00 299,806.77 $24,000.00 $19,600.00 $1,132,441.50 $113,244.15 $24,000.00 $1,613,092.42 $772,102.58 Low Bid 2nd Bid • 3rd Bid 4th Bid Planned and Engineered Item Engineer's Estimate lnsituform Construction Michels James W. Fowler # BID ITEM UNIT QTY . Unit Price Cost Unit Price Total Bid Unit Price Total Bid Unit Price Total Bid Unit Price Total Bid I Mobilization LS 1 $30,000.00 $ 30,000.00 $ 15,000.00 $ 15,000.00 $ 92,500.00 $ 92,500.00 $ 52,326.00 s 52,326.00 $ 116,000.00 s 116,000.00 2 Temporary Traffic Control LS 1 $9,000.00 s 9,000.00 $ 20,000.00 s 20,000.00 $ 74,746.00 $ 74,746.00 $ 7,592.00 $ 7,592.00 $ 55,000.00 $ 55,000.00 3 Pre-Installation Video inspection LF 16292 $1.00 $ 16,292.00 $ 1.00 $ 16,292.00 $ 1.00 s 16,292.00 $ 0 .50 $ 8,146 .00 $ 3.50 $ 57,022 .00 Cleaning of Host Pipe, Incl. Waste LF 16292 $3.80 $ 61,909.60 $ 3.00 $ 48,876.00 $ 1.00 $ 16,292.00 $ 5.00 $ 81,460.00 $ 11.00 s 179,212.00 4 Material Removal, Haul, & Diososal 5 Tap Intrusion Removal* EA 4 $400.00 s 1,600.00 $ 407.00 $ 1,628.00 $ 500.00 s 2,000 .00 $ 524.00 $ 2,096 .00 $ 400.00 $ 1,600.00 6 Pre liner• LF 1410 $12.00 $ 16,920.00 s 3.75 $ 5,287.50 s 1.00 $ 1,410.00 $ 3.00 s 4,230 .00 $ 1.00 $ 1,410.00 7 GIPP Storm Pipe 12 In . Diam. LF 13234 $58.27 $ 771,145 .18 $ 42.00 $ 555,828.00 $ 34.00 $ 449,956.00 $ 46.00 $ 608,764 .00 $ 64.00 $ 846,976.00 8 GIPP Storm Pipe 15 In . Diam. LF 1474 $94.41 $ 139,160.34 $ 56.00 $ 82,544.00 $ 58.00 $ 85,492.00 $ 62.00 $ 91,388.00 $ 65.00 $ 95,810.00 9 GIPP Storm Pipe 18 In. Diam . LF 1584 $117.38 $ 185,929.92 $ 79.00 $ 125,136.00 $ 78 .00 s 123,552.00 $ 78.00 $ 123,552.00 $ 97.00 $ 153,648.00 10 Tap Connection Reinstatement* EA 8 $175.00 $ 1,400.00 $ 150.00 $ 1,200.00 $ 350.00 $ 2,800.00 $ 388.00 $ 3,104.00 $ 400.00 s 3,200.00 II Open Cut Repair FA 1 $ 130,000.00 $ 130,000.00 $ 130,000.00 s 130,000.00 $ 130,000.00 $ 130,000.00 $ 130,000.0~ $ 130,000.00 $ 130,000.00 $ 130,000.00 I :Minor Change CALC. 1 $ 130,000.00 $ 130,000.00 $ 130,000.00 $ 130,000.00 $ 130,000.00 $ 130,000.00 $ 130,000.00 $ 130,000.00 $ 130,000.00 $ 130,000.00 12 I Schedule A $ 1,493,357.04 $ 1,131,791.50 $ 1,125,040.00 $ 1,242,658.00 $ 1,769,878.00 13 lcatchbasin Rehabilitation I EA I 1 Is 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 650.00 $ 650.00 $ 20,500.00 $ 20,500.00 $ 9,742.00 s 9,742.00 $ 11,500.00 $ 11,500.00 Schedule B $ 10,000.00 $ 650.00 $ 20,500.00 $ 9,742.00 $ 11,500.00 Total $ 1,503,357.04 $ 1,132,441.50 $ 1,145,540.00 $ 1,252,400.00 $ 1,781,378.00 This page left blank intentionally. 22 COUNCIL MEETING DATE: February 21, 2017 ITEM#: CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: S 356th Street (Pacific Highway South to Enchanted Parkway) Improvement Project -BID AWARD POLICY QUESTION: Should City Council award the S 356th Street (Pacific Highway South to Enchanted Parkway) Improvement Project to the lowest responsive, responsible bidder? COMMITTEE: Land Use and Transportation Committee CATEGORY: ISi Consent D City Council Business D Ordinance D Resolution MEETING DATE: February 6, 2017 D D Public Hearing Other STAFF REPORT BY: Naveen Chandra, P .E . Street Systems Proj ect Engineer ~ DEPT: Public Works Attachments: 1. Land Use and Transportation Committee Memorandum dated February 6, 2017 2. S 356th Street (Pacific Highway South to Enchanted Parkway) Project Bid Tabulation Options Considered: 1. Award the S 356th Street (Pacific Highway South to Enchanted Parkway) hnprovement Project to SCI Infrastructure, LLC, the lowest responsive, responsible bidder, in the amount of $3,890,299.10 and approve a 10% contingency of $389,029.91 for a total budgeted amount of $4,279,329.01 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract. 2. Reject all bids for the S 356th Street (Pacific Highway South to Enchanted Parkway) Improvement Project and direct staff to rebid the project and return to Committee for further action. MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: The Mayor recommends forwarding option 1 to the February 21, 2017 City Council Consent Agenda for Approval. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Bob Celski, Chair Lydia Assefa-Dawson, Member Mark Koppang, Member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "I move to authorize staff to award the S 356th Street (Paci.fie Highway South to Enchanted Parkway) Improvement Project to SCI Infrastructure, LLC, the lowest responsive, responsible bidder, in the amount of $3,890,299.10 and approve a 10% contingency of $389,029.91, for a total budgeted amount of$4,279,329.01 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract." (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: 0 APPROVED 0 DENIED D TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION 0 MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) REVISED-1/2015 23 COUNCIL BILL# 15T reading Enactment reading ORDINANCE# RESOLUTION # CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM DATE: February 6, 2017 TO: Land Use and Transportation Committee Jim Farrell, Mayor t. n \ Marwan Salloum, P.E., Public Works Director ~- Naveen Chandra, P.E., Street Systems Project Engineer ~ VIA: FROM: SUBJECT: S 356th Street (Pacific Highway South to Enchanted Parkway) Improvement Project -Bid Award BACKGROUND: Five bids were received and opened on January 26, 2017 for the S 356th Street (Pacific Highway South to Enchanted Parkway) Improvement Project; please see attached Bid Tabulation Summary. The lowest responsive, responsible bidder is SCI Infrastructure, LLC with a total bid of $3,890,299.10. AVAILABLE FUNDING: The available budget for the S 356th Street (Pacific Highway South to Enchanted Parkway) Improvement Project is $6,593,543 and is comprised of the following: AVAILABLE FUNDING: TIB Funding Budgeted City Funds in 2014 Budgeted City Funds in 2017 Mitigation Fee Comcast Undergrounding Lakehaven Utility District TOT AL AVAILABLE BUDGET ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES: $3,381,673 $1,302,000 $1,500,000 $95,800 $76,442 $539,628 $6,895,543 The following is a breakdown of the estimated total project costs based on the low bid: Design Right-of-Way Acquisition 2017 Construction Cost 10% Construction Contingency Construction Management Utility Undergrounding Intergovernmental Service (WSDOT & King County) City Staff Project Administration TOT AL PROJECT COSTS $620,000.00 $354,000.00 $3,890,299.00 $389,030.00 $527,313.00 $200,000.00 $40,000.00 $100,000.00 $6,120,642.00 Total Project Costs are $774,901.00 less than Total Available Budget. K:\LUTC\2017\02-06-17 S 356th Street Improvement Project -Bid Award.do'2 4 A2 ConslrucUon Surveying A3 As-&.olltSwvlly oncl -~ A4 SPCC Plan A5 TYl>8 B Progress Scneaule (M',n. Bid S5.000) A6 Mobilization A7 Field Office Building A6 Traffic Control Supervisor A9 Off-Duly Unifonned Police Officer A10 Flogge,g oncl Spotler> Al1 Other Traffic Control Lal>ar A12 Othel"Te,,_.,y Tnrffio Contn>1 A13 Construction Signs Class A A14 SeQlJefltial ArraN Sign A15 Portable Changeable Message Sign A16 Business Access Sign A17 Clearing and Grubblna A16 -"'-8111,g A19 Road>ide Cleanup A20 RomoVlllolSltudure9and~ScheduleA A21 Sawcuttlng A22 Remove ExisUng Catch Basin A23 Remove Existing Storm Sewer Pipe A24 Remove Fence A25 ~ravel Borrow Incl. Haul A26 Car:::ivel Borrow for Trench Backfill Incl. Haul A27 Roadway ExcavaUon Incl , Haul A2B Unsuitable Foundation Excavation Incl . Haul A29 Slrucl.ure Excavation Class B Incl Haul for Undergrounding of Overhead UUlitfes A30 Structure Exca,alion Class B Ind Haul b-Strudlnl Earth Walls A31 Shoring or Extra Excavation Class 8 A32 Shorino o, Extra Excavotian '°' Slr\Jal.r.ll Ear1h Walls A33 Comn>lled Domlty F'oll A34 Crushed SUrfsctna Base Course A35 Tmnpom,y Pawment -HMA Cl, 1/2" PG 64-22 A37 HMA. for PreleveUno Ct 112" PG 64-22 A38 HMA Cl. 1" PG 64-22 A39 Commercial HMA PG 64-22 A40 Planing BltlJminous Pavemenl M l Cemen, Cone. Pa"""""'1 A42 SlruOIUtl! Ear1l, Wal M3 --Block Wall A44 Beekfil for Sln>Ctulal Earth Wal Ind. Houl A45 Shaft-30 Inch Diameter A46 Furnishing Soldier PIie -W14x48 Wide Flange Beams A47 Tim!>o,-ugging A46 Prefabricated Drainage Mal S. 356TH STREET IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT (Pacific Highway S to Enchnated Parkway S) RFB No. 17~01 1 LS 1 LS 1 LS 1 LS 1 LS 1 LS 1 LS 1 EST 3.600 HR 2.400 HR 1 LS 200 SF 1,200 HR 7,200 HR B EA 1 LS 1 LS 1 EST , LS 4,200 SF 8 EA 440 LF ll20 LF 7,200 TN 1,610 1N 2,500 CY 560 CY 1,060 CY 1.300 CY 19.200 SF 1 LS 50. CY ,,s,o TON 200 TON 3.080 TON 235 TON 1,950 TON 140 TON 4,890 SY 80 CY 7,160 SF 830 SF 2,260 CY 415 LF 465 LF 870 SF 50 S Y BID OPENING DATI:: JANUARY 26. 2017 BID TABULATION-VERIFIED 38000.00 $36.000.00 38000.00 $38.000.00 12000.00 $12.000.00 9000,00 $9.000.00 650.00 $650.00 500.00 $500.00 6500.00 $6.500.00 5000.00 55,000.00 275000,00 $275.000.00 175000.00 $175.000.00 34000.00 $34.000.00 17000.00 $17,000.00 60000.00 $60.000.00 115000.00 $115,000.00 SOOD .DD $5,000.00 5000.00 $5,000.00 52.00 $167,200.00 51.00 $183.600.00 52.00 S124,600.00 61 .00 $146,400.00 25000.00 $25.000.00 7500.00 $7,500.00 25.00 SS,000.00 30,00 S6.000.00 2.50 S3.000.00 2.00 $2.400.00 4.00 $26.600.00 3,00 $21.600.00 400.00 $2,400.00 SOD.DO $3,000.00 40000.00 $40,000,00 37000.00 $37,000.00 7500,00 $7,500,00 7500.00 $7,500.00 5000.00 $5,000.00 S000.00 $5.000.00 22000.00 $22,000.00 30000.00 $30,000.00 4,75 $19,950.00 2.50 $10,500.00 400.00 $3,200.00 900.00 $7,200.00 19.50 S6.560.00 20.00 $8,800.00 3.75 S3.075.00 5.00 $4.100.00 19,00 $136,800 00 26.00 $201,600.00 16.00 $28.960.00 60.00 $108,600.00 25,00 $62,500.00 37.00 $92,500.00 .22.00 $12.320.00 50.00 $26.000,00 36 .50 $36,690.00 25.00 $28,500.00 25.00 $32,500.00 · 39.00 $50,700.00 0.50 $9,600.00 0.50 $9,600.00 50000.00 $50.000.00 5000.00 SS.000.00 120.00 $6,000 00 150.00 $7,500.00 16.00 $63,180.00 35,00 $122,650.00 20.00 $4.000.00 150.00 $30.000.00 67.00 $206,360.00 64.00 $197,1 20.00 72.00 $16.920.00 105.00 $24.675,00 67.75 $132.112 .50 72.00 $140.400.00 125.00 $17,500.00 115.00 $16.100.00 2.40 511.736,00 4,00 $19.560.00 600.00 $48,000.00 300.00 $24.000.00 24.00 $171,840.00 26.00 $200,480.00 24.00 $19,920.00 26,00 SZ!.240.00 25,00 $56.500.00 40.00 $90,400,00 75.00 $31 ,125.00 110.00 $45,650.00 25.00 $11.625.00 25.00 $11 ,625.00 26.00 $22,620.00 33.00 $26.710.00 15.00 $750.00 15.00 $750.00 36500.00 $36,500.00 9120.00 $9,120.00 1000.00 $1 ,000.00 5000.00 $5,000.00 310·100.00 $310.100.00 11400.00 $11 .400.00 105400,00 $105,400.00 5000.00 $5.000.00 54.00 $194,400.00 54.00 $129.600.00 11300.00 511 ,300.00 .29.00 S5.800.00 3.00 S3.600.00 4 .00 $26,600.00 285.00 $1.710.00 36630.00 $36.630.00 4000.00 $4,000.00 5000.00 $5,000.00 44100.00 $44,100.00 3.10 $13,020.00 350.00 $2,600,00 29.50 S12.980Jl0 9.30 $70626.00 20.50 $147,600.00 46.00 $86,860.00 35.50 $86,750.00 35.50 $19.680,00 21.00 $22,260.00 46.00 $62,400.00 0.60 $11 ,520.00 11500.00 $11,500.00 140.00 $7.000.00 35.00 $122.850.00 105.00 ur.000,00 58.00 $172,460.00 59.00 $13.665.00 65.51 $127,744.50 106.50 $15,190.00 3.20 $15,646.00 700,00 $56,000.00 24,00 $171,640.00 24,00 $19,920.00 38.00 $65.660.00 63,25 $34.546.75 27.50 $12,787.50 13.75 $11 .962.50 17.00 SBS0.00 31500.00 $31 .500.00 33500.00 $33,500.00 S 60,000.00 3500,00 S3 .. 500.00 5000.00 S5.000.00 $ 20,000.00 500,00 SS00.00 600.00 S600.00 S 1,000.00 5000.00 55,000.00 6000.00 $6.000,00 S 5.000.00 406360,72 $406.380.72 160000.00 $160 000.00 S 330,000.00 7500.00 S7,500.00 21500.00 $21 ,500.00 $ 25.000.00 15500.00 $15,500.00 15000.00 $15,000.00 S 50,000.00 5000.00 $5,000.00 5000.00 $5.000.00 S 5.000.00 67.00 $241.200.00 52.00 S167,2DO.OO $ 55.00 67,00 $160.600.00 49.00 $117.600.00 $ 55.00 7500,00 $7,500.00 48000.00 $46,000.00 S 50,000.00 850 $1.700.00 25,00 SS.000.00 S 25.00 4.00 $4.600.00 6.00 $7.200.00 $ 5.00 3.00 $21.600.00 4,00 $26,600.00 S 3.00 175.00 $1 ,050 00 SOD.OD S3.000.00 S 250.00 30000.00 $30.000.00 166000,00 $166.000.00 $ 103.000.00 7500.00 $7,500.00 10000.00 $10.000.00 $ 20.000.00 5000.00 ss.000.00 5000.00 $5,000.00 S 5,000.00 500.00 $500.00 100000.00 S 100,000.00 S 7,000.00 4.00 $16,600.00 3.60 $15,960.00 $ 4.00 300.00 $2,400.00 ll20.00 $6,560.00 S 400.00 21.511 $9,460.00 22.so $9,900.00 $ 15.00 2.65 $2.337.00 9.00 $7,360.00 S 5.00 2050 $147,600.00 30.30 $216.160.00 $ 16.00 27.00 $46.670.00 46,80 $64,706.00 S 20.00 2650 $71 ,250,00 36.00 $90.000.00 $ 28.00 43.50 $24,360.00 49,00 $27.440.00 S 30.00 $16,600.00 45.50 $46.230.00 37.00 $39,22 0.00 S 30,00 $31.800.00 14.50 $16,650.00 46.00 $59,600.00 S 25.00 $32,500.001 3.50 $67.200.00 1.25 S24.000 00 S 1.00 $19,200.00 9500.00 $9,500.00 9000.00 $9,000.00 S 10,000.00 S10 .000.00 210.00 $10,500.00 160.00 $8,000.00 S 150,00 $7,500.00 21.25 S7Ul!7.50 33.50 $117.565.00 $ 28.00 $98,260.00 187.00 $!1,400.00 230,00 1148.000.00 $ 150.00 $30.000.00 75.00 $231 ,000.00 68.55 $211 ,134.00 S 65.00 $261,800.00 76.00 $16,330.00 72.25 $16.978.75 $ 60.00 $16.800 0 65.00 S165~750.00 60.20 $156,390.00 S 70.00 $136.500.0 135.00 $16,900.00 132,65 $18,599.00 S 125,00 $17,500.00 4.40 $21 ,516.00 4.00 $19,560.00 S 3.00 $14.670.00 300.00 $24,000.00 705,00 $56,400.00 $ 300.00 $24,000.00 27.50 $196 900,00 25.00 $179,00.0.00 S 30.00 $214,800.00· 24.00 $19,920.00 26.00 S21 1SBO ,OO S 25.00 $20,750.00 40,00 $90,400.00 48.50 $109,610.00 $ 35.00 $79.100.00 104.00 $43,160.00 112.50 S46,667 .50 S 109.00 $45.235.00 32,00 $14,660.00 27.00 $12,555.00 S 60.00 $27,900.00 16.00 $13,920.00 19.00 $16 .~0.00 $ 16.00 $13,920.00, 41 .50 $2.075.00 25.00 $1.250.00 S 20.00 $1 ,000.00 ~·-BlcU B1d '5 ~~~~ ----------- A49 Concrele Fascia Panel 870 SF 90.00 $78,300.00 75.00 $65 ,250.00 97.00 $84,390.00 35.00 $30,450.00 36.50 531 ,755.00 $ 60.00 $52,200.0 ASO Removing Soldier Pile Shaft Obstructions 1 EST 10000.00 $10,000.00 10000,00 $10.000.00 10000.00 !1{'.M" 00 10000.00 $10.000.00 10000.00 $10 .000.00 $ 10,000.00 $10,000.00 A51 -F-Ml&c;.Or.,lna9" 1 EST 5000.00 $5,000.00 5000.00 ss.000 .00 5000,00 $5.000.00 5000.00 $5,000.00 5000.0Q $5,000.00 S 5,000.00 S5 .ooo_oo A52 Orufn Pipe, 6 In. Diam. 100 LF 30.00 $3.000.00 40J)() $4,000.00 25.00 $2,500.00 11.00 $1,100.00 50.00 SS,000,00 S 25.00 $2,500.00 A53 DucOle tron Stonn Sewer Pipe 12 In. Diam . 250 LF 65.00 $16,250.00 65,00 $16,250.00 55.50 $13,875.00 65.00 $16.250.00 96.00 $24,000.00 S 85.00 $21,250.00 AS,I Class IV Reinf. Cone. Stonn Sewer Pipe 12 In. Diam . 1,575 LF 50.00 $78,750.00 60.00 $94,500.00 45.00 $70,875.00 61.00 $96,075.00 82.00 $129,150.00 S 70.00 $1 10,250.00 ASS Clas> IV RA,inf . C(inc. S1orm S.-P-090 18 In. Diam. 485 LF 75.00 $36,375.00 72.00 $34,920.00 64.00 $31 ,(),1().00 67 .00 $32.495.00 105 .00 $50,925.00 S 65 .00 S,41,225.00 ASS ClassWR»inl, Cone. S"""1 S.-p; ... 2, In . Diam. 2, LF 110.00 $2,750.00 150.00 $3,750.00 113.00 $2,825.00 115.00 52,675.00 165 .00 $4,125.00 S 115.00 $2,875.00 A57 Catch Basin Type 1 17 EA 1225,00 $20,825.00 1050.00 $17,850.00 1250.00 $21 ,250.00 1650.00 $31.450.00 1500.00 $25,500.00 S 1i500.00 $25,500.00 ASa' Catch Basin Type 1 L 8 EA 1325.00 $7.950,00 1060.00 $6,480.00 1510.00 $9,060,00 2000,00 $12.000.00 1800.00 $10,800.00 S 1,700.00 $10,200.00 A59 C111<:h Basln Type 2 , 48 In. Diani. 13 EA 2550.00 $33,150.00 2500.00 $32.500.00 2720.00 S35 ,36QOO 5200.00 $67,600,00 2800.00 $36,400.00 S 3,200.00 $41 .600.0( A60 Cald> Basin T)'ll8 2. 60 In. Ola,n. w.ilt, Aow Raslr!dor 1 EA 8750.00 $6,750.00 8500.00 S8.50o.oo 8400.00 $8,400.00 11084.00 $11 ,084.00 12000.00 $12,000.00 S 7,000.00 $7.000.00 A61 Adjust E>c)'S!lng Stoim O.:.lna9<1 Slrudunt 13 EA •50.00 $5.850,00 500.00 $6,500.00 525.QO $6,825.00 450.00 $5,650.00 325.00 $4.225,00 S 1,000.00 $13.000.00 = Cq/1-IO~ Ololnage 511\JdUre 6 EA 500.00 $3,000.00 1100.00 $6,600.00 1260100 $7,580.00 1500.00 $9,000.00 330.00 $1,980.00 S 1,000.00 $6,000.0( A63 lnslal! Solid Cowrcne.i.t>'ngS1rucl>Jn! 3 EA 950.00 $2,850.00 600.00 $1 ,800.00 860.00 S2A80,00 850.00 $2.550.00 550.00 $1,650.00 S 1.000 00 $3,00MO A64 Rea:iTistrucl Drainage Structure 2 EA 2000.00 $4,000.00 3100.00 $6.200.00 4000.00 SB.000.00 1500.00 $3.000.00 1900.00 $3,800.00 $ 2,000.00 $4,000.00 A65 Relocate Existing Stormwater Treatment Vault 1 EA 10000.00 $10,000.00 11000,00 $11 ,000.00 9700.00 $9,700.00 9500.00 $9,500.00 4600.00 $4.600.00 S 15,000.00 S15.00MO AS6 Slormwater Detention Pond 1 LS 70000,00 S70,000,00 89000.00 $89,000.00 125000.00 $125,000.00 25000.00 $25,000.00 150000.00 $150,000.00 $178,500.00 $178 500.00 A67 Catch Basin Insert for Oil Control 1 EA 25-0.00 $250.00 1500,00 $1.500.00 B30.00 S830.00 850.00 $850.00 1500.00 $1,500.00 S 1,200.00 51 ,200.00 A68 s---4 'EA 18750.00 $75,000.00 21000.00 $84,000.00 19970,00 $79,880.00 18500.00 514,000.00 23500.00 $94,000.00 S 18,000.00 $72 ,000.00 A69 Modular Wetland System Linear 4 X 13 1 EA 56250.00 $56.250.00 66000.00 $66,000.00 63170.00 $63.170.00 66000.00 568,000.00 59500.00 $59,500.00 $ '5.000.00 $45,000.00 A70 Modular Wetland System Linear4 X 17 1 EA 65000.00 $65,000.00 75000.00 S75.000.00 71500.00 $71 ,500.00 76000.00 $76,000.00 70900.00 $70,900.00 S 65.000,00 $65.000.00 A71 EroSKln Control and Water Pollution Prevenuon 1 LS 25000.00 $25.000.00 35000.00 $35,000.00 50150.00 S50,15o_oo 50000.00 sso.000.00 15000,00 $15.000.00 S 60.000.00 $60 ,000.0( A72 Seeding, Ferfilizing and Mulching 2,200 SY 1.25 $2,750.00 1.20 $2.640,00 1.50 $3,300.00 1.50 53,300.00 1.50 $3,300.00 S 2.50 $5,500.0C A73 [Topsoil Type A 485 CY 33.50 $16.247.50 32.00 $15,520.00 36,50 $17,702.50 35.0Q $16,975.00 36.00 $17,460.00 S 45.00 $21,825.00 A74 Bark Mulch 55 CY 44,50 $2,447.50 43.00 $2,365.00 49.00 $2,695.00 4.8 100 $2,640.00 50.00 $2.750.00 S 45.00 $2,475.00 A75 PSfPE, Acer Saccharum 'Green Mountain' I Green Mountain Maple , 2 112• Cal., 12'-14' Hl 20 EA 480.00 $9,200.00 440,00 $8,800.00 500.00 $10.000.00 484.00 $9.680.00 495.00 $9,900.00 S 400 00 $8,000.00 A76 PSIPE, Tilla Tomentosa 'PNI 6051' / Green Mountain Linden, 2 112" Cal., 12'-14' Hl 36 EA 460,00 $16,560.00 440.0Q $15,840.00 500.00 $18,000.00 440.00 $15,840.00 495.00 $17 ,B20.00 S 400.00 $14.400.00 A77 P51PE , Fraxinus latifofia / Oregon Ash, 5 Gal. Cont 18 EA 410.00 $7,380.00 22.00 $396.00 25.00 $450.00 24.20 $435.60 25.00 $450 ,00 $ 45.00 $810.00 A78 PSIPE, Ar:$ circunatum / Vine Maple, 5 Gal. Cont, 21 EA 25.00 $525.00 24.00 $504.00 27.50 $577.50 26.40 $554,40 26.00 $546.00 S 45.00 $945.00 A79 PSIPE, Pseudotsuga menziesii / Douglas fir. 5 Gal . Cont, 21 EA 23.00 S483.00 22.00 $482.00 25.00 $525.00 24.20 $508.20 25.00 $525.00 S 45.00 $945.00 ABO PSIPE. albus/"""""""'.1Gal.Conl. 235 EA 8.25 S1 ,93B.75 8.00 $1 ,880.00 9.00 $2.115.00 B.80 $2.068.00 9.00 $2,115.00 $ 12.00 $2,820.00 A81 PSIPE. lrts ,..,_ I Oregon Iris, 1 Gal. C<lnl. 430 EA 8.25 $3,547.50 8.0D $3.440.00 9.00 $3,870,00 8.80 $3,784.00 9.00 $3.870.00 S B.OD $3,440.00 A82 r;iS,IPE, Desehampsia cespitosa / Tufted Hair Grass. 1 Gal. ConL 9BO EA 9.25 $9,065.00 9.00 $8,820.00 10.25 $10.045.00 9.90 $9,702.00 10,00 $9,800.00 $ B.00 $7,840.00 AB3 Sod Installation 1,605 SY 8.oo $12,840.00 7.50 $12.037.50 8.50 $13,642.50 B.25 $13,241.25 8.50 $13,642,50 S 5.00 SB.025.00 A84 Water Quality Grass Seed Mix 830 SY 3.10 S2 573.00 3.00 $2,490.00 3.50 S2,905.00 3.30 $2,739.00 3.50 $2,905.00 $ 2.50 $2.075,00 ASS Aulomatic Irrigation Syslsm Complete 1 LS 62000.00 $62,000.00 51000.00 S51 ~000.00 57930.00 $57,930.00 55000.00 S55.000 .00 57000.00 $57,000.00 $ 76,000.00 $78,000 00 A86 Lakehaven Utl l tv District Connectk>n Fee 1 EST 11000.00 $11 ,000.00 11000.00 S11 ,000.00 11000.00 $11 ,000.00 11000.00 $11,000.00 11000.00 $11 ,000.00 S 11.000.00 S11 ,000.00 A87 Integral Curt> 240 SF 48.00 $11,520.00 50.00 $12,000.00 62.50 S15.000.00 14.50 $3,480.00 ,40.00 $9,600.00 S 50.00 $12.000.00 ABS Extruded Curb, Type 6 40 LF 25.00 $1 ,000.00 30.00 $1,200.00 28.50 $1,140.00 13.20 $528,00 28.00 $1,120.00 $ 12.00 $400.Q( A69 Cement Cone. Traffic Curt, and Gutter 3,770 LF 12.45 $46,936.50 10.50 $39,51!5.00 17.00 $64,090.00 14.75 $55,607,50 17.50 $65.975.00 $ 20.00 $75.400.0< A90 Reinforced Cement Cone. Traffic Curb & Gutter 1 70 Lf 28.00 $4,760.00 25.00 $4,250.00 29.00 $4,930.00 30.00 $5,100.00 42.00 $7,140,00 $ 4000 $6,800 .00 A91 Cement Cone. Pavement Approach 3-Day 910 SY 60,00 $54,600.00 51 .00 $48 ,410.00 65.25 $59,377.50 ,1.00 $42,770.00 59.50 $54.145,00 $ 65.00 $59.150.00 A92 ReinftJl'Ced Ccrnet\l Cone. Industrial Pavement Approach , 3-Dav 250 SY 90.00 $?? soo.oo 83.00 $20,750.00 109.00 $27,250.00 79.50 $19,875.00 95 .00 $23,750.00 $ 90.00 $22,500.00 A93 Raised Pavement Markers, Type 2 4 HUN '40.00 $1 ,760.00 420.00 $1 ,660.00 480.00 $1 ,920.00 535.00 $2,140.00 505.00 $2,020,00 $ 350.00 $1,400.00 A94 Beam GuardraA Type 1 210 LF eo.oo $12,600.00 57.00 $11 ,970.00 53.00 $11 ,130.00 285.00 $59,850.00 84 .00 $13,440 .00 $ 40.00 $8,400.00 A95 lliock Vtnyl Coated Chain Link Feoce -4 Fl 2 ,230 LF 22.50 $50,175.00 22,00 $49,060.00 25.00 $55,750.00 24.QO $53,520.00 25.00 $55.750.00 $ 30.00 $66,900.0C A96 Retrofil Black Vinyl Coated Chain Link Fence TO!> Rail 880 LF aoo $5,440.00 7.00 $4,760.00 8.00 S5440.00 7.00 $4,760.00 JS.00 $10 . .200.00 $ B.00 $5;*'10.00 A97 Double 20 Ft. Chain Link Gate 2 El>. 1300,00 $2,600.00 1200.00 $2,400.00 1370.00 $2,740.00 1320.00 $2,640.00 1350 00 $2,700.00 $ 2,000.00 $4,000 .00 A98 Single 6 Ft. Chain Unk Gate 1 EA 600.00 $600.00 600.00 $600.00 640.00 $640.00 600.00 $800,00 630.00 $630 00 $ 800,00 SBOO.OC A99 Remove and Reset Chain Link Fence 420 LF 30.00 $12,600.00 21.00· $11 ,340.00 31 .00 $13.020.00 30.00 $12.BOO.OO 30.00 $12,600.00 S 8.oo $3,360,0Q A100 Remove and Reset Chain Link Gate 1 EA 625.00 $625.00 600.00 $600.00 680.00 $680.00 660.00 $660.00 675.00 $675.00 S 750,00 $750.00 A101 Adjust Monument Case and Cover 4 EA 500.00 $2,000.00 500.00 $2.000.00 410.00 $1.640.00 700.00 $2.800.00 425,00 $1 ,700.00 $ 500.00 S2 ,000,00 A102 Thickened Edge Sidewalk 1,170 LF 49.00 $57.330.00 56.00 $65,520.00 65.50 $76.635.00 58.00 $67.860.00 64.30 575,231 .00 -S 30.00 $35,100.00 A10J Cement Cone Stdewalk 3,000 SY 25.85 $77,550.00 31 .00 $93,000.00 3BJ 5 $116,250.00 30.00 $90,000.00 42.50 $127.500.00 S 35.00 $105,000.00 A104 Cement Cone. Singte Direction Curb Ramp 2 EA 1800.00 $3,600,00 3200.00 $6,400.00 1275.00 $2,550,00 2200.00 $4,400.0Q 2125.00 $4,250.00 $ 1,800.00 $3,600.00 -~~~~~ ~. ~~~~~ A-105 Quarry $palls 3 CY 100.00 $300.00 2.50.00 $750.00 '1<4(),00 $420.00 88.00 $264.00 -200.00 $600_00 $ 300.00 ~$900.ooJ-; A106 Relocate Mai lbox 1 EA 650.00 $850.00 1500.00 51,500.00 575.00 $575.00 275.00 $275,00 425.00 S425.00 S 450.00 S450 .00 A107 lllumlnatton S ystem, Complelo 1 LS 125000.00 $125,000.00 121000_00 $121,000.00 149600.00 $149,600_00 235000.00 S235.000.00 135500.00 S135,500_00 $201,000.00 $201 ,000_00 A108 Traffic Signal System Modillcallons at S 356th St& Pacific Highway S. Complete 1 LS 13000_00 513,000.00 12500_00 $12,500.00 12900,00 $12.900-00 26560.00 $26,560.00 14500,00 $14.500.00 s 25,000.00 $25,000 00• A109 lnterconnects_.,,,Coml)(<,le 1 LS 22000.00 S22.000.00 19800.00 $19.800_00 32270,00 $32.270_00 58900_00 $58,900.00 22500.00 $22.500_00 $ 36.000.00 $36,000.00 A110 Mod'lficaHon of Existing Private Lumlnalre Conduit/Wiring 1 EST 5000.00 $5,000.00 500D-00 $5,000 _00 5000.00 $5,000-00 5000-00 $5,000JJO 5000_00 $5,000_QQ $ 5.000-00 $5,000.00 A111 PermanentSigning 1 LS 4500.00 $4,500.00 4500_00 $4,500.00 2850,00 $2,850-00 16500.00 $18,500 .00 3000.00 $3,000 _00 $ 2,000.00 $2,000JJO' A112 Plastic Stop Line Type A 13 LF 32.00 $416.00 30 ,00 $390.00 34.25 $445.25 t4Jl0 $182 _00 28.00 $364.00 $ 12.00 $156,00 A113 Pronted Plastic Line Type D 16,600 LF 1.60 $26,560.00 1.50 $24,900.00 1.70 $28.220.00 1,50 $24,800 .00 1.65 $27,390.00 $ 2.00 $33,.200 _00 A114 ProfiledPlasUcWideLineTypeD 500 LF 6_25 $3,125.00 6.00 $3,000.00 6 .80 $3,400.00 4:00 $2.000,00 5_30 $2.650.00 S 4.00 $2 ,000.00 A115 Profiled Plastic Dotted Wide Line Type D 140 LF 8-25 $875.00 6.00 $840 _00 6,80 $952.00 4.00 $560.00 2.80 $392,00 $ 3-00 $420-00 A116 Paint Bicycle Lane Symbol Tvpe A 9 EA 80.00 S720.00 75.00 $675.00 85.00 S765.00 198_00 $1.782.00 255.00 $2.295.00 S 75,00 $675.00 A117 PtastlcTraflicArrowTypeA 15 EA 130 _00 $1 ,950 _00 • 125.00 51,875.00 145.00 52,175.00 180.00 $2 .700 .00 140.00 $2.100 _00 $ 100.00 $1 ,500-00 A118 TemporaryPaintStripe 12.000 LF 0.25 $3.000.00 020 $2,400.00 0.25 $3 .000_00 0110 $6 ,000.00 0.50 $6.000,00 S 0-50 $6 ,000 .00 A119 Resolution of Utility Conflicls 1 EST 20000.00 $20,000 .00 20000,00 $20,000.00 20000.00 $20,000.00 20000.00 $20,000_0Q 20000-00 $20 ,000 _00 $ 20,00D-00 $20.000 0~ A120 Polholing 1 EST 10000,00 $10,000 .00 10000.00 $10,000.00 10000_00 $10,000.00 10000.00 S\ll.000.00 10000.00 $10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $10.000_00; A121 Pltrun Sand 250 CY 32 .00 $8,000.00 71 .00 $17,750.00 61 _00 $15250,00 44.00 $11 ,000.00 55-<Xl S13,750.00 S 30.00 $7,500.00 A122 Excavation for Relrainin_n PSE Cond.u.b. 1 EST 5000.00 $5,000.00 5000.00 $5,000.00 5000.00 $5,000.00 5000,00 SS.000.00 SOOCU>O SS,000.00 $ 5.000-00 SS,000,0C -,-11!181:<!IA!l"SGBED!l llE"'A~ . --,,_ --. .,..s ,--;;1;526;5113'.25'. -. ~ ~-3,S_19~ ---~ ~"$:i3'917.;rt~~-~ -J -~lr7S .o)G;-17 ' S ~.2~-in.15, $ ,,1811,936.GO !SCHEDULE B -LAKEHAVEN WATER ANO SEWER B1 IFla9garaand S- B2 !Removal of Structures and Obstructions, Schedule B B3 !Remove AC Waler Main B4 !Remove Ductile Iron/Cast tron Water Main BS rRemove Exlstini Gate Valve B6 I Remove Existing Hydrant Assembly _87 I Remove Existing Water Service Connection BB !Structure Excavation Class B Incl. Haul for Schedule B ·B9 l Shorini or Extra ExcavaUon Cl. B for Water Main B10 I Temporary Pavement B1 1 !Ductile Iron Pipe for Water Main 8 In . Diam. 8 12 !Additional Cast Iron Frtti_lll!s B13 ilConne ct lo Existng Water Main 8 In. Diam. B14 -l8emovol and Repfaarment of Unruilablo Fwndlllion MalOri21 Bf5 [Gravel Base For Trench Backfill B16 tConcrete for Thrust Bloclti~ B17 {Trench Saf~ System B18 fConstruction SeQuencing and Temporary Water Service 819 JGate Valve, 8 In. 820 I Hydrant Assembll'_, 6 In. 621 ]Service Connection 5/8 x 3/4 In , Setter J2 In. Service Pipe} 822 I Service Connection 1 In. Setter (2 J!,_._§!_~ce Pj~_) B23 Service Connection 2 In. Setter (2 In. Service Pipe) 824 Customer Supply Line 825 !Seeding, Fertilizing and Mulching 026 !Topsoil Type A 827 !Resolution of Ullli_!r Conflict 828 IPolholinll_ B29 J~E"1sllng S.-Minl>ole toGtade BSD IR=>n<lnJcl MaM<llo 831 IU-ed Site Changes SU&TO!~~~ED<11£"1J,,::jij0)Jals; WSST9.5% SOB:TOT,(l..seHEQ!J(E _::e • ,- 1·.1 .. l~ ~-;-~ ' 320 1030 140 910 6610 40 1350 1000 70 850 10 10 1 10 200 15 HRS LS LF LF EA EA EA CY SF TN LF LB EA CY CY CV LS LS EA EA EA EA EA LF SY CY EST EST EA EA EST 52.00 10000,00 35.00 20.00 400.00 300,00 300-00 16 _00 1.50 30 _00 52.50 3_75 1850.00 48.00 30.00 150.00 4000.00 14500.00 1850,00 4275.00 2400,00 3100,0Q 3000_00 70 .0Q 1.25 50.00 5000.00 3000.00 400.00 1500.00 5000.00 - $15,840.00 $10,000 _00 $36,050.00 $2,800.00 $2,400.00 $600.00 $1~00.00 $14,560.00 $9,915.00 s1.200100 $70,875.00 $3,750.00 $9.750,00 $3,360,00 g ~._500.00 $1.500-00 54,000.00 s11.500_00 518,500.00 $17,100.00 $2.400.00 $6~00.00 $3,000.00 $700.00 $250.00 $750 _00 $5,000.00 $3,000.00 $800 .00 $4,500.0Cl $5,000.00 mslilo:oo. $28,101 .00 $323~.00 5 1.00 1000_00 40.00 24.00 750 .00 1100 ,00 1500.00 40 ,00 0.50 250,00 55 _00 4_00 4300.00 50,00 60.00 150.00 500,00 5000.00 1600_00 5300.00 2000.00 2000.00 ~ 200.00 10.00 75_00 5000.00 3000.00 1000_00 35 00.00 5000.00 --- s15;S20.ool 54.oo S1 .ODO.DOI 3420 ,00 $41 ,200.00 1 54,00 $3 ,360.00 1 39.00 $4,500.00] 410 .00 $2,200.00 1 1230 ,00 se.000.001 615.oo $36,400.001 26 .00 $3.305-001 0.60 $10.QOO _OO J 105_00 $87.750_00 ) 52_00 S4,ooo.oo l 5.oo s21.500.00 1 2230.oo $3.500.00 ( 64.00 $51,000.001 34.50, S1 .500_00J 150.00 s5oo oo I 4s6o.oo S5,ooo.ool 30100.00 $16,000.001 2150.00 s21~0_001 5410.00 s2.ooo.oo I 5310.00 S4,ooo.ooJ 2-100 .00 $2,500.00 2760.00 $2.000.00 250.00 s2,000_001 3.00 s 1. 125 _001 36.50 S5.ooo.oo l 5000.00 $3,000.00 1 3000.00 s2,ooo,00 1 525_00 s10.500.00I 3950.oo S5,000.00J 5000.00 ~S375~j.. -"' $35,659,20 T >;:Ufli019.20 ,.-.:,. s11~.oo $3.420-00 $55,620.00 $5,460.00 $b_460 .00 $2,460.00 $2,460.00 $23.660.00 $3,966.00 S4,2QO _QO $70200_00 $5,000.00 $11 .150,00 $4,480.00 }29.325.00 s1 .soo_oo $4,560_00 $30,700 _00 $21 ,500-00 $21 ,880.00 $5,370.00° $4,200.00 $2,760.00 $2 ,500.00 S6oo_oo $547.50 $5,000 .00 S3.000.00 $1 ,050,00 $11,850.00 $5,000.00 ~;t58i50 $34,500,06 $397,esa:56 67.00 3500,00 42 .00 17.00 500.00 825_00 1000-00 9-50 2.50 215 ,00 64.00 2.00 5500.00 20.00 35.00 325.00 3400,00 15000_00 1780.00 4250.00 2600_00 2200.0Q ~ 82-0Q 2.75 35.00 5000.00 3000.00 575.00 f 850.00 5000.00 521,440.00 S3,500.00 $43,260_00 $2 ,380.00 $3.000.00 $1.650,00 $4,000.00 $8,645.00 $16,525.00 $8-600.00 $86,400.00 $2,000-00 $27.500.00 $1,400.00 $29,750.00 $3,250.00 $3,400.00 $15 ,000 .00 $17,800 .00 $17,000 .00 $2 ,600.00 $4.400,00 $2,500 .00 $820.00 $550_00 $525 _00 $5 ,000.00 $3 ,000.00 $1,150.00 $5.550,00 $5,000.00 ~~- $33.021 .53 1:ilo,016.53 ~.00 1500.00 67.00 35.00 155.00 400,00 380Jl0 55 -00 1.00 230_00 85.50 6 _50 2100.00 155.00 45.00 250_00 6800.00 28500_00 1735.00 8500.00 2000.00 2200.00 4300-00 115_00 1,50 36.00 5000.00 3000-00 760-00 750.00 SOOOJJO s,s,640.ool s 55.00 s1 .500 .001 s 2,000.00 S69.010.00 1 s 28.00 54,900.00 1 s 1a_oo S93o.ool s 500.00 S800 .001 s 1,000.00 $1.520_00 1 S 1,200.00 S50.o5o_oo I s 30.oo S6.610.00I S 2-00 $9.200.001 s 165 .oo s 115,425_0 0 I s 85 .oo S6.soo.ooJ s 5.oo s1o_soo.001 s z.soo_oo $10.850.00( $ 55.00 S38,250_001 s 45 _00 g_soo_oo I s 300.oo $6,800.00 1 S 5.000.00 s2a.~.001 s 10.000_00 S17.350_00I S 1,900.00 $26,000_001 s 6.500.00 $2,000.00] $__3.000.00 $4,400,001 $ 3_000.00 S4.100_001 s 4.ooo_oo s1 .15o.ooJ s 35.00 $300-001 S 2.50 $540_001 $ 45 ,00 S5.ooo.ool s 5.ooo.oo S3.ooo.oo I s 3.ooo _oo s1 .520.00 1 s 750 _00 sz,2_50.00 I s 2,500,00 ss.000.00 I s 5,000.00 ~,295;00 $43,063 03 ~~358:0S $17,600.00 $2 .000 .00 S2B,840 _00 $2,520.00 S3,ooo _oo s2,ooo.oo $4,800.00 $27 ,300,00 $13,220.00 $6 .600.00 $114,750.00' S5,000.00! $12.500.00! S3.850.oo; $3~.25 0.00 $3.000,00] $5 .000.0C !10,000_0( $19.000_.QQ s2e,ooo_oo $3,000.00 $6,000 .00 S4~ $350.00 $500,0l $675 .0• $5 ,000 .00 $3 .00 0.001 S1.500.00I $7 ,500J)() S5,ooo.ool $311 ,75,5.00 $36,266.73 S411,1)_21.7ll C2 Install Condu.il 4 In. I 1,920 LF 4.10 $7,872.00 4.00 $7,680.00 3,75 $7.200.00 11.25 $21,600.00 27.00 $51,840.00 $ 5 .00 cs Install Conduit 6 In -1.920 LF 6,20 $11,904.00 6.00 511,520.00 5 .60 $10.752.00 14,00 $26.880.00 29,00 $55.680.00 S 8.00 $11,520.00 C4 lnstan PSE Junction Box 4•5•,c7•xs·e· 1 EA 975.00 $1175,00 1000.00 s,.000.00 BC0.00 $800.00 1150.00 $1. 150.00 1850 .. 00 $1.650,00 $ 1,500,00 $1 ,500.00 cs Install PSE Transformer 35•,c4~ 2 EA 750.00 $1,500.00 750.00 $1,500.00 800.00 $1,600.00 1150.00 $2.300.00 880.00 $1,760.00 S 1.000.00 S2,000.00 C6 ll>otaP PSE Honc!holo fl"'X30"l<1:Z-1 EA sso.oa saso.oo 750.00 S750 .00 800.00 $600.00 575:00 $575.00 660.00 $660,00 $ BC0.00 SB00.00 C7 lnSIII PSE Vista Switch Vaull ~ 1 EA 350.00 '550.00 2000.00 12 ,000.00 no.oo rno.oo 8000.00 $6,000.00 3650.00 $3,650 .00 $ 1,800.00 $1,800.00 CB Install PSE Pull Vault5'10'x5'x11'4" 1 EA 360.00 $360.00 1750.00 $1 ,750.00 no.oo rno.oo «0(),00 $4,400.00 2000.00 $2,000.00 S 1.B00.00 $1 ,800.00 C9 ~Sile ...... _ 1 EST 500Q.llO SS.000.00 5000.00 $5.000 .00 5000.00 $5.000.00 5000.00 $5,000.00 5000,00 SS.000.00 S 5,000.00 $5,000 .00 .::SUBJ'.OT,l!;~_U,:'j:;,_ ~ ~-"712t,u:oo ! -~.00 _m;i52.® ~" ~ .S7W~:OO ' -sj,_•....,.;Oo I --~.oo. - :HEDULE D · COMCAST UNOERGROU11DING 01 Tinstan Conduit 2 In. 263 LF 3.10 $815.30 3.00 $789.00 3.00 $789.00 8.50 S2.235.50 25.50 $6.706-50 $ 3 .00 S7B9I D2 ilnstal Conduit 4 In . 1.357 LF 4.15 $5.631 .55 4 ,00 $5.428.00 3.75 $5.086.75 11 ,25 515,266.25 27.00 $36.639.00 S 5.00 $6.785-1 03 Tin.tanVd1 SGLB2436 1 EA 975.00 $975.00 1500,00 S1.500.00 500.00 $500.00 115000 S1,150,0Q 1100.00 $1,100.00 $ 1,000.00 $1,000.001 04 jl!m,;pecled Sito Chanoos 1 EST 2500.00 $2,500.00 2.500.00 $2,500.00 2500.00 S2.500.00 2500.00 $2,500.00 2500.00 S2 .500.00 S 2.500.00 S2.&l0.ool ~S!JBJ~~SCJ.IEtllJl;E '"ti~ ;._c_qc :_ -~~~ ----~ .lllJ~ ,........ --,.--,;-...,.SS:eif.tl; .---W,-<$1:1~ r_ --T" ~ ~ S'1,0l'4:00 '.IOTAIC ~. -~~·-""'':... ---i$3;890~1lJ :$;1~0 S'4-".1(-J -• S;1)5q~,i.iJr -• • :.-..---g--~•iiJ ,$4;653.3JJ.73 81d Chedc List Bid Form Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Acknowledged Addenda # 1 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes !~ Addiw:'d,1, I.(. Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Bid Schedule Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Bid Signature Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Bid Bond Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Subcontractor List Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Combined Affidavit and Certifi"caHoo Fonn Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Conlraclor's Compliance Statement Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Proposal for lncorporatloo R-led Materials Yes Yes Ye,; Yes Yes !Xlfttraclor'sCertificaleofR---.tv.ft. Yes Yes Ye,; Yes Yes Cbntracto('s State ID N!..mber Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes VERll'lCATIO ll'EM /f51 • Ski Sd'INhAI: Shewed It IS -$.20,S75; COrrea V1kle Is $20,825 (122S •11 ), a difference of $50,00, but the total is correct on both bid schedule Ind vtrflatUorl. Therefore no varatlon ~found°'-k11quhd. COUNCIL MEETING DAT:..:E:..:.:_:F~e.:.:.b.::_ru:..:.a.:.::.ry.::......=2.:.:.1,:....::2:..:.0..:.17.:__ ____________ IT_E.:.:M~#__.:::====- CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: RESOLUTION: ADOPTION OF AMENDED 2017-22 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PLAN POLICY QUESTION: Should the Council approve the proposed amendments to the 2017-22 Transportation Improvement Plan? COMMITTEE: Land Use/ Transportation CATEGORY: D Consent D City Council Business D Ordinance t83 Resolution MEETING DATE: February 6, 2017 Public Hearing Other STAFF REPORT BY: Rick Perez,. P .E.,_ City Traffic_ Engineer -·•------~~~~=--~~~~~~-~~:.~~------ Attachments: Land Use/ Transportation Committee memorandum dated February 6, 2017 . Options Considered: 1. Adoption of the amended 2017-22 TIP and ASIP. 2. Do not adopt the amended 2017-22 TIP and provide direction to staff. MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: The Mayor reconunends forwarding Option 1 to the Febru a 21, 2017 City Council meeting for approval. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:/ move to forward Option 1 to the Febro.ary 21, 2016 City Council Business agenda for approval. Committee Chair Committee Member Committee Member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "/ move approval of the amended 2017-22 Transportation Improvement Plan and Arterial Street Improvement Plan as presented. " (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFTCE) COUNCIL ACTION: 0 APPROVED D DENIED 0 TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION 0 MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) REVISED-l/2015 29 COUNCIL BILL# IsT reading Enactment reading ORDINANCE# RESOLUTION# DATE: TO: VIA: FROM: SUBJECT: February 6, 2017 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM Land Use/ Transportation Committee Jim Ferrell, Mayor \\ . Marwan Salloum, P.E., Director of Public Works~ Rick Perez; P.E., City Traffic Engineer {fJf_ Amendment to 2017-2022 Transportation Improvement Plan BACKGROUND: In accordance with the requirements of Chapters 35.77 and 47.26 of the Revised Code of Washington, the City of Federal Way adopted its original TIP and ASIP on July 23, 1991. The City is also required to adopt a revised TIP and ASIP on an annual basis reflecting the City's current and future street and arterial needs. These plans identify capital projects that the City intends to construct over the next six years. In order to be eligible for grant funding, projects are required to be listed in the City's TIP. The City has been awarded two grants for projects that were not shown on the current TIP. Rather than wait until July to adopt a new TIP, it is proposed to amend the existing TIP to list these projects in order to expedite the projects. Other housekeeping items are also included, as described below. The City is required to hold a minimum of one public hearing on the revised plan, which is proposed for the February 21, 2017 Council meeting. Once the revised plans have been adopted by Resolution, a copy of the respective plans must be filed with the Washington State Secretary of Transportation and the Washington State Transportation Improvement Board. Attached for your review and comment are the proposed amendments to the 2016-2022 TIP and ASIP (Exhibit A), a location map (Exhibit B), and a draft resolution for adoption (Exhibit C). The six-year TIP and ASIP respond to the Growth Management Act concurrency requirements as well as other emerging needs. Projects are selected based on criteria adopted in the City's Comprehensive Plan policy TP2.3, which reads, "Prioritize transportation projects considering concurrency, safety, multimodal enhancements, environmental impacts, and cost effectiveness." Each project was ranked using the scoring criteria established for Transportation TIP/CIP Prioritization. Staff also reviewed and analyzed available grant-eligible programs suitable for project programmmg. Completed Projects (No expenditures in 2016 or later) • S 288111 Street Overlay: Military Road S -I-5 • S 3241h Street Overlay: SR 99 -S 322nd Street Deleted Project {Listing was contingent on grant award) • 26111 Avenue SW: SW 327ih Street-SW 3301h Street Modified Project (Additional grant funds awarded) • Citywide Adaptive Traffic Control System Proposed New Project • Military Road S at S 298 1h Street Compact Roundabout 30 EXHIBIT A CITY OF FEDERAL WAY -TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PLAN [!!P) • 201 7 TO 2022 I I j [ I I I I [ Map ROADWAY CAPITAL PROJECTS Year2016 Costs I n $thousands 10-Location Description Previous Yu.rs 2U1ti 2017 2018 2018 2020 2021 2022 Total 1a City Center Aocess Ph!!S<! 1 • Envln>nmental Update env;ronmental documenta.Uon for modified aocess .alS 3201h SI & S 3241h SI 2 .500 2,500 1b City Center Access Phase 2 -S 320th St im 1-5 Bridae Add HOV lanes on S 3201h St reaUQll ramns in SE auadrant 5,6 12 2.123 62,187 62.187 132.106 2 101h Ave SW t111_SW Camous Dr Add SB right-tum iane 145 1.084 17.l!l 3 SW 344th st: 121h Ave SW -21 st Ave SW Extend 3 lane orincioaJ coUector witn bil<e lanes. sidewalks , illumination 2.884 7.280 10,164 4 1st Ave S @ S 32Blh St l nstail raised medl an, imorove access at 328th 210 1,687 f,897 5 SR 99 @ S 3 12il>St Add 2nd left-turn lane NB 1,500 80 5 4,603 6,708 6 S 304th St @ 281h Ave S Add NB riaht-tum lane. sianal 292 2,079 2,371 7 S 352nd SI: SR 99-S R 161 Extend 3 lane principal collector and signal at SR-99 1.499 4,120 5,61 9 8 SW 320th S1 @ 21st Ave SW Add 2nd WB left-turn lane, Interconnect to 261h Ave SW 1,740 4 ,429 6,169 9 SW 3201h St @ 4 7th Ave SW Install traffic signal 569 569 10 S 3121h S I@ 28th Ave S Add SB right-turn lane 771 771 11 SW 336th W'J I SW 340th St: 26th Pl SW -HO'II R d Widen to 5 lanes add s ianal at 26tn Pl SW 210 2,62.7 9,597 9,597 22,031 12 s ·3S6th S t SR 99 -SR 161 Widen to 5 lanes, bil<e lanes. sidewalks , iUumina~on 350 200 5.562 6,112 13 S 356th SI@ SR 16 1 Add 2nd NB Left to SR 161 -support phase of Triangle Project 820 3,280 4,100 14 S 320th St & 1st Ave Soulh Add EBL, WBL. WBR, NBT. SBR; widen to 5 lanes N to 316 or Altematlive Measure 569 9,891 10.460 15 s 3441h wv & w-haeuser wt s Roundabout 31 3 1.450 1,763 16 SR 99 HOV Lanes Phase 5: S 340th St • S 356th St Add HOV lanes, install raised median: roundabout at 340th St. turn lanes at 348th 2,000 2,680 6.460 6.460 17.""' 17 Ct!\/WKle Traffic ,;nnaJ modifi~ons -Flashina Yellow Arrow retrofits 165 749 914 18 16tnAve S : S 344th S I -S 348th St Add SB auxiliary lane 400 1,800 4,105 6,105 19 Mmtarv Rd s @ s 298th St Construct compact roundabout 100 105 598 803 20 CftyMl!o Implement Adaptive Traffic Control System 200 900 900 2,000 Sub-I Roadway C·apital Projec:u 5,543 11,515 12,532 9,965 15,351 18,049 87,584 81,455 241,994 ' I I I Map NON-MOTORIZED CAPITAL PROJc1, '" Yea.r 2016 Costs.In 5 tllousancts ID Location Description Previous Years 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Total 21 .21st Ave S : S 3 14tn·St-S 316th St Pedestrian Connection 300 500 2.000 2.800 22 Ullh Ave S : S 312th S t -S 3 151h SI Install sidewalk on wesl side 100 400 500 23 S 3141h St: 2oth Ave S -23rd Ave S lnstaU sidewali<s, ADA ram.os •. cwbs & cutter, pedf;>Slrian improvements 175 1.485 1,685 3.345 24 1st Ave S: S ~S l-$3121hSt Shoulder improvements 3,77( 3,770 25 S 3361h St: SR 99 -20 0, Ave S Install sidewalk on north side 639 639 26 21st Ave S: S 316th SI -S 320tn St Install sidewalk on west side 472 884 1.c"" 27 SR 509: 11th Pl S -16th Ave S Install sidewalk on soulh side 200 1,300 1,500 28 CihMrido Pedestrian Safetv Install mid-block crossing treatments 320 320 fW 29 20th Ave S & S 3 16th St Install sidewalk and streetlights on east and soulh sides 95 300 395 30 SR 509: SW3 12_th SI •21st Ave SW Install sidewalk and streetlights on soutn side 2.00 1.300 1,500 31 S 3121h S t 24th Ave S • S teel Laka Park· Install sioewalk and streetliahts on south side 100 600 700 32 S 312th St: Steel lake Park • 28th Ave S Install sidewalk and streetlights on soulh side 100 650 750 Subtotal Non-Motoriud Caj,ltal Pm~w I 1,262 2.020 900 2.834 639 1,485 1,685 3,no 14,595 1 I :TOTAL CAPITAL PROJECT COSTS 6,805 13,535 13,432 12.799 15.990 19;534 89,269 85,225 256,589 I I !Draft Amendment 29 Dec 2016 ·--------- IFinal Adooled 21 Jun 2016 bv Resol~on #16-706 i w I\J l <iu1t>'''l"f 11l"' Jim J:\co mpl ~t'm n,j>ortatlon\ffp 17~ 4 .tru<d Pugel Sound .s~. ~q~ """ /'ov.:rtt Ha ' 509q+: . l} ~ .... , ,J: ~ EXHIBIT B 'l'rr111( lake ., i ;; ·~ ... 0) I !. City of Federal Way 2017-2022 Transportation Improvement Plan Amended Legend • Intersection Improvement -Corridor Improvement ,, ·-, Non-Motorized Improvement Orignal Map Date: April, 2016 Revised Map Date: January 2017 City of Federal Way, 33325 8th Ave S, Federal Way, WA 98003 (253) 835-7000 0.5 1 1 N Miles A Fed eral Way This map is accompanied by no warranties, and is simply a graphic representation . EXHIBIT C RESOLUTION NO. __ A RESOLUTION of the City of Federal Way, Washington, adopting an extended and revised Transportation Improvement Program and Arterial Street Improvement Plan for 2017-22, and directing the same to be filed with the Washington State Secretary of Transportation and the Transportation Improvement Board. WHEREAS, pursuant to the requirements of Chapters 35.77 and 47.26 RCW, the Federal Way City Council adopted an original Transportation Improvement Program (''TIP") on July 23, 1991 (Resolution No. 91-67); and WHEREAS, the Federal Way City Council updated a TIP annually thereafter; and WHEREAS, the Federal Way City Council held a public hearing on the amended TIP on February 21, 2017, in compliance with the requirements of State laws; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined current and future City street and arterial needs, and based upon these findings has prepared an amended TIP and an Arterial Street Improvement Plan ("ASIP") for the ensuing six calendar years; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapters 35.77 and 47.26 RCW, the City Council is required annually to revise and adopt an extended TIP and ASIP; and WHEREAS, the City's SEP A Responsible Official has adopted the Determination of Non- Significance ("DNS"), Federal Way File 16-101835-00-SE, issued for the City's 2017-22 TIP and ASIP, which includes the extended and revised projects contained in the TIP adopted herein; and WHEREAS, adoption of the City's 2017-22 TIP and ASIP DNS reflects the fact that there will be no significant adverse environmental impacts as a result of adoption or implementation of the extended and revised TIP and ASIP adopted herein; Resolution No. 17- 33 Page I of3 Rev 1/15 NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Sectio.n 1. Program Adopted. The amended Transportation Improvement Program and Arterial Street Improvement Plan for the City ofF ederal Way, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference, which sets forth the City's transportation project locations, types of improvements, and the estimated costs thereof, is hereby approved and adopted for the ensuing six (6) calendar years (2017-22 inclusive). Section 2; Filing of Program. Pursuant to Chapter 35.77 RCW, the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to file a copy of this Resolution, together with Exhibit A, with the Washington State Secretary of Transportation and the Washington State Transportation Improvement Board. Section 3. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this resolution should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this resolution. Section 4. Corrections. The City Clerk and the codifiers of this resolution are authorized to make necessary corrections to this resolution including, but not limited to, the correction of scrivener/clerical errors, references, resolution numbering, section/subsection numbers and any references thereto. Section 5. Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority and prior to the effective date of this resolution is hereby ratified and affirmed. Section 6. Effective Date. This resolution shall be effective immediately upon passage by the Resolution No. 17-__ Page 2 of 3 Rev 1/15 34 Federal Way City Council. RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON this --· day of ______ _, 20 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MAYOR, JIM FERRELL ATTEST: CITY CLERK, STEPHANIE COURTNEY, CMC APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY, FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: RESOLUTION NO.: Resolution No. 17-__ 35 Page3 of3 Rev 1/15 This page left blank intentionally. 36 COUNCIL MEETING DATE: February 21, 2017 ITEM#: CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: REVISED TRANSPORTATION CIP PRIORITIZATION CRITERIA POLICY QUESTION: Should the Council adopt revised prioritization criteria for transportation capital projects? COMMITTEE: Land Use/ Transportation CATEGORY: ISi Consent D City Council Business D Ordinance D Resolution MEETING DATE: February 6, 2017 D D Public Hearing Other DEPT: Public Works Attachments: Memorandum to Land Use/ Transportation Committee dated February 6, 2017. Options Considered: 1. Approve the draft prioritization criteria. 2. Do not approve the draft prioritization criteria and provide direction to staff. MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: The Mayor recommends Option l be forwarded to the February 21, 2017 City Council Consent Agenda for approval. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: I move to forward Option 1 to the February 21, 2017 consent agenda for approval. Bob Celski, Chair Lydia Assefa-Dawson, Member Mark Koppang, Member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "I move approval of the draft revised criteria for the prioritization of transportation capital projects. " (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: D APPROVED 0 DENIED D TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION 0 MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) REVISED -1/2015 K:\COUNCIL\AGDBILLS\2016\11-15-16 New Street Lighting Prioritization Criteria.doc 37 COUNCIL BILL # 15T reading Enactment reading ORDINANCE# RESOLUTION # DATE: TO: VIA: FROM: SUBJECT: February 6, 2017 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM Land Use and Transportation Committee Jim Ferrell, Mayor \. t <\ . ____..,.- Marwan Salloum P.E., Public Works Director ~ Rick Perez P.E., City Traffic Engineer Revised Transportation Capital Project Prioritization Criteria BACKGROUND On June 16, 2015, City Council adopted the 2015 update of the Comprehensive Plan, which revised level of service standards for transportation, and provided several new concepts for prioritization of non-motorized projects. The Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan was adopted in 2013 and proposed project prioritization criteria that were very different and would have required staff to collect much more data than past procedures, and identified over $330 million in new project needs. Finally, safety grant funding is increasing in emphasis with the adoption of Target Zero goals by the State, thus staff pursued ways to increase the number of safety- related criteria. Therefore, staff proposes to harmonize motorized and non-motorized projects with one set of prioritization criteria, increase the emphasis on safety, and reduce the emphasis on providing roadway capacity improvements in recognition of the new level of service standard. Key points in the proposed changes are as follows: 1. The criterion for level of service improvement defines how non-motorized projects would be scored, using the new level of service criteria for non-motorized users in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual. 2. The criterion for concurrency requirement is replaced with a new safety measurement for total number of collisions. Although higher-volume intersections will dominate the scoring, this is consistent with state procedures. Note thc,t we already score safety in collision rate and collision severity indices, so this will increase the emphasis on safety and reduce the emphasis on capacity improvements. Also note that concurrency requirement was essentially the same score as the level of service improvement, so this change reduces this double-counting. 3. All safety related criteria will use a 5-year average instead of three years, which would yield a more statistically stable measurement. This is also consistent with new State practice. 4. The HOV Supportive criterion defines scoring for non-motorized projects as using the same score as under the Non-Motorized Supportive criterion, as these projects should improve accessibility to transit service. 5. Amended language is provided for the Benefit/Cost Ratio criterion to clarify the calculation of this score. The revised scoring structure is provided in Attachment A. 38 I ATTACHMENT A Transportation TIP/CIP Prioritization Criteria Each project is rated on a scale of zero to fi yne (five being best) on the following criteria: Caoeurreney Requirement: If the project is needed now to maintain the level of sef¥i.ee standards adopted in the Comprehensi•,re Plan, five poiats. If needed 1Nithin six year EeeHespoaEH:Bg to the +Faasportatioa lHlpro•,remeat Phm reEfmremeats, fem= points . If Reeded within 20 years (eonespendiRg to the Capital Improvement Plan horiz:eI1), 3 points. Level of Service Improvement: If the i;~roject is needed now to maintain the level of service standards ado:gted in the Com:grehensive Plan, five :goints. If needed within six years (corres:gonding to the Trans:gortation Im:grovement Plan horizon, fom 12oints. If needed within 20 years (corres_gonding to the Ca2ital Im12rovernent Plan horizon), 3 points. If a eone\:H'fency requiremOfl:t, same score as Concurrency. Otherwise, estimated number of levels of service improvement. For example, improvement from D to C, 1 point; E to C, 2 points. If primarily a non-motorized project, score using the sum of improvement in Bicycle and Pedestrian LOS . Collision Imurovem ent: If the project would im12rove the trans12ortation safetv at a high collision intersection or co1Tidor, points are assigned based on the existing 5-year average collision history as shown in Table 1. Table 1 -Scoring of Collisions Points Intersection Collisions Corridor Collisions (Total collisions) (Total collisions oer mile) 0 0 -5 0 -50 1 5 -10 50 -100 2 10-25 100 -250 3 25-50 250-500 4 50-100 500-1000 5 > 100 > 1000 Collision Rate Improvement: If the project would improve the transportation safety at a high collision intersection or corridor, points are assigned based on the existing 5-year average collision experieneehistory as shown in Table -l-2_. 39 Table 11-Scoring of Collision Rates Points Intersection Collision Rate Corridor Collision Rate (Collisions per million entering vehicles) (Collisions per million vehicle miles) 0 0-0.50 0-1.0 1 0.50-1.00 1.0-2.5 2 1.00 -1.50 2.5 -5.0 3 1.50-2.00 5.0-10.0 4 2.00-2.50 10.0-25.0 5 > 2.50 > 25.0 Collision Severity Rate Improvement: If the project would improve the transportation safety at a high collision severity intersection or corridor, points are assigned based on the existing 5-year average collision history~erienee as shown in Table 2.J. Table J2 -Scoring of Collision Severity Rates Points Intersection Collision Severity Rate Corridor Collision Severity Rate (Societal cost of collisions per million (Societal cost of collisions per million entering vehicles) vehicle miles) 0 < $10,000 < $100 ,000 1 $10,000 -25,000 $100,000 -250,000 2 $25,000 -50,000 $250,000 -500,000 3 $50,000 -100,000 $500,000 -1,000,000 4 $100,000 -250,000 $1 ,000 ,000 -$2,500,000 5 > $250,000 > $2,500,000 HOV Supportive: Projects that add HOV lanes, 5 points; projects that reduce delays for transit, 1 point for LOS improvement for transit vehicle movements. For primarily non-motorized projects, use same score as Non-Motorized Supportive for improving access to trans it. Non-Motorized Supportive: One point for each of the street that sidewalks are added; 1 point each for each side of the street that bike lanes are added; 1 point for improving pedestrian opportunities for crossing major streets. Community Support: Subjective determination based on citizen complaints estimate of impacts of project. Air Quality: Same as LOS Improvement. Ease of Implementation: Subjective determination based on project complexity, competiveness for grant applications, political opposition, environmental impacts, etc. 40 Benefit/Cost Ratio: Sliding scale based on the subtotal of points from all other criteria divided by the estimated cost of the project. The highest-ranking project best ratio is defiaed scored as five points, the weFStlowest-ranking project zero points, and all other project scores are interpolated. 41