The URL can be used to link to this page

LUTC PKT 11-05-2018 Committee Members City Staff Mark Koppang, Chair EJ Walsh, P.E., Public Works Director Jesse E. Johnson, Member Mercedes Tenuta, Administrative Assistant II Hoang V. Tran, Member (253) 835-2701 City of Federal Way City Council Land Use & Transportation Committee November 5, 2018 City Hall 5:00 p.m. Council Chambers *AMENDED* MEETING AGENDA 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PUBLIC COMMENT 3. COMMITTEE BUSINESS Topic Title/Description Presenter Page Action or Info Council Date Time A. Approval of Minutes: October 1, 2018 Tenuta 3 Action N/A 5 min B. ORDINANCE: Abandoned Shopping Carts Davis 7 Action November 20, 2018 Ordinance 5 min C. Steel Lake Park to Downtown Trail – Project Acceptance Mullen 19 Action November 20, 2018 Consent 5 min D. 2018 Asphalt Overlay – Project Acceptance Huynh 21 Action November 20, 2018 Consent 5 min E. Green Gables ’18 NTS – SW 325th Place (51st Place SW to Hoyt Road SW) Preston 23 Action November 20, 2018 Consent 5 min F. ORDINANCE: Complete Streets Policy Revisions Preston 29 Action November 20, 2018 Ordinance 10 min G. Solid Waste Collection Services Procurement – Authorization for Proposals Van Orsow 41 Action November 20, 2018 Consent 5 min H. 2019/2020 Surface Water Maintenance and Services – Bid Award Thurlow 43 Action November 20, 2018 Consent 5 min I. Draft Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Transition Plan – Stage 1 Winkler 45 Action November 20, 2018 Consent 15 min J. 2019 Street Sweeping Services – Bid Award Winkler 89 Action November 20, 2018 Consent 5 min K. 2019 Right-of-Way Landscape Maintenance Winkler 93 Info N/A 5 min L. *Add Item* Report on Progress on Aircraft Issues Weidenfeld Info N/A 4. OTHER 5. FUTURE MEETINGS/AGENDA ITEMS: The next LUTC meeting will be Monday, December 3, 2018 at 5:00 p.m. in City Hall Council Chambers. 6. ADJOURNMENT Committee Members City Staff Mark Koppang, Chair EJ Walsh, P.E., Public Works Director Jesse E. Johnson, Member Mercedes Tenuta, Administrative Assistant II Hoang V. Tran, Member (253) 835-2701 City of Federal Way City Council Land Use & Transportation Committee November 5, 2018 City Hall 5:00 p.m. Council Chambers MEETING AGENDA 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PUBLIC COMMENT 3. COMMITTEE BUSINESS Topic Title/Description Presenter Page Action or Info Council Date Time A. Approval of Minutes: October 1, 2018 Tenuta 3 Action N/A 5 min B. ORDINANCE: Abandoned Shopping Carts Davis 7 Action November 20, 2018 Ordinance 5 min C. Steel Lake Park to Downtown Trail – Project Acceptance Mullen 19 Action November 20, 2018 Consent 5 min D. 2018 Asphalt Overlay – Project Acceptance Huynh 21 Action November 20, 2018 Consent 5 min E. Green Gables ’18 NTS – SW 325th Place (51st Place SW to Hoyt Road SW) Preston 23 Action November 20, 2018 Consent 5 min F. ORDINANCE: Complete Streets Policy Revisions Preston 29 Action November 20, 2018 Ordinance 10 min G. Solid Waste Collection Services Procurement – Authorization for Proposals Van Orsow 41 Action November 20, 2018 Consent 5 min H. 2019/2020 Surface Water Maintenance and Services – Bid Award Thurlow 43 Action November 20, 2018 Consent 5 min I. Draft Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Transition Plan – Stage 1 Winkler 45 Action November 20, 2018 Consent 15 min J. 2019 Street Sweeping Services – Bid Award Winkler 89 Action November 20, 2018 Consent 5 min K. 2019 Right-of-Way Landscape Maintenance Winkler 93 Info N/A 5 min 4. OTHER 5. FUTURE MEETINGS/AGENDA ITEMS: The next LUTC meeting will be Monday, December 3, 2018 at 5:00 p.m. in City Hall Council Chambers. 6. ADJOURNMENT This page left blank intentionally. 2 Committee Members City Staff Mark Koppang, Chair EJ Walsh, P.E., Public Works Director Hoang V. Tran, Member Mercedes Tenuta, Administrative Assistant II Jesse E. Johnson, Member (253) 835-2701 City of Federal Way City Council Land Use & Transportation Committee October 1, 2018 City Hall 5:00 p.m. Council Chambers MEETING SUMMARY Committee Members in Attendance: Committee Chair Mark Koppang, Committee member Jesse Johnson, and Committee member Hoang Tran. Councilmembers in attendance: Deputy Mayor Susan Honda and Councilmember Martin Moore. Staff in Attendance: Public Works Director EJ Walsh, Deputy Public Works Director/Street Systems Manager Desireé Winkler, Deputy City Attorney Mark Orthmann, Planning Manager Robert “Doc” Hansen, Surface Water Manager Theresa Thurlow, City Traffic Engineer Rick Perez, Senior Traffic Engineer Erik Preston, Principal Planner Margaret Clark, Street Systems Project Engineer Christine Mullen, SWM Project Engineer Fei Tang, and Administrative Assistant II Mercedes Tenuta. 1.CALL TO ORDER: Chair Koppang called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. 2.PUBLIC COMMENT: Pattie Ward, a resident of Lake Jeane and the head of the Lake Jeane Management Association, explained that a court ruling allowed homeowners to treat the lake’s toxicity. Due to the cost to maintain treatment of the lake, she is requesting that the Council make a motion to move forward with a Lake Management District. Dana Hollaway, a member of the Quiet Skies Puget Sound Grass Roots Organization, expressed concerns with the airplane noise and emissions that will impact the Federal Way community. She spoke in favor of item H with approval of Option 1. 3.COMMITTEE BUSINESS: Topic Title/Description A.Approval of Minutes: September 10, 2018 Committee approved the September 10, 2018 LUTC minutes as presented. •Moved: Johnson •Seconded: Tran •Passed: 3-0 unanimously B.21st Ave S (S 320th St to S 316th St) Pedestrian Improvements – Project Acceptance Street Systems Project Engineer, Christine Mullen, presented the project which completed a 12’ sidewalk with street trees and decorative street lights on the west side of 21st Ave S from just north of S 320th Street to S 316th Street. Prior to release of retainage on a Public Works construction project, Council must accept the work as complete to meet state requirements. Ms. Mullen provided before and after pictures and outlined the final construction contract amount which came in below budget. Committee forwarded Option 1 (Authorize final acceptance of the 21st Ave S (S 320th St to S 316th St) Pedestrian Improvements constructed by Active Construction, Inc., in the amount of $652,420.17, as complete) to the October 16, 2018 Council Consent Agenda for approval. •Moved: Tran •Seconded: Johnson 3 DRAFT Committee Members City Staff Mark Koppang, Chair EJ Walsh, P.E., Public Works Director Hoang V. Tran, Member Mercedes Tenuta, Administrative Assistant II Jesse E. Johnson, Member (253) 835-2701 •Passed: 3-0 unanimously C.Sherwood Forest ’18 NTS – 18th Avenue SW & SW 353rd Place Senior Traffic Engineer, Erik Preston, presented a study area map and background for the project area. A petition was submitted on May 7, 2018 with concerns of excessive speeding and cut-through traffic. Both 18th Ave SW and SW 353rd Place were evaluated with data collected in June 2018 during the school year which resulted in the minimum criteria met of 3.0 points. A community meeting was held July 25, 2018 with 8 in attendance. The balloting resulting in a 70% approval rate. Mr. Preston briefly touched on the mini-roundabout option of being landscaped. Typically this is done with an agreement with the Homeowner’s Association (“HOA”) to maintain the landscaping for 5 years; however this neighborhood currently doesn’t have an HOA. Mr. Preston outlined the budget considerations which indicated this project’s estimate exceeds the available 2018 budget based on projects already completed or currently under construction. There is an option to phase and complete the work in 2019 if funds are not available. Mr. Preston, Deputy Mayor Honda, and Committee members held a brief discussion regarding the phased approach, a general overview of the NTS process, the budget for NTS in 2019-20, the option for homeowner’s to maintain the mini-roundabout, and the cost differential between having landscaping vs. not. Committee authorized the installation of the two speed humps in 2018 and the mini-roundabout in 2019. •Moved: Koppang •Seconded: Johnson •Passed: 3-0 unanimously D.Lakota Park Stormwater Facility Repair Project – Final Acceptance SWM Project Engineer, Fei Tang, provided a background of the project that rebuilt the berm that forms a boundary between Lakota Park and Lakota Wetlands to its design height and replaced approximately 470 linear feet of pipe that regulates detention within the area. Prior to release of retainage on a Public Works construction project, Council must accept the work as complete to meet state requirements. Mr. Tang provided pictures and outlined the final construction contract amount which came in under budget. Committee forwarded Option 1 (Authorize final acceptance of the Lakota Park Stormwater Facility Repair Project constructed by Gary Harper Construction, Inc., in amount of $429,666.00, as complete) to the October 16, 2018 Council Consent Agenda for approval. •Moved: Tran •Seconded: Johnson •Passed: 3-0 unanimously E.West Hylebos Creek S 373rd Street Gravel Removal Project – Final Acceptance SWM Project Engineer, Fei Tang, provided a background of the project that removed 73 cubic yards of gravel from a small branch of the West Hylebos Creek to restore stream flow, protect the existing bridge, and allow inspection and potential maintenance of the bridge. Prior to release of retainage on a Public Works construction project, Council must accept the work as complete to meet state requirements. Mr. Tang provided pictures and outlined the final construction contract amount which came in under budget. Committee forwarded Option 1 (Authorize final acceptance of the West Hylebos Creek South 373rd Street Gravel Removal Project constructed by Northwest Cascade, Inc., in the amount of $66,205.23, as complete) to the October 16, 2018 Council Consent Agenda for approval. •Moved: Tran •Seconded: Johnson •Passed: 3-0 unanimously 4 Committee Members City Staff Mark Koppang, Chair EJ Walsh, P.E., Public Works Director Hoang V. Tran, Member Mercedes Tenuta, Administrative Assistant II Jesse E. Johnson, Member (253) 835-2701 F.ORDINANCE: Apprenticeship Utilization Requirements for Public Works Projects Deputy Public Works Director/Street Systems Manager, Desireé Winkler, presented a background explaining that there is a current and anticipated shortfall of skilled labor and the City can support development of skilled labor work force through implementation of an apprenticeship program. The proposed ordinance applies to construction projects with minimum construction costs of $2M (which would be adjusted each calendar year by 100% of the annual percentage change in the Consumer Price Index (“CPI”). In addition, the contractor shall employ apprentices for at least 15% of the contract labor hours unless waived or reduced by the Public Works Director. Ms. Winkler outlined the minimum percentage of contract labor hours and the list of exceptions. Ms. Winkler and Councilmembers held a brief discussion regarding how the good faith effort will be evaluated, any potential burden to the contractor, how the CPI will be reported and any potential financial impacts. Committee forwarded the proposed Ordinance to First Reading on October 16, 2018. •Moved: Tran •Seconded: Johnson •Passed: 3-0 unanimously G.ORDINANCE: Amend 19.142 FWRC and 15.15 FWRC, Flood Damage Prevention Planning Manager, Robert “Doc” Hansen, outlined the reasons for the code amendments are to meet state laws, identify exempt activities, and update the requirement of floodplain permits. The proposed amendments are: •Eliminate 15.15 due to it replicating 19.142 •Add and amend definitions •Provide exemptions for normal maintenance •Require habitat assessments Committee forwarded the proposed Ordinance to First Reading on October 16, 2018. •Moved: Johnson •Seconded: Tran •Passed: 3-0 unanimously H.Approval of Federal Way Mayor’s Quiet and Healthy Skies Task Force Report Public Works Director, EJ Walsh, stated that Senior Policy Advisor, Yarden Weidenfeld, could not attend this LUTC meeting. Action taken at this meeting would send the item to the October 16, 2018 Council Business Agenda with the intent for Mr. Weidenfeld to provide a full presentation at that time. Mr. Walsh outlined the options for the committee to consider. Chair Koppang introduced David Berger and Chris Hall, authors of the Quiet and Healthy Skies Task Force Report, to answer any questions and thanked them for their dedication. Mr. Berger explained that the acquisition of the portable noise monitor is crucial so that the City can capture actual noise data to use to respond to the draft Environmental Impact Statement that is part of Strategic Airport Master Plan (“SAMP”). Having the data available would be very helpful since the port rejected the request when performing the study. Mr. Berger outlined the importance to establish an “Aviation Impacts” committee which would function to address issues, provide oversight, keep citizens informed, and offer opportunities for citizens to be heard. Mr. Berger, Mr. Hall, Deputy Mayor Honda, and Committee members held a brief discussion regarding the potential for the Aviation Impacts committee to be part of LUTC, the locations available for the portable noise monitor, and the potential placements of the monitors. Committee forwarded the Federal Way Mayor’s Quiet and Healthy Skies Task Force Report, including all twenty-four (24) distinct recommendations, to Council Business at the October 16, 2018 Council for approval. •Moved: Koppang 5 Committee Members City Staff Mark Koppang, Chair EJ Walsh, P.E., Public Works Director Hoang V. Tran, Member Mercedes Tenuta, Administrative Assistant II Jesse E. Johnson, Member (253) 835-2701 •Seconded: Tran •Passed: 3-0 unanimously *Chair Koppang allowed citizen comment outside of the Public Comment period below: Lyn Idahosa, a Federal Way resident, expressed concerns regarding the mold issue for tenants/renters. She introduced Ashley Comier to speak along with her. Ashley Comier, with Washington CAN, expressed concerns regarding housing conditions for tenants and requested to have a meeting to discuss the concerns, legalities, and landlord accountabilities. Chair Koppang advised that since the previous Council meeting, the issue(s) have been forwarded to the Community Development Director, Brian Davis, and is on his list of work program items to address. 4.OTHER 5.FUTURE MEETINGS/AGENDA ITEMS: The next LUTC meeting will be held on November 5, 2018 at 5:00 p.m. in City Hall Council Chambers. 6.ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 6:06 p.m. Attest: Approved by Committee: Mercedes Tenuta, Administrative Assistant II 6 ITEM#: COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 20, 2018 .--.,;------------------=====- CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: ORDINANCE: ABANDONED SHOPPING CARTS POLICY QUESTION: Should the City amend the Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) by adding definitions and a new chapter regulating abandoned shopping carts? COMMITTEE: LUTC CATEGORY: D Consent D City Council Business STAFF REPORT BY: Brian Davis, Director Attachments: StaffReport Memo and Infographic Ordinance Options Considered: cgj Ordinance D Resolution 1) Approve the Mayor's Recommendation; MEETING DATE: Nov 5, 2018 D D Public Hearing Other DEPT: Community Development 2) Approve the Mayor's Recommendation as further amended by LUTC; or 3) Do not adopt the Mayor's Recommendation, TION: "I move to forwar Option I to the City Council for approval. " COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: I move to forward the proposed ordinance to First Reading on November 20, 2018. Mark Koppang, Chair Hoang Tran, Member Jesse Johnson, Member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION(S): FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE (November 20, 2018): "I move to forward approval of the ordinance to the December 4, 2018, Council Meeting for enactment." SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE (December 4, 2018): "I move approval of the proposed ordinance. " (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'!J"OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: 0 APPROVED 0 DENIED 0 TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION 0 MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) REVISED -12/2017 7 COUNCIL BILL# First reading Enactment reading ORDINANCE# RESOLUTION# DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM October 30, 2018 Land Use and Transportation Committee ... Brian Davis, Community Development Director ~ Abandoned Shopping Cart Ordinance The City for many years has provided a retrieval service of abandoned shopping carts for free. The work was afforded through a volunteer program comprised of retired police officers and city equipment. The age of the volunteers coupled with the amount of work has far exceeded the ability of the City to continue the program. Unfortunately, shopping carts are being left abandoned across the City at increased numbers which has become an issue of blight and public safety. The proposed ordinance establishes incentives for retailers to prevent shopping carts from leaving their property, and it imposes fines when shopping carts are retrieved by the City and when left unclaimed. The attached infographic on the next two pages explains the process as follows: 1. The City picks up abandoned shopping carts in rights-of-way, city-owned properties, and private properties (when permitted). 2. The City takes the carts to a recovery location, likely the Brooklake Park property at 356th Sand Pacific Highway. 3. The City contacts the retailers of the retrieved carts, informing them the carts will be held for 14 days. 4. Retailers may pick up their abandoned carts. A $25 impound fee per cart is charged to the retailer . 5. Unclaimed carts after 14 days are recycled by the City with an additional $25 fee per cart charged to the retailer. The proposed ordinance was drafted after input from retailers over two meetings and based on research of neighboring city ordinances related to abandoned shopping carts . 8 Fo r years , the City of Federal Way has tackled the prob lem of abandoned sh opp ing carts. For nearly ten years , vo lunteers with the Federal Way Po lice Department have pr ov ided the free ca rt removal service . In its fi rst year , 2010 , the team removed ove r 1200 abandoned carts . Th is year, hey are on track to re move 2000 . On ave rage, the volun teer team removes about 300 shopping carts per mo nth. Shopping carts can co st between $75 -400. It is esti mated that the vo lunteer -based program has saved reta ilers ab out $2.25 mill ion ove r the course of eight years. With the recent ret irement of the volunteers , he City mus t now begin to funnel the aba ndoned carts removal serv ice . The infograph ic below illus trates the futu res eps that will be ta ken to recove r the aba ndon ed shopp ing ca rts. 0 CITY GAT CARS E S The City of fede ral Way wi ll pick up abandoned shopp ing carts along fights-o f-way, City -owned propert ies , and , when given pe rmission , pri vate properties . CARTS TAK ECOVE OC TION ---1 Jl.-;l -1 ---l''-H-:Jl : .· . rm,~~ ,·:· --,, l J l .. TO Once gat hered , the City ta ke s th e ca rt s to a re covery locat ion. 8 9 e 8 C TY C TAC S R TAILERS The City contacts the retailers of the abandoned cart s and informs each retai ler that the City will hold the carts for 14 days. R TAILERS ~ra ·1:.:.•y ~ku~!bando n~ 0 carts , but ~111 be charged a $25 per cart fee . NC ME CART A E SALVAGED If carts are no t ret ri eved by the retail er, the City takes them to a saJvage yard where for disposal. and an add r: onal $"25 per cart fee wiH be imposed. CON ACT To repo·rt an aba ndoned shopping cart , co ntact the City of Federal Way Commu nity Deve lopment Department Ph one: (253 ) 835 ·2617 , 01 through the City 's web si te: cityo ffoderalwa y.com lpage (code comp li ance req uest-form 10 • ORDINANCE NO. 18----- AN ORDINANCE of the City of Federal Way, Washington, relating to shopping cart regulation; amending FWRC 07 .03.020 and 07 .03.040, and adding new Chapter 07 .25 FWRC. (Amending Ordinance Nos. 09-596; 10-669; and 12-715) WHEREAS, Article XI, Section 11 of the Washington State Constitution authorizes the City Council to make all local police and other regulations as long as they do not conflict with general state laws; and WHEREAS, RCW 35A.11.020 authorizes the City Council to adopt and enforce ordinances regulating municipal affairs and impose penalties not exceeding five thousand dollars; and WHEREAS, the City Council has enacted the City's ordinances, some of which are set forth in the Federal Way Revised Code including Chapter 7, which identifies public nuisances; and WHEREAS, retail businesses provide shopping carts for the convenience of customers shopping on the premises of the businesses; and WHEREAS, a shopping cart that has been removed from the premises of the business and left abandoned on public or private property throughout the City constitutes a potential hazard to the health and safety of the public; and WHEREAS, shopping .carts abandoned on public or private property contribute to conditions of blight in the community and reduced property values; and WHEREAS, shopping carts abandoned on public or private property can obstruct free access to sidewalks, streets and other rights-of-way, interfere with pedestrian and vehicular Ordinance No. 18-__ 11 Page I of7 Rev 1/18 traffic on pathways, driveways, public and private streets, and impede emergency services . NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Findings . The foregoing recitals are adopted as findings of the City Council. Section 2. Section 7.03.020 of the Federal Way Revised Code is hereby amended by adding the following definitions in alphabetical order: "Abandoned shopping cart" means any shopping cart made available for customers to use that has been removed from the retail establishment's premises, without the owner's written consent, and is located on either public or private property. "Director" means the director of the Community Development Department or a person designated by the director of the Community Development Department. "Shopping cart" means a basket mounted on wheels or a similar device of the type generally used in a retail establishment by a customer for the purpose of transporting goods of any kind. Section 3. Section 7.03.040 of the Federal Way Revised Code is hereby amended by adding subsection (21) to read as follows: (21) Causing or allowing any shopping cart to be abandoned on either public or private property. Section 4. A new chapter of the Federal Way Revised Code is hereby created, Chapter 7.25, to read as follows: Ordinance No. 18- 12 Page2 o/7 Rev 1/18 Chapter 7 .25 ABANDONED SHOPPING CARTS 7.25.010 Purpose and Af!.Plicability .. _,, __ ... _ ... -· _ .. ,, .. -.. ,-..... -...... -........ _._,, ___ ..... -.... ·--·-· ... _ .. _,_ (1) A purpose of this chapter is to provide for the prompt retrieval oflost, stolen or abandoned shopping carts in order to promote public safety and improve the image and appearance of the City. It is a further purpose of this chapter to have the owners and operators of businesses providing shopping carts use the means available to them to deter, prevent or mitigate the removal of shopping carts from their business premises, and to retrieve any carts that may be removed despite these efforts. It is a further purpose of this chapter to prevent the illegal removal of shopping carts from the business premises, to prevent the continued possession of illegally removed carts, and to prevent the accumulation of illegally removed carts on public or private properties. (2) Applicability: This chapter shall apply to all shopping carts in the City of Federal Way. 7.25.020 Definitions. The definitions in this section apply throughout this chapter unless the context clearly requires otherwise. Unless defined otherwise here, the definitions of FWRC 1.05.020 shall control. "Owner" means the owner or retailer identified by an identification sign on a shopping cart or, in relation to a shopping cart without an identification sign, the retail establishment that makes available that shopping cart for customers to use. "Retail Establishment" means any business that makes available shopping carts for customers of the business to use regardless of whether such business is advertised or operated as a retail or wholesale business, and regardless of whether such business is open to the general public, is a private club or business, or is a membership store. Ordinance No. 18-__ 13 Page3 ofl Rev 1/18 7.25.030__1denti~.cation .. Signs ........ ____ . ···-······ _ ................. . Each shopping cart offered or provided for customers to use shall have an identification sign affixed to it in accordance with RCW 9A.56.270(2), as now enacted or hereafter amended. 7 .25.040 lmpoundment and Fees ............ _ ..... -..................... _ ....... -............ ····--··· ................ -.......................... -............. ······-.. ···-........................ -······· (1) Impoundment of Shopping Carts: The City may immediately impound an abandoned shopping cart on private land within the city with the consent of the party in possession of the land and may immediately impound an abandoned shopping cart on public land within the city. (2) Notification: The City shall notify the owner of each impounded shopping cart in writing if the shopping cart has an identification sign as required by FWRC 7.25.030. The Director may establish by rule a process for owners to register a preferred method of notification. If delivered by U.S. mail, the notice shall be deemed to have been received 3 days after mailing. The notice shall state the amount of the impound fee and that the owner has 14 days from the date of receipt to retrieve the shopping cart. The notice shall also state that if the shopping cart is not retrieved within 14 days, the City may dispose of the shopping cart. (3) Impound Fee: The City shall charge a shopping cart impound fee to the owner of each abandoned shopping cart impounded by the City, unless the fee is eligible for waiver. Each shopping cart impounded by the City shall constitute a separate violation. The shopping cart impound fee shall be per the fee schedule maintained by the City Clerk. (4) Fee Waivers: The City shall waive the impound fee for up to three impounded shopping carts within any calendar month owned by any retail establishment that, prior to the impoundment, has implemented security measures as defined in FWRC 7.25.050. The City shall waive no impound fees for a particular retail establishment in a calendar month if four or more shopping carts from that retail establishment are impounded within that calendar month. Ordinance No . 18-__ 14 Page 4 of7 Rev 1/18 ( 1) Security measures are methods to prevent removal of shopping carts from or to return them to the premises of the retail establishment including, but not limited to: (a) Electronically-activated self-braking wheels; or (b) Poles mounted to shopping carts or other physical barriers 'that prevent removing the shopping carts from the interior of the retail establishment; or ( c) Utilization of a shopping cart patrol and retrieval company who recovers shopping carts on behalf of the retail business within a two mile radius of the contracting retail establishment no fewer than two times per week; or ( d) Security personnel dedicated to cart control and reten~ion; or ( e) Other measures deemed appropriate and effective by the Director. 7 .25.060 _Dis position .. of _Unclaimed . ShopJ>in__g _ carts ............... -, .... -..... _,._ ..................................................................... _ .. __ .............. -.. The City may summarily dispose of shopping carts impounded by the City that are either not retrieved within 14 days following the receipt of notification or without an identification sign. If the City disposes of a shopping cart, the City may assess the owner with a disposal fee in addition to the impoundment fee. The shopping cart disposal fee shall be per the fee schedule maintained by the City Clerk. Section 5. Impound and Disposal Fees. The shopping cart impound fee is set at $25 until the fee schedule maintained by the City Clerk is updated to include a shopping cart impound fee. The shopping cart disposal fee is set at $25 until the fee schedule maintained by the City Clerk is updated to include a shopping cart disposal fee. Section 6. Severability. Should any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase of this ordinance, or its application to any person or situation, be declared unconstitutional or invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of Ordinance No. 18- 15 Page5 o/7 Rev 1/18 this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation. The City Council of the City of Federal Way hereby declares that it would have adopted this ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clauses, phrase, or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact tha~ any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions be declared invalid or unconstitutional. Section 7. Corrections. The City Clerk and the codifiers of this ordinance are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance including, but not limited to, the correction of scrivener's or clerical errors, references, ordinance numbering, section or subsection numbers, and any references thereto. Section 8. Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority and prior to the effective date of this ordinance is hereby ratified and affirmed. Section 9. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect 30 days after its passage and publication, as provided by law. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Federal Way this 20 ________ _, CITY OF FEDERAL WAY: JIM FERRELL, MAYOR ATTEST: STEPHANIE COURTNEY, CMC, CITY CLERK Ordinance No. 18-__ 16 ~~~-day of Page 6 o/7 Rev 1/18 APPROVED AS TO FORM: J. RYAN CALL, CITY ATTORNEY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO.: Ordinance No. 18-__ 17 Page 7of7 Rev 1/18 This page left blank intentionally. 18 COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 20, 2018 ITEM#: CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: STEEL LAKE PARK TO DOWNTOWN TRAIL -PROJECT ACCEPTANCE -----'====-=- POLICY QUESTION: Should City Council accept the Steel Lake Park to Downtown Trail project as complete? COMMITTEE: Land Use & Transportation CATEGORY: cg] Consent D City Council Business D Ordinance D Resolution MEETING DATE: November 5, 2018 D D Public Hearing Other STAFF REPORT BY: Christine J. Mullen, P .. Street Systems Proj. Engr. DEPT: Public Works Attachments: Land Use & Transportation Committee Memorandum dated November 5, 2018 Options Considered: 1) Authorize final acceptance of the Steel Lake Park to Downtown Trail project constructed by Ceccanti, Inc., in the amount of $713,434.14 as complete. 2) Do not authorize final acceptance of the completed Steel Lake Park to Downtown Trail project as complete, and provide direction to staff. MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: The Mayor recommends forwarding Option 1 to the November 20th City Council consent agenda for approval. ~v ~C. -I'!& DIRECTOR APPROVAL: !!/....t./ to/-zc.f,'3 "O'unc n lnitial!Dnle Initial/Date COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: I move to forward Option 1 to the November 20, 2018 City Council consent agenda for approval. Mark Koppang, Committee Chair Jesse Johnson, Committee Member Hoang Tran, Committee Member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "I move approval of final acceptance of the Steel Lake Park to Downtown Trail project constructed by Ceccanti, Inc., in the amount of$ 713,434.14 as complete. " (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: D APPROVED D DENIED 0 TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION 0 MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) REVISED-12/2017 19 COUNCIL BILL# First reading Enactment reading ORDINANCE# RESOLUTION# DATE: November 5, 2018 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM TO: Land Use and Transportation Committee VIA: Jim FeITell , Mayor FROM· ct,/,uJIJ . Wa lsh P.E., Public Works Director · Christine Mullen, P .E., Street Systems Project Enginee~ SUBJECT: Steel Lake Park to Downtown Trail -Project Acceptance FINANCIAL IMPACTS: This is the acceptance of construction as complete, and therefore no additional funds are proposed to be spent as part of this agenda item. BACKGROUND: This project provided an 8 ft . sidewalk on the south side of S312th Street from the entrance to Steel Lake Park to 24th Ave S. (approximately 700 feet), a planter strip separating the sidewalk and roadway, illumination, and ADA ramps. 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. The Steel Lake Park to Downtown Trail Project constructed by Ceccanti Construction Inc., is complete. The final construction contract amount is $713,434.14. This is $180,424.42 below the $893,858.56 (including contingency) budget that was approved by the City Council on June 20, 2017. cc: Project File 20 COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 20, 2018 ITEM#: CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: 2018 ASPHALT OVERLAY -PROJECT ACCEPTANCE POLICY QUESTION: Should the Council accept the 2018 Asphalt Overlay Project constructed by Tucci and Sons, Inc. as complete? COMMITTEE: Land Use and Transportation Committee CATEGORY: i::gJ Consent D Ordinance D City Council Business D Resolution STAFF REPORT BY: Jeff Hu yn h, Street Systems Engineer -~ MEETING DATE: November 5, 2018 D Public Hearing D Other DEPT: Public Works Attachments: Memorandum to Land Use and Transportation Committee dated November 5, 2018 Options Considered: 1. Authorize final acceptance of the 2018 Asphalt Overlay Project constructed by Tucci and Sons, Inc. in the amount of $1,333,094.12 as complete. 2. Do not authorize final acceptance of the completed 2018 Asphalt Overlay Project constructed by Tucci and Sons, Inc. as complete and provide direction to staff. MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: The Mayor recommends Option 1 be forwarded to the November 20, 2018 Council Consent Agend for approval. DIRECTOR APPROVAL: ~ W [o/zY1s -/<;j lnitial/Da1e COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: I move to forward Option 1 to the November 20, 2018 consent agenda for approval. Mark Koppang , Committee Chair Jesse Johnson , Committee Member Hoang Tran, Committee Member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "I move approval of final acceptance of the 2018 Asphalt Overlay Project constructed by Tucci and Sons, Inc. in the amount of$1,333,094.12 as complete." (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: 0 APPROVED 0 DENIED 0 TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION 0 MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) REVISED-L2/20L 7 21 COUNCIL BILL# First reading Enactment reading ORDINANCE# RESOLUTION # CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM DATE: November 5, 2018 TO: Land Use & Transportation Committee VIA: Jim Ferrell, Mayor FROM·~,/ EJ Walsh, P.E., Public Works Director · Jeff Huynh, Street Systems Engineer~ SUBJECT: 2018 Asphalt Overlay-Project Acceptance FINANCIAL IMPACTS: This is the acceptance of construction as complete, therefore no additional funds are proposed to be spent as part of this agenda item. BACKGROUND: 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. The 2018 Asphalt Overlay Project contract with Tucci and Sons, Inc. is complete. The final construction contract amount is $1,333,094.12. This is $75,474.88 below the $1,408,569.00 (including contingency) budget that was approved by the City Council on March 20, 2018. cc : Project File 22 ITEM#: COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 20, 2018 _....:_ __________________ __;=====- CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: GREEN GABLES '18 NTS -SW 325m PLACE (51 sT PLACE SW TO HOYT ROAD SW) POLICY QUESTION: Should the Council approve the installation of four ( 4) Speed Humps on SW 325th Place and one (1) lane divider on 4ih Avenue SW at the intersection with SW 325th Place? COMMITTEE: Land Use and Transportation Committee MEETING DATE: November 5, 2018 CATEGORY: IZ] Consent D Ordinance D Public Hearing D City Council Business D Resolution D Other STAFF REPORT BY: Erik Preston, P .E., Senior Traffic Enginee~ DEPT: Public Works Attachments: Land Use and Transportation Committee Memorandum dated November 5, 2018 Options Considered: 1. Authorize the installation of four (4) speed humps on SW 325 1h Place and one (1) lane divider on 4ih Avenue SW at the intersection with SW 3251h Place. 2. Do not authorize the installation of the proposed traffic calming devices and provide direction to staff. MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: The Mayor recommends forwarding Option 1 to the November 20, 2018 City Council consent agenda or approval. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: I move to forward Option 1 to the November 20, 2018 consent agenda for approval. Mark Koppang, Committee C-hair Jesse Johnson, Committee Member Hoang Tran, Committee Member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "I move to authorize the installation of four (4) speed humps on SW 3251 " Place and one(]) lane divider on 4t" Avenue SW at the intersection with SW 3251 " Place." (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) COUNC[L ACTlON: 0 APPROVED D DENlED 0 TAB LED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION 0 MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) REVISED -12/2 017 23 COUNCIL BILL# First reading Enactment reading ORDlNANCE# RESOLUTlON # DATE: TO: VIA: FROM: November 5, 2018 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM Land Use and Transportation Committee Jim Ferrell, Mayor ttll,«Walsh, P.E., Public Works Director Erik Preston, P .E., Senior Traffic Engineer ~ SUBJECT: Green Gables '18 NTS-SW 3251h Pl (51 81 Pl SW to Hoyt Rd SW) FINANCIAL IMPACTS: This project is part of the Neighborhood Traffic Safety (NTS) Program. In accordance with the approved budget this project is funded by the Streets Fund. Upon completion of this project, ongoing costs associated with operations and maintenance will be performed and funded through Streets and Traffic Division maintenance . Funding requirements for operations and maintenance of infrastructure is reviewed and adjusted as required during the budget process. The currently allocated NTS budget is $50,000 per year with $20 ,000 designated specifically for school NTS and/or school safety related improvements. Currently, two (2) NTS projects have been built in 2018 at a c~st of $37,500, with another currently under construction at a cost of $8,000, leaving $4,500 still available for 2018 . The estimated cost of this project is approximately $17,000 which exceeds the $15,000 per neighborhood per year budget limitation policy guideline and the available 2018 budget. Due to a gas main replacement on SW 325th Pl, a full width asphalt overlay is required. The overlay has not been scheduled, but is likely to occur in the spring of 2019. As a result, the construction of this project could not occur until spring or early summer 2019, once the overlay is complete. One 2018 NTS project is currently planned to construct phase 2 in 2019 at a cost of $12,500. The construction of this project in 2019 at a cost of $17,000 would consume a total of$29,500 , leaving $20,500 available in the 2019 NTS budget. BACKGROUND: Residents along SW 325th Pl submitted a petition on May 22, 2018 requesting traffic calming devices to control vehicle speeds along SW 325th Pl between 51 st Pl SW and Hoyt Rd SW which is classified as a Minor Collector with a posted speed limit of 25 mph. Traffic studies were conducted in June of 2018, and the results are as follows: 85% Daily Park or # of 5 yr. # of 5 yr. Total Street Speed Traffic School Collisions Injury/Fatal Score (mph) Collisions SW 325tn Pl (E/o 49°' Ave SW) 31.8 1,272 No 0 0 -(Minor Collector. 25mph) SW 325°' Pl (E/o 4?1 11 Ave SW) 29.5 2,002 No 0 0 -(Minor Collector. 25mph) Points Scored 2.0 1.0 0 0 0 3.0 Based on the current adopted NTS installation criteria (per table below), the petition scored 3.0 total severity points . This meets the minimum 3 .0 severity points to qualify for the installation of traffic calming devices . 24 Minor Collector Street NTS Criteria Point 85th Percentile Average Daily Location 5-Year Collision History Scale Speed Traffic (ADT) School/Park Total Injury Fatal 0.0 0 -25 0 -1,000 No 1 -- 0.5 26 -27 1,001 -1,800 Yes 2 -- 1.0 28 -29 11001 -2 1soo -3 1 - 1.5 30 -31 2,601 -3,400 -4 -- 2.0 32-33 3,401 -4,200 -5 2 1 2.5 34-35 4,201 -5,000 -6 -- 3.0 36+ 5,001 + -7+ 3+ 2+ A neighborhood traffic safety meeting was held on June 21, 2018. The 19+ attendees all agreed that reducing speeding along the entire length of SW 325th Pl was a high priority. There was also concern about westbound vehicles cutting the comer when turning left (south) onto 47th Ave SW. Speed Humps, an All-Way Stop, Mini- Roundabout, Lane Dividers, and Raised Crosswalks were among the options discussed during the meeting along with a variety of combiriations. PROPOSAL: Based on the se concerns, Option 1 (below) was developed to slow vehicles along the entire length of SW 325th Pl and restrict vehicles from cutting across the intersec tion with 4 7 111 Ave SW. With the reduced speed provided by the spee d hu m ps, th e safety of th e SW 325 1h Pl corridor shoul d be greatly improved for both motorists and pedestrians. Option I -Four (4) Speed Humps and one (1) Lane Divider This option would install a total of four (4) speed humps and one (1) lane divider as shown on the attached figure. Great effort was taken to space the speed humps as evenly as possible so vehicles did not get a chance to speed up in-between devices. The typical spacing is between 430 and 500 feet, which is in the middle of the 300-600 foot "rule-of-thumb" window for effective spacing of traffic calming devices. The humps are located to avoid directly impacting driveways and mailbox delivery and will be located at the marked locations near ( or between) the following addresses: • 4624 SW 3251h Way • 4727 SW 325th Place • 4909 SW 325th Place • 5016 SW 3251h Place The lane divider curb will be about 50 feet long and located on the centerline of 4?1h Ave SW at the approach to SW 325 1h Pl. The proposed devices should be effective in reducing vehicle speeds and· improving vehicular and pedestrian safety. However, there may be some negative impacts to the neighborhood including inconvenience and perhaps a slight increase in emergency response time. Option 2 -No Action This option would not build any traffic calming devices and the street would remain in its current configuration. Advisory Ballot In accordance with established NTS policies, City staff sent a total of 158 ballots to property owners and occupants within 600 feet (measured along the road centerline) of the proposed traffic calming device locations. The table below summarizes the incomplete ballot results for the 48 ballots received (30% return rate): Option 1 2 Green Gables 2018 NTS Ballot Count Description Four (4) Speed Humps and one (1) lane divider No Action 25 Total Percent 32 67% 16 33% The Traffic Division staff proposal is in accordance with the balloting results in recommending Option 1. The proposed locations for the speed hwnps and lane divider have been marked on the street. The proposed package should be effective in reducing speeds along SW 325th Pl and restrict vehicles from cutting across the intersection with 47 1 1, Ave SW. However, there may be some negative impacts to the neighborhood including inconvenience, noise, and a slight increase in emergency response time. These improvements would not be constructed until after the full width asphalt overlay of the street is completed. The overlay has not been scheduled, but is likely to be completed in the spring of 2019 with these improvements constructed soon after in the spring or early summer. cc: Project File Day File encl : Map of Option I 26 Green Gables NTS ’18 – SW 325 Pl (51 Pl SW to Hoyt Rd SW) – Option 1 Map Speed Humps Speed Hump Centerline Divider Curb 27 This page left blank intentionally. 28 COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 20, 2018 ITEM#: CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: ORDINANCE: COMPLETE STREETS POLICY REVISIONS POLICY QUESTION: Should the City Council approve the ordinance to update and strengthen the Complete Streets policy in FWRC 19.135.205? COMMITTEE: Land Use & Transportation Committee CATEGORY: D Consent D · City Council Business l:8J Ordinance D Resolution STAFF REPORT BY: Erik Preston, Senior Traffic Engineer Attachments: Staff Report Ordinance Options Considered: MEETING DATE: Nov. 5, 2018 D D Public Hearing Other DEPT: Public Works 1. Approve the Ordinance and forward to the November 20, 2018 City Council meeting for first reading. 2. Reject the Ordinance and provide direction to staff. MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: Option 1 DIRECTORAPPROVAL: ~~ io/1'1118 Initial/Date Initia I/Date COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: I move to forward the proposed ordinance to First Reading on November 20, 2018. Mark Koppang , Committee Chair Jesse Johnson, Committee Member Hoang Tran, Committee Member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION(S): FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE (NOVEMBER 20, 2018): "I move to forward approval of the proposed ordinance to the December 4, 2018 Council Meetingfor enactment." SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE (DECEMBER 4, 2018): "I move approval of the proposed ordinance. " (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: 0 APPROVED 0 DENIED 0 TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION 0 MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) REVISED-12/2017 29 COUNCIL BILL# First reading Enactment reading ORDINANCE# RESOLUTION# DATE: TO: VIA: FROM: SUBJECT: CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM November 5, 2018 Land Use & Transportation Committee Jim Ferrell Mayor ~/ E. J. Walsh, P .E., Director of Public Works l.;'/, V Erik Preston P .E ., Senior Traffic Engineer ~ Ordinance: Complete Streets Policy Revisions FINANCIAL IMPACTS: There are no direct financial impacts to City budgets from the policy revision. The policy revision may impact future projects, but each project budget will be impacted differently (if at all) and those impacts will be determined during the planning and scoping of each project. Funding requirements for operations and maintenance of infrastructure is reviewed and adjusted as required during the budget process. BACKGROUND: The City first created a Complete Streets Policy (FWRC 19.135.205) in 2012, adopted by Ordinance 12- 718. The purpose of the Complete Streets Policy is to assure that facilities will be provided for roadway users of all ages and abilities and that appropriate accommodations are made for bicyclists, pedestrians, transit users, motorists, passengers, and freight movement. The current policy allows exceptions to be granted relatively easily within the Public W arks Department with no public process or notice. Recently grant funding agencies have recognized that such policies are ineffective in creating the type of complete streets we desire, ones that are safe and accessible for all users, particularly non-motorized modes. Increasingly, grant funding agencies have begun to require that jurisdictions have stronger complete streets policies in place in order to receive grant funding from some funding sources for non-motorized improvement projects. Strengthening the City's Complete Streets Policy will allow the City to be more eligible to receive grant funds and therefore build more sidewalks, bike lanes, shoulder walkways and other non-motorized facilities currently listed on the TIP and CIP. The proposed policy update better defines the City's vision and intent for Complete Streets by showing a commitment in all project phases, including project selection and policy implementation. The proposal also creates well-defined, clear, and accountable exceptions that require high-level approval. Approval of this updated complete streets ordinance would allow the City to submit nomination forms to local non-profit organizations so they can nominate the City for a Complete Streets Award from the Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) before the December 14, 2018 cutoff. If approved by TIB, City staff would create a complete streets work plan with TIB in January/February 2019. Awards range between $100,000 and $1,000,000 and may be available as soon as March 2019. cc: Project File Day File 30 Ordinance No. 18-_____ Page 1 of 9 Rev 3/17 LU ORDINANCE NO. _________ AN ORDINANCE of the City of Federal Way, Washington, relating to Complete Streets policy revisions to build streets for all users and travel modes; amending FWRC 19.135.205. (Amending Ordinance No. 12-718) ______________________________________________________________________________ WHEREAS, the City recognizes the need to periodically modify Title 19 of the Federal Way Revised Code (“FWRC”), “Zoning and Development Code,” in order to conform to state and federal law, codify administrative practices, clarify and update zoning regulations as deemed necessary, and improve the efficiency of the regulations and the development review process; and WHEREAS, this ordinance, containing amendments to development regulations and the text of Title 19 FWRC, has complied with Process VI review, Chapter 19.80 FWRC, pursuant to Chapter 19.35 FWRC; and WHEREAS, it is in the public interest for the City Council to adopt a revised Complete Streets policy which provides stronger development regulations for the accommodation of pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users of all ages and abilities, as well as motorists, passengers, and freight within the City of Federal Way; and WHEREAS, complete streets are designed to provide safe access to users of all ages and abilities, including pedestrians, bicyclists, transit users, motorists, passengers, and freight; and WHEREAS, the goal of the complete streets program is to: (1) promote the health and fitness of the Federal Way community by encouraging walking, cycling, and the use of public transit; (2) improve safety by scoping, planning, and designing arterials to include features such as wider sidewalks, dedicated multi-use pathways, dedicated bicycle facilities, medians, and Revised version provided at the meeting on 11/5/2018 Ordinance No. 18-_____ Page 2 of 9 Rev 3/17 LU streetscape features; and (3) protect the environment and reduce congestion by providing safe alternatives to single occupancy driving; and WHEREAS, walking and cycling enhances physical and mental health through physical activity, helps reduce obesity, and helps to reduce air pollution; and WHEREAS, Federal Way’s Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element goals include providing a connected system of pedestrian and bicycle facilities that are integrated into a coordinated regional network as well as providing for an enhanced high capacity transit system; and WHEREAS, Federal Way’s Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element policies support increased access to non-motorized and alternative modes of transportation and emphasize transportation safety and efficiency; and WHEREAS, an Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (“DNS”) was properly issued for the Proposal on September 7, 2018, and no comments or appeals were received and the DNS was finalized on October 12, 2018; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission properly conducted a duly noticed public hearing on these code amendments on October 24, 2018; and WHEREAS, due to absences of three of the seven Planning Commissioners, the four Planning Commissioners in attendance voted three to one in favor of recommending adoption of the code amendments; and WHEREAS, FWRC 19.80.240(1)(a) requires a majority vote of the entire membership of the Planning Commission to recommend that the City Council adopt the code amendments; and WHEREAS, a majority of the entire membership of the Planning Commission did not recommend that the City Council should adopt the code amendments; and Ordinance No. 18-_____ Page 3 of 9 Rev 3/17 LU WHEREAS, pursuant to FWRC 19.80.240(1)(c), the code amendments were sent to the Land Use & Transportation Committee of the Federal Way City Council without a Planning Commission recommendation; and WHEREAS, the Land Use & Transportation Committee of the Federal Way City Council considered these code amendments on November 5, 2018, and recommended adoption of the text amendments. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Findings. The City Council of the City of Federal Way makes the following findings with respect to the proposed amendments. (a) These code amendments are in the best interest of the residents of the City and will benefit the City as a whole by reinforcing the city’s commitment to ensuring infrastructure improvements are made with the consideration for safe and convenient travel for all modes of transportation.. (b) These code amendments comply with Chapter 36.70A RCW, Growth Management. (c) These code amendments are consistent with the intent and purpose of Title 19 FWRC and will implement and are consistent with the applicable provisions of the Federal Way Comprehensive Plan. (d) These code amendments bear a substantial relationship to, and will protect and not adversely affect, the public health, safety, and welfare. (e) These code amendments have followed the proper procedure required under the FWRC. Ordinance No. 18-_____ Page 4 of 9 Rev 3/17 LU Section 2. Conclusions. Pursuant to Chapter 19.80 FWRC and Chapter 19.35 FWRC, and based upon the recitals and the findings set forth in Section 1, the Federal Way City Council makes the following Conclusions of Law with respect to the decisional criteria necessary for the adoption of the proposed amendments: (a) The proposed FWRC amendments are consistent with, and substantially implement, the following Federal Way Comprehensive Plan goals and policies: TP1.1 Reduce reliance on drive alone trips by prioritizing and implementing supportive local-level transit, high-occupancy vehicle (HOV), and non-motorized improvements. TP1.5 Enhance mobility using the existing footprint of the roadway and technological advancements. When widening roadways, impacts to non-motorized users and transit vehicles and passengers should be minimized. TP1.10 Coordinate with transit agencies to provide convenient non-motorized access to transit facilities. TP2.3 Prioritize transportation projects considering concurrency, safety, multimodal enhancements, environmental impacts, and cost effectiveness. TP2.4 Assure cost-effective maintenance of transportation facilities under the City’s jurisdiction, including non-motorized facilities. TP3.8 Encourage non-motorized improvements that minimize the need for residents to use motorized modes by extending the existing non-motorized system and providing: 1. Access to activity centers and schools; 2. Linkage to transit, park & ride lots, and school bus networks; 3. Completion of planned pedestrian/jogging or bicycle trails; 4. Designating a network of streets that can safely and efficiently accommodate bicycles; and 5. Extend sidewalks to all streets. TP3.10 Provide a one-mile grid of bicycle facilities connecting major activity centers, recreational facilities, and schools. TP3.11 Incorporate pedestrian and bicycle features as design elements in the City Center as reflected in the Federal Way Comprehensive Plan Vision and City Center Street Design Guidelines. Ordinance No. 18-_____ Page 5 of 9 Rev 3/17 LU TP3.12 Include sufficient area in rights-of-way for bike lanes, sidewalks, and landscaped medians to provide separation from motorized traffic. Use landscaped medians to separate opposing traffic when safety and aesthetic purposes dictate the need. TP3.17 Coordinate development of the non-motorized system with surrounding jurisdictions and regional system extensions. TP4.4 Protect existing and acquire future right-of-way consistent with functional classification cross-section (transit, rail, bike, and pedestrian) needs. TP4.7 Enhance the viability of regional and local transit service by establishing design standards for streets that move transit, pedestrian, and cyclists in the City Center. TP5.8 Encourage the provision of a robust transportation alternative rich environment so that all members of the community, including those with transportation disadvantages, have viable travel options or alternatives. (b) The proposed FWRC amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, and welfare because it ensures that transportation improvements consider the safety and mobility of all modes of travel, and the varying abilities of citizens to move throughout the community safely and easily on foot and bicycle. (c) The proposed amendment is in the best interest of the public and the residents of the City of Federal Way because complete streets are focused on the safe and convenient movement of people using all modes of travel. Complete streets also support economic development as access to commercial areas and between neighborhoods and commercial areas is enhanced with greater emphasis on connectivity. Livability is improved as it becomes easier to move about the community. Section 3. FWRC 19.135.205 is hereby amended to read as follows: Ordinance No. 18-_____ Page 6 of 9 Rev 3/17 LU 19.135.205 Complete Streets. (1) Complete Streets Policy. The city of Federal Way will plan for, design, and construct all new and retrofitted transportation projects to provide reasonable and appropriate accommodation for pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit passengers users of all ages and abilities, as well as trucks, buses, and automobiles motorists, passengers, emergency responders, and freight, with a goal of street connectivity that creates a comprehensive, integrated, connected network for all modes because all users of the network are legitimate and equally deserving of safe facilities. (2) “Complete Street” means a road that is designed to be safe and accessible for motorists, bicyclists, school and public transit users, freight, emergency responders, and pedestrians of all ages and abilities. The complete street policy focuses not just on changing individual roads, but on changing the decision-making process so that all users are routinely considered during the scoping, planning, design, construction, operation, and maintenance of all roadways. “Complete streets infrastructure” means design features that contribute to a safe, convenient, or comfortable travel experience for users, including but not limited to features such as: sidewalks; shared use paths; bicycle lanes; automobile lanes; paved shoulders; street trees and landscaping; planter strips; curbs; accessible curb ramps; bulb outs; crosswalks; refuge islands; pedestrian and traffic signals, including countdown and accessible signals; signage; street furniture; bicycle parking facilities; mini-roundabouts; traffic calming devices such as speed humps and traffic circles, and surface treatments such as paving blocks and textured pavement; narrow vehicle lanes; and raised medians. (3) The City of Federal Way shall incorporate complete streets infrastructure into the Transportation Element of the City’s Comprehensive Plan, ADA Transition Plan, Public Works Development Standards, Parks and Recreational Master Plan, and all other plans, manuals, rules, regulations, and programs as feasible and appropriate. (4) The City of Federal Way will foster partnerships with all Washington State transportation funding agencies including the Washington State Department of Transportation, the Transportation Improvement Board, the Federal Highway Administration, King County, Federal Way School District, citizens, businesses, interest groups, neighborhoods, and any funding agency to implement Federal Way’s complete streets policy. Ordinance No. 18-_____ Page 7 of 9 Rev 3/17 LU (5) The Public Works Director, or their designee, shall modify, develop, and adopt policies, design criteria, standards, and guidelines based upon recognized best practices in street design, construction, and operations, including but not limited to the latest editions of the American Association of State Transportation Officials and Institute of Transportation Engineers guidelines and standards, while reflecting the context and character of the surrounding built and natural environment and enhancing the appearance of such. (26) Exceptions. Facilities for bicyclists, pedestrians, transit users and/or persons of all ages and abilities are not required to be provided in new construction, retrofit, or reconstruction projects, except in any of the following extraordinary circumstances: (a) Where establishment would be contrary to public safety The project involves a roadway on which non-motorized use is prohibited by law. In this case an effort shall be made to accommodate pedestrians and bicyclists elsewhere, including on roadways that cross or otherwise intersect with the affected roadway; or (b) Where there is no identified current or long-term need, as established in city plans and future travel demand models; or (c) Where inclusion in a small project would create a very short section of improvements with problematic transitions on either end, or that are unlikely to be followed by similar improvements at either end, resulting in little progress on implementing multi-modal networks as set forth in the transportation chapter of the Federal Way Comprehensive Plan; Where the cost of accommodation is excessively disproportionate to the need or probable use; and/or (d) Where a modification, deferment, or waiver to the requirements of this chapter has been granted by the public works director per FWRC 19.135.070. (d) Where routine maintenance and repair of the transportation network is performed that does not change the roadway geometry or operations, such as mowing, sweeping, spot repair, surface treatments, re-paving, pavement overlay, or interim measures; or Ordinance No. 18-_____ Page 8 of 9 Rev 3/17 LU (e) Where emergency repairs require an immediate, rapid response; however, temporary accommodations for all modes should still be made. Depending on the severity of the repairs, opportunities to improve multimodal access should still be made; or (f) Where a reasonable and equivalent project along the same corridor is already programmed to provide facilities exempted from the project at hand. Any exception to this policy for public projects requires documentation and supporting data to be approved by the City Council upon review and recommendation from the Land Use and Transportation Committee. Supporting documents and data for all requested exemptions shall be made publicly available. Exceptions to this policy, as outlined above, may be granted by the Public Works Director for private development projects in response to a modification, deferment, or waiver request under FWRC 19.135.070. Supporting documents and data for all such granted exceptions shall be made publicly available with ability for public comment. Section 4._Severability. The provisions of this ordinance are declared separate and severable. The invalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, section, or portion of this ordinance, or the invalidity of the application thereof to any person or circumstance, shall not affect the validity of the remainder of the ordinance, or the validity of its application to any other persons or circumstances. Section_5._Corrections. The City Clerk and the codifiers of this ordinance are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance including, but not limited to, the correction of scrivener/clerical errors, references, ordinance numbering, section/subsection numbers and any references thereto. Section 6. Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority and prior to the effective date of this ordinance is hereby ratified and affirmed. Ordinance No. 18-_____ Page 9 of 9 Rev 3/17 LU Section 7. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective five (5) days after passage and publication as provided by law. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Federal Way this _________ day of ___________________, 20___. CITY OF FEDERAL WAY: ________________________________ JIM FERRELL, MAYOR ATTEST: ________________________________________ STEPHANIE COURTNEY, CMC, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: __________________________________________ J. RYAN CALL, CITY ATTORNEY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO.: ORDINANCE NO. ---- AN ORDINANCE of the City of Federal Way, Washington, relating to Complete Streets policy revisions to build streets for all users and travel modes; amending FWRC 19.135.205; (Amending Ordinance No.12-718) WHEREAS, the City recognizes the need to periodically modify Title 19 of the Federal Way Revised Code ("FWRC"), "Zoning and Development Code," in order to conform to state and federal law, codify administrative practices, clarify and update zoning regulations as deemed necessary, and improve the efficiency of the regulations and the development review process; and WHEREAS, this ordinance, containing amendments to development regulations and the text of Title 19 FWRC, has complied with Process VI review, Chapter 19.80 FWRC, pursuant to Chapter 19.35 FWRC; and WHEREAS, it is in the public interest for the City Council to adopt a revised Complete Streets policy which provides stronger development regulations for the accommodation of pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users of all ages and abilities, as well as motorists, passengers, and freight within the City of Federal Way; and WHEREAS, complete streets are designed to provide safe access to users of all ages and abilities, including pedestrians, bicyclists, transit users, motorists, passengers, and freight; and WHEREAS, the goal of the complete streets program is to: (1) promote the health and fitness of the Federal Way community by encouraging walking, cycling, and the use of public transit; (2) improve safety by scoping, planning, and designing arterials to include features such as wider sidewalks, dedicated multi-use pathways, dedicated bicycle facilities, medians, and Ordinance No. 18-__ 31 Page 1 o/9 Rev 3/17 LU streetscape features; and (3) protect the environment and reduce congestion by providing safe alternatives to single occupancy driving; and WHEREAS, walking and cycling enhances physical and mental health through physical activity, helps reduce obesity, and helps to reduce air pollution; and WHEREAS, Federal Way's Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element goals include providing a connected system of pedestrian and bicycle facilities that are integrated into a coordinated regional network as well as providing for an enhanced high capacity transit system; and WHEREAS, Federal Way's Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element policies support increased access to non-motorized and alternative modes of transportation and emphasize transportation safety and efficiency; and WHEREAS, an Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance ("DNS") was properly issued for the Proposal on September 7, 2018, and no comments or appeals were received and the DNS was finalized on October 12, 2018; and. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission properly conducted a duly noticed public hearing on these code amendments on October 24, 2018, and forwarded a recommendation of approval to the City Council; and WHEREAS, the Land Use & Transportation Committee of the Federal Way City Council considered these code amendments on November 5, 2018, and recommended adoption of the text amendments as recommended by the Planning Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Ordinance No. 18-__ 32 Page 2 of9 Rev 3/17 LU Secti on l. Findi ngs . The City Council of the City of Federal Way makes the following findings with respect to the proposed amendments. (a) These code amendments are in the best interest of the residents of the City and will benefit the City as a whole by reinforcing the city's commitment to ensuring infrastructure improvements are made with the consideration for safe and convenient travel for all modes of transportation .. (b) These code amendments comply with Chapter 36.70A RCW, Growth Management. ( c) These code amendments are consistent with the intent and purpose of Title 19 FWRC and will implement and are consistent with the applicable provisions of the Federal Way Comprehensive Plan. ( d) These code amendments bear a substantial relationship to, and will protect and not adversely affect, the public health, safety, and welfare. (e) These code amendments have followed the proper procedure required under the FWRC. Section 2. Conclusions. Pursuant to Chapter 19.80 FWRC and Chapter 19.35 FWRC, and based upon the recitals and the findings set forth in Section 1, the Federal Way City Council makes the following Conclusions of Law with respect to the decisional criteria necessary for the adoption of the proposed amendments: (a) The proposed FWRC amendments are consistent with, and substantially implement, the following Federal Way Comprehensive Plan goals and policies: TPl.1 Reduce reliance on drive alone trips by prioritizing and implementing supportive local-level transit, high-occupancy vehicle (HOV), and non-motorized improvements. Ordinance No. 18-__ 33 Page 3 o/9 Rev3/17 LU TPl.5 Enhance mobility using the existing footprint of the roadway and technological advancements. When widening roadways, impacts to non-motorized users and transit vehicles and passengers should be minimized. TPl.10 Coordinate with transit agencies to provide convenient non-motorized access to transit facilities. TP2.3 Prioritize transportation projects considering concurrency, safety, multimodal enhancements, environmental impacts, and cost effectiveness. TP2.4 Assure cost-effective maintenance of transportation facilities under the City's jurisdiction, including non-motorized facilities. TP3.8 Encourage non-motorized improvements that mm1m1ze the need for residents to use motorized modes by extending the existing non-motorized system and providing: 1. Access to activity centers and schools; 2. Linkage to transit, park & ride lots, and school bus networks; 3. Completion of planned pedestrian/jogging or bicycle trails; 4. Designating a network of streets that can safely and efficiently accommodate bicycles; and 5. Extend sidewalks to all streets. TP3.10 Provide a one-mile grid of bicycle facilities connecting major activity centers, recreational facilities, and schools. TP3.11 Incorporate pedestrian and bicycle features as design elements in the City Center as reflected in the Federal Way Comprehensive Plan Vision and City Center ·street Design Guidelines. TP3.12 Include sufficient area in rights-of-way for bike lanes, sidewalks, and landscaped medians to provide separation from motorized traffic. Use landscaped medians to separate opposing traffic when safety and aesthetic purposes dictate the need. TP3.17 Coordinate development of the non-motorized system with surrounding jurisdictions and regional system extensions. TP4.4 Protect existing and acquire future right-of-way consistent with functional classification cross-section (transit, rail, bike, and pedestrian) needs. TP4. 7 Enhance the viability of regional and local transit service by establishing design standards for streets that move transit, pedestrian, and cyclists in the City Center. Ordinance No. 18- 34 Page 4 of9 Rev 3/17 LU TP5.8 Encourage the prov1s10n of a robust transportation alternative rich environment so that all members of the community, including those with transportation disadvantages, have viable travel options or alternatives. (b) The proposed FWRC amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, and welfare because it ensures that transportation improvements consider the safety and mobility of all modes of travel, and the varying abilities of citizens to move throughout the community safely and easily on foot and bicycle. (c) The proposed amendment is in the best interest of the public and the residents of the City of Federal Way because complete streets are focused on the safe and convenient movement of people using all . modes of travel. Complete streets also support economic development as access to commercial areas and between neighborhoods and commercial areas is enhanced with greater emphasis on connectivity. Livability is improved as it becomes easier to move about the community. Section 3. FWRC 19.135.205 is hereby amended to read as follows: 19.135.205 Complete Streets. (1) Complete Streets Policy. The city of Federal Way will plan for, design, and construct all new and retrofitted transportation projects to provide reasonable and appropriate accommodation for pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit passengers users of all ages and abilities, as well as trucks, buses, and automobiles motorists, passengers. emergency responders. and freight, with a goal of street connectivity that creates a comprehensive, integrated, connected network for all modes because all users of the network are legitimate and eg ually deserving of safe facilities. (2) ' Complete Street" means a road that is designed to be safe and accessible for motorists, bicyclists. school and public transit users, freight, emergency responders, and pedestrians of all ages and abilities. The complete street policy focuses not just on changing individual roads, but on changing the decision-making proce ss so that all users are routinely considered during the scoping, planning, design, construction, operation, and maintenance of all roadways. Ordinance No. 18-__ 35 Page 5 of9 Rev 3/17 LU "Complete streets infrastructure" means design features that contribute to a safe, convenient, or comfortable travel experience for users, including but not limited to featu.res such as: sidewalks; shared use paths; bicycle lanes; automobile lanes; paved shoulders; street trees and landscaping; planter trips; curbs; accessible curb ramps; bulb outs; crosswalks; refuge islands; pedestrian and traffic signals. including countdown and accessible signals; signage; street furniture; bicycle parking facilities; mini-roundabouts; traffic calming devices such as speed humps and traffic circles, and surface treatments such as paving blocks and textured pavement; narrow vehicle lanes; and raised medians. (3) The City of Federal Way shall incorporate complete streets infrastructure into the Transportation Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan, ADA Transition Plan. J>ublic Works Development Standards, Parks and Recreational Master Plan. and all other plans. manuals. rules, regulations. and programs as feasible and appropriate. (4) The City of Federal Way will foster partnerships with all Washington State transportation funding agencies including the Washington State Department of Transportation. the Transportation Improvement Board. the Federal Highway Administration. King County, Federal Way School District. citizens, businesses, interest groups, neighborhoods, and any funding agency to implement Federal Way's complete streets policy. (5) The Public Works Director, or their designee, shall modify, develop, and adopt policies, design criteria. standards, and guidelines based upon recognized best practices in street design, construction, and operations, including but not limited to the latest editions of the American Association of State Transportation Officials and Institute of Transportation Engineers guidelines and standards. while reflecting the context and character of the surrounding built and natural environment and enhancing the appearance of such. (iQ) Exceptions. Facilities for bicyclists, pedestrians, transit users and/or persons of all ages and abilities are net required to be provided in new construction, retrofit, or reconstruction projects, except in any of the following extraordinary circumstances: (a) \Vhere establishment would be contrary to public safety The project involves a roadway on which non-motorized use is prohibited by law. ln this case an effort shall be made to Ordinance No. 18- 36 Page 6 of9 Rev 3/17 LU accommodate pedestrians and bicyclists elsewhere. including on roadways that cross or otherwise intersect with the affected roadway; or (b) Where there is no identified current or long7term need, as establishes i:a eity plans and future travel d-emand models; or (c) \I/here i-aclusion in a small projeot would create a ·,ery short section of improvements 1Nith problematic transitioRs on either end, or that are unlikely to be follmved by simila:r improvements at either end resulting in little progress on implementing multi modal eetworks as set forth in the transportation chapter of the Federal Way Comprehensive Plan; Where the cost of accommodation is excessively disproportionate to the need or probable use;aad,Lor (d) V/here a modifieation, de!erment, or ·.vaiver to the requiremeats of this ehapter has heen granted hy the public works director per FWRC 19.135.070. (d) Where routine maintenance and repair of the transportation network is performed that does not change the roadway geometry or operations. such as mowing, sweeping, spot repair. surface treatments. re-paving. pavement overlay, or interim measures; or (e) Where emergency repairs require an immediate, rapid response; however, temporary accommodations for all modes should still be made. Depending on the severity of the repairs. opportunities to improve multimodal access should still be made; or (f) Where a reasonable and equivalent project a long the same corridor is already programmed to provide facilities ex.empted from the project at hand. Any exception to this policy for public pro·jects requires documentation and supporting data to be approved by the City Council upon review and recommendation from the Land Use and Transportation Committee. Supporting documents and data for all requested exemptions shall be made publicly available. Exceptions to this policy. as outlined above, may be granted by the Public Works Director for private development projects in response to a modification. deferment. Ordinance No. 18-__ 37 Page 7of9 Rev3/17 LU or waiver request w1der FWRC 19.135.070. Supporting documents and data for all such granted exceptions shall be made publicly availab le with ability for public comment. Section 4. Severability. The provisions of this ordinance are declared separate and severable. The invalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, section, or portion of this ordinance, or the invalidity of the application thereof to any person or circumstance, shall not affect the validity of the remainder of the ordinance, or the validity of its application to any other persons or circumstances. Section 5. Corrections. The City Clerk and the codifiers of this ordinance are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance including, but not limited to, the correction of scrivener/clerical errors, references, ordinance numbering, section/subsection numbers and any references thereto. Section 6. Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority and prior to the effective date of this ordinance is hereby ratified and affirmed. Section 7. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective five (5) days after passage and publication as provided by law. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Federal Way this ____ day of 20 --------~ CITY OF FEDERAL WAY: JIM FERRELL, MAYOR ATTEST: STEPHANIE COURTNEY, CMC, CITY CLERK Ordinance No. 18- 38 Page8of9 Rev 3/17 LU APPROVED AS TO FORM: J. RYAN CALL, CITY ATTORNEY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE:- ORDINANCE NO.: Ordinance No. 18-__ 39 Page 9of9 Rev3/I7 LU This page left blank intentionally. 40 COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 20, 2018 ITEM#: CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: SOLID WASTE COLLECTION SERVICES PROCUREMENT-AUTHORIZATION FOR PROPOSALS POLICY QUESTION: Should the City Council authorize staff to request proposals for solid waste collection services via a competitive procurement process? COMMITTEE: Land Use & Transportation CATEGORY: ISi Consent D City Council Business D Ordinance D Resolution STAFF REPORT BY: Rob Van Orsow, Solid Waste & Recy clin Attachments: 1. Memorandum to Land Use & Transportation Committee Options Considered: 1. Authorize soliciting Proposals. 2. Do not authorize soliciting Proposals and provide direction to staff. MEETING DATE: Nov. 5, 2018 D D Public Hearing Other DEPT: Public Works MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: The Mayor recommends forwarding Option 1 to the November 20, 2018 City Council Consent Agenda for approval. Initial/Date COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: I move to forward Option I to the November 20, 2018 consent agenda for approval. Mark Koppang, Committee Chair Jesse Johnson , Committee Member Hoang Tran, Committee Member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: ""[ move approval of the authorization of staff to request Proposals for Solid Waste and Recycling Collection Services. " (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: D APPROVED D DENIED D TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION 0 MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) REVlSED-12/2017 41 COUNCIL BILL# First reading Enactment reading ORDINANCE# RESOLUTION# CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM DATE: November 5, 2018 TO: Land Use & Transportation Committee VIA: Jim Ferrell, Mayor tu{, dwaJsh , P .E., Director of Public Works FROM: Rob Van Orsow, Solid Waste & Recycling Coordinat~U-- SUBJECT: Solid Waste Collection Services Procurement-Authorization for Proposals FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The City of Federal Way is conducting a Solid Waste Collection Services Contract procurement process. A Professional Services contract is in place for consultant assistance with this process (funded per the adopted 2018 budget) and there are no other immediate financial impacts. BACKGROUND: The City of Federal Way City Council previously adopted Council Resolution 18-740 that approves completing a competitive Request for Proposals (RFP) process to procure a new Contractor to provide comprehensive Solid Waste Collection services under City administration. As such, this request is to authorize: cc : 1. Request for Proposals for Solid Waste Collection Services Project File Day File 42 COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 20, 2018 ITEM#: CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: 2019/2020 SURFACE WATER MAINTENANCE AND SERVICES BID AWARD POLICY QUESTION: Should City Council authorize SWM staff to award the 2019/2020 Surface Water Maintenance and Services Contract to Action Services Corporation, the lowest responsive responsible bidder, in the amount of $218,592 .00? COMMITTEE: Land Use and Transportation Committee CATEGORY: ~ Consent D City Council Business D Ordinance D Resolution STAFF REPORT BY: Theresa Thurlow, P.E., Surface Water Manager MEETING DATE: November 5, 2018 D D Public Hearing Other DEPT: Public Works Attachments: Land Use and Transportation Committee memorandum dated November 5 , 2018 Options Considered: 1. Authorize staff to award the 2019/2020 Surface Water Maintenance and Services Contract to Action Services Corporation, the lowest responsive, responsible bidder, in the amount of $218,592.00. 2. Do not authorize staff to proceed and p rovide direct_io_n_to_st_a _ff_. _______________ _ MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: The Mayor recommends forwarding Optionl to the November 20, 2018 Council Consent Agenda for approval. MAYOR APPROVAL: ~ h?·:~:ig-'DlRECTORAPPROVAL: ¥,Y /O)'Zbl ,g ~ Counci l Initial/Date · Initial/Date ,..-:;~~c=-o-mm--"i,---tte::=.e --=-~- Initial/Date COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: I move. to forward Option 1 to the Novemb er 20, 2018 consent agenda for approval. Ma rk Koppang Committee C hair J esse Johnson Committee Member Hoang Tran, Committee M ember PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "I move to authorize SWM staff to award th e 2019/2020 Surfac e Wat er Maintenance and Service s Contract to Action Services Corporation, the lowest responsive, responsible bidder in the amount of$218,592.00 ." (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: 0 APPROVED D DENIED 0 TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION 0 MOVED TO SECOND READING (o rdi nances only) REVISED -12/201 7 43 COUNCIL BILL# First reading Enactment reading ORDINANCE# RESOLUTION# CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM DATE: November 5, 2018 TO: Land Use & Transportation Committee VIA: .Jim 9rrell, Mayor FROM· u//>r!rwalsh P.E., Public Works Director · There a T hurl w , P.E. Surface Water Manager Y-, SUBJECT: 2019/2020 Surface Water Maintenance and Services Bid Award FINANCIAL IMPACTS: This project is included within the proposed 2019/2020 budget under the Surface Water Management (SWM) 401 (operations) fund. In accordance with the proposed budget this project is funded by the SWM funds in the amount of$231,513.00. This is an on-going maintenance service vactoring the City's catch basins and manholes in accordance the NPDES Phase II Permit. These services have had an escalating financial impact as a result of changing regulatory requirements and increases in the City's drainage infrastructure. This contract is for calendar year 2019 with an option of extension into 2020. BACKGROUND: Three bids were received and opened on October 17, 2018 for the 2019/2020 SWM Maintenance and Services Contract. The Bid Tabulation Summary is as follows: Company Bravo Environmental, LLC Action Services Corporation Best Parking Lot Cleaning, LLC Bid Amount $234,979.32 $218,592.00 $224,734.49 Action Services has been determined to be the lowest responsive, responsible bidder with a bid amount of $218,592.00. The amount available in the 2019 budget for this contract is $231,513.00. cc: Project File 44 COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 20, 2018 ITEM#: ~=====- CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: DRAFT AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA) TRANSITION PLAN -ST AGE 1 POLICY QUESTION: Should council authorize staff to take the Draft ADA Transition Plan -Stage 1 out for public outreach and review and return to council to share public outreach results and to complete final Plan adoption? COMMITTEE: Land Use and Transportation Committee CATEGORY: [gJ Consent D City Council Business Attachments: StaffReport D Ordinance D Resolution MEETING DATE: November 5, 2018 D D Public Hearing Other DEPT: Public Works Draft Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Transition Plan -Stage 1 -City Center Options Considered: 1. Authorize staff to take the Draft ADA Transition Plan -Stage 1 out for public outreach and review and return to council to share public outreach results and to complete final Plan adoption. 2. Do not authorize staff to take the Draft ADA Transition Plan -Stage 1 out for public outreach and review and provide direction to staff. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: I move to forward Option I to the November 20, 2018 consent agenda for approval. Mark Koppang, Committee Chair Jesse Johnson, Committee Member Hoang Tran, Committee Member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "/ move to authorize staff to take the Draft ADA Transition Plan -Stage I out for public outreach and review and return to Council to share public outreach results and to complete final plan adoption. " (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFF ICE) COUNCIL ACTlON: D APPROVED D DENIED D TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTlON 0 MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) REVISED-12/2017 45 COUNCIL BILL # First reading Ena~tment reading ORDINANCE# RESOLUTlON # CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM DATE: November 5, 2018 TO: Land Use & Transportation Committee VIA: Jim Ferrell Mayor FROM· ~Walsh, P.E., Public Works Director • 1~esiree S. Wi.ttlder , P.E., Deputy Public Works Director SUBJECT: Draft Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Transition Plan -Stage 1 FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The development of this "Draft Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Transition Plan -Stage 1" has been accomplished through existing staff resources and will be finalized with existing staff resources. The larger financial impact of completing the physical infrastructure upgrades is currently not fully funded and is currently implemented through the course of other capital improvement projects. Additional funding for stand-alone infrastructure upgrades will need to be identified in future budget discussions. BACKGROUND: The landmark Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 provides comprehensive civil rights protections to qualified individuals with disabilities in the areas of employment, public accommodations, state and local government services, and telecommunications. A primary goal of the ADA is the equal participation of individuals with disabilities in the mainstream of American society. The ADA requires that all governmental agencies complete a Transition Plan for the construction of accessible routes in streets, municipally owned parking lots, and public facilities. A summary of requirements for the ADA Transition Plan are as follows: 1) Policies, procedures, and design standards to ensure new construction and modifications meet current ADA standards. 2) Detailed inventory and evaluation of existing pedestrian pathways. 3) Detailed outline of the process and schedule for removing these barriers to make public pathways accessible; 4) Establishment of a grievance process that may be used by anyone who wishes to file a complaint alleging discrimination on the basis of disability. 5) Identification of an ADA Coordinator. 6) A robust public outreach process for the development of the ADA Transition Plan. The detailed evaluation of the city's existing pedestrian facilities requires walking and measuring every stretch of pathway including sidewalks, driveways, and curb ramps. This is a tremendous undertaking and has been accomplished through existing and temporary staff resources. Given the immensity of a city- wide evaluation, staff focused on one geographical location with the highest density of pedestrians -the city center. This is one stage of a multiple stage process that will eventually have all public facilities evaluated. 46 November 5, 2018 Land Use and Transportation Committee Draft ADA Transition Plan -Stage l Page 2 Summary -City Center Findin-gs In City Center there are over $4.0 Million of non-ADA compliant pedestrian facilities. However, it is recommended that approximately $1.0 Million of these non-compliant facilities be classified as a barrier and require replacement. Strategy for implementing replacements include replacement of facilities as part of adjacent pavement overlay and/or capital improvement projects; requirement for development to upgrade as part of development; and establishing funding for stand-alone spot improvement projects. Next Ste ps Staff will be taking the "Draft ADA Transition Plan -Stage 1" through a robust public outreach process that will include the following: 1) Public review copies of the draft plan will be made available in public libraries, at City Hall, and on the City's web site. Advertisement of it's availability will be made through legal notices and social media. 2) Alternative forms of this document will be made available upon request. 3) Specific outreach to groups representing disabled populations will be made requesting review and feedback on the Draft Plan and recommended next steps. Staff envisions this to include senior housing facilities as well. 4) Staff with work with Public Transit Agencies regarding specific groups, citizens, or riders that may have an interest in the City's Transition Plan and outreach.to them accordingly. 5) If there is enough interest, staff will host an open house at the community center to present the Draft Plan. Feedback from the public outreach process will help to finalize the Plan. Staff proposes to bring the final plan including results of the public outreach process to council for final consideration and adoption in June 2019. 47 I_. ,J .. ' -' .. .. .. . . ' . ~ I• ' . I .. ,• -t I I • • . _ ... 48 DRAFT Table of Contents AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT TRANSITION PLAN STAGE 1-CITY CENTER ........................... 0 City of Federal Way ..................................................................................................................... O List of Abbreviations/Acronyms/Symbols ...................................................................................... 2 1.0 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 3 2.0 Overview .............................................................................................................................. 3 3.0 Policies and Procedures ............................................................................................................ 4 3.1 City of Federal Way Policies and Procedures for Creating Barrier-Free Transportation Systems: New Construction and Alterations ....................................................................... 4 3.2 Pedestrian Path Evaluation Procedures: ............................................................................ 6 3.2.1 Preliminary Evaluation -Curb Ramps Only ........................................................................... 6 3.2.2 Detailed Evaluation ................................................................................................................ 7 4.0 Sidewalk, Curb Ramp, Driveway and Accessible Pedestrian Signal Inventory ..................... 11 4.1 Barrier Prioritization .......................................................................................................... 12 4.2 Accessibility Index Score ....................................................................................................... 12 4.3 Geographic Prioritization Methodology ................................................................................. 14 4.4 Geographical Location Consideration ................................................................................ 15 5.0 Highest Priority Evaluation Criteria ......................................................................................... 15 6.0 Strategies for Funding Barrier Removal.. ................................................................................ 18 7.0 Findings for City Center ........................................................................................................... 18 7.1 Sidewalk ............................................................................................................................. 20 7.2 Curb Ramps ........................................................................................................................ 24 7.3 Driveway ............................................................................................................................ 27 7.4 Pedestrian Signals .............................................................................................................. 31 7.5 Transition Plan Cost and Schedule ..................................................................................... 33 8.0 Recommendations .................................................................................................................. 36 Appendix A ................................................................................................................................................ 38 Page 11 49 DRAFT List of Abbreviations/ Acronyms/Symbols ADA APS BAA DWS GIS M/T/S MUTCD PAR PPB PCP City min. max. in. ft. " ' O/o Page I 2 Americans with Disabilities Act Accessible Pedestrian Signal Boarding and Alighting Detectable Warning System Geographic Information System Median/Traffic Island/Splitter Island Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices Pedestrian Access Route Pedestrian Push Button Pedestrian Circulation Paths City of Federal Way minimum maximum inch(es) feet inch(es) feet percent 50 DRAFT 1.0 Introduction The landmark Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 provides comprehensive civil rights protections to qualified individuals with disabilities in the areas of employment, public accommodations, state and local government services, and telecommunications. A primary goal of the ADA is the equal participation of individuals with disabilities in the "mainstream" of American society. Title II of the Act took effect on January 26, 1992 and covers programs, activities, and services of public entities, including City of Federal Way, Washington. Most requirements of Title II are based on Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in federally assisted programs and activities. The ADA extends Section 504's non-discrimination requirement to all activities of public entities, not only those that receive Federal financial assistance. Stage 1 of the City of Federal Way Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Transition Plan provides policies and practices for implementing physical pedestrian improvements within the public right-of-way of the City of Federal Way in the City Center. The goal is to optimize the pedestrian experience, to provide safe and usable pedestrian facilities for all pedestrians, and to assure compliance with all federal, state, and local regulations and standards. The ADA requires that all governmental agencies complete a Transition Plan for the construction of accessible routes in streets, municipally owned parking lots, and Public Facilities. The contents and requirements of ADA Transition Plans are described in the ADA Title II Technical Assistance Manual, Section II-8.3000. Future stages of the City's ADA Transition plan will cover: Stage 2 -Arterial Streets Stage 3 -City Properties (under ADAAG) Stage 4 -Collector Streets Stage 5 -Local Streets The stages were developed in order to have manageable amounts of work to complete and analyze. The order of the stages were determined to address the areas that serve the greatest number of people and that support access to mass transit. 2.0 Overview The City of Federal Way ADA Transition Plan contains the following: • Policies and Procedures • A list of physical barriers in the City that limit the accessibility of public pedestrian paths, including signalized pedestrian crossings to individuals with disabilities; • A detailed outline of the process to be implemented for removing these barriers to make public sidewalks accessible; • A schedule for taking the necessary steps to achieve compliance with Title II and identifies the interim steps that will be taken for the transition period; • The name of the official responsible for the Plan's implementation. Page I 3 51 DRAFT This ADA Transition Plan is the first published by City of Federal Way. It should be considered a first step of a larger process. City of Federal Way's approach is unique, in that this document does not attempt to inventory all ADA deficiencies city-wide. This document fully inventories selected geographic areas within the City such as the City Center. Taking an incremental approach better utilizes City of Federal Way's limited resources, balancing community needs with funding realities. The reduced scope of this first edition ADA Transition Plan will provide the City with valuable cost data that can be applied to other geographic areas within the City in future Plan updates, More accurate cost data will help to better fit size of projects to program budgets. The ADA requires that meaningful public participation be included as part of the ADA Transition Plan drafting and adoption process. Input from various stakeholders is currently being sought. Members of the public who have requested accommodations are being invited to review the draft of this plan, as well as other disabled individuals and their advocates. The draft of this plan will be provided in accessible formats upon request. In addition to the specific call for comment on this draft Transition Plan, the document will undergo public hearings that allow for public comment at City of Federal Way City Council meetings. There is much work to do to upgrade Federal Way's pedestrian facilities within its public rights of way, but the City of Federal Way is committed to making ours an accessible community. 3.0 Policies and Procedures A barrier-free transportation system requires policies and procedures that ensure that all departments and programs are striving to meet the goal of a transportation system that is free of barriers. Planning documents must provide clear policy direction for new development. Inspection practices must assure that sidewalk facilities have been constructed according to plan and meet applicable standards. The City has an interest in exercising particular diligence in regard to pedestrian facility development, regardless of whether pedestrian facilities have been constructed as part of a private development project or as part of a public works project. The cost associated with remediation of work that has been done incorrectly often far exceeds the original cost of the initial project. 3.1 City of Federal Way Policies and Procedures for Creatin& Barrier-Free Transportation Systems: New Construction and Alterations Title II of the ADA requires that new facilities be designed and constructed such that they are readily accessible to and usable by persons with disabilities. New construction projects address the construction of a new roadway or other transportation facility where none existed before. New construction is expected to meet the highest level of ADA accessibility unless it is structurally impracticable to achieve full compliance. Page I 4 52 DRAFT If full ADA compliance cannot be achieved in new construction, compliance is required to the extent structurally practicable. The United States Department of Justice (USDOJ), the primary enforcement agency for the ADA, has explicitly clarified in its guidance on the ADA regulations that structural impracticability is not to be applied to situations in which a facility is located in "hilly" terrain or on a plot of land upon which there are steep grades. In such circumstances, accessibility can be achieved without destroying the physical integrity of the structure, and is required in the construction of new facilities. The City of Federal way Development Standards demonstrate and take into account ADA requirements for new construction by providing compliant details for use in new developments or within public Rights of Way. In the City of Federal Way, the vast majority of construction projects are not classified as new construction under the ADA, but rather they are classified as alterations. An alteration is a project that occurs within an existing developed right-of-way. Alterations include reconstruction, major rehabilitation, widening, resurfacing ( e.g., asphalt overlays or mill and fill), signal installation and upgrades, and projects of similar scale and effect. An alteration project must be planned, designed, and constructed so that the required accessibility improvements occur at the same time as the alteration. Alterations to existing facilities are required to meet new construction standards to the maximum extent feasible. If full ADA compliance cannot be achieved in an alteration, compliance is required to the maximum extent feasible within the scope of the project. Examples of work that is not within the scope of a project include the need to acquire right of way when right of way is not being acquired elsewhere on the project; the need to relocate utilities when utilities are not being relocated elsewhere on the project; the need to vertically realign the roadway when the roadway is not being vertically realigned elsewhere on the project; etc. Federal Way will document instances in alteration projects where full compliance could not be achieved in a maximum extent feasible memorandum. The documentation of these instances will reveal the standard of care that guided engineering judgments. On January 23, 2008 the US Department of Transportation issued a memorandum titled Public Rights of Way Advisory. In this memorandum, USDOT requires local agencies receiving federal funds, such as Federal Way, to utilize the 2005 PROW AG for accessibility standards for all new construction and for all alteration projects. USDOT has provided subsequent clarification that "resurfacing is an alteration that triggers the requirement to add curb ramps if it involves work on a street or roadway spanning from one intersection to another, and includes overlays of additional material to the road surface, with or without milling," provided the overlay impacts an intersection or crosswalk. Minor patching, such as may occur to fill a pothole or adjust a utility lid is exempt. Page I 5 53 DRAFT Specific Federal Way Policies are as follows: 3.1.1 The City's Comprehensive Plan includes goals and policies that support development of an accessible transportation system (Chapter Three Transportation, page 66, Policy TP62); 3.1.2 Updates to the City Development Standards will include specific requirements to upgrade sidewalks and traffic signal crossings to meet current ADA guidelines; 3.1.3 Concurrent with street overlay work, every place where sidewalks intersect the project, the crossing will be brought up to current ADA guidelines, including compliant accessible routes, to the maximum extent feasible; 3.1.,4 Concurrent with all major capital improvement projects, sidewalks (including driveways and curb ramps within the project limits) will be brought up to current ADA guidelines, and accessible pedestrian signals (APS) shall be installed at all signalized pedestrian crossings; 3.1.5 Roadway design will meet current ADA guidelines to the maximum extent feasible to assure that new ramps are properly located, designed, and constructed correctly; 3 .1.6 Inspection practices will assure that sidewalk facilities have been constructed according to plan and meet applicable guidelines; 3 .1. 7 Citizen requests will be well-documented and follow-through will be tracked. 3.1.8 The Public Works Director/Deputy Director will serve as the Sidewalk Transition Plan Manager for the Public Works Department for work within public right-of-way. Federal Way is responsible for transitioning all of the City pedestrian facilities within public rights-of-way and public facilities to be compliant with the current ADA guidelines. Upgrading the entire network is an immense undertaking and must be done in phases that are dependent on available resources. 3.2 Pedestrian Path Evaluation Procedures: Beginning in 2017, the City is updating the sidewalk and curb ramp inventory using the following two-step process: 3.2.1 Preliminary Evaluation -Curb Ramps Only Preliminary evaluation is designed to give the City a reasonably accurate sense for what the existing conditions are. "The Preliminary Evaluation-Curb Ramps Only" will inventory and document: A. Existence of sidewalk; B. Existence of curb ramps at all locations in which the sidewalk intersects roadway intersections or makes a major transition; C. Analysis using the City's aerial photography and Google Street View ™to determine whether or not existing curb ramps are compliant. These will be categorized as follows:: Page I 6 1. Not compliant with current ADA guidelines and do not offer "substantial compliance", i.e. do not offer and safe and usable access to the majority of the population needing curb ramps for mobility; 54 DRAFT 2. Not compliant with current ADA guidelines but do offer "'substantial" compliance, i.e. they do offer safe and usable access to the majority of the population needing curb ramps for mobility (the ramp was built in the past under a vastly different standard and was compliant when built, but falls short of current guidelines); or 3. Geometry is close to the current guideline, and: a. Has ADA detectable warning surface; or b. Does not have ADA detectable warning surface; and c. Does have what appears to be a level landing that is close to or exceeds four feet by four feet in area. d. Does not have what appears to be a level landing that is close to or exceeds four feet by four feet in area. The City concluded this work in 2017 and the results showed that over 80% of the 2,600+ curb ramps fail to meet current ADA standards. However, it is estimated that approximately 30% of the 2,600+ curb ramps would need to be replaced or retrofitt~d in order to provide reasonable accessibility. 3.2.2 Detailed Evaluation Detailed evaluation will fully satisfy the Federal guidance covering self-evaluation. The following evaluation criteria are based on the 2005 PROW AG and have been incorporated into inventory sheets covering six types of pedestrian facilities found within the City of Federal Way: Six types of pedestrian facilities are: 1. Pedestrian Circulation Paths (PCP) (sidewalks and road shoulders) 2. Curb ramp 3. Pedestrian pushbutton 4. Bus Stop 5. Public Parking 6. Street Furniture Evaluation Criteria are listed below for all above facilities: 1. Pedestrian Circulation Paths (PCP) (sidewalks and road shoulders) • Continuous pedestrian access route • Diverging surfaces protected to prevent trips or falls • 4' min. clear width, excluding curb • 80" min. vertical clearance to protruding object, or 27" max. height barrier for protruding object • Post mounted objects 27" to 80" height protrude 4" max., excluding curb • Objects that protrude greater than 4" at a height greater than 27" and less than 80" must be equipped with a cane-detectable-warning device. • A Pedestrian Access Route (PAR) less than 5' wide clear width ( exclusive of curb) shall provide passing spaces 200' min. apart Page I 7 55 DRAFT • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Passing spaces 5' X 5' min . PAR cross slope max. 2.0%, except mid-block crosswalk and connected curb ramp can match street grade Cross slope 5.0% max. at crosswalk without stop sign control Max. running grade for PAR adjacent to roadway shall not exceed the profile grade of the adjacent roadway 5.0% max. running grade for PAR not adjacent to roadway 5.0% max. running grade in a crosswalk (marked or unmarked) PAR surface shall be firm, stable and slip resistant Vertical alignment shall be planar Grade breaks shall be flush 1/4" max. vertical surface discontinuity Vertical surface discontinuities between 1/4" and 1/2" may be beveled at 2H:1V or flatter, except at grade breaks. Sidewalk joints and grate openings shall not permit passage of a max. 1/2" diameter sphere Elongated grate openings shall be oriented perpendicular to the dominant direction of travel Provide a PAR if a driveway intersects a walkway/sidewalk 2. Curb Ramps • PAR at each end of crosswalk connected by a ramp • Entrance to the street within crosswalk markings at marked crossings • Clear width 4' min., unobstructed, excluding flares • Running slope 8.3% max. unless ramp length is 15' • Cross slope 2.0% max. • Mid-block ramp cross slope may match the roadway profile • Landing required at top of perpendicular ramp and at bottom of parallel ramp • Ramp landing 4' by 4' min. • Ramp landing cross slopes 2.0% max. • Mid-block landing cross slopes may match the street profile. • Flare slopes 10.0% max. measured relative to curb slope • Flare slope required when PCP crosses the ramp from the side • 5.0% max. gutter counter slope at the foot of the ramp • Surfaces shall be firm, stable and slip resistant • Gratings, access covers, utility objects and other appurtenances shall not be located on curb ramps, landings or gutters within the PAR • No vertical surface discontinuity is allowed within curb ramps, landings, or clear spaces for operable parts, which must be planar • Grade breaks at the top and bottom of curb ramps must be perpendicular to the direction of travel • Grade breaks must be flush • 4' by 4' min. clear space where the bottom of curb ramp or landing meets gutter Page I 8 56 DRAFT • Clear space must be contained within the crosswalk width • Detectable Warning Surface (DWS) required if the curb ramp/landing connects to a roadway • Truncated dome pattern required for DWS • Rows of truncated domes parallel with back of curb • DWS must be full width of curb ramp/landing connection to the street • DWS must be 24' min. depth • DWS must be installed at back of curb • DWS must contrast with background (light-on-dark or dark-on-light) • Median/Traffic Island/Splitter Island (M/T/S) shall provide a PAR connecting to each crosswalk • Each MIT /S PAR is 6' min. length • M/T/S shall provide a passing space min. 5' wide by 5' long for each PAR • DWS located at each M/T/S curb ramp or roadway entrance of a PAR • M/T/S DWS are separated by 2' min. in the direction of travel • . When the PAR of a shared-use path goes through a median or traffic island, the width shall be the same as the width of the shared-use path 3. Pedestrian Push Buttons (PPB) (at signalized intersections) Page I 9 • Signalized pedestrian crossings use Accessible Pedestrian Signals (APS) • PPB not greater than 5' from the crosswalk line ( extended) that is furthest from the center of the intersection • PPB between 1.5' and 1 O' from the edge of the curb, shoulder, or pavement • PPB mounting height 48" max., 15" min. (42" desirable) • Clear space adjacent to PPB must be connected to the crosswalk served by a PAR (May overlap ramp landing) • Clear space adjacent to PPB 30" min. (design wheelchair width) by 48" min. ( design wheelchair length) • Additional maneuvering space required if the clear space is constrained on 3 sides • Adjacent sidewalk access have 2.0% max. running and cross slopes • Reach range for a parallel approach 1 O" max. if push button mounting height is between 46" and 48" • Reach range for a parallel approach 24" max. (10" or less desirable) if push button mounting height is 46" max. • Reach range for a forward approach O" max. • APS push buttons shall have a locator tone that operates during the DON'T WALK and the flashing DON'T WALK intervals only • APS push buttons shall have both audible and vibrotactile indications during the WALK interval • APS push button control faces shall be installed to face the intersection and be parallel to the crosswalk served • APS push buttons shall have a tactile arrow that indicates the crossing direction activated by the button 57 DRAFT • APS push button is aligned parallel to the direction of travel in the associated crosswalk • APS push buttons shall be high contrast (light-on-dark or dark-on-light) against its housing • APS push buttons with extended push button press features shall be marked with three braille dots forming an equilateral triangle in the center of the push button • If additional crossing time is provided by an extended push button feature, then an MUTCD R10-32P plaque shall be mounted adjacent to or integral with the APS push button • If the pedestrian clearance time is sufficient only to cross from the curb or shoulder to a median to wait the next cycle, then an additional APS push button shall be provided in the median • 10' min. spacing between APS push buttons (5' min. in medians and islands), if feasible • For spacing 10' or greater, audible WALK indication shall be a percussive tone • For spacing less than 10', audible WALK indication shall be a speech walk message 4. Bus Stops • Boarding and Alighting Area (BAA) to 8' min. (measured perpendicular to the curb/roadway) by 5' min. (measured parallel to the curb/roadway) • BAA grade 2.0% max. measured perpendicular to the roadway, matches street grade measured parallel to the street • BAA connected to streets, sidewalks or pedestrian paths by a PAR • Bus shelter clear space entirely within the shelter • Bus Shelter clear space 36" by 48" min. if constrained on three sides. Clear space 30" by 48" min. if not constrained on three sides • Bus shelter connected to the boarding and alighting area by a PAR 5. Public Parking Page I 10 • Number of accessible ramps shall meet or exceed the minimum required number of stalls for the block perimeter. • Accessible stalls are located where most convenient to key destinations. • Accessible stalls are located where street cross section and grade are flattest. • For parallel stalls, where the adjacent walkway width exceeds 14 ft, a 5 ft min. access aisle shall be provided at street level. • Parallel stall access aisles shall be connected to the PCP with a PAR. • Parallel stall access aisles shall not encroach on vehicle travel lanes. • Sidewalk adjacent to parallel stalls is free of obstructions and/or curb ramps. • When an access aisle is not required, the accessible parking stall shall be located at either end of the block face. • When an access aisle is not required, the end of block curb ramp may be used as the PAR. 58 DRAFT • For p~rpendicular stalls, an 8 ft min. width access aisle shall be provided at street level the full length of the accessible stall. • Perpendicular stall access aisles shall be connected to the PCP with a PAR. • Perpendicular stall access aisles shall be marked to discourage parking in them. • Two perpendicular stalls may share an access aisle except where backing in is prohibited. 6. Street Furniture Where tables are provided in a single location, at least 5.0%, but no fewer than 1, shall comply with Jhe following. • At tables provide a level 30" by 48" clear ground space with knee and toe clearance. • Knee clearance at tables shall be 8" deep min. at 27" height, and may be reduced to 9" height at 11" deep. • Table tops shall be 28" min. and 34" max. height. • The table clear ground space shall be attached to the PCP with a PAR. Where benches without tables are provided at a single location, at least 50% but not less than 1, shall comply with the following: • Provide a level 30" by 48" clear ground space parallel to the short axis of the bench at the end of the bench. • Bench height at the front shall be between 17" min. and 19" max. height. • The bench clear ground space shall be attached to the PCP with a PAR. Trained inspectors use the inventory sheets to identify accessibility barriers in any of these pedestrian facilities. This data will be automatically entered into a database in the City's GIS system and when complete will include all of the City's streets. Once the data is complete, the database will be maintained in-house and such changes as annexations and improvements and/or deterioration that the "score" of a sidewalk segment or curb ramp will be accounted for as soon as the new data is entered. The pedestrian paths (sidewalks), curb ramps, PPB, BAA data dictionary used during ArcCollector TM self-evaluation are located in Appendix A. 4.0 Sidewalk. Curb Ramp. Driveway and Accessible Pedestrian Signal Inventory As of August 2018 approximately 36% of the City's sidewalks have been inventoried. Preparing a complete and useful inventory is costly for all agencies because of the huge amount of labor required to collect, input, and manage the data. The City of Federal Way has been striving toward the goal of having a complete and accurate inventory of all public infrastructures. The City's current sidewalk and curb ramp inventory was completed in 2018 as part of a comprehensive citywide walkway study focused on high pedestrian use areas with emphasis on the City Center and principal arterial streets, and the City has also completed an inventory of all the city-owned traffic signals that may need accessible pedestrian signal improvements. Page I 11 59 DRAFT The inventory identified 1,311 existing curb ramps with approximately 445 of those judged to offer compliance when inventoried. There are 87 traffic signals in Federal Way, six of which are owned and operated by WSDOT. The City has 563 push buttons, among 224 does not have Audible tones. 4.1 Barrier Prioritization To focus City efforts toward facilities that pose the largest barrier within the public right of way, an analysis of the accessibility of each pedestrian facility and its proximity to public destinations such as government offices, schools, churches, parks, transit, senior centers, multifamily homes, and other pedestrian attraction zone are undergoing data collection. The result of this analysis will be a prioritized list of facilities with barriers. If the facility did not meet PROW AG criteria points were assigned, with the number of points dependent on the relative extent of non-compliance. Each facility is given a point ( described in section 4.2) for each deficiency category and a sum total of these points indicate the level of noncompliance based on geometric factors. These are categorized into three different levels. A higher total score indicates a higher level of non-compliance (i.e. more of a barrier). The three categories are as follows: 1. Level 1 : total score greater than 10 2. Level 2: total score between 5 and 10 3. Level 3: total score less than 5 Each of these Level 1, 2, and 3 non-compliance facilities are given further prioritization depending on the proximity to different types of public destinations. A geographical location index score table lists the public destination and corresponding score. The lower the score, the higher the priority. Two types of score are combined in one table named as priority matrix table and are developed for sidewalk, driveway, and curb ramp within the City Center. In those tables highest priority will be given to Level 1 noncompliance closer to public facilities (within 118th mile radius). 4.2 Accessibility Index Score A number of criteria were used to establish the extent to which each pedestrian facility did or did not present a barrier to accessible mobility. The following Tables show these criteria, the threshold used to identify them as a barrier, and the score used to indicate the severity of each barrier relative to each other. These scores are used in barrier prioritization matrix described in section 4.1 Page I 12 60 DRAFT Table 1. Sidewalks Criteria Threshold Score Width <32 inches 11 <48 inches 3 Cross Slope >2% 2 Cross Slope >4% 11 Ramp Slope >8.33% 2 Ramp Slope >10% 11 Surface Condition <Average 3 Vertical Discontinuity <~ inch . 0 Vertical Discontinuity > 1/4 inch and<l/2 4 inch Vertical Discontinuity >l/2 inch 11 Horizontal Discontinuity >l/2 inch 11 Fixed Obstacles Present 11 Protruding Obstacles Present 3 Non-Compliant Driveway Present 2 Non-Compliant Driveway Cross slope >4% 11 Non-Compliant Driveway Ramp slope> 10% 11 Table 2. Curb Ramps Criteria Threshold Score Landing Not present 11 Landing Width <32 inches 11 Landing Width <48 inches 3 Ramp Width <48 inches 3 Ramp Width <32 inches 11 Ramp Running Slope >8.33% 4 Ramp Running Slope >10% 11 Ramp Running Cross Slope >2% 2 Ramp Cross Slope >4% 11 Truncated Domes Not Present 3 Flare Slope >10% 2 Gutter Slope >2% 1 Lip >~Inch 2 Lip >1/2 inch 11 Landing Clear Scape < 4ft X 4ft 2 Landing Cross Slope >4% 2 Page I 13 61 DRAFT Table 3. Driveways Criteria Threshold Score Cross Slope >2%. 2 Cross Slope >4% 11 Ramp Slope >8.33% 4 Ramp Slope >10% 11 Table 4. Pedestrian Push Button Accessibility Index Criteria Threshold Score No Audible y 11 Only Audible y 5 Same Pole y 5 Non-compliant Push 15" min. 5 Button Height 48" max. 4.3 Geo1:raphic Prioritization Methodolo&Y The following criteria will be considered to select and prioritize deficient facilities from the inventories and those identified by citizen request and are based on following considerations: 1. Government Building: Title II requires city governments to ensure that all of the programs, services, and activities, when viewed in their entirety, are accessible to people with disabilities. Any feature that serves as a barrier to access to a government building or activity is assumed to have the highest priority. The feature must be corrected or an alternative route established that provides barrier-free access; 2. Primary Walk Route to School: A location that is a barrier along a primary route fo school will have a higher priority than other walkways near schools; 3. Churches: church properties frequently host senior and disabled groups /activities. 4. Senior Citizen Center and Housing/ Assisted Living/Social Service Agency/Disabled: a location that is a barrier to these locations will have higher priority; 5. Transit Center or bus stop: a location blocking access to fixed route bus service will have higher priority; 6. Park: a location blocking pedestrian access to parks will have higher priority; 7. Pedestrian Attractions: a walkway that services more pedestrians than one with a lower number of pedestrians. The following facilities are identified as ones that tend to attract pedestrians. Additional consideration should accrue to locations that are in close proximity to more than one of the following pedestrian attractors: a. Hospitals b. Arterial Streets c. High Density residential neighborhoods d. Urban center e. Commercial/Mixed Use f. Commercial Neighborhood Page I 14 62 DRAFT 8. Availability of a convenient alternative route. If there is no alternative available, i.e. available by crossing a two-lane street or by going around a block counter-clockwise instead of clockwise, the location should be given priority over a location that does have an alternative available. 9. Location has standing curb, or "unusable" ramp, versus a location that has a usable ramp that does not conform to current guidelines. 10. The.location is not within the project limits of a larger capital improvement project that is reasonably expected to be funded within the next six years. 4.4 GeoKraphical Location Consideration Table 5. Items of Geographical Location Consideration Location Criteria Ratin2 Criteria Government/Public Building Within 1/8-mile radius of Government Building Schools Proximity to Schools Within 1/8-mile radius of School Walk-to-School Route Within Safe routes to School Zone Church Within 1/8-mile radius of Church Senior Center/ Assisted Within 1/8-mile radius of location Living Parks Within 1/8-mile radius of Park Transit Park and Ride, Transit Center Within 1/8-mile of high-capacity Transit Stop Transit Bus Stops Pedestrian Attraction Zone Downtown /Urban Within Y<i-mile radius of Downtown, Urban /Commercial Business Centers and Commercial Business Center Zoning /Hospital/ Library/ High Density Residential Neighborhood 5.0 Hi&hest Priority Evaluation Criteria Citywide, not all non-compliant ramps and traffic signals can be upgraded or replaced immediately, or even in the short term. The City does not have the financial resources to do so. As such, facilities that are not up to current guidelines, but offer relatively safe usability and are not blocking access to an individual or to groups of individuals have a lower priority than barriers that cannot accommodate a large percentage of the affected population. Page I 15 63 DRAFT All requests for pedestrian accessibility improvements will continue to be given careful consideration. The City will continue to assign evaluation of citizen requests a high priority and when there is an immediate need, if practical, address barriers in those locations as soon as resources are available. However, in some instances, some barriers are beyond the City's ability to correct. In those cases, the City will work towards identifying an interim alternative accessible route. High Priority facilities evaluation criteria is presented in the following table. To identify facilities that do not meet PROW AG criteria but offer relatively safe usability are presented in the table under the column Low Priority Barrier. Therefore, those facilities that meet the criteria will not get a higher priority. Table 6. Pedestrian Circulation Path/Pedestrian Access Route PROW AG Criteria Low Priority Barrier to be Addressed by Alteration Project Only or by Public Request. 4' minimum clear width, excluding the The clear width may be reduced to 32" at curb. spot locations (i.e., utility poles, signal poles or other foundation-mounted appurtenances) provided there is no drop- off on either side. Pedestrian Access Route cross slope Cross slopes above 4% maximum will be maximum 2%, except mid-block allowed on existing sidewalks and road crosswalks and connected curb ramps can shoulders. match street grade. Pedestrian Access Route surfaces shall be Gravel shoulders will not be paved. firm, stable and slip resistant. Vertical surface discontinuities between Sidewalk panels displaced greater than Y2" 1/4" and 1/2" may be beveled at 2H: 1 V or may be ground provided the resulting slope flatter, except at grade breaks. is planar and flatter than 8.3%. Page I 16 64 DRAFT Table 7. Curb Ramps PROWAG Criteria Low Priority Barrier to be Addressed by Alteration Project Only or by Public Request. Clear width 4' minimum, unobstructed, The clear width may be reduced to 32" excluding flares. provided all other 2005 PROW AG guidelines are met. Cross slope 2.0% maximum. Cross slopes up to 4.0% maximum will be allowed on existing sidewalks and road shoulders. Ramp landing cross slopes 2.0% maximum. Cross slopes up to 4.0% maximum will be allowed on existing sidewalks and road shoulders. Flare slopes 10.0% maximum as measured Flare slopes may exceed I 0.0% as ' relative to the curb slope. measured relative to the curb slope where the flare is constrained by an existing utility facility or a foundation-mounted street appurtenance. Gratings, access covers, utility objects and Utility covers are permitted where such other appurtenances shall not be located on covers are treated with a slip resistant curb ramps, landings or gutters within the coating, the maximum open space is Yz" or Pedestrian Access Route less, the cover surface is firm and stable, and surface discontinuities are W' or less. Detectible Warning Surface required if the Detectible Warning Surface will not be curb ramp/landing connects to a-roadway prioritized for crossings adjacent to a paved shoulder for Local Access streets. Table 8. Pedestrian Push Buttons and Accessible Pedestrian Signals (APS) PROW AG Criteria Low Priority Barrier to be Addressed by Alteration Project Only or by Public Request. Push buttons located no greater than 5' Push buttons may be located greater than 5' from the crosswalk line ( extended) that is from the crosswalk line provided they are furthest from the center of the intersection. mounted on a signal pole. Pushbuttons between I 1/2' and 10' from Push buttons may be mounted less than 1.5' the edge of the curb, shoulder, or pavement or greater than IO' from the curb, shoulder or pavement provided they are mounted on a signal pole. Two pushbuttons on the same comer Push Button are on the same pole will be should be separated by at least IO feet separated only with new grant funded construction and citizen request Page I 17 65 DRAFT 6.0 Strate&ies for Fundin& Barrier Removal Opportunities for funding the removal of a€cess barriers include: • New or widened roads • Roadway alteration projects • Maintenance upgrade and repair projects and programs • Requiring private developers to remove access barriers when development affects facilities within the right-of-way; and • Actively seeking out and applying for grant funding specific to removal of access barriers when available. All of the City's capital improvement projects and private development projects within the City's rights-of-way will be constructed to current ADA guidelines. In addition, the City currently has in place a pavement management program that schedules roadway rehabilitation and maintenance. The City plans to review public roadway barriers during the implementation of this Plan, and address those barriers that can be resolved as part of the on-going pavement maintenance and rehabilitation program. As part of the review, the City will revise the Transition Plan schedule for the removal of barriers. The Transition Plan schedule will also be updated as projects for new construction and roadway alterations arise. As a result, the City of Federal Way averages over $300,000 in expenditures annually to achieve the City's goal of a barrier-free transportation system. It should be noted that, although grant funding is theoretically available for retrofitting existing streets, grant funding program criteria are currently structured such that a pure barrier removal project would not score well enough to receive funding. As such, other than as a part of a larger capital improvement project, the majority of barrier removal work is entirely city-funded. 7 .0 FindinKS for City Center The City Center is defined in the City's Comprehensive Plan as the area generally bordered by S 312 th to the north, S 3 24th to the South, 11th Place to the west, and Interstate 5 to the east. See Figure 1 for the City Center Vicinity Map. Page I 18 66 DRAFT City of Federal Way City Center ST PL PL U) ~ a, 1-.u,rer I uk,· S 313 ST S 315 ST 16 ST S 316 ST S 317 ST 0 [I> Figure 1: City Center Vicinity U) U) U) [f) [f) >. s ....J ~ ~ ~ ! 308 CT Q_ ;! ~ 0 "' N N ~ S 310 ST Albertsons S 312 ST HMart Walmart Pavillions Center en )-S 316 ST s: i/acanl tn Best ~ Buy ~ J:: ~ u.. 0 f S 316 PL Trader S 318 PL Joe·s [f) ..,,. f- "'u ~ ~ [f) Cl'. ~ > ('J 0..: N 3 14 ST S316 ST Town ,-, ~ Squarerransit';,,L 0:: Park Center ,s, > u, ~ Pal -do ~ Wor ld 0..: (/) ~ sr N ~ Map Date: October 20 '18 City of Federal Way 33325 6th Ave S Federal way WA 98003 (253) 835-7000 www ci tyoffederalwa y.com s 309 ST s rn 310 ST > ;; s N 3 11 ST S 312 ST Steel Lake SteE La k1 u, A n n Park ~ 00 N S315LN z ___, S 316 LN ~ S 317 ST ~Truman ~ H_S. "' Gateway ~ S' .J7<) 320th Street Library S 320 ST SeaTac Village Plaza 5 Center 0 J 19 P1}4atte11 e 's <i;,..J, -Nip ~ G~~"-;;...~ S 320 ST c; S 321 ST 11 ra l Way ni u n ity 50 0 Page I 19 Safeway rn ~ S322 ..-PL .... 1 000 Feel Sears "1 w I\J 01 Celebration Center Ross The Commons at Federal Wa y > < (/J S 322 ST ~ en Cmemas Macy·s s 324 sr S 324 P L Target Federal Way / S 320th Street Park & Ride WINGED FOOT WY S 324 ST Driver Licensing ~ City Center SEMINOLE LN (/) _J a_ (') ~ s 328 ST S325 ST S 327 ST Vehicle Licensing Post Office (98003) S 330 ST !, """ C:T ___, <C < Me R10 ~~ "'wv 0~z C.,FiRRy ..: z ___, '"'1Lts pt [3 Ol Yfwp/C 'Ny OAK- !j,! 5 MONT ,_ o COLONIAL WY CT S 328 PL -0 X E ~ iii r.) I N <Ill r/l ro :9 r/l a. ro :;;: u (I) 0 a:: <( 0 ~ a_ 0 >- (I) We;, ;;i Teel ]ii Ce11 ll'.'. Legend This map is accompanied by NO warranties Major Streets Freeway Ramp Div ided Freeway Arlena! Street Local Streets Collector Street Local Street 67 Federal Way DRAFT 7.1 Sidewalk City Staff divided the sidewalks into approximately The location and data are in GIS. The analysis concluded that City Center has 41 % ADA compliant sidewalk and 59% non-compliant sidewalk as shown in Figure 2. City Center has only 2% missing sidewalk in mostly one side of a street. All City Center sidewalks are compliant for ADA width. Priority matrix table is attached. The scoring criteria are described in Section 4 .1. Figure 2. City Center Sidewalk Deficiency • I Figure 3. Sidewalk Priority Chart 137 Page I 20 68 Compliant Sidewalk Non Compliant Sidewalk Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 O'I \D DRAFT Table 9: Sidewalk Priority Matrix Location Serving Government Priority Description Offices and Public Facilities Sidewalk does not meet current standards-6 priority matrix score > 10 points Sidewalk does not meet current standards-2 priority matrix score <= 10 points and >5 Sidewalk does not meet current standards-36 priority matrix score <= 5 points Note : Each cell represents number of deficient facilities Page I 21 Primary Walk Route to Churches School 9 0 0 0 50 1 Senior Citizen Transit Any Center/ Assisted Center/Park Living/Social and Ride/ Park Pedestrian Total Service Agency bus stop attraction 0 8 14 7 44 0 1 2 1 6 0 11 20 19 137 DRAFT Figure 4. City Center No Sidewalk Percentage 2% 98% Sidewalk No Sidewalk The City does not have sidewalks on the Northside of S 314th St from Pete Von Reichbauer Way S to 23rd Ave S and portion of Southside at S 314th Place. S 314th Place is CUITently a private road but is designated to receive sidewalk with redevelopment. Sidewalk is also missing on the north side of S 312th St between 23 rd Ave Sand 25th Ave S. t,, !)t ,'3r Page I 22 Figure 5. Map: No Sidewalk Locations · .• "' > •:rt l > ':;, .. liii :ila -~,, • .'i t·,~· ,,. /) " , . ., ., ' ·/,i1•1 1-'!•I _l t, .1v 70 t DRAFT Table 10: Sidewalk Compliance Statistics for City Center Sidewalk Measurement Category Feet Percentage Sidewalk Material Concrete 25,680 100 Asphalt Others Sidewalk Cracks, Vertical Displacement Fully ADA compliant 22,730 88.51 Non-compliant 2,950 11.49 Sidewalk Cross Slope 0.0%-2.0%(ADA Compliant) 11 ,640 51.96 2.1%-4.0% 13,344 45.33 >4% 696 2.71 Sidewalk Width O.l '-4.0' 4.1' to <5.0' (ADA compliant if200 ft. long or less) >=5.0' (ADA compliant) 25 ,689 100 Sidewalk Obstruction Fixed object obstruction sidewalk path 171 0.67 Page I 23 71 DRAFT 7.2 Curb Ramps In City Center 71 % of curb ramps are ADA non-compliant with ADA and 29% are compliant. Priority matrix table is attached. Figure 6. City Center Deficient Curb Ramp Percentage 29% 71% L' Figure 7. City Center Priority Level Chart for Curb Ramp Page I 24 72 Non Compliant Compliant Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 ....... w DRAFT Table 11: Curb Ramp Priority Matrix Location Serving Government Priority Description Offices and Public Facilities Curb Ramp does not meet current standards-priority 15 matrix score > 10 points Curb Ramp does not meet current standards-priority 21 matrix score <= 10 points and >5 points Curb Ramp does not meet current standards-priority 23 matrix score <= 5 points Note : Each cell represents number of deficient facilities Page I 25 Primary Walk Route to Churches School 25 0 25 0 4 0 Senior Citizen Transit center/ Center, Any Assisted Living/Social Park and Park Pedestrian Total Service Ride/ bus attraction Agency stop 2 6 4 16 66 3 9 1 2 56 1 11 2 2 43 DRAFT Table 12: City Center Curb Ramp Compliance Statistics: Curb Ramp Measurement Cate2ory Number Percenta2e Curb Ramp Type Perpendicular 152 60.8 Parallel 70 28 Parallel Single Direction 26 10.2 Median crossing 2 0.8 Other/Non standard 0 0 Curb Ramps Absent Where Required Total missing Ramps 1 0.4 Curb Ramps Fully ADA Compliant Fully Compliant 66 26.4 Non fully compliant 184 73.6 TopLandin2 4.0' or greater (ADA Compliant) 142 56.8 <4.0' 10 4 Cross Slope 0.0%-2.0% (ADA Compliant) 122 48.8 2.1%-4.0% 128 51.2 >4% 0 0 Ramp Slope 0.0% to less than 8.33% 134 53.6 8.33%-10% 44 17.6 >10% 72 28.8 Flared Side Slope (only perpendicular ramps) 0.0%-10% (ADA Compliant) 194 77.6 >10% 56 22.4 Truncated Dome No Truncated Dome 125 50 Truncated Dome 125 50 Ramp Obstruction No Obstruction Present 250 100 Page I 26 74 DRAFT 7 .3 Driveway The City Center has 67% ADA deficient driveways and 33% non-deficient driveways. When the City will construct new sidewalk, according to ADA compliance, noncompliant driveways will be constructed according to ADA standards. The Priority matrix table is attached. Page I 27 Figure 8. Deficient and Nondeficient Driveway Percentage At City Center Figure 9. Driveway Priority Matrix 75 Deficient Non Deficient Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 ...... 0\ DRAFT Table 13: Driveway Priority Matrix Location Serving Priority Description Government Offices and Public Facilities Driveway does not meet current standards- priority matrix score > 5 10 points Driveway does not meet current standards- priority matrix score 3 <= 10 points to >5 points Driveway does not meet current standards- priority matrix score <= 10 5 points Page I 28 Primary Walk Churches Route to School 0 0 0 0 17 0 Transit Senior Citizen Center, Center/ Assisted Park Any Living/Social and Ride Park Pedestrian Total Service Agency /Bus Attraction Stop 0 0 19 9 33 0 0 1 0 4 0 2 20 30 79 DRAFT Table 14: Driveway Entrance Compliance Statistics Driveway Entrance Measurement Category Number Percentage Driveway Entrances Fully ADA Compliant Fully Compliant 56 32 Non-compliant 119 68 Ramp Running Slope <=8.33% ( ADA Compliant) 147 82.85 8.34%-9.99% 5 2.85 10% or greater 23 13.14 Ramp Cross Slope 0.0%-2.0% (ADA Compliant) 65 37.14 2.1%-4% 88 50.29 >4% 22 12.57 Driveway entrances featuring cross slopes greater than 4% and ramp running slopes greater than 10% are potentially significant barriers to accessibility. The following Figure 10 shows all of the "Priority 1" deficiencies for sidewalks, curb ramps, and driveways. Page I 29 77 DRAFT City of Federal Way City Center .,. ;: S 309 ST S 309 PL S 310 PL (/) ~ "' S 313 ST (/) ?!: 314 ST a, (/) ;';: S315 ST S 316 ST S 316 ST 17ST c;;'b 8- "' d79 "z "' ..,. '<" S321 ST ;2 S 324 PL ST a sr S 317 ST ~ I q UJ ?r ~ Figure 10: Map Date· October 2018 City of Federal \/Vay 33325 8l11 Ave S Priority 1 Pedestrian Barriers Federal way, WA 98003 (253) 635-7000 S 300S, - VJ (/) (f) (/) >S ....J ~ ~ ;:; 308 CT a. ~ 0 N N N S 310 ST ... • S 31i,.ST _ ... ' >- j' 5 <r & ~ S 316 ST S316AI_ . ... J: ~, (.) S 316 PL <i ii: ii'.• -, (/) (.) f 31 8 PL ?i ~ ;;; (/) " f--<'j(.) VJ ~ e, N 314 ST ... (f) > <( " N www cityo ffederalway com s 309ST s w 310ST > ;;; s N 311 ST S 312 ST "' ~ co N I() S 315 LM =, f "' a'. ,n N ... s :::, 319PL W S 320 ST .~ .. ...._ S liolO ST ,t'~ s;.~" ... ,... t t 324ST ._ s 328 ST S 330 ST (/) > s S 325 ?;: ST ~ S 327 ST S 330ST (/) ....J a. • (/) ....J a. - ~322S, S 324ST i- • W'NGED FOOT WY > <( c "' c, (/) (f) 2 a:: ....J N N -t? l> < en Legend •• Driveway High Priority .,. Curb Ramp High Priority u X E Q) E Q) u Q)I <ii u a. :::) <(I 0 :!: rJ> a. "' ~ '§ C]} ·e CL <( 0 i CL (.) "' ~ ~ ti ____ _iU:£_ ___ :___::.__ ___ ,2S23~31[JSi]T~==~(/)~=~~,~:::::::~ G This map 1s accompanied by ~ --Sidewalk High Priority .,: 332 ~ ~ ~ ST _\ N 0 500 1 000 Feel Page I 30 Legend Freeway Ramp Divided Freeway Arterial Street Collector Street Local Street Private Street 78 C NO warranties. ~ Federal Way DRAFT 7 .4 Pedestrian Sianals For Pedestrian signals, higher priority will be given to locations where there is potential demand to accessible pedestrian signals. APS will be installed according to the availability of funding and citizens' requests or if alterations trigger replacement. Where the existing APS is only audible the City will replace them according to citizens' request only. Other deficiencies are of low priority. However, on federally funded projects , any deficient pedestrian signal will be repaired to make them fully compliant. Figure 11 shows the location of the deficient pedestrian push buttons in city center. Table 15: Pedestrian Signal Compliance Statistics for City Center ~ Pedestrian Signal Measurement Category) Number Percentage Button APS Status NoAPS 20 14.28 Non-Compliant APS Compliant APS Height of push button 0.0'-1.25' 0 1.25'-3.0'(ADA compliant not recommended) 31 22.14 3.0'-4.0'(ADA compliant recommended height) 108 77.14 >4.0' 1 0.71 Distance Between Push Button and Edge of Curb 0.0'-1.4' l.5'-6.0'(ADA Compliant) 6.l '-10.0'(ADA Compliant if physical constraint) >10.0' 68 48.57 Distance Between Push Buttons Same Pole(ADA compliant if physical constraint) 36 25.71 Different poles 0.0'-9.9'(ADA compliant if physical constraint) Different poles 10.0'(ADA compliant) Page I 31 79 DRAFT C ity of Federa l Way City Cente r ST PL PL 16ST ;. (/.\fl'/' I uke S 313 ST S 315 ST S 316 ST S 3 17 ST Figure 11: Deficient Pedestrian Push Buttons Map Date: October 20 I B City of F edera l Way 33325 8th Ave S . Fede ral Way WA 98003 !253) 835-7000 U) (J) (J) U) >S _J ~ ~ ! 308 CT lL ~ D -;!: "' S 310ST Albertsons • S 312 ST • HMa1t Pavillions Center UJ Best ~ Buy :? en ~ e S316ST :::c !:::2 S 316 PL Wa/mart Vacant Trader !:!: 0 S 318 PL Joe's ~ • >-:.:: ri > (L S3!6 ST 314 ST . Town ;• >-... :.:: Squa r erransif9,:.. !I'. Park C e nte r d' > U} ~ Pal -do World N (L ww w cityoffede ralway com s 309 ST s UJ 310 ST ~ "' s "' 31 1 ST S 312 ST Steel Lake Ste La k u, Ann Park S315LN z _J ~ co N "' N S 316 LN ~Truman S 317 ST ~ H.S. Gateway 5 Center Q 319 PLMatfene's ~~ 320th Street library • • S 320 ST SeaTac Village Plaza ~¢~ Gl-"-t,;,/,; 320 ST c. 321 ral Way unity Safeway en i S322 ..-PL .... Legend • Celebration Center • Sears •'-, c., t\) u, Ross The Commons at Federal Wa y ~ < en S 322 ST • ~ (/) Macy's • S 324 PL Cmemas S 324 ST Targel Federal Way / S 324 ST Driver Licensing ~ City Center S 320th Street Park & Ride WINGED FOOT WY (fJ ..J a. M S 325 ST .... ... S S327ST 32 8 Vehicle ST Licensing Post Office (98003 ) S 330 <(_"ii. >-z u,O :, ;:: C) <( z <(.Z....1 OAK- MONT <n w wz I:, ,-a COLONIAL WY S328 PL CT Wey Tee Ce11 This map is accompanied by NO warranties N • De ficie nt Ped est rian Butt on Major Streets u )( ~ <ii c Q) tJ I M I Q) [/) "' .a U) a. C1I ~ t Q) 0 ct <t: 0 1 ~ a. u >- Q) tJ ~ a:: 500 1,000 J:'eel Freeway Ramp Divided Freeway Arteroal S tr eet L ocal Streets G Collector S!reet Loca l Street ~ Federal Way Page I 32 80 DRAFT 7.5 Transition Plan Cost and Schedule It will take the City many years of dedicated work to upgrade all sidewalk, traffic signals, and other pedestrian improvements to meet current ADA guidelines. This is further constrained by updates to the current guidelines that make current compliant improvements non-compliant. The City does not presently have standalone ADA funding. This Plan provides a foundation for this work, but will require updates in the future. The City will take interim steps on an annual basis to implement this Plan. The City of Federal Way's objective is to address all known Priority 1 deficiencies within 20 years. This schedule can be accelerated if the budget becomes available for standalone barrier removal. The cost estimate is only for the City Center, Priority Level I locations, and cost estimation for all deficiencies is attached. Page I 33 81 DRAFT Table 16: City Center Priority Level I Cost Estimation Unit Price ADA Deficiencies Improvement Type Unit Measurements (2018) Total Cost (Remove and Replace) Sidewalks Non-Compliant Sidewalk Sidewalk improvements SY all >4ft $100 $0 Width (upgrade/reconstruct existing sidewalk) Non-Compliant Sidewalk Sidewalk improvements SY 8'X700 (GIS $100 $62,222 Slope (upgrade/reconstruct existing sidewalk) length) Non-Compliant Driveways New Driveway with Curb, Gutter, and SY l2'X35'x33 $150 $231,000 Sidewalk Non-Compliant Vertical Sidewalk improvements (sidewalk grading) SY 8'X20'X38 $100 $67,556 Discontinuity Sidewalk Fixed Obstacles Sidewalk improvements (tree removal, SY 8'X20'Xl $100 $1,778 (trees) panel replacement) Sidewalk Fixed Obstacles Sidewalk improvements (Relocate utility SY 8'x20'x3 $100 $5,333 (Utility Poles) poles, panel replacement) Sidewalk Fixed Obstacles (fire Sidewalk improvements (Relocate Fire SY $100 $0 hydrant) Hydrants, panel replacement) Sidewalk fixed obstacles Sidewalk improvements (Mailbox, remove · SY $100 $0 (Mail Box) and relocate) Sidewalk Fixed Obstacles Sidewalk improvements ( remove and SY 8'X20'Xl S\00 $3,555 (Junction Box ) relocate junction box and panel, reset sidewa lk and junction box ) Subtotal $371,444 Curb Ramps Curb Ramp without Truncated Add MMA truncated domes EA 3 $1,200 $3,600 Domes Crossings with missing curb New curb ramps EA I $5,200 $5,200 ramp Substandard curb landings Curb ramp improvement (upgrade/install EA 9 $5,200 $46,800 top landing) Non-compliant ramp width , curb ramp improvement (reconstruct EA 56 $5,200 $291,200 slope and others existing) Subtotal $346,800 Push Buttons Location without APS Push Upgrade existing traffic signal to APS EA 20 $1,000 $20,000 Button Push buttons on same pole Add new pedestrian push button pole EA Not in level I $3,000 $0 priority Subtotal $20,000 Total $738,244 Contingency @ 10% $73,824 Design and Construction $88,589 Engineering @l 12 % Mobilization @ 8% $59,060 TWSC + Traffic Control@ $110,737 15% Total 2018 Dollars $1,070,454 * City will fix curb ramps with no other deficiencies other than only missing truncated dome in P1iority level I because it is easy to fix without major construction. Page I 34 82 DRAFT Table 17: City Center Cost Estimation for All Deficiencies Unit Price ADA Deficiencies Improvement Type Uni Measurements (2018) Total Cost t (Remove and Replace) Sidewalks Non-Compliant Sidewalk Sidewalk improvements ( upgrade/reconstruct SY all >4ft $100 $0 Width existing sidewalk ) Non-Compliant Sidewalk Slope Sidewalk improvements ( upgrade/reconstruct SY 8'Xl4,000 (GIS $100 $1,244,444 existing sidewalk ) length) Non-Compliant Driveways New Driveway with Curb, Gutter, and SY 12'X35'xl 17 $150 $819,000 Sidewalk Non-Compliant Vertical Sidewalk improvements (sidewalk grading) SY 8'X 20'X56 $100 $99,556 Discontinuity Sidewalk Fixed Obstacles Sidewalk improvements (tree removal, panel SY 8'X20'Xl $100 $1,778 (trees) replacement) Sidewalk fixed obstacles Sidewalk improvements (Relocate utility SY 8'X20'X3 $100 $5,333 (Utility Poles) poles, panel replacement) Sidewalk fixed obstacles (fire Sidewalk improvements (Relocate Fire SY $100 $0 hydrant) Hydrants, panel replacement) Sidewalk fixed obstacles (Mail Sidewalk improvements (Mailbox, remove SY $100 $0 Box) and relocate) Sidewalk fixed obstacles Sidewalk improvements ( remove and SY 8'X20'X4 SIOO $1,778 (Junction Box) relocate junction box and panel, reset sidewalk and junction box ) Subtotal $2,171,889 Curb Ramps Curb Ramp without Truncated No other deficiencies EA 3 $1,200 $3,600 Domes Crossings with missing curb New curb ramps EA l $5,200 $5,200 ramp substandard curb landings Curb ramp improvement ( upgrade/install top EA 16 $5,200 $83,200 landing) Non-compliant ramp width , curb ramp improvement (reconstruct EA 149 $5,200 $774,800 slope and others existing) Subtotal $866,800 Push Buttons Location without APS Push Upgrade existing traffic signal to APS EA 20 $1,000 $20,000 Button Push buttons on same pole Add new pedestrian push button pole EA 36 $3,000 $108,000 Subtotal $128,000 Total $3,166,689 Contingency @ l 0% $316,669 Design and Construction $380,003 Engineering Ca} 12 % Mobilization @ 8% $253,335 TWSC + Traffic Control@ $475,003 15% Total 2018 Dollars $4,591,699 Page I 35 83 DRAFT 8.0 Recommendations Recommendations 1: Develop performance measures and processes to track removal of barriers Status: Underway The primary purpose of an ADA Transition Plan is to develop a plan for removal of accessibility barriers. In order to show progress towards this requirement, the City should develop a process of tracking barrier removal on a year by year basis. It is recommended that the City actively update the GIS ADA self-assessment database developed for this plan, tracking how and when ADA barriers are removed. This data can be used to provide annual updates on progress and demonstrate to the public as well as federal regulators that the City is making progress to meet Title II requirements. Procedures: Re-inventory areas within overlay and Capital Improvement Projects annually. Recommendations 2: Develop a standard grievance process for barriers in the public right of way. Status: Pending City of Federal Way Grievance Procedure under the Americans with Disabilities Act This grievance procedure is established to meet the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA). It may be used by anyone who wishes to file a complaint alleging discrimination on the basis of disability in the provision of services, activities, facilities and programs. The complaint should be in writing and contain information about the alleged discrimination such as name, address, and phone number of complainer and location, date and description of the problem. Alternative means of filing complaints such as personal interviews or a recording of the complaint will be made available upon request. The form in Appendix A may be used by a qualified individual with a disability who believes he or she has experienced discrimination based on disability status in admission to, access to and treatment in facilities, program, services, or activities provided by City of Federal Way. An authorized representative may file on behalf of a qualified person with a disability. Grievance on behalf of classes of individuals are also permitted. Information requested on the form must be filled out completely to help expediting the grievance process. The complaint should be submitted by the grievant and /or his/ her designee as soon as possible to: Page I 36 84 DRAFT ADA Coordinator Desiree Winkler, PE D eputy Director of Public Works 3332 5 8th Ave nu e .South Federal Way WA 98003-6325 Phone:253-835-2700 Fax 253-835-2709 Recommendation 3: Develop stand-alone funding to remove the highest priority barriers not associated with Capital projects. Recommendation 4: Prioritized next steps Continue Stages 2 and 3. Page I 37 85 DRAFT APPENDIX A: Customer Service Request for Barrier Removal PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 33325 gth Avenue South Federal Way WA 98003-6325 253-835-2700; Fax 253-835-2709 www .cityoffedt:ra lway .com The Customer Request for Barrier Removal program is established through guidance under the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) to serve citizens with disabilities who have identified physical/structural barriers in the community which impede access to services, programs and activities offered by the City of Federal Way. Date of Request: -------------- Name: First Middle Last --------------------------- Address: --------------------------------- Telephone number ___________ Mobile# _____________ _ Email: ----------------------------------If person needing accommodation is not the individual completing this form, please enter Name ----------------------------------Phone# email -----------------Location information (please provide specific location of the problem/request) Street Name and Address' (if available) Cross Street Comments: (describe your request/concern, if possible location on Map) Page I 38 86 DRAFT Signature:------------------------------- Date: --------------------------------- Please return this form to City of Federal Way ADA Coordinator. City Staff will be in contact with you soon. CITY OF FEDERAL WAY PuBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 3332S 8rn A VENUE SOUTH FEDERAL WAY WA 98003-6325 For assistance in completing this form please contact (253) 835-2700 Or email: pw-admin@cityoffederalway.com Page I 39 87 This page left blank intentionally. 88 COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 20, 2018 ITEM#: CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: 2019 STREET SWEEPING SERVICES BID AWARD POLICY QUESTION: Should council award of the 2019 Street Sweeping Services contract to Action Services Corporation, the lowest responsive responsible bidder, in the amount of $112,855.00? COMMITTEE: Land Use and Transportation Committee CATEGORY: ~ Consent D Ordinance D City Council Busines~ D Resolution P,~ STAFF REPORT BY . Desiree S. Winkler, P.E., DeEuty Director Attachments: Staff Report Bid Tabulations Options Considered: MEETING DATE: November 5, 2018 D Public Hearing D Other DEPT: Public Works 1) Award the 2019 Street Sweeping Services contract to Action Services Corporation, the lowest responsive responsible bidder in the amount of $112,855.00. 2) Do not award the 2019 Street Sweeping Services contract and provide direction to staff. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:/ move to forward Option 1 to the November 20, 2018 consent agenda for approval. Mark Koppang Committe Chair Je se Johnson , Committee Member Hoang Tran, Committee Me mber PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: I move to award the 2019 Street Sweeping Services contract to Action Services Corporation, the lowest responsive responsible bidder in the amount of $112,855.00. (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: 0 APPROVED 0 DENIED 0 TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION 0 MOVED TO SECOND READING (o rdinances only) REVISED -12/2017 89 COUNCIL BILL# First reading Enactment reading ORDINANCE# RESOLUTION# CITY OF FEDERAL WAY M-EMORANDUM DATE: November 5, 2018 TO: Land Use & Transportation Committee VIA: , 1}111 Fenell , Mayor FROM· CV/_~J Walsh, P.E., Director of Public Works · ~siree S. Winkler, P.E., Deputy Public Works Director SUBJECT: 2019 Street Sweeping Services Bid Award FINANCIAL IMPACTS: This project is included within the proposed 2019/2020 budget under the Surface Water Management (SWM) Fund 401. In accordance with the proposed budget this project is funded by SWM funds in the amount of $120,105.00. This is an on-going project within a comparable cost of the previous year's contract amounts. BACKGROUND: Two bids were received and opened on October 25, 2018 for the 2019 Street Sweeping Services Contract. The total bids for this contract are as follows: Company Action Services Corp. Best Parking Lot Cleaning, Inc. Available 2019 Budget Amount Bid Amount $112,855.00 $121,517.70 $120,105.00 The lowest responsive, responsible bidder is Action Services Corporation with a total bid of $112,855.00. The amount available in the 2019 budget for this contract is $120,105.00. 90 \.0 I-' City of Federal Way, WA 2019 STREET SWEEPING SERVICES RFB No. 18-013 BidO Oat, October 25, 2018 Vendor Name ---> Location ----------> Cost per Item Amount Unit Mile 1 Major Arterial Streets 23.24 Miles $54 .00 2 Minor Arterial Streets 9.35 Miles $54.00 3 Collector Arterials . 50 .97 Miles $54.00 ·4 State Routes 14.04 Miles $51.50 5 Residential Streets 148.17 Miles $48.00 Total Basic Annual Bid 6 Emergency Call out 200 Hours $20.00 BID TOTAL PER YEAR Bid Form (B) Bid Schedule(C) Bid Signature (D) Addendum Acknowledged Bid Bond Form Sub Contracgtors List (F) Combined Affidavit and Certification Form (G) Contractor's Compliance Statement (H) Contractor Certification-Wage Law Compliance (I) Bid 1 Bid 2 ACTION SERVICES BEST PARKING LOT CLEANING INC Bremerton, WA Puyallup, WA Cost per #Time per Cost per Cost per #Time Sweeping Year Total Cost Mile Sweeping per Year Total Cost $1 ,254.96 14 $17,569.44 $53.00 $1,231.72 14 $17,244.08 $504 .90 14 $7,068 .60 $53.00 $495 .55 14 $6,937.70 $2,752.38 14 $38,533.32 '"$53.00 $2,701.41 14 $37,819.74 $723 .06 14 $10,122 .84 $58.00 $814.32 14 $11,400.48 $7 ,112.16 5 $35,560.80 $42.00 $6,223.14 5 $31,115.70 $108,855.00 $104,517.70 $4,000 .00 $85.00 $17,000.00 $112,8'55.00 $121,517.70 YES YES N/A N/A YES YES N/A YES YES Cashier's Check YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES Page 1 of 1 This page left blank intentionally. 92 COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 20, 2018 ITEM#: CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: 2019 RIGHT-OF-WAY LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE POLICY QUESTION: n/a -Information only COMMITTEE: Land Use and Transportation Committee CATEGORY: N/ A -INFO ONLY 0 Consent D Attachments: Staff Report D Ordinance D Resolution Options Considered: n/a -Information only COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: n/a-Information only MEETING DATE: November 5, 2018 D D Public Hearing Other DEPT: Public Works DIRECTORAPPROVAL: z..t~ 1~'2/.,f(B ln it iaUDate Mark Kopp ang , Co mmi tte e Chair Jesse Johnson, Committee Member Hoang T ran, Co mm ittee Me mb er PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: n/a -Information onl y (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: D APPROVED 0 DENIED 0 TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION 0 MOVED TO SECOND READING (o rdinan ces only) REV!SED -12/201 7 93 COUNCIL BILL# First reading Enactment reading ORDINANCE# RESOLUTION# CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM DATE: November 5, 2018 TO: Land Use & Transportation Committee VIA: . Jjm j'enell Mayor FROM· ~Walsh, P .E., Director of Public Works · ~iree S. Winkler, P.E ., Deputy Public Works Director SUBJECT: 2019 Right-of-Way Landscape Maintenance FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The 2019 Right-of-Way Landscape Maintenance contract is included in the proposed 2019/2020 budget under the Streets Fund 101 and Solid Waste Fund 106 ( for litter control) for a total amount of $290,000.00. In accordance with the proposed budget this service is funded by $240,000 General Fund and $50,000 Solid Waste Fund. The proposed budget was developed as a modest increase over previous year's contracts. However, in September 2018, the State Department of Labor and Industries established new rates for landscape laborers that increased the prevailing wage from $17 .87 per hour to $37.67 per hour (a 112% increase). It is anticipated that in order to continue contracting out the right-of-way landscape maintenance, the contract costs will double . BACKGROUND: There are over thirty-one (31) acres of formal landscaping that is maintained within the City's right-of- way that includes, but is not limited to : street trees , imgation, mow strips, median beds , shrubs, and tree wells. Maintenance of these areas have been completed through private contract. The 2019 Right-of-Way Landscape Maintenance Contract was let out to bid on October 5, 2018 with bid opening on October 25, 2018. No bids were received . Follow up conversations with the current and previous contractors stated the following reasons for not submitting bids: 1) The City's current budget does not have enough funds to afford the new prevailing wages. 2) Contractor has decided to no longer perform public agency landscape work in order to avoid conflicts with internal staff on different pay ranges (public vs. private work). Staff is in the process of evaluating options for how to conduct landscape maintenance in the future. These conversations include the Parks Department as they are also impacted by these new prevailing wages. 94 COUNCIL MEETING DATE: N/A ITEM#: CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: REPORT ON PROGRESS ON AIRCRAFT ISSUES POLICY QUESTION: None COMMITTEE: Land Use and Transportation (LUTC) CATEGORY: D Consent D City Council Business D Ordinance D Resolution STAFF REPORT BY: Yarden F. W eidenfeld, Senior Policy Advisor Attachments: Staff Report with attachments. 0 tions Considered: N/ A MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: N/A MAYOR APPROVAL: NIA -------Committee Initial/Date COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: N/ A NIA Council Initial/Date MEETING DATE: November 5, 2018 Public Hearing Other -Standing Report DEPT: Mayor's Office ---------------- Committee Chair Committee Member Committee Member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: NIA (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: 0 APPROVED D DENIED 0 TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION 0 MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) REVISED-12/2017 COUNCIL BILL# First reading Enactment reading ORDINANCE# RESOLUTION # DATE: TO: FROM: CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM November 2, 2018 SUBJECT: Members of Land Use and Transportation Committee (LUTC) Yarden F. Weidenfeld, Senior Policy Advisor t V Report on Progress on Aircraft Issues Financial Impacts: NONE Background Information: On October 16, 2018, following the recommendation of the Land Use and Transportation Committee (LUTC), City Council unanimously adopted the Federal Way Mayor's Quiet and Healthy Skies Task Force Report in entirety, including all twenty-four (24) distinct recommendations. One of those recommendations was to "[ f]orm an Aviation Impacts Committee of the City Council to oversee implementation of the City's various policy actions and initiatives related to Sea-Tac existing operations and future growth." City Council decided to delegate this function to LUTC. Mayor Ferrell assigned me to give monthly reports as to progress on the recommendations and other aircraft related issues. This is the first of these reports. Developments: 1. Sea-Tac Airport Stakeholders Roundtable (StART) a. Meetings of City Officials-On September 13, 2018 and October 17, 2018, Port of Seattle Aviation Director Lance Lyttle convened meetings of the city staff StART representatives to discuss how things have been going so far and to address certain concerns raised by Port officials and others. See Attachment One (Agendas). Key concerns of the Port involved its view that StART should serve as a working committee to address and resolve some key concerns of nearby communities and its fear that the use of inflammatory language by members of the public and some members of StART could hamper that effort by leading to the withdrawal of airline and/or FAA officials. Concerns raised by others included the need for buy-in and feedback from the public and the possibility of allowing alternates for the community representatives (as are allowed for the staff representatives). Rev. 7/18 The original operating procedures, working updates, and final revised operating procedures are contained in Attachment Two. In general, it was decided that the public comments should relate to the meeting agenda and that the facilitator (an outside person retained by the Port), with assistance from StART members, would be responsible for ensuring that all comments remain on point and are made respectfully in accordance with the "Commitment from Stakeholders" (last page of Operating Procedures). It was suggested that enough time be allotted for public comments from everyone requesting to make one. The agenda for the next StART meeting did indeed add some extra time for public comments. With respect to community representatives, it was decided that since there are two community representatives from each member city, alternates are not necessary. A section was also added to allow for working groups on specific topics, such as the recently form working group on aviation noise. b. Regular Meetings-Regular StART meetings were held earlier this year in February, April, June, and August. Agendas, short recaps, and longer summaries of these meetings are contained in Attachment Three. The most recent full StART meeting was held on October 24, 2018. See Attachment Four for the meeting agenda. Some key points that emerged or that were discussed: 1. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthori z ation-Congress passed a standard five-year reauthorization bill for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), extending to 2023. (Recent reauthorizations have been temporary one-year carryovers.) Key items include: 1. Infrastructure for airports. 2. Creation of noise ombudsman for each of nine regions (in addition to recently authorized community outreach person). 3. Study on the impact of overflight noise on health, including Seattle (per amendment by Representative Pramila Jayapal). 4. One-year deadline for evaluation of the 65 DNL metric for nmse. 5. Studies regarding: Rev. 7/18 a. Impact of takeoff and landing on community noise b. Feasibility of disbursal for new flight paths c. Noise exposure impacts on communities d. Feasibility of phasing out Stage 3 aircraft e. Environmental mitigation for noise, air quality, and water quality at airports or within five miles of airports. Unfortunately, neither of Representative Adam Smith's proposals (for a federal study on the impact of ultra-fine particles (UFPs) and to expand the definition of airport-impacted communities) made it into the bill. Support for both of these bills, which could be introduced at the next session, is amongst the recommendations of the Task Force report. Highline Schools remain eligible for noise mitigation grants. Sheila Brush, a community StART representative from Des Moines, pointed out that much of what is in the FAA reauthorization does not apply to Sea-Tac Airport since many provisions only apply to the eleven "metro-plex" airports. StART may form a working group to go through the bill and determine what applies to Sea-Tac and how it could qualify to be a "metro-plex" airport. It was also pointed out that the reauthorization bill does not include funding, which has yet to be authorized in the appropriations process. 11. Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP)-A brief report was given on the recent completion of the scoping public comment period for the Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP) on September 28, 2018. The Port reported that: 1. Over three hundred (300) people attended public scoping meetings. 2. Approximately 750 submittals were received. 3. The Port is reviewing all the comments and will issue a report in early 2019 with all comments and the Port's response to each comment. m. Noise Working Group-See below. 1v. Presentation on Forthcoming Fleet Changes-We heard from Dr. Robert Stoker (Senior Manager of Flight Sciences-Noise, Vibration Rev. 7/18 and Emissions at Boeing Company and from the Alaska and Delta Airlines StART representatives. The gist of these presentations was that newer airplanes, including the soon-to-be-released 777X, are quieter, more efficient, and emit less carbon. Sheila Brush, however, pointed out that while Boeing is doing a great job producing aircraft that cause less noise, this positive effect is negated by the increased frequency of flights. c. Aviation Noise Working Group-Meetings of the Aviation Noise Working Group have been held in August, September, and most recently on October 29, 2018. See Attachment Five for meeting agendas. The Port retained private consultant Vince Mestre as an expert to advise the working group. Mestre has been involved in aviation issues since 1973, the year of the first airport noise study. He has written over twelve technical papers on the subject, has international experience in Europe (including Russia), was technical advisor for the Oakland Community Forum, and has designed noise pro grams at several airports including John Wayne Airport in Orange County, California (which has one of the strictest noise regulations in the world). Some ideas being discussed for implementation at SeaTac include: 1. Runway Use Agreement-This is one option being discussed to mitigate the increasing use of the third runway. It may require a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the Port of Seattle and the FAA and/or other parties. There has been such an agreement at SeaTac in the past, but its exceptions overwhelmed the basic idea, and it is no longer being used. It is possible that such an agreement could include a night-time limitation on the third runway. 11. Night-Time Voluntary Curfews-As discussed in the Task Force report, mandatory curfews at airports have been virtually impossible since the 1990 passage of the Airport Noise & Capacity Act (ANCA). However, voluntary curfews are not precluded. Monetary incentives or penalties are prohibited, but airlines that participate could be rewarded with positive publicity ( or penalized with negative publicity). It was decided to look in particular at the hours of midnight to 5 :00 AM. The Port was asked to research the nature and frequency of these flights, including runways used, airlines and aircraft, and flights paths. See Attachment Six for the Port's presentation on these items. 111. Glide Slope Analysis-As discussed in the Task Force report, the standard glide slope in the United States is three degrees. However, north flow approaches on one SeaTac runway are on a 2.75 degree glide slope, affecting Federal Way. Moving those approaches up to a three-degree glide slope is feasible, though it would require some re- Rev. 7/18 configurations of the airfield. Federal Way community representative Chris Hall has also asked for a look at a 3 .2 degree glide slope, as is used in Frankfurt. Some concerns from airlines on these ideas include passenger comfort, fuel costs, and reconfiguration costs. 1v. Reverse Thrust Study-For many people near the airport, the use of reverse thrust on landings is a contributor to noise. The Working Group is looking into why it is used and whether it can be limited. v. N oise Abatement Departure Procedures-The working group is examining the departure procedures and was informed that the FAA only allows three departure procedures-"regular," "close-in," and "distant". Procedures are designed by runway, not airport. The "close- in" procedure benefits communities close to the runway but leads to higher noise levels for farther away communities. The "distant" procedure is the opposite. See Attachment Seven for the most recent presentation by Vince Mestre on some of these issues. 2. Airport Community Impacts Study-On September 4, 2018, City Council unanimously agreed to participate in the Sea-Tac Airport Community Impacts study. As was reported at that time, scoping for the study had been stalled due to concerns raised regarding attempted last-minute changes made to the authorizing proviso and a perceived need to "reboot" the advisory process to include more community representation. The advisory process has now restarted with a community, in addition to staff, representative from each participating city to advise the Department of Commerce. Task Force member David Berger is the community representative for Federal Way. Meetings have been held on October 15, 2018 and October 29, 2018, with another set for November 19, 2018. State Representative Tina Orwall is now a regular participant. On October 29, 2018, advisory committee members were informed that the Port of Seattle lobbyist who had been participating in committee meetings had decided not to attend this meeting and was unclear if he would attend in the future. He felt unwelcomed at prior meetings. A concern was raised that without the Port's participation, the study results may be ignored, as happened with the last study on local impacts of the airport in 1997. It remains to be seen how this plays out. See Attachment Eight for the most recent meeting agendas. The advisory committee is now working through a more detailed scope (or statement) of work and a "Project Charter". The Project Charter includes work schedule with a new goal that the study be submitted to the State Legislature by April 15, 2020. It was also decided that the Rev . 7/18 Request for Proposals (RFPs) should be published by December 31 , 2018. 3. Meeting with Port Officials on Task Force Report-Port of Seattle Aviation Director Lance Lyttle asked Mayor Ferrell if he could have some of his staff meet with City staff to provide feedback on the Task Force report. That meeting was held on October 26 , 2018 with Port of Seattle Local Government Relations Manager Dave Kaplan, Aviation Environment and Sustainability Director Arlyn Purcell, and Director of Capital Project Delivery Clare Gallagher. The City was represented by Public Works Director EJ Walsh, Planning Manager Doc Hansen, Principal Planner Margaret Clark, and myself. Task Force members David Berger and Chris Hall also attended. See Attachment Nine for the outline of the Port's response. As can be seen, there are many areas of agreement and other areas where the Port is open to further discussion. Rev. 7/18 OY"l~ StART ~ SEA-TAC STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY ROUND TABLE Mid-year Check-in with City Managers/ Administrators Meeting Agenda September 13, 2018; 2:00 pm -3:00 pm Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Offices, Executive Conference Room (5th Floor) 17801 International Blvd., SeaTac (Directions ) Staff will meet attendees at the Airport Office Building reception desk and escort them to the 5th Floor Meeting Purpose: Discuss StART's operating procedures, assess StART's objectives and gage each entity's commitment to StART. Agenda: 2:00 pm Welcome and Introductions All present 2:05 pm Assessing the commitment to StART All present 2:15 pm Operating procedures: general feedback All present 2:25 pm Operating procedures: membership Lance Lyttle 2:35 pm Operating procedures: public comment Lance Lyttle 2:45 pm Operating procedures: elected official representation Lance Lyttle 2:55 pm Next steps All present StART enhances cooperat,on between the Port of Seattle and the ne1ghbonng commumt1es of Sea-Tac Airport StART~ SEA-TAC STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY ROUND TABLE Mid-year Check-in with City Managers/ Administrators Meeting #2 Agenda Wednesday-October 17, 2018; 3:00 pm -4:30 pm Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Offices, Executive Conference Room (5th Floor) 17801 International Blvd., SeaTac (Directions ) Staff will meet attendees at the Airport Office Building reception desk and escort them to the 5th Floor Meeting Purpose: Discuss recommended changes to StART's operating procedures, gather input and establish next steps to adoption. Agenda: 3:00 pm 3:05 pm Welcome and Introductions Reasons behind the Recommended Changes • 3:20 pm Proposal #1: Working Groups All present Lance Lyttle • 3:25 pm Proposal #2: Amending Operating Procedures • 3:30 pm • 3:35 pm • 3:40 pm • 3:45 pm Proposal #3: Public Comment Proposal #4: Role of Alternates Proposal #5: Role of Facilitator & Chair Proposal #7: Additional Changes 3:50 pm 4:20 pm 4:30 pm Discussion Operating Procedures: Next steps Conclusion All present Lance Lyttle & Phyllis Shulman StART enhances cooperotwn between the Port of Seattle and the neighboring c,t1es of Seo-Tac Airport TWO StART ~ SEA-TAC STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY ROUND TABLE Background OPERATING PROCEDURES February 28, 2018 In fall 2017, the Port of Seattle (Port) developed the Sea-Tac Stakeholder Advisory Round Table (StART) to enhance cooperation between the Port and the neighboring communities of SeaTac, Burien, Des Moines, Normandy Park, Tukwila and Federal Way (Communities). This voluntary, non-governing regional roundtable is being convened by the Aviation Managing Director, influenced by discussions with leadership from the cities representing the Communities. Purpose StART provides Southwest King County cities, Communities, airline representatives, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Port with the opportunity to: • Support meaningful and collaborative public dialogue and engagement on airport- related operations, planning and development; • Provide an opportunity for the community to inform the airport-related decision making of the Port of Seattle and other Southwest King County jurisdictions/organizations; and • Raise public knowledge about the airport and impacted communities. The intent is to provide a forum that fosters a spirit of good will, respect and openness while encouraging candid discussion between the Port and residential and business community members from SeaTac, Burien, Des Moines, Normandy Park, Tukwila and Federal Way. StART is the preeminent forum for information-sharing, discussing the Communities' concerns, and providing feedback to the Port for issues related to Sea-Tac International Airport's capital plans and operations. StART's effectiveness will be driven by a willingness by all parties to fully discuss matters of mutual concern. All parties pledge their good faith best effort to achieve those ends (see Commitments from Stakeholders). Reporting Structure StART is convened by the Port's Aviation Managing Director who will serve as the Sponsor. The sponsor will provide staff support and technical analysis/expertise, and work with the facilitator to identify briefing topics, work toward consensus to shape feedback and provide transparency. StART shall have an informal relationship structure to the Highline Forum, with opportunities to provide regular reports on StART activity. The Highline Forum provides Southwest King County municipalities (elected representation and senior staff), educational governing bodies, and the Port with the opportunity to share information, interact with outside speakers and other StART enhances cooperat,on between the Port of Seattle and the ne1ghbor1ng commun1t1es of Seo-Tac Airport governmental organizations, and work in partnership on initiatives that benefit the residents of Southwest King County. Each member-city of the Highline Forum will be given a formal role to designate StART members (see Membership), identify recommended briefing topics to StART, and/or invite the StART to present on a regular basis. After completion and upon achieving consensus from StART members, an Annual Report shall be presented to the Port of Seattle Commission and the High line Forum. Upon request to the Sponsor, each city or representational body will receive a presentation of the Annual Report. Membership StART shall consist of the following members: • Three (3) members serving as stakeholders, designated by each Highline Forum-member city electing to participate. Two (2) members shall be community members who reside, own a business or property, or are employed within the city and who do not serve as an elected official. One (1) member shall be a non-elected city employee. • Two (2) airline representatives from the two highest passenger volume carriers serving Sea-Tac Airport (one representative per carrier). • One (1) air cargo representative. • Two (2) representatives from the Port. One (1) representative shall be the Port's Aviation Managing Director. The Port's Aviation Managing Director shall designate the second representative. Each city or representational body may assign one (1) non-elected alternate staff member to serve on StART. The alternate staff from each city must be assigned by the chief administrative officer. Assigned alternates are encouraged to attend all meetings in order to remain current on StART activities. Members shall be appointed for a two (2) year term; membership shall be renewed in January of every even numbered year. All members and alternates who serve on StART shall serve at the pleasure of their appointing bodies. It is the responsibility of each city or representational body to notify the facilitator anytime a member is appointed to or terminates service on StART. A member who is absent for three (3) consecutive regular meetings or one-third of all regular meetings in a rolling twelve-month timeframe automatically vacates the member's position. This does not apply to an absence due to illness or injury of the member, an illness or injury of a member's immediate family member, active military service, or the birth or adoption of a member's child for 90 days after the event. Federal Aviation Administration A representative from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is expected to participate at meetings of the StART. Periodically, time will be set aside at meetings for the representative to provide updates and briefings to StART. 2 StART enhances cooperation between the Port of Seattle and the ne1ghbor1ng commun1t1es of Sea-Toe Airport I Facilitator An independent, neutral facilitator will be selected and provided by the Port to assist in the preparation, management and summation of StART meetings. The facilitator will be responsible for ensuring a fair, open, honest, and balanced discussion of issues at StART meetings. As a collaborative process provider, the facilitator will not act as an advocate for anyone on any substantive issue. The facilitator may have non-confidential, informal communications and perform facilitation activities with Port staff, StART members, and others between and during meetings. The facilitator will manage member engagement and address situations where it appears that a member is not acting in accordance with the Commitments from Stakeholders. The facilitator will serve as the lead disseminator of all information related to StART and its meetings, including meeting agendas and summaries. The facilitator will keep a running list of aviation topics of interest to be used in the development of StART meeting agendas, which will be periodically updated through discussions with members. The facilitator will be responsible for drafting meeting summaries, which will be provided electronically in draft form to StART members for proposed correction and comment prior to the next meeting. Final meeting summaries will be posted on the Port's StART webpage for public view. Staff and Resources As directed by the Sponsor, the Port will have lead responsibility for staffing the StART, working with the facilitator for meeting preparation and follow-up. Technical advice from agencies, organizations or individuals with specialized expertise will be available to StART as issues arise. Meetings • Frequency StART shall meet six (6) times a year unless otherwise agreed to. Meetings will be scheduled on the 4th Wednesday of the month (typically February, April, June, August, October, December) alternating with the Highline Forum. Meetings typically begin at 6 PM and conclude at 8 PM. If Christmas falls on the fourth week in December, StART will be held on the third Wednesday in December. Special meetings may be called upon with twenty-four (24) hours notice by the Sponsor. Any regularly scheduled or special meeting may be cancelled upon the concurrence of a simple majority of members. Each party shall designate one of its members to have the authority to so act. • Meeting Attendance Members will notify the facilitator via email if they are unable to attend, preferably one week in advance. A majority of StART members must be present to constitute a quorum for holding a regular or special meeting. Regular or special meetings cannot be held if a quorum is not present. 3 StART enhances cooperation between the Port of Seattle and the neighboring communities of Sea-Tac A!rport • Location The location of StART meetings will be at Sea-Tac International Airport unless otherwise noticed. It is anticipated that several meetings per year will be held at locations away from the airport. • Notification of Meetings Attendance at StART meetings is open to the public and the media. All meeting materials, including agendas, are considered public documents and available to the public consistent with the requirements of the Wash i ngton State Public Records Act Chap t er 42.56 RCW . Meeting materials will be posted one week prior to a meeting for the public to view. Meeting notices, agendas, and final meeting summaries will be posted on the Port of Seattle's StART website. A media advisory will be sent to local media in advance of each meeting. • Meeting Agendas StART meeting agendas will be provided electronically as a sustainability measure; however, hard copies will be made available to members upon request. Each meeting shall include the following regular agenda items: public comment, updates from the Aviation Managing Director, roundtable updates from each member, informational presentation(s), and meeting evaluation. The facilitator and Port staff will develop the Working Agenda for each StART meeting. Members will receive advance copies of the Working Agenda and are able to provide input and suggest changes prior to the agenda's finalization. A running list of aviation topics of interest will be kept by the facilitator and periodically updated through discussions with members. At the final meeting of the year, members will evaluate if changes need to be made to the StART agenda structure for the following year's meetings. • Public Comment All StART meetings are open to the public and noticed in the appropriate Southwest King County media outlets prior to each meeting. Time is set aside at each meeting for the public to provide comments. Members of the public who wish to speak are asked to sign-up before the meeting begins and are provided up to three minutes of time. Members of the public are encouraged to submit written comments to Port staff for circulation to the full StART membership. StART does not engage in dialogue with those who provide public comment during meetings. Questions or requests for information or documents may be made separately from StART meetings. Feedback StART is not a formal decision-making body or an inter-local agency; StART will not follow procedural rules of order and will not entertain motions or record votes. 4 StART enhances cooperat,on between the Port of Seattle and the ne,ghbor,ng commun,t1es of Sea-Tac Airport StART will use consensus to shape feedback, which will be captured in a formal meeting summary developed by the facilitator. Consensus-based actions are the product of discussions among the members to distinguish underlying values, interests, and concerns with a goal of developing widely accepted feedback. The facilitator will assist StART in articulating points of agreement, as well as articulating concerns that require further exploration or areas where consensus could not be achieved. Annual Report StART will have an annual evaluation to review accomplishments and outstanding issues. With assistance from Port staff, the facilitator will produce an annual report based on StART's annual evaluation. After completion and upon achieving consensus from StART members, the annual report shall be presented to the Port of Seattle Commission and the Highline Forum. Upon request to the Sponsor, each city or representational body will receive a presentation of the Annual Report. 5 St A RT enhances cooperatwn between the Port of Seattle and the ne,ghbonng communities of Sea-Tac Airport StART ~ SEA-TAC STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY ROUND TABLE COMMITMENT FROM STAKEHOLDERS StART members will participate in good faith, which means: 1. Set aside time to prepare for and participate in the meetings. 2. Participate fully, honestly and fairly, commenting constructively and specifically. 3. Speak respectfully, briefly and non-repetitively; not speaking again on a subject until all other members desiring to speak have had the opportunity to speak. 4. Allow people to say what is true for them without fear of criticism from StART members . 5. Avoid side conversations during meetings. 6. Provide information as much in advance as possible of the meeting in which such information is to be used and share all relevant information to the maximum extent possible. 7. Generate and explore all options on the merits with an open mind, listening to different points of view with a goal of understanding the underlying interests of other StART members. 8. Consult regularly with their appointing bodies and provide their input in a clear and concise manner. 9. Each member agrees to work toward fair and practical feedback that reflects the diverse interests of all StART members and the public. 10. When communicating with others, accurately summarize the StART process, discussion and meetings, presenting a full, fair and balanced view of the issues and arguments out of respect for the process and other members. 11. Strive for consensus in shaping feedback and closure on issues. 12. Self-regulate and help other members abide by these commitments. 6 StART enhances coop1crat10n between the Port of Seattle and the neighboring commun,t,es of Sea-Tac Airport Background StART~ SEA-TAC STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY ROUND TABLE DRAFT UPDATED OPERATING PROCEDURES October X, 2018 In fall 2017, the Port of Seattle (Port) developed the Sea-Tac Stakeholder Advisory Round Table (StART) to enhance cooperation between the Port and the neighboring cities of SeaTac, Burien, Des Moines, Normandy Park, Tukwila and Federal Way (cities). This voluntary, non-governing regional roundtable is being convened by the Aviation Managing Director, influenced by discussions with leadership from the cities representing their communities. Purpose StART provides Southwest King County cities, communities, airline representatives, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Port with the opportunity to: • Support meaningful and collaborative public dialogue and engagement on airport- related operations, planning and development; • Provide an opportunity for the communities to inform the airport-related decision making of the Port of Seattle and other Southwest King County jurisdictions/organizations; and • Raise public knowledge about the airport and impacted communities. The intent is to provide a forum that fosters a spirit of good will, respect and openness while encouraging candid discussion between the Port and residential and business community members from SeaTac, Burien, Des Moines, Normandy Park, Tukwila and Federal Way. StART is the preeminent forum for information-sharing, discussing the communities' concerns, and providing feedback to the Port for issues related to Sea-Tac Airport ca13ital 13lans anel 013erations. StART's effectiveness will be driven by a willingness by all parties to fully discuss matters of mutual concern. All parties pledge their good faith best effort to achieve those ends (see Commitments from Stakeholders). Sponsorship StART is convened by the Port's Aviation Managing Director, who in addition to serving as the chair, will serve as the sponsor. The sponsor will provide staff support and technical analysis/expertise, and work with the facilitator to identify briefing topics and work toward consensus to shape feedback and provide transparency. Reporting Structure StART enhances cooperat,on between the Port of Seattle and the ne,ghbonng c,t,es of Sea-Tac Airport Through discussions at StART meetings, StART members will provide input and feedback to the Port's Aviation Managing Director and staff. StART shall have an informal relationship structure to the Highline Forum, with opportunities to provide regular reports on StART activity. The High line Forum provides Southwest King County cities (elected representation and senior staff), educational governing bodies, and the Port with the opportunity to share information, interact with outside speakers and other governmental organizations, and work in partnership on initiatives that benefit the residents of Southwest King County. Each member-city of the Highline Forum will be given a formal role to designate StART members (see Membership), identify recommended briefing topics to StART, and/or invite StART to present on a regular basis. After completion and upon achieving consensus from StART members, an Annual Report shall be presented to the Port of Seattle Commission and the Highline Forum. Upon request to the chair, each city or represeRtational easy will receive a presentation of the Annual Report. Membership StART shall consist of the following members: • Three (3) members serving as stakeholders, designated by each Highline Forum-member city electing to participate. Two (2) members shall be community members who reside, own a business or property, or are employed within the city and who do not serve as an elected official. One (1) member shall be a non-elected city employee. • Two (2) airline representatives from each ofthe two highest passenger volume carriers serving Sea-Tac Airport (one representative and one alternate per carrier). • One (1) air cargo representative. • Two (2) representatives from the Port. One (1) representative shall be the Port's Aviation Managing Director. The Port's Aviation Managing Director shall designate the second representative. StART enhances cooperation between the Port of Seattle and the neighboring ot,es of Sea-Tac Airport 2 Each Highline Forum-member ci t y may assign one (1) non-elected city employee to serve as an alternate for the city employee member. The alternate emj;!loyee from each city must be assigned by the chief admin istrative officer. Assigned alternates are encouraged to attend all meetings in order to remain current on StART activities. Because it is important for StART's membership to remain consistent in order to effe ctively address issues, each city has two appointed community members so that if one of the community members is unable to attend a meeting, a second StART community member from that city is available to participate and provide information either representative would like brought forth at the meeting. Members shall be appointed for a two (2) year term; membership shall be renewed in January of every even numbered year. All members and alternates who serve on StART shall serve at the pleasure of their appointing bodies. It is the responsibility of each city or representational body to notify the facilitator anytime a member is appointed to or terminates service on StART . A member who is absent for tl:iree (3) consec1:.1t ive regular meeti ngs or one third of all reg1:.1 lar meetings in a roll i ng twe lve month timeframe a1:.1tomatica ll y vacates the member's positi o n . This does not apply to an absence sue to i ll ness or in j ury of the member, an illness or inj1:.1ry of a member's immediate fami ly member, active military service, or the birth or adopt i on of a member's child for 90 days after the e·.·ent. Federal Aviation Administration Representatives from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) are expected to participate at StART meetings. Periodically, time will be set aside at meetings for representatives to provide updates and briefings at StART meetings. Facilitator An independent, neutral facilitator will be selected and provided by the Port to assist in the preparation, management and summation of StART meetings. The facilitator will be responsible for ensuring a fair, open, honest, and balanced discussion of issues at StART meetings. As a collaborative process provider, the facilitator will not act as an advocate for anyone on any substantive issue. The facilitator may have non-confidential, informal communications and perform facilitation activities with Port staff, StART members, and others between and during meetings. To ensure a spirit of goodwill, respect, openness and candidness occurs at all StART meetings, the facilitator will manage member engagement and address situations where it appears that a member is not acting in accordance with the Commitments from Stakeholders. The facilitator will serve as the lead disseminator of all information related to StART and its meetings, including meeting agendas and summaries. The facilitator will keep a running list of aviation topics of interest to be used in the development of StART meeting agendas, which will be periodically updated through discussions with members. The facilitator will be responsible for drafting meeting summaries, which will be provided electronically in draft form to StART members for proposed correction and comment prior to the next meeting. Final meeting summaries will be posted on the Port's StART webpage for public view. StART enhances cooperatwn between the Port of Seattle and the ne,ghbor,ng c,t,es of Sea-Tac Airport 3 itaf.f aREt Rese1i1r,es As directed by the S130Asor, the Port will l:ia•,e leael res13onsibility for staffing the StART, working witl=I tl=le facilitator f.or meeting 13re13aration and follow u13. Technical aelvice from agencies, organizations or inelivieluals with specializes CJEpertise will be a·,ailable to StART as issues arise. Meetings • Frequency StART shall meet six (6) times a year unless otherwise agreed to. Meetings will be scheduled on the 4th Wednesday of the month (typically February, April, June, August, October, December) alternating with the High line Forum. Meetings typically begin at 6 PM and conclude at 8 PM. If Christmas falls on the fourth week in December, StART will be held on the third Wednesday in December. Special meetings may be called upon with twenty-four (24) hours notice by the Sponsor. Any regularly scheduled or special meeting may be cancelled upon the concurrence of a simple majority of members. Each party shall designate one of its members to have the authority to so act. • Meeting Attendance Members will notify the facilitator via email if they are unable to attend, preferably one week in advance. A majority of StART members must be present to constit1:.1te a quorum f.or holeling a regular or special meeting. Regular or special meetings cannot be helEi if a q1,rnr1:.1m is not present. • Location The location of StART meetings will be at Sea-Tac Airport unless otherwise noticed. It is possible that some meetings will be held at locations away from the airport. • Notification of Meetings Attendance at StART meetings is open to the public and the media. All meeting materials, including agendas, are considered public documents and available to the public consistent with the requirements of the Washington State Public Records Act Chapter 42.56 RCW. Meeting agendas materials will be posted one week prior to a meeting for the public to view. Meeting notices, agendas, and final meeting summaries will be posted on the Port of Seattle's StART website: www.portseattle.org/page/sea-tac-stakeholder-advisory-round-table. A meelia ael•,isory will be sent to local meelia in aelvance of eacl=I meeting. • Meeting Agendas St/\RT meeting agenelas will bq provideel electronically as a sustainability measure; hov .. ever, hard copies will be maele available to members upon request. Each meeting may include the following agenda items: updates from the Aviation Managing Director, roundtable updates from each member and informational presentation(s). The facilitator and Port staff will develop the Agenda for each StART meeting. Members will receive advance copies of the Agenda and are able to provide input and suggest changes prior StART enhances cooperat,on between the Port of Seattle and the neighboring c,t1es of Sea-Tac Airport 4 to the agenda's finalization. A running list of aviation topics of interest will be kept by the facilitator and periodically updated through discussions with members. At the final meeting of the year, members will complete a yearly evaluation. evah,:1ate if Gl:1aAges Reed to ae made to the StART agenda str1::1ct1::1re for the following year's meetings. • Public Comment All StART meetings are open to the public and the majority of the meeting agenda is dedicated to StART-related business. aAd Aoticed in the af:)propriate So1::1thwest King Co1::1nty media 01::1tlets 13rior to each meeting. Limited time is set aside at each meeting for the public to provide comments pertitent to the StART meeting agenda topics. Members of the public who wish to speak are asked to sign-up before the meeting begins and are provided one to three minutes of time. Due to time limitations, not all who sign-up to speak will necessarily be provided an opportunity to speak. Members ofthe public are encouraged to submit written comments to Port staff for circulation to the full StART membership. StART does not engage in dialogue with those who provide public comment during meetings. Questions or requests for information or documents may be made separately from StART meetings. · Feedback StART is not a formal decision-making body or an inter-local agency; StART will not follow procedural rules of order and will not entertain motions or record votes. StART will use consensus to shape feedback, which will be captured in a formal meeting summary developed by the facilitator. Consensus-based actions are the product of discussions among the members to distinguish underlying values, interests, and concerns with a goal of developing widely accepted feedback. The facilitator will assist StART in articulating points of agreement, as well as articulating concerns that require further exploration or areas where consensus could not be achieved. Working Groups Working groups may be established to allow for work to continue between StART meetings and to give specific issues and topics a more in-depth focus. A working group will be comprised of a subset of StART members and any staff support and technical analysis/expertise as identified by the Port. Working groups adhere to the StART Commitments from Stakeholders. Working groups set their agendas and work plan . Working groups will report out on the progress of their work and are open to suggested topics and guidance on their work plan during StART meetings. StART members who are not a member ofthe working group may attend as "observers". Working group meetings are not open to the public. Amending the Operating Procedures Operating Procedures may be amended by consensus of the Airport's Managing Director and the non-elected employee representatives from each of the Highline Forum cities. Proposed modifications to the Operating Procedures will be distributed in writing to the Airport's Managing Director and the non-elected employee representatives. Any proposed modification StART enhances cooperation between the Port of Seattle and the neighboring cities of Sea-Tac Airport 5 to StART's Operating Procedures will be evaluated at a separately scheduled meeting with the Airport's Managing Di rector and the non-elected employee representatives. If there is consensus, modifications to the Operating Procedures will be communicated to the StART members. Annual Report StART will have an annual evaluation to review accomplishments and outstanding issues. With assistance from Port staff, the facilitator will produce an annual report based on StART's yearly evaluation. After completion and upon achieving consensus from StART members, the annual report shall be presented to the Port of Seattle Commission and the Highline Forum. Upon request to the chair, each city will receive a presentation of the Annual Report. StART enhances cooperation between the Port of Seattle and the neighboring cities of Sea-Tac Airport 6 StART ~ SEA-TAC STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY ROUND TABLE COMMITMENT FROM STAKEHOLDERS StART members will participate in good faith, which means: 1. Set aside time to prepare for and participate in the meetings. 2. Participate fully, honestly and fairly, commenting constructively and specifically. 3. Speak respectfully, briefly and non-repetitively; not speaking again on a subject until all other members desiring to speak have had the opportunity to speak. 4. Allow people to say what is true for them without fear of criticism from StART members . 5. Avoid side conversations during meetings. 6. Provide information as much in advance as possible of the meeting in which such information is to be used and share all relevant information to the maximum extent possible. 7. Generate and explore all options on the merits with an open mind, listening to different points of view with a goal of understanding the underlying interests of other StART members. 8. Consult regularly with their appointing bodies and provide their input in a clear and concise manner. 9. Each member agrees to work toward fair and practical feedback that reflects the diverse interests of all StART members and the public. 10. When communicating with others, accurately summarize the StART process, discussion and meetings, presenting a full, fair and balanced view of the issues and arguments out of respect for the process and other members. 11. Strive for consensus in shaping feedback and closure on issues. 12. Self-regulate and help other members abide by these commitments. StART enhances cooperat,on between the Port of Seattle and the ne1ghbonng c,t1es of Sea-Tac Airport 7 StART~ SEA-TAC STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY ROUND TABLE Background DRAFT UPDATED OPERATING PROCEDURES October X, 2018 In fall 2017, the Port of Seattle (Port) developed the Sea-Tac Stakeholder Advisory Round Table (StART) to enhance cooperation between the Port and the neighboring cities of SeaTac, Burien, Des Moines, Normandy Park, Tukwila and Federal Way (cities). This voluntary, non-governing regional roundtable is being convened by the Aviation Managing Director, influenced by discussions with leadership from the cities representing their communities. Purpose StART provides Southwest King County cities, communities, airline representatives, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Port with the opportunity to: • Support meaningful and collaborative public dialogue and engagement on airport- related operations, planning and development; • Provide an opportunity for the communities to inform the airport-related decision making of the Port of Seattle and other Southwest King County jurisdictions/organizations; and • Raise public knowledge about the airport and impacted communities. The intent is to provide a forum that fosters a spirit of good will, respect and openness while encouraging candid discussion between the Port and residential and business community members from SeaTac, Burien, Des Moines, Normandy Park, Tukwila and Federal Way. StART is the preeminent forum for information-sharing, discussing the communities' concerns, and providing feedback to the Port for issues related to Sea-Tac Airport ca13ital 13laAs aAel 013erati0As. StART's effectiveness will be driven by a willingness by all parties to fully discuss matters of mutual concern. All parties pledge their good faith best effort to achieve those ends (see Commitments from Stakeholders). Sponsorship StART is convened by the Port's Aviation Managing Director, who in addition to serving as the chair, will serve as the sponsor. The sponsor will provide staff support and technical analysis/expertise, and work with the facilitator to identify briefing topics and work toward consensus to shape feedbaek aRd pre¥ide traA&pareRe; potential solutions . StART enhances cooperot,on between the Port of Seattle and the ne1ghbonng c1t1es of Sea-Tac Airport Reporting Structure Through discussions at StART meetings, StART members will provide input and feedback to the Port's Aviation Managing Director and staff. StART shall have an informal relationship structure to the Highline Forum, with opportunities to provide regular reports on StART activity. The Highline Forum provides Southwest King County cities (elected representation and senior staff), educational governing bodies, and the Port with the opportunity to share information, interact with outside speakers and other governmental organizations, and work in partnership on initiatives that benefit the residents of Southwest King County. Each member-city of the Highline Forum will be given a formal role to designate StART members (see Membership), identify recommended briefing topics to StART, and/or invite StART to present on a regular basis. After completion and upon achieving consensus from StART members, an Annual Report shall be presented to the Port of Seattle Commission and the High line Forum. Upon request to the chair, each city or re13resentational eoay will receive a presentation of the Annual Report. Membership StART shall consist of the following members: • Three (3) members serving as stakeholders, designated by each Highline Forum-member city electing to participate. Two (2) members shall be community members who reside, own a business or property, or are employed within the city and who do not serve as an elected official. One (1) member shall be a non-elected city employee. • Two (2) airline representatives from each of the two highest passenger volume carriers serving Sea-Tac Airport (one representative and one alternate per carrier). • One (1) air cargo representative. • Two (2) representatives from the Port. One (1) representative shall be the Port's Aviation Managing Director. The Port's Aviation Managing Director shall designate the second representative. StART enhances cooperation between the Port of Seattle and the ne1ghbonng cities of Sea-Tac Airport 2 Each Highline Forum-member city may assign one (1) non-elected city employee to serve as an alternate for the city employee member. The alternate employee from each city must be assigned by the chief administrative officer. Assigned alternates are encouraged to attend all meetings in order to remain current on StART activities. Because it is important for StART's membership to remain consistent in order to effectively address issues, each city has two appointed community members. Community members on StART are not assigned alternates. If one of the community members is unable to attend a meeting, the a-second StART community member from that city is available to participate and provide information either representative would like brought forth at the meeting. Members shall be appointed for a two (2) year term; membership shall be renewed in January of every even numbered year. All members and alternates who serve on StART shall serve at the pleasure of their appointing bodies. It is the responsibility of each city or representational body to notify the facilitator anytime a member is appointed to or terminates service on StART . A memser wl=io is assent fer tl=iree (~) consecl:lt ii,,•e regl:llar meetings or one third of all regl:llar meetings in a rolling twelve month timefraFRe a1:1tomatica l ly ·,acates tt:1e memser's f.lOSition. This does not af)f.l lY to an assence e1:1e to i l lness or inj1:1ry of the member, an illness or inj1:1ry of a member's immediate family memser, aetii,e militaP( service, or the birth or aelof)tion of a meml:ler's chilel for 90 elays after the event. Federal Aviation Administration Representatives from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) are expected to participate at StART meetings. Periodically, time will be set aside at meetings for representatives to provide updates and briefings at StART meetings. Facilitator An independent, neutral facilitator will be selected and provided by the Port to assist in the preparation, management and summation of each StART meeting. The facilitator will preside over the StART meetings and the faeilitater will be responsible for ensuring a fair, open, honest, and balanced discussion of issues and ensure the timely administering of the agendaa.t StART meetings . As a collaborative process provider, the facilitator will not act as an advocate for anyone on any substantive issue. The facilitator may have non-confidential, informal communications and perform facilitation activities with Port staff, StART members, and others between and during meetings. To ensure a spirit of goodwill, respect, openness and candidness occurs at all StART meetings, the facilitator will manage member engagement and address situations where it appears that a member is not acting in accordance with the Commitments from Stakeholders. The facilitator will serve as the lead disseminator of all information related to StART and its meetings, including meeting agendas and summaries. The facilitator will keep a running list of aviation topics of interest to be used in the development of StART meeting agendas, which will be periodically updated through discussions with members. The facilitator will be responsible for drafting meeting summaries, which will be provided electronically in draft form to StART St ART enhances cooperot,on between the Port of Seattle and the neighboring c,t,es of Seo-Toe Airport 3 members for proposed correction and comment prior to the next meeting. Final meeting summaries will be posted on the Port's StART webpage for public view. itaff aREI Resewrees As elirected 8\' the Sponsor, the Port will have leael resf')onsibilit•t for staffing the StART, working with the facilitator for meeting preparation anel follow up. Ted~nical ad·,ice from agencies, organizations or individuals with specialized eJ<pertise will be available to StART as issues arise. Meetings • Frequency StART shall meet six (6) times a year unless otherwise agreed to. Meetings will be scheduled on the 4th Wednesday of the month (typically February, April, June, August, October, December) alternating with the Highline Forum. Meetings typically begin at 6 PM and conclude at 8 PM. If Christmas falls on the fourth week in December, StART will be held on the third Wednesday in December. Special meetings may be called upon with twenty-four (24) hours notice by the Sponsor. Any regularly scheduled or special meeting may be cancelled upon the concurrence of a simple majority of members. Each party shall designate one of its members to have the authority to so act. • Meeting Attendance Members will notify the facilitator via email if they are unable to attend, preferably one week in advance. A majority of StART members must be present to constitute a quorum for holeling a reg1::1lar or special meeting. Reg1::1lar or s13ecial meetings cannot be held if a eiuor1::1m is not present. • Location The location of StART meetings will be at Sea-Tac Airport unless otherwise noticed. It is possible that some meetings will be held at locations away from the airport. • Notification of Meetings Attendance at StART meetings is open to the public and the media. All meeting materials, including agendas, are considered public documents and available to the public consistent with the requirements of the Washington State Public Records Act Chapter 42.56 RCW. Meeting agendas materials will be posted one week prior to a meeting for the public to view. Meeting notices, agendas, and final meeting summaries will be posted on the Port of Seattle's StART website: www.portseattle.org/page/sea-tac-stakeholder-advisory-round-table. A meelia aelvisory will be sent to local meelia in advance of each meeting. • Meeting Agendas StART meeting agenelas will be provieled electronically as a sustainabilit•; measure; however, harel copies v,ill be maele available to members 1::1pon reetuest. Each meeting may include the following agenda items: updates from the Aviation Managing Director, roundtable updates from each member and informational presentation(s). St ART enhances cooperatwn between the Port of Seattle and the ne1ghbor,ng ot1es of Sea-Tac Airport 4 The facilitator and Port staff will develop the Agenda for each StART meeting. Members will receive advance copies of the Agenda and are able to provide input and suggest changes prior to the agenda's finalization. A running list of aviation topics of interest will be kept by the facilitator and periodically updated through discussions with members. At the final meeting of the year, members will complete a yearly evaluation. evah,1ate if changes neea t o be maae to the StART agenda strl:lcture for the folloi.\•ing year's meetings. • Public Comment All StART meetings are open to the public and the majerit·1 ef the meeting agenda is dedicated to StART-related business. ana noticed in the appropriate Sol:lthwest King Col:lnty nieaia outlets prior to each meeting. Limited time is set aside at each meeting for the public to provide comments pertiteRtpertinent to the topics listed on that day's StART meeting agenda. ~ StART meeting agenda to pies , Members of the public who wish to speak are asked to sign-up before the meeting begins and are provided one to three minutes of time. Due to time limitations, not all who sign-up to speak will necessarily be provided an opportunity to speak. Members of the public are encouraged to submit written comments to Port staff for circulation to the full StART membership. StART does not engage in dialogue with those who provide public comment during meetings. Questions or requests for information or documents may be made separately from StART meetings. Feedback StART is not a formal decision-making body or an inter-local agency; StART will not follow procedural rules of order and will not entertain motions or record votes. StART will use consensus to shape feedback, which will be captured in a formal meeting summary developed by the facilitator. Consensus-based actions are the product of discussions among the members to distinguish underlying values, interests, and concerns with a goal of developing widely accepted feedback. The facilitator will assist StART in articulating points of agreement, as well as articulating concerns that require further exploration or areas where consensus could not be achieved. Working Groups Working groups may be established to allow for work to continue between StART meetings and to give specific issues and topics a more in-depth focus. A working group will be comprised of a subset of StART members and any staff support and technical analysis/expertise as identified by the Port. Working groups adhere to the StART Commitments from Stakeholders. Working groups set their agendas and work plan. Working groups will report out on the progress of their work and are open to suggested topics and guidance on their work plan during StART meetings. StART members who are not a member ofthe working group may attend as "observers". Working group meetings are not open to the public. Amending the Operating Procedures 5 StART enhances cooperat,on between the Port of Seattle and the ne,ghbonng ot,es of Sea-Tac Airport Operating Procedures may be amended by consensus of the Airport's Managing Director and the non-elected employee representatives from each of the Highline Forum cities . Proposed modifications to the Operating Procedures will be distributed in writing to the Airport's Managing Director and the non-elected employee representatives. Any proposed modification to StART's Operating Procedures will be evaluated at a separately scheduled meeting with the Airport's Managing Director and the non-elected employee representatives. If there is consensus, modifications to the Operating Procedures will be communicated to the StART members. Annual Report StART will have an annual evaluation to review accomplishments and outstanding issues. With assistance from Port staff, the facilitator will produce an annual report based on StART's yearly evaluation. After completion and upon achieving consensus from StART members, the annual report shall be presented to the Port of Seattle Commission and the High line Forum. Upon request to the chair, each city will receive a presentation ofthe Annual Report. St ART enhances cooperot,on between the Port of Seattle and the ne1ghbonng ot1es of Sea-Tac Airport 6 StART~ SEA-TAC STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY ROUND TABLE COMMITMENT FROM STAKEHOLDERS StART members will participate in good faith, which means: 1. Set aside time to prepare for and participate in the meetings. 2. Participate fully, honestly and fairly, commenting constructively and specifically . 3. Speak respectfully, briefly and non-repetitively; not speaking again on a subject until all other members desiring to speak have had the opportunity to speak. 4 . Allow people to say what is true for them without fear of criticism from StART members. 5. Avoid side conversations during meetings. 6. Provide information as much in advance as possible of the meeting in which such information is to be used and share all relevant information to the maximum extent possible. 7. Generate and explore all options on the merits with an open mind, listening to different points of view with a goal of understanding the underlying interests of other StART members. 8. Consult regularly with their appointing bodies and provide their input in a clear and concise manner. 9. Each member agrees to work toward fair and practical feedback that reflects the diverse interests of all StART members and the public. 10. When communicating with others, accurately summarize the StART process, discussion and meetings, presenting a full, fair and balanced view of the issues and arguments out of respect for the process and other members. 11. Strive for consensus in shaping feedback and closure on issues . 12. Self-regulate and help other members abide by these commitments. StART enhances cooperot,on between the Port of Seattle and the ne,ghbonng ot,es of Sea-Tac Airport 7 StART ~ SEA-TAC STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY ROUND TABLE Background OPERATING PROCEDURES Updated on October 19, 2018 In fall 2017, the Port of Seattle (Port) developed the Sea-Tac Stakeholder Advisory Round Table (StART) to enhance cooperation between the Port and the neighboring cities of SeaTac, Burien, Des Moines, Normandy Park, Tukwila and Federal Way (cities). This voluntary, non-governing regional roundtable is being convened by the Aviation Managing Director, influenced by discussions with leadership from the cities representing their communities. Purpose StART provides Southwest King County cities, communities, airline representatives, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Port with the opportunity to: • Support meaningful and collaborative public dialogue and engagement on airport- related operations, planning and development; • Provide an opportunity for the communities to inform the airport-related decision making of the Port of Seattle and other Southwest King County jurisdictions/organizations; and • Raise public knowledge about the airport and impacted communities. The intent is to provide a forum that fosters a spirit of good will, respect and openness while encouraging candid discussion between the Port and residential and business community members from SeaTac, Burien, Des Moines, Normandy Park, Tukwila and Federal Way. StART is the preeminent forum for information-sharing, discussing the communities' concerns, and providing feedback to the Port for issues related to Sea-Tac Airport. StART's effectiveness will be driven by a willingness by all parties to fully discuss matters of mutual concern. All parties pledge their good faith best effort to achieve those ends (see Commitments from Stakeholders). Sponsorship StART is convened by the Port's Aviation Managing Director, who in addition to serving as the chair, will serve as the sponsor. The sponsor will provide staff support and technical analysis/expertise, and work with the facilitator to identify briefing topics and work toward consensus to shape potential solutions. StART enhances cooperat10n between the Port of Seattle and the neighboring c,t1es of Sea-Tac Airport Reporting Structure Through discussions at StART meetings, StART members will provide input and feedback to the Port's Aviation Managing Director and staff. StART shall have an informal relationship structure to the Highline Forum, with opportunities to provide regular reports on StART activity. The Highline Forum provides Southwest King County cities (elected representation and senior staff), educational governing bodies, and the Port with the opportunity to share information, interact with outside speakers and other governmental organizations, and work in partnership on initiatives that benefit the residents of Southwest King County. Each member-city of the Highline Forum will be given a formal role to designate StART members (see Membership), identify recommended briefing topics to StART, and/or invite StART to present on a regular basis. After completion and upon achieving consensus from StART members, an Annual Report shall be presented to the Port of Seattle Commission and the Highline Forum. Upon request to the chair, each city will receive a presentation of the Annual Report. Membership StART shall consist of the following members: • Three (3) members serving as stakeholders, designated by each Highline Forum-member city electing to participate. Two (2) members shall be community members who reside, own a business or property, or are employed within the city and who do not serve as an elected official. One (1) member shall be a non-elected city employee. • Two (2) airline representatives from each of the two highest passenger volume carriers serving Sea-Tac Airport (one representative and one alternate per carrier). • One (1) air cargo representative. • Two (2) representatives from the Port. One (1) representative shall be the Port's Aviation Managing Director. The Port's Aviation Managing Director shall designate the second representative. StART enhances cooperat10n between the Port of Seattle and the neighboring c1t1es of Seo-Toe Airport 2 Each Highline Forum-member city may assign one (1) non-elected city employee to serve as an alternate for the city employee member. The alternate employee from each city must be assigned by the chief administrative officer. Assigned alternates are encouraged to attend all meetings in order to remain current on StART activities. Because it is important for StART's membership to remain consistent in order to effectively address issues, each city has two appointed community members. Community members on StART are not assigned alternates. If one of the community members is unable to attend a meeting, the second StART community member from that city is available to participate and provide information either representative would like brought forth at the meeting. Members shall be appointed for a two (2) year term; membership shall be renewed in January of every even numbered year. All members and alternates who serve on StART shall serve at the pleasure of their appointing bodies. It is the responsibility of each city or representational body to notify the facilitator anytime a member is appointed to or terminates service on StART . Federal Aviation Administration Representatives from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) are expected to participate at StART meetings. Periodically, time will be set aside at meetings for representatives to provide updates and briefings at StART meetings. Facilitator An independent, neutral facilitator will be selected and provided by the Port to assist in the preparation, management and summation of each StART meeting. The facilitator will preside over the StART meetings and be responsible for ensuring a fair, open, honest, and balanced discussion of issues and ensure the timely administering of the agenda. As a collaborative process provider, the facilitator will not act as an advocate for anyone on any substantive issue . The facilitator may have non-confidential, informal communications and perform facilitation activities with Port staff, StART members, and others between and during meetings. To ensure a spirit of goodwill, respect, openness and candidness occurs at all StART meetings, the facilitator will manage member engagement and address situations where it appears that a member is not acting in accordance with the Commitments from Stakeholders. The facilitator will serve as the lead disseminator of all information related to StART and its meetings, including meeting agendas and summaries. The facilitator will keep a running list of aviation topics of interest to be used in the development of StART meeting agendas, which will be periodically updated through discussions with members. The facilitator will be responsible for drafting meeting summaries, which will be provided electronically in draft form to StART members for proposed correction and comment prior to the next meeting. Final meeting summaries will be posted on the Port's StART webpage for public view. Meetings • Frequency StART shall meet six (6) times·a year unless otherwise agreed to. Meetings will be scheduled on the 4th Wednesday of the month (typically February, April, June, August, October, December) 3 StART enhances cooperation between the Port of Seattle and the neighboring c1t1es of Sea-Tac Airport alternating with the Highline Forum. Meetings typically begin at 6 PM and conclude at 8 PM. If Christmas falls on the fourth week in December, StART will be held on the third Wednesday in December. Special meetings may be called upon with twenty-four (24) hours notice by the Sponsor. Any regularly scheduled or special meeting may be cancelled upon the concurrence of a simple majority of members. Each party shall designate one of its members to have the authority to so act. • Meeting Attendance Members will notify the facilitator via email if they are unable to attend, preferably one week in advance. • Location The location of StART meetings will be at Sea-Tac Airport unless otherwise noticed. It is possible that some meetings will be held at locations away from the airport. • Notification of Meetings Attendance at StART meetings is open to the public and the media. All meeting materials, including agendas, are considered public documents and available to the public consistent with the requirements of the Washington State Public Records Act Chapter 42.56 RCW. Meeting agendas will be posted one week prior to a meeting for the public to view. Meeting notices, agendas, and final meeting summaries will be posted on the Port of Seattle's StART website: www.portseattle.org/page/sea-tac-stakeholder-advisory-round-table. • Meeting Agendas Each meeting may include the following agenda items: updates from the Aviation Managing Director, roundtable updates from each member and informational presentation(s). The facilitator and Port staff will develop the Agenda for each StART meeting. Members will receive advance copies of the Agenda and are able to provide input and suggest changes prior to the agenda's finalization. A running list of aviation topics of interest will be kept by the facilitator and periodically updated through discussions with members. At the final meeting of the year, members will complete a yearly evaluation . • Public Comment All StART meetings are open to the public and the meeting agenda is dedicated to StART- related business. Limited time is set aside at each meeting for the public to provide comments pertinent to the topics listed on that day's StART meeting agenda. Members of the public who wish to speak are asked to sign-up before the meeting begins and are provided one to three minutes of time. Due to time limitations, not all who sign-up to speak will necessarily be provided an opportunity to speak. Members of the public are encouraged to submit written comments to Port staff for circulation to the full StART membership. StART enhances cooperat10n between the Port of Seattle and the ne,ghbor,ng c1t1es of Sea-Tac Airport 4 StART does not engage in dialogue with those who provide public comment during meetings. Questions or requests for information or documents may be made separately from StART meetings. Feedback StART is not a formal decision-making body or an inter-local agency; StART will not follow procedural rules of order and will not entertain motions or record votes. StART will use consensus to shape feedback, which will be captured in a formal meeting summary developed by the facilitator. Consensus-based actions are the product of discussions among the members to distinguish underlying values, interests, and concerns with a goal of developing widely accepted feedback. The facilitator will assist StART in articulating points of agreement, as well as articulating concerns that require further exploration or areas where consensus could not be achieved. Working Groups Working groups may be established to allow for work to continue between StART meetings and to give specific issues and topics a more in-depth focus. A working group will be comprised of a subset of StART members and any staff support and technical analysis/expertise as identified by the Port. Working groups adhere to the StART Commitments from Stakeholders. Working groups set their agendas and work plan. Working groups will report out on the progress of their work and are open to suggested topics and guidance on their work plan during StART meetings. StART members who are not a member of the working group may attend as "observers". Working group meetings are not open to the public. Amending the Operating Procedures Operating Procedures may be amended by consensus of the Airport's Managing Director and the non-elected employee representatives from each of the Highline Forum cities. Proposed modifications to the Operating Procedures will be distributed in writing to the Airport's Managing Director and the non-elected employee representatives. Any proposed modification to StART's Operating Procedures will be evaluated at a separately scheduled meeting with the Airport's Managing Director and the non-elected employee representatives. If there is consensus, modifications to the Operating Procedures will be communicated to the StART members. Annual Report StART will have an annual evaluation to review accomplishments and outstanding issues. With assistance from Port staff, the facilitator will produce an annual report based on StART's yearly evaluation. After completion and upon achieving consensus from StART members, the annual report shall be presented to the Port of Seattle Commission and the Highline Forum. Upon request to the chair, each city will receive a presentation of the Annual Report. StART enhances cooperot,on between the Port of Seattle and the ne,ghbonng c,t1es of Sea-Tac A,rport 5 StART ~ SEA-TAC STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY ROUND TABLE COMMITMENT FROM STAKEHOLDERS StART members will participate in good faith, which means: 1. Set aside time to prepare for and participate in the meetings. 2. Participate fully, honestly and fairly, commenting constructively and specifically. 3. Speak respectfully, briefly and non-repetitively; not speaking again on a subject until all other members desiring to speak have had the opportunity to speak . 4. Allow people to say what is true for them without fear of criticism from StART members. 5. Avoid side conversations during meetings. 6. Provide information as much in advance as possible of the meeting in which such information is to be used and share all relevant information to the maximum extent possible. 7. Generate and explore all options on the merits with an open mind, listening to different points of view with a goal of understanding the underlying interests of other StART members. 8. Consult regularly with their appointing bodies and provide their input in a clear and concise manner. 9. Each member agrees to work toward fair and practical feedback that reflects the diverse interests of all StART members and the public. 10. When communicating with others, accurately summarize the StART process, discussion and meetings, presenting a full, fair and balanced view of the issues and arguments out of respect for the process and other members. 11. Strive for consensus in shaping feedback and closure on issues. 12. Self-regulate and help other members abide by these commitments . StART enhances cooperot1on between the Port of Se attle and the ne1ghbonng c,t,es of Seo-Tac Airport 6 6:00pm 6:30pm 6:40pm 6:50pm 7:30pm 7:50pm T~<ee StART ~ SEA-TAC STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY ROUND TABLE Kick-Off Meeting Agenda February 28, 2018 6:00 pm -8:00 pm Sea-Tac International Airport Conference Center 17801 International Blvd. (Directions ) Introductory Comments (30 minutes) • Member Introductions Introduction of Facilitator (10 minutes) • Roles & Commitments of Members • Role of the Public • Format and Logistics of Future Meetings Public Comment (10 minutes) Presentation and Q & A (40 minutes) -Sea-Tac International Airport 101 Discussion (20 minutes) -2018 StART Look Ahead Meeting Wrap Up (10 minutes) • Closing Comments • Meeting Evaluation Form • Future Meeting Dates & Focus Lance Lyttle, Sea-Tac Airport Director StART Members Phyllis Shulman Public Lance Lyttle & StART Members StART Members Lance Lyttle & StART Members Next Meeting: Wednesday, April 25 -Sea-Tac International Airport Conference Center 6:00 pm -8:00 pm StART ~ SEA-TAC STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY ROUND TABLE Feb. 28, 2018 Meeting Summary The Sea-Tac Stakeholder Advisory Round Table (StART) kick-off meeting took place Feb. 28, 2018. This voluntary, non-governing regional roundtable, convened by the Aviation Managing Director, Lance Lyttle, is a venue for the Port of Seattle to engage with the communities of SeaTac, Burien, Des Moines, Normandy Park, Tukwila and Federal Way. Representatives from Delta Air Lines, Alaska Airlines and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) also participate. The current members are: Burien: John Parnass, Terry Plumb, Brian Wilson Federal Way: John Resing, Chris Hall, Yarden Weidenfeld Des Moines: Sheila Brush, Ken Rogers , Michael Matthias Normandy Park: Eric Zimmerman, Earnest Thompson, Mark Happen SeaTac: Tejvir Basra, Rober Akhtar, Joe Scarcia Tukwila: Trina Cook, Thomas Lee , Brandon Miles Alaska Airlines: Megan Ouellette Delta Air Lines: Tony Gonchar Port Of Seattle: Lance Lyttle, Mike Ehl This first meeting began with a welcome by Lyttle, who praised the unique opportunity that the round table presents. For the first time , he said, a group representing the community, cities , airlines, the FAA and the Port will regularly sit down together to build collaborative relationships and enhance cooperation. The meetings are expected to enhance transparency and support two-way dialog, as well as allow constructive verbal and written public feedback to help inform airport-related decision-making. The focus of the first meeting was an overview of the Port as an organization, how the airport is governed and how it operates. The presentation mapped out current and future airport projects, highlighting upcoming opportunities and presenting potential challenges. To review the airport presentation, click here . The StART facilitator, an outside consultant, shared a preliminary list of potential issues that could be considered at future meetings. These included initial thoughts that stakeholders expressed during individual interviews with the facilitator prior to the kick-off meeting. During the meeting, stakeholders suggested additional topics to consider, and discussed topics that could be explored at their second meeting. There was consensus on the need for greater understanding of roles and responsibilities, decision-making authority, and which decisions about airport air and ground operations the representatives can influence. Next, the facilitator will consolidate the comments from the first meeting into a list of topics for stakeholders to consider. StART ~ SEA-TAC STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY ROUND TABLE The next meeting is set for 6 p.m., April 25, at the Conference Center at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport. The public is invited to attend. StART meeting mat er ials may be found on the Port of Seattle website. StART ~ SEA-TAC STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY ROUND TABLE Member John Parness Terry Plumb Brian Wilson Lisa Marshall (Alt) John Resing Chris Hall Varden Weidenfeld Sheila Brush Ken Rogers Michael Matthias Eric Zimmerman Earnest Thompson Mark Happen Jennifer-Ferrer- Santa Ines (Alt) Non-Member Randy Fiertz StART FACILITATOR'S MEETING SUMMARY Wednesday, February 28, 2018 6:00-8:00, Conference Center SeaTac Airport Interest Interest Represented Member Represented Burien X Tejvir Basra SeaTac Burien X Robert Akhtar SeaTac Burien X Joe Scordo SeaTac Burien -Jeff Robinson (Alt) SeaTac Federal Way X Katrina (Trina) Cook Tukwila Federal Way X Joan (Thomas) Lee Tukwila Federal Way X Brandon Miles Tukwila Des Moines X Lance Lyttle Port of Seattle Des Moines X Mike Ehl Port of Seattle Des Moines X Clare Gallagher (Alt) Port of Seattle Normandy Park X Katie Halse Port of Seattle Normandy Park X James Masoero for Delta Airlines 2/28 mtg (Tony Gonchar unavailable) Normandy Park X Scott Ingham (Alt) Delta Airlines Normandy Park -Megan Ouellette Alaska Airlines air cargo -Matt Shelby (Alt) Alaska Airlines Non-Member Federal Aviation X Joelle Briggs Federal Aviation Agency Agency Facilitator: Phyllis Shulman, Civic Alchemy Introductory Comments: Lance Lyttle, Sea-Tac Airport Director X X X X X X X X X - X X X - X X Lance discussed the purpose of the advisory roundtable and set the stage for this new initiative. • Opportunity for a new approach • Work to understand one another and listen through a new lens • Desire constructive feedback and honest and respectful conversations StART enhances cooperation between the Port of Seattle and the neighboring communities of Sea-Tac Airport • May involve sometimes difficult conversations, but desire is to be focused on solutions • First time this group of individuals are at the table together Member Introductions: StART Members Members introduced themselves and answered the question: "What does a cooperative relationship look like to you?" Responses included: • Mutual understanding of facts and data • Transparency and balance • Clear understanding of roles and accountability for responsibility • Agenda that we can agree to and discussion based on facts/data • Raising awareness and keeping stakeholders engaged • Not about dwelling in the past, but about moving forward together • Progressive partnership between community and the Port, FAA, and airlines; increase the positive impact within the community • Listen to all parties • Listen with open mind and giving benefit of the doubt • Evidenced based data • Listen and be willing to change your mind • Mutual benefits that are allocated justly to all participants • Find common areas • Listening, open/honest communication, respect other viewpoints which might be different from your own • Thoughtful, sharing, listening • Willingness to compromise • Willingness to listen • Open and honest exchange, listen to one another • Listen to each other and seek solutions Macintosh HD:Users:phyllis:Documents:Civic Alchemy:StART:Meetlng notes:Final drafts and final meeting summaries:02-28-18 Meeting Summary (flnal).docx March 2018 StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary February 28, 2018 Page 2 Introduction of Facilitator, Phyllis Shulman The facilitator discussed roles and commitment of members, the role of the public, and the format and logistics of future meetings. She also reviewed general meeting protocols. Public Comment The facilitator reviewed that 10 minutes of public comment are allowed at each meeting. In addition to oral comment, written comment sheets are available and all comments will be attached to the meeting summary as an appendix. Public comments are compiled on Appendix B. of the meeting summary. Presentation and Q & A: Lance Lyttle & StART Members Lance presented an overview of the Sea-Tac International Airport. The presentation is available at the StART website here. Quest ions and comments after the presentation: 1. Q. How many people came through the airport pre-9/11? A. About 22 million. More flights, but fewer passengers. 2. Q. What does TNC stand for? A. Transportation network companies 3. Q. Airport is always under construction. Will it ever be complete, stop changing, etc.? A. Yes, it's always under construction. Ours is renovation. 4. Q. How can you have more people going through the airport with fewer flights? A. Aircraft are being replaced by larger planes which accommodate more passengers . In 2000, there were 22 million passengers. 5. Q. This is the third airport you've worked at (referring to Lance). Is community engagement similar at other airports? A. No, if a stakeholder meeting like this was held in Houston, unlikely that the public would show up. The impact of the airport is different in different communities. Macintosh HD:Users:phyllis:Documents:Civic Alchemy:StART:Meeting notes:F[nal drafts and final meeting summaries:02-28-18 Meeting Summary (final),docx March 2018 StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary February 28, 2018 Page 3 Discussion: StART Members The facilitator asked participants to review the initial list of possible topics for discussion at the StART meetings and to brainstorm on other topics. The initial list and additions to that list based on the conversation is attached to the meeting summary as Appendix A. Participants discussed potential agenda items for the April meeting. There was wide agreement that understanding roles and responsibilities, authorities, and what can be influenced is foundational for other issues. Participants expressed interest in a number of other issues. These issues are noted in Appendix A. The facilitator will develop a survey to get feedback on priorities for discussion topics to inform agenda development. Meeting Wrap Up: Lance Lyttle & StART Members Lance thanked everyone for attending and looks forward to future meetings. Next Meeting: Wednesday, April 25, 2018 Sea-Tac International Airport Conference Center, 6:00 pm -8:00 pm MEETING EVALUATIONS (Meeting evaluations were not utilized for this meeting.) # of responses __ _ 1. Overall Meetinc Poor Fair Good Very Good Excellent Experience N/A 2, Presentatians Not Useful Somewhat Very Useful Useful N/A Comments: N/ A 3. Discussion Not Useful Somewhat Very Useful Useful N/A Comments: N/ A 4. Overall Comments, Suggestions, or Questions: N/ A 5. Outreach and engagement involvements reported during the last two months: N/A Macintosh HD:Users:phyllis:Documents:Civic Alchemy:StART:Meeting notes:Final drafts and final meeting summaries:02-28-18 Meeting Summary (final).docx March 2018 StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary February 28, 2018 Page 4 Appendix A: Potential List of Issues for Discussion Based on Facilitator's Meetings with Stakeholders As of 03-23-18 Background: Prior to the kick-off meeting of StART the facilitator met with all StART stakeholders, with the exception of Tukwila (due to time constraints). As part of each meeting the stakeholders were asked to reflect on a number of questions. The following lists are a consolidation of the answers to two questions: 1. What are the issues that you think are relevant to discuss as part of StART? 2. One objective of StART is to develop shared understanding. What would be helpful to know? Learn? For yourself and for the group? These lists are a starting point for helping to identify future agenda items; therefore, items on this draft list may or may not be part of a meeting discussion. The list will be modified over time, based on interest, as priorities for discussion emerge and additional issues are added. The items listed are not in any order of priority. 1. What are the issues that you think are relevant to discuss as part of StART? • SAMP including the breadth of the environmental analysis • Airport growth (airfield and airspace) - o What would a positive shared vision of the future include? o What can be mitigated, prevented, monitored, improved now? o Alternatives to growing the airport? o Regional approach to growth o Long-term visioning -what is vision for next 10 years, 20 years? o Other modes of transportation to pursue? o How to determine the capacity of communities to handle impacts? How are limits to growth determined? o What is best way to maximize use of the limited airport footprint while supporting livability and other goals? • Noise o Night and early morning flights o What generates specific noise? Macintosh HD:Users:phyllis:Documents:Civic Akhemy:StART:Meeting notes:Final drafts and flnal meeting summaries:02-28-18 Meeting Summary (flnal).docM March 2018 StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary February 28, 2018 Page 5 o How do community logs of noise compare to Port analysis? o Noise prevention and mitigation • Pollution and Public Health • How are airport impacts mitigated for, including options and opportunities to influence? • Flights -flight paths, night flights • Shared economic development opportunities and shared prosperity for the airport, airlines, and communities. How to increase employment opportunities at the airport for nearby residents? 2. One objective of StART is to develop shared understanding. What would be helpful to know? Learn? For yourself and for the group? • Roles, responsibilities, and decision-making authority of airport, Port, airlines, FAA, tenants, State, PSRC, and others in operations on the ground and in the air. • Transparency on what is being considered for the future, procedural changes • Next Gen • Airline flight operations, flight paths, opportunities for pro-active input, whole system approach • What studies are currently being undertaken, what studies are needed, and what data needs updating? • Information on pollution and health effects of pollution • Understanding of safety zone -what it is, what it means, who decides? • Air cargo issues-what studies have been done, how do decisions get made, what affects the Port's goals? • Understanding the lnterlocal Agreement between SeaTac and Port • Understanding how demand and flight patterns are determined/decided • Shared data on user fees, storm water runoff, transportation planning • Identification of opportunities for additional cooperative engagement with FAA, Port, airlines, communities and identification of what type of engagement works well • Future technologies -what is on the horizon? • 3rd runway impacts on the communities o compared to expectations communicated during the process o identification of changing conditions o comparison of mitigations identified to mitigations delivered Macintosh HD:Users:phyllis:Documents:Civic Alchemy:StART:Meeting notes:Final drafts and final meeting summaries:02-28-18 Meeting Summary (flnal).doc,c March 2018 StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary February 28, 2018 Page 6 o comparison of expected use and current use • Q400s -intent of airlines, timetable for use, capital plans for the fleet • Port of Seattle mission and community/economic benefits • PSRC Study on Air System • Airport o Operations -changes/history, what drives growth o Environmental-sustainability measures, noise programs including limitations, Part 150, Airspace, air quality o Future investments including SAMP Environmental review process and best way to influence and make comments o Programs -workforce development, noise Issues added from 02-28-18 StART Meeting Discussion • Landside operations including transportation network companies (TNCs), vehicle movement, private and commercial • Plans for baggage safety and luggage theft • SAMP-timing of analysis, baseline assumptions at each stage, why certain choices were made. Why EA instead of EIS? What are the assumptions and where do they come from? Who influences the assumptions? • Airport footprint-how to make it bigger • Bullet trains, hyperloop technologies • FAA community engagement opportunities • Specific powers and obligations and explanation of federal pre-emption. What can be influenced? • How does the FAA do planning for flight paths? What is behind some decisions made regarding flight paths? How is noise analyzed? • Traffic impacts on 1-5, 1-405. How are forecasts made? Is there a whole system approach to traffic and transportation planning? • Growth and how airport growth impacts cities. What is spent on mitigation? • Noise abatement programs • How FAA noise contour is decided? Do the formulas work? • Health. Health authorities/University of Washington-what are impacts that can be related to the airport? • Next Gen and Wake Re-categorization. What are its effects? What's in store for communities with Next Gen? Macintosh HD:Users:phyllis:Documents:Civic Alchemy:StART:Meeting notes:Final drafts and flnal meeting summaries:02-28-18 Meeting Summary (final).docx March 2018 StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary February 28, 2018 Page 7 • Where can revenues be spent and not spent? • What are the airlines, Port, and FAA's preferred future? • Role, responsibilities, and what can be influenced? o Is it possible for the airport to have a curfew? o Who makes decisions and how is it decided when aircraft models are phased in or out, specifically Q400s? o How noise mitigations work. What are the rules? Who is responsible for rule changes? o Nighttime flight restrictions. Who decides? o Altitude analysis -how choices are made. Macintosh HD:Users:phyllis:Documents:Clvic Alchemy:StART:Meetlng notes:Final drafts and flnal meeting summaries:02-28-18 Meeting Summary (flnal).docx StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary February 28, 2018 Page 8 March 2018 Appendix B: Summary of Public Comments 1. Mike O'Hallorran (written comments): • Should airline pilots or pilot associations be invited to attend StART? • I would like to thank all the government agencies, airlines partners for being involved. • Only "2 or 3" airline partners are "fly quiet" partners. • My neighborhood in the Renton Highlands is impacted by SeaTac, Boeing Field, and Renton Municipal. • I like the concept of "what subjects can we as a group" influence? Is there hanging fruit? • Possible agenda and speaker subjects: o Sea-Tac Airport emission reductions. Ground based port and airline transportation initiatives for cleaner vehicles. (Somewhat in likeness to the Port of Seattle's class 8 truck new model program) • Impact of air traffic over the Puget Sound eastside including the new "southwest approach" for planes arriving from the east coast and internationally. o Currently, there are intermittent days where air traffic is too low over the eastside. o Also includes using a gliding airport approach versus the use of full power to descend. o Are propeller driven aircraft "scattering" after takeoff" Are they full flights' Are they flying too low". • Grade each airline companies using a scale similar to the Heathrow Airport study. • What is the "fly quiet" program"? (Alaska, Horizon and Delta account for over 60% of air traffic and are not "fly quiet" partners.) • How can the Port of Seattle help airline companies become "fly quiet" compliant at Sea-Tac Airport. (Aircraft with over 20 years of service should not be allowed to use Sea-Tac Airport or McDonald Douglas MD-80 type of aircraft use banned for Sea- Tac-airspace.) 2. Christopher Mitchell (Des Moines) (oral comments): • Lives under the 3rd runway flight path on 10th Ave. S. Is concerned about pollution, noise, and cancer risks. Hopeful that there can be bullet trains and hyperloops Macintosh HD:Users:phyllis:Documents:Civic Alchemy:StART:Meeting notes:Final drafts and final meetin11 summaries:02-28-18 Meeting Summary (final),docx March 2018 StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary February 28, 2018 Page 9 incorporated into the transportation system as has happened in many other countries including China and Japan. 3. David Goebel (representing noRNP) (written comments): • While I understand this was the kickoff meeting, I was disappointed by the technical level of the discussion. For future meetings, I and my organization, nornp.org would like the FAA representatives to engage much more deeply on topics such as Wake Recategorization and Optimized Profile Descent's Impact on extended low altitude level-offs on approach. I would also suggest that Vashon Island should have been included among the communities severely impacted by KSEA. With the 2015 introduction of the HAWKZ RNP, and its concentrated flight path and lowered altitudes to permit Elliot Bay arrivals, some parts of Vashon Island newly have DNL comparable to, if not more than, some parts of the other communities that "are" part of StART. Macintosh HD:Users:phyllls:Documents:Civic Alchemy:StART:Meeting notes:Final drafts and final meeting summarles:02-28-18 Meeting Summary (flnal).docx StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary February 28, 2018 Page 10 March 2018 StART ~ SEA-TAC STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY ROUND TABLE Meeting Agenda (Revised) April 25, 2018 6:00 pm -8:00 pm Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Conference Center 17801 International Blvd. ( Directions ) Meeting Ob jecti ve : To expand and develop shared understanding of roles and responsibilities, decision-making authorities, and what can be influenced in aviation operations. 6:00 pm 6:05 pm 6:15 pm 6:20 pm 6:30 pm 7:50 pm Welcome • Member Introductions Public Comment Facilitator's Update Sea-Tac Airport Updates • Capital Projects • Quarterly Statistics Aviation Operations: Roles & Responsibilities • Presentation/ Panel (40 min) • Question & Answer (40 min) Meeting Wrap Up • Closing Comments • Meeting Evaluation Form Lance Lyttle, Airport Director Public Phyllis Shulman Lance Lyttle, Airport Director Mike Ehl, Airport Operations Director Representatives from Port of Seattle, Federal Aviation Administration, Delta Air Lines & Alaska Airlines StART Members Lance Lyttle & StART Members Next Meeting: June 27-6:00 pm -8:00 pm {Sea-Tac International Airport Conference Center) StART ~ SEA-TAC STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY ROUND TABLE April 25, 2018 Meeting Recap The second Sea-Tac Stakeholder Advisory Round Table (StART) meeting took place on April 25, 2018 with a focus on aviation operations roles and responsibilities. This voluntary, non- governing regional roundtable, convened by the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Director, Lance Lyttle, is a venue for the Port of Seattle to engage with the communities of SeaTac, Burien, Des Moines, Normandy Park, Tukwila and Federal Way. Representatives from Delta Air Lines, Alaska Airlines and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) also participate. After public comment, Lyttle provided an airport update on operations and ongoing facility construction. The update included a roll out of the Port's new website and examples of accessible information, including ai rport cap ital pr o je cts and airpo r t statistics . A new feature on the website includes downloadable data on Sea-Tac's flight track monitoring system using 24 permanent noise monitors to show single and daily noise events. Airport noise data can be found here . The facilitator reviewed the "StART Potential Topics Survey Results," observing that the priorities fell within the following themes: impacts, airport development and growth, meeting current and future demand, economic development/community/Port partnership potential, and operations and investments. The survey feedback will provide the basis for development of future meeting agendas. The meeting's main focus was to develop shared understanding of roles and responsibilities, decision-making authorities, and what can be influenced in aviation operations. A panel comprised of Port staff, Federal Aviation Administration representatives and representatives from Delta Air Lines and Alaska Airlines provided an overview presentation that can be accessed here . StART members followed by asking the panelists questions related to noise impacts, operations at Sea-Tac, quality of life and flight paths . A longer meeting summary will be posted to the StART website by May 11. Based on member survey responses, the next meeting will focus on aviation impacts and mitigation/reduction of aviation impacts, including noise and air quality. The next meeting is scheduled for 6 p.m., June 27, at the Conference Center at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport. The public is invited to attend . StAR T meetihg documents may be found on the Port of Seattle website. 'itART t'nhance'> wopt'rat,on bt->tween the Port of Seattle and the ne,ghbormg cornmun,tw, of Sea-Tac Airport StART ~ SEA-TAC STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY ROUND TABLE DRAFT StART FACILITATOR'S MEETING SUMMARY April 25, 2018 6:00-8:00 PM, Conference Center Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Interest Member Represented John Parness Burien Terry Plumb Burien Brian Wilson Burien Lisa Marshall (Alt) Burien John Resing Federal Way Chris Hall Federal Way Varden Weidenfeld Federal Way Sheila Brush Des Moines Ken Rogers Des Moines Michael Matthias Des Moines Eric Zimmerman Normandy Park Earnest Thompson Normandy Park Mark Happen Normandy Park Jennifer-Ferrer-Normandy Park Santa Ines (Alt) Laura Sanders Lynden (air freight shipping and logistics) Non-Member Randy Fiertz Federal Aviation Administration Additional Participants: Kim Stover, Federal Aviation Administration Katie Halse, Port of Seattle Facilitator: Phyllis Shulman, Civic Alchemy Interest Member Represented X Tejvir Basra SeaTac X Robert Akhtar SeaTac X Joe Scarcia SeaTac -Jeff Robinson (Alt) SeaTac X Katrina (Trina) Cook Tukwila X Joan (Thomas) Lee Tukwila X Brandon Miles Tukwila X Lance Lyttle Port of Seattle X Mike Ehl Port of Seattle X Clare Gallagher (Alt) Port of Seattle X X Tony Gonchar Delta Air Lines X Scott Ingham (Alt) Delta Air Lines -Megan Ouellette Alaska Airlines (represented by Steven Osterdahl) -Matt Shelby (Alt) Alaska Airlines Non-Member X Joelle Briggs Federal Aviation Administration X X X X X - - X X X X X X - X StART enhances cooperation between the Port of Seattle and the neighboring communities of Sea-Tac Airport Meeting Objective: To expand and develop shared understanding of roles and responsibilities, decision-making authorities, and what can be influenced in aviation operations. Welcome: Lance Lyttle, Airport Director After member introductions, Lyttle reviewed the meeting objective and reflected on the previous meeting, highlighting that these are difficult conversations but he desires to focus on solutions. Gaining a shared understanding of roles and responsibilities will help StART to narrow in on the solutions to focus on. He emphasized the importance of building a cooperative relationship that includes listening with an open mind, evidence based information, transparency, and respect for other's viewpoints. Public Comment The facilitator reviewed that 10 minutes of public comment is allocated at each meeting. In addition to oral comment, written comment sheets are available and all comments will be attached to the meeting summary as an appendix (Compiled public comments are included here as Appendix A). Sea-Tac Airport Updates: Lance Lyttle, Airport Director Katie Halse, Local Government Relations Manager Lyttle provided an airport update on operations and ongoing facility construction. The update included a roll out of the Port's new website and examples of accessible information, including airport capital projects and airport statistics. A new feature on the website includes downloadable data on Sea-Tac's flight track monitoring system using 24 permanent noise monitors to show single and daily noise events. Airport noise data can be found here: htt s: ublic.tableau.com rofile ortofseattlebi#! vizhome Sea- Tacnoisemonitoringsystemdata/Contents . Lyttle also announced that the Port will be inviting StART members and Highline Forum members to a Noise 101 workshop that will be held in May. A leading noise expert will lead the workshop. The facilitator will send out details of the date and location to StART members for registration. Facilitator's Update: Phyllis Shulman, Civic Alchemy Shulman shared the results from the member survey related to prioritizing possible future discussion topics (Appendix B). She noted that some topics are interrelated with the following themes: • Impacts: including noise; air quality, pollution and public health; impact mitigation, prevention, reduction (range of options) Macintosh HD:Users:phyllisshulman:Desktop:April 2018 Draft StART Meeting Summary_2018-0515.docx May 2018 StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary April 25, 2018 Page 2 • Airport development and growth • Meeting current and future demand • Economic development/community/Port partnership potential • Operations and investments The facilitator reviewed three principles for engagement in discussion: • Respect: Multiple viewpoints exist and all have value • Generosity: Share your viewpoint with others and give time to others to share theirs • Curiosity: Listen to what is important to others Aviation Operations: Roles and Responsibilities The main topic of the meeting was aviation operations -roles and responsibilities. Presenters and panelists included: • Mike Ehl, Director, Airport Operations, Port of Seattle • Stan Shepherd, Aviation Noise Programs Manager, Port of Seattle • Arlyn Purcell, Director, Aviation Environment and Sustainability, Port of Seattle • Randy Fiertz, Director, Airport Division, Northwest Mountain Division, Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) • Kim Stover, Director of Operations, Air Traffic Services, Western Service Area, FAA • Tony Gonchar, Vice President, Seattle, Delta Air Lines • Steven Osterdahl, Director, Air Traffic and Airspace Operations, Alaska Airlines Presentation The presentation by Port staff and FAA representatives is available here: https ://www .portseattle.org/sites/d efau It/fl I es/201 8- 04/2018 04 25%20StART%20Role Responsibility%20Presentation FINAL%20for%20WEB.pdf. A video provided by the FAA regarding Air Traffic Control Procedures for the Seattle Region is available here: https://www.youtube.com /watch?v=YMxpKhzNnjl&feature=youtu.be StART members submitted a number of questions to the facilitator prior to the meeting. Presenters worked to address questions related to aviation operations roles and responsibilities in the presentation or during the panel discussion. Macintosh HD:Users:phyllisshulman;Oesktop:April 2018 Draft StART Meeting Summary_2018-0515.docx May 2018 StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary April 25, 2018 Page 3 Question & Answer: Panel and StART Members Following the presentation, panelists were asked questions from StART members. Some of the topics were captured on a "bulletin board" (Appendix C) for discussion at future meetings or follow-up. The panel provided responses to various issues and questions raised by the members, including: • development of flight paths; • Port of Seattle requirements under FAA's grant assurances https:ljwww.faa.gov/airports/aip/grant assurances/media/airport-sponsor-assurances- aip.pdf; • ability of the Port of Seattle to impose flight restrictions on service to Sea-Tac; • local noise ordinance enforcement; • flight path decision-making; • FAA's role in the Port of Seattle's Sustainable Master Plan; • voluntary curfews; • utilization of 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 161, Notice and Approval of Airport Noise and Access Restrictions; • restrictions/limitations of Port of Seattle utilization of grant funds from the FAA as well as property tax levy funds; • air traffic controller incentives; • determination of airline hubs; • concerns about possible aircraft separation changes; • noise mitigation; • FAA's noise annoyance study; and • whether FAA and Port of Seattle have considered increasing compensation to developers due to additional costs due to height restrictions and sound insulation. Meeting Wrap Up: Lance Lyttle & StART Members Based on survey results, the facilitator stated that the next StART meeting will focus on impacts: noise; air quality, pollution and public health; impact mitigation, prevention, reduction -range of options. Lyttle thanked StART members and the public for their attendance. Next Meeting: June 27, 2018 Sea-Tac International Airport Conference Center, 6:00 pm -8:00 pm Macintosh HD:Users:phyllisshulman:Desktop:April 2018 Draft StART Meeting Summary_2018-0515.docx May 2018 StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary April 25, 2018 Page 4 MEETING EVALUATIONS/or April 25, 2018 StART Meeting # of responses: 9 1. Overall Meeting Experience Very Poor Fair Good Good Excellent 0 3 2 2 1 2. Presentation Somewhat Not Useful Useful Very Useful 1 7 1 Comments: • We do not need airport stats or website updates. We need more time for discussion. • No presentation should have content that can't be read on the screen. Really not good use of time to have material on the screen that does not communicate well. • Presentations seemed "canned," just the party line. • Nice to learn some of the big picture of the airport 3. Discussion Somewhat Not Useful Useful Very Useful 0 4 5 Comments: • The questions from the panel were most important, while not answered in full transparency they were educated questions. • There are just so many complexities it is difficult to get a sense of accomplishment or progress. But, it certainly is better than past meetings. It is worth keeping the dialogue. Just difficult and complex topics in a short period. • Need some information on how you work together. We just heard how you work independently. • Mostly on topic. Macintosh HD:Users:phyllisshulman:Desktop:April 2018 Draft StART Meeting Summary_2018-0515.docx StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary April 25, 2018 Page 5 May 2018 4. Overall Comments, Suggestions, or Questions • Need work group to invite bullet train and hyperloop reps. • More discussion/less presentation. • Give power points out in advance. • Move public comment to after discussion. • Huge step forward in understanding the complexity. • Need some work on your graphics. They were unreadable. • Ideas about "focus on what we can do" and "what tools do we have at our disposal" are worth FAA answering! Work group on part 161 would be a good idea. • Someone needs to respond to the concern about compensation for removal of trees within the clear area of the safety zone when on private property. • Public comment usually isn't a discussion ... not sure if the expectation is clear for the attending public. 5. Outreach and engagement involvements reported during the last two months N/A Macintosh HD:Users:phyllisshulman:Desktop:April 2018 Draft StART Meeting Summary_2018-0515.doc>C May 2018 StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary April 25, 2018 Page 6 Appendix A Summary of Public Comments 1. David Goebel (written comments): • Please bring someone from the tower to explain the complete decision flow chart that's used when a flow change is made. 2. Mike O'Halloran (written comments): • Sea-Tac airport does an extensive evaluation of flights and flight patterns. The Renton Highlands is impacted not only by Sea-Tac traffic but also small aircraft from Renton Airport and Boeing Field, tripling the impact on the ground. • So, the impact surface area of Sea-Tac should be expanded to an area at least 10 miles in all directions. Meaning ALL even the smallest aircraft in the 10 mile area are monitored and under flight controller control with an emphasis on "flying friendly." • We need a no fly/activity curfew rule for/from 10 PM to 5 AM. • Why not use Moses Lake airport for all international flights from the State of Washington? 3. Susan Petersen (written comments): • Too much B.S. and dancing around DIRECT questions • Ms. Facilitator must understand that 1.5 minutes is NOT enough time and before we hear the content of the meeting. This is a very emotional issue for those of us whose greatest investment is our home! Our health counts too! • What about the people?! None of the FAA or POS addresses us. It's all about money for the Port and nothing, not even our quality of life for us. • 1970's DNL is not even close to what it should be today and you all know 4. Dana Holloway (oral comments): • Have lived in Federal Way for 42 years. Noise has increased impacting quality of life. Can't enjoy being outside or inside. Port, FAA, and airlines have taken away peaceful quality of life. Stop noise and pollution -why do you refuse to make a decision? Instead, you increase cargo and commercial flights. Port Commissioners should be required to live under the flight path. 5. Debi Wagner (oral comments): • Request to provide comments at the end of the meeting instead of the beginning. Public should be able to provide comments and feedback after hearing the public comments. How bad are you going to hurt us and what are Macintosh HD:Users:phyllisshulman:Oesktop:April 2018 Draft StART Meeting Summary_2018-0S15.docx StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary May 2018 . April 25, 2018 Page 7 you going to do about it? Harms are additive. Everything from the 3rd runway forward is additive and cumulative . Do no harm. Improve the environment, if possible. 6. Larry Cripe (oral comments): • Member of Quiet Skies Coalition . Specifically to the FAA: we have never been allowed to sit in on meetings with the City and FAA. We were promised that there wouldn 't be a fourth runway but July 26, 2016 changed that with the turns over Burien. The decision process has not been openly accessible to the public. 7. Carol Oliver (oral comments): • 15-year resident. Noise has increased greatly. Gardening isn't enjoyable and worried about toxins. Have been experiencing ear infections, hearing/ health problems, difficult sleeping, unable to concentrate. There is a decrease in property value. Insulted by comments about the same people calling on the complaint line . 8. Candace Urqhart (oral comments): • Request discussion during the StART meeting about the cutting down of trees between the FAA and the Port, including who is requiring that trees are removed on private property without compensation? And who is taking responsibility? Only 10 minutes of public comment is inadequate and a joke. 9. JC Harris (oral comments): • Communities are in a reactive mode. Cities should join together to establish a public group with a public fund to create a political organization different from the Port. The Port should be ours. Macintosh HD:Users:phyllisshulman:Desktop:April 2018 Draft StART Meeting Summary_2018·0515.docx StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary April 25, 2018 Page 8 May 2018 Appendix B StART Potential Discussion Topics Survey Results as of 4-23-18 Question 1. Check THREE topics you are most interested in discussing. Question 2. Give each of your top three choices (from Question 1) a priority ranking, with 1 denoting the highest priority. (Only rank your top three choices.) TOT AL RESPONSES: 20 Topic Sustainable Airport Master Plan Airport Growth and related topics Noise Air quality, pollution, and public health Impact mitigation, prevention, reduction -range of options Shared economic development opportunities Next Gen and Wake Recategorization Visioning-preferred future for communities, airlines, Port, FAA Overview of current studies and needed research Air cargo Understanding the lnterlocal Agreement with the City of SeaTac Community engagement and influence -how to increase effectiveness Future technologies, including bullet trains, hyperloop technologies MacIntosh HD:Users:phyllisshulman:Desktop:April 2018 Draft StART Meeting Summary_2018-0S15.docx May 2018 Number who chose topic in their top 3 choices 4 3 10 8 8 2 3 0 0 1 0 1 1 Number Number Number who chose who chose who chose topic as topic as #2 topic as #3 #1 priority priority priority 2 1 1 1 0 2 4 4 2 1 5 2 2 2 4 1 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary April 25, 2018 Page 9 Topic 3rd runway impacts on communities Q400s -intent of airlines, capital plans for fleet, timetable for use Airport operations including future investment Environmental sustainability efforts and programs Environmental review processes Airline flight operations, flight paths, nighttime flights, altitude analysis Safety zone Landside operations including TNCs, vehicle movement, private and commercial Plans for baggage safety and luggage theft Airport footprint Specific powers and obligations and explanation of federal pre- emption Traffic impacts, locally and regionally Revenues -constraints and opportunities for spending Macintosh HD:Users:phyllisshulman:Oesktop:Aprfl 2018 Draft StART Meeting Summary_2018-0515.docx May 2018 Number who chose topic in their top 3 choices 2 2 1 0 1 4 0 3 1 0 2 3 1 Number Number Number who chose who chose who chose topic as topic as #2 topic as #3 #1 priority priority priority 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary April 25, 2018 Page 10 Appendix C Bulletin Board of Technical Questions/Topics for Future Discussion or Follow-up • Distribute information on the 39 grant assurances • Determination of runway north/south flow • Components of determination or changes to separation • 65 DNL congressionally mandated? M•cin.tosh HD:Usars:phyllisshulman:Desk(op:Aprll 2018 Draft StART Meeting summary_2018-0515.dOCJC May2018 StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary April 25, 2018 Page 11 I StART ~ SEA-TAC STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY ROUND TABLE Meeting Agenda June 27, 2018 6:00 pm -8:00 pm Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Conference Center 17801 International Blvd. (Directions Meeting Objectives : To discuss and prioritize a list of potential actions for StART to explore related to preventing, reducing, and/or mitigating aviation noise. To consider constructive next steps including the formation of a StART aviation noise working group. 6:00 pm 6:05 pm 6:10 pm 6:20 pm 7:30 pm 7:45 pm 7:55 pm . Welcome • Member Introductions Facilitator's Update Congressional Update (Noise) Aviation Noise Discussion Sea-Tac Airport Updates • Capital Projects (SAMP) • Operations Public Comment Meeting Wrap Up • Closing Comments • Meeting Evaluation Form Mike Ehl, Airport Operations Director Phyllis Shulman Eric Schinfeld StART members Clare Gallagher, Capital Projects Delivery Director Mike Ehl, Airport Operations Director Public Mike Ehl & StART Members Next Meeting: August 22nd -6:00 pm -8:00 pm, Location tbd StART enhances cooperation between the Port of Seattle and the ne1ghbonng communities of Sea-Tac Airport StART ~ SEA-TAC STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY ROUND TABLE June 27, 2018 Recap The Sea-Tac Stakeholder Advisory Round Table (StART) meeting took place on June 27, 2018 with a focus on discussing and prioritizing potential actions for StART to explore related to preventing, reducing, and/or mitigating aviation noise. This voluntary, advisory roundtable, convened by the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Director, Lance Lyttle, is a venue for the Port of Seattle to engage with the communities of SeaTac, Burien, Des Moines, Normandy Park, Tukwila and Federal Way. Representatives from Delta Air Lines, Alaska Airlines, and Lynden Transport are also members. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) participates as a non-member. The facilitator discussed feedback received from StART participants as well as the public at large about when in the agenda to put public comment. Due to feedback, the public comment period has been moved to the end of the meeting agenda. The facilitator also reminded the public that comments can be provided in writing at the meeting or via email and encouraged public engagement with the community representatives on StART. Port staff provided an update on current federal congressional legislation focused on aviation noise. These include FY 18 Appropriations, the FAA Bill, National Defense Authorization Act, FY 19 Appropriations, and the Aviation Impacted Communities Act. The meeting's main focus was.to identify potential actions that could be considered and recommended by StART to prevent, reduce, and/or mitigate aviation noise. Members itemized and discussed actions that they were interested in and prioritized the list of actions. The highest priorities were the identification of near-term actions that can be taken now, potential modifications to air operations, and potential modifications to ground operations. There was also interest in identifying appropriate ways to engage elected officials at the City, State, and Federal level in the process. Initial steps were taken at the conclusion of the meeting to create a small working group or groups. The group or groups will be tasked with exploring and discussing the ideas in more depth and providing recommendations for potential actions. The prioritized list will be refined and used as a basis for the focus of the working group(s). Port staff provided brief updates on the Sustainable Airport Master Plan and operations and then public comment was heard. The next meeting is scheduled for 6 p.m., August 22, location TBD. The public is invited to attend. StART meeting documents may be found on the Port of Seattle website. StART enhances cooperation between the Port of Seattle and the ne,ghbonng communities of Sea-Tac Airport StART ~ SEA-TAC STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY ROUND TABLE FINAL DRAFT StART FACILITATOR'S MEETING SUMMARY Wednesday, June 27, 2018 6:00-8:00 PM, Conference Center SeaTac Airport Interest Member Represented John Parness Burien Terry Plumb Burien Brian Wilson Burien Lisa Marshall (Alt) Burien John Resing Federal Way Chris Hall Federal Way Varden Weidenfeld Federal Way Sheila Brush Des Moines Ken Rogers Des Moines Michael Matthias Des Moines Eric Zimmerman Normandy Park Earnest Thompson Normandy Park Mark Happen Normandy Park Jennifer-Ferrer-Normandy Park Santa Ines (Alt) Laura Sanders Lynden (air cargo) Non-Member Randy Fiertz Federal Aviation Agency Additional Participants: Eric Schinfeld, Port of Seattle Marco Milanese, Port of Seattle Facilitator: Phyllis Shulman, Civic Alchemy Note taker: Megan King, Floyd Snider Member X Tejvir Basra X Robert Akhtar -Joe Scarcia X Jeff Robinson (Alt) -Katrina (Trina) Cook X Joan (Thomas) Lee -Brandon Miles X Lance Lyttle (phone) X Mike Ehl (Alt) X Clare Gallagher (Alt) X Tony Gonchar X Scott Ingham (Alt) X Megan Ouellette -Matt Shelby (Alt) X Scott Kennedy Non-Member X Joelle Briggs Interest Re.presented SeaTac SeaTac SeaTac SeaTac Tukwila Tukwila Tukwila Port of Seattle Port of Seattle Port of Seattle Delta Airlines Delta Airlines Alaska Airlines Alaska Airlines Alaska Airlines Federal Aviation Agency X X X X X X X X X X X X X - - X StART enhances cooperation between the Port of Seattle and the neighboring communities of Sea-Tac Airport Meeting Objectives: To discuss and prioritize a list of potential actions for StART to explore related to preventing, reducing, and/or mitigating aviation noise. To consider constructive next steps including the formation of a StART aviation noise working group. Welcome: Lance Lyttle, Airport Director Lyttle welcomed participants and gave an overview of his intent for the meeting highlighting his interest in moving forward with some constructive ideas and recommendations for action. Lyttle stated that starting with this meeting and going forward, the group will focus on what we can do collaboratively to move toward practical solutions. Lyttle participated by phone due to his travel schedule. Member Introductions: StART Members All members and participants introduced themselves and their affiliations . Facilitator's Update: Phyllis Shulman, Civic Alchemy The facilitator described that during the last meeting comments were received from the public about the public comment process during these meetings. Surveys were sent to StART participants to solicit feedback about where in the agenda to have public comment. As a result of the feedback, the public comment period has been moved to the end of the meeting. The public comment period will be 10 minutes, with each commenter limited to 1-3 minutes each, depending on the number of commenters who wish to speak. The facilitator also reminded the public that the StART community representatives at this meeting are appointed by their respective cities to represent their communities. She encouraged the public to engage with the StART community representatives if they have comments or concerns that they would like to see addressed. Congressional Update on Aircraft Noise Mitigation: Eric Schinfeld, Port of Seattle Schinfeld explained that many noise regulations are determined by Congress. Schinfeld summarized the status of five current bills in Congress that have a component related to noise mitigation. June 2018 DRAFT StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary June 27, 2018 Page 2 FV18 Appropriations • Provides funding for federal government through September 30, 2018. • Contained increased funding for eight Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) full- time equivalents (FTEs), one for each regional office, to focus on community engagement. • The Port of Seattle (the Port) and cities have sent a joint letter calling for expedited hiring of this person in our region, and our Congressional delegation under Senator Murray's leadership has sent a similar letter. FAA Reauthorization Bill • Passed House on April 27, 2018. • Contains multiple noise studies, including: o Adds Seattle to a national study of the impact of noise on human health near major airports; o Encourages exploration of the feasibility of dispersal headings or other lateral track variations to address community noise concerns; o Requires the FAA to complete within one year the ongoing evaluation of alternative metrics to the current Day Night Level (DNL) 65 standard; o Directs the FAA administrator to study the relationship between jet aircraft approach and takeoff speeds and corresponding noise impacts on communities surrounding airports; and o Requires a GAO report studying whether air traffic controllers and airspace designers are trained on. noise and health impact mitigation in addition to efficiency. • Contains language ensuring noise insulation funding eligibility for Highline Public Schools. The Bill is currently in the Senate with unclear prospects, mostly due to issues related to pilot training requirements, unrelated tax issues, and lack of availability for Senate floor time. National Defense Authorization Act • The House version of the annual military funding authorization bill now contains the same legislation from the FAA bill that ensures eligibility for Highline Public School noise insulation funding (supported by U.S. Representative Adam Smith). • The Bill has now passed the House and the Senate, and is awaiting a conference committee to resolve differences between the two bills. Final passage is expected in the next few months. June 2018 DRAFT StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary June 27, 2018 Page 3 FY 19 Appropriations • In process now. • House Transportation Appropriations bill, which includes the FAA, has several noise provisions, including: o Language that "strongly encourages the FAA to permit second round noise insulation to account for subsequent improvements in technology." o "Directs the FAA to evaluate alternative metrics to the current Day Night Level (DNL) 65 standard, and requests that the FAA not rely solely on modeling and simulation for the evaluation." o The committee also recommended that Regional Centers of Air Transportation Excellence should study "the impacts of aircraft noise on humans and effective methods for mitigating such impacts." • Unclear when appropriations will be finalized, possibly by September 30, 2018, due to controversy over other unrelated issues. Aviation Impacted Communities Act • New legislation proposed by U.S. Representative Adam Smith. • The legislation would help cities, localities, and neighborhoods engage with the FAA, and it would require that the FAA communicate directly with residents and locally- nominated leaders on issues of aviation noise and environmental impacts through the creation of community boards. • It establishes a new "aviation impacted communities" designation, defined as any residential neighborhood or municipality located 3,000 feet below, and one mile on either side of any commercial jet route. • It would require that the FAA develop action plans to respond to both communities' concerns as well as any recommendations for mitigation identified in impact studies. • It would expand the availability of mitigation funding for aviation impacted communities outside of the current 65 DNL contour. • However, there is not a clear path to passage for this legislation at the current time. Christine Nhan, U.S. Representative Adam Smith's field representative, added that this legislation is being prepared in coordination with the Port, FAA, and others. This bill is a starting point and they are always interested in gathering additional feedback. They have been working with the Quiet Skies Coalition, who is also supportive. U.S. Representative Pramila Jayapal's office is also supportive. Nhan encouraged StART participants and the public to reach out to other Quiet Skies Coalition groups throughout the country to get other members of Congress to support the legislation. June 2018 DRAFT StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary June 27, 2018 Page 4 Aviation Noise Discussion: StART Members The main topic of the meeting was a discussion on aviation noise. In preparation for the meeting, StART members were asked to provide information about their entity's previous, existing, and currently proposed efforts to prevent, reduce, and/or mitigate aviation noise. This information was compiled into a table to be used as a foundation for discussion. StART members were asked to come prepared to identify and discuss potential actions that can be explored by StART to address aviation related noise. Members provided a range of ideas. After consolidating the list, members were asked to prioritize the list in order to get a sense of the top two to three ideas that could be explored further. The list of possible actions was meant to be a starting point for discussion. The ideas included: • Include elected officials at City, State and Federal level in the process • Identification of near-term actions that can be taken now and identification of best practices from efforts elsewhere • Modification to air operations: o Restrict night time flights o Restrict prop planes and/or cargo flights o Provide clarity on how flight volume is determined o Revise long-term plan related to air cargo/restrict additional regular flights o Look at current mitigation techniques (with FAA) that can be applied to air operations o Restrict flight paths over residential areas o Modify takeoff angles (utilized by Frankfurt Airport) ) • Modification to ground operations: o Evaluate modifications to operations/activities on airfield to reduce noise toward residences o Reduction of ground noise and noise attenuation/cancellation mitigation o Evaluate restrictions on westernmost runway and whether changes can be made to what planes use which runway o Look at reducing/restricting use of reverse thrust during landings • Focus on operations actions instead of mitigation actions· • Construction of additional airport/reduce number of flights at Sea-Tac • Upgrade/replace aging residential sound insulation • Identify areas where incremental progress can be made given all existing limitations, restrictions, and funding issues June 2018 DRAFT StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary June 27, 2018 Page 5 • City modifications to land use and zoning • Explore potential mitigation funding in areas outside the 65 DNL zone • Survey communities for data on local impacts for clearer understanding of community impact (fatigue, land value, etc.) • Look at appropriateness of using DNL measurement as benchmark for evaluating noise • Hear from representatives from bullet trains/hyper loop The highest priorities were the identification of near-term actions that can otential modifications to air o erations and otential modifications to round o erations. There was also interest in identifyi ng appropriate ways to engage elected officials at the City, State, and Federal level in the process. A small working group or groups were established to explore and discuss the ideas in more depth and to provide recommendations for potential actions. StART members were surveyed for their interest in participating in a small working group. Nine members were interested. The prioritized list will be refined and used as a basis for the focus of the working group(s). Additional ideas may emerge in the process. Subject matter experts including the airline, FAA, and air cargo representatives will participate as needed. Sea-Tac Airport Updates Capital Projects (SAMP) -Clare Gallagher, Port of Seattle Gallagher explained that the Port will be hosting public hearings for the Sustainable Airport Master Plan {SAMP) in the early fall. The scoping period starts in late July with 4 to 5 scoping meetings and will include webinars, online open houses, etc. Operations -Mike Ehl, Port of Seattle Ehl provided an operations summary: • Passenger percentage is up 5.8%, year to date. • Air cargo percentage is up 5.1%. Year to date, 37,083 tons through May. Public Comment Compiled public comments are included here as Appendix A. June 2018 DRAFT StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary June 27, 2018 Page 6 Meeting Wrap-Up: Lance Lyttle, Mike Ehl, & StART Members Lyttle reiterated the intent of StART was to develop solutions to bring to the elected officials for possible action not to omit them from the process. This intent of StART to be an advisory body was confirmed by a number of City Managers who participated in the design of StART. Next Meeting: Tuesday, August 21, 2018 (NOTE DATE CHANGE) Sea-Tac International Airport Conference Center, 6:00 pm -8:00 pm MEETING EVALUATIONS # of responses _1_ Very 1. Overall Meeting Poor Fair Good Good Excellent Experience 1 Somewhat 2. Presentations Not Useful Useful Very Useful 1 Somewhat 3. Discussion Not Useful Useful Very Useful 1 4. Overall Comments, Suggestions, or Questions The FAA industry did not speak ... that's horrible. Why are you afraid of hyper loop and bullet train Reps? 5. Outreach and engagement involvements reported during the last two months N/A June 2018 DRAFT StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary June 27, 2018 Page 7 Appendix A Summary of Public Comments 1. Jean Hilde (Shoreline; oral comments): • Referenced an article or document released by the FAA describing changes to the airport that were central to airport growth. • Has aircraft overhead every 30-60 seconds, from 5 AM to midnight when south flow is in effect. • Many approach paths seem to be narrowed into a single corridor, over her home. 90 percent of aviation noise from southbound aircraft. Flight trackers show flights at 3,000 feet, but every 30-60 seconds. • She now is wearing earplugs indoors. • Growth demand driven by passengers, so why are airlines offering deals to fly? 2. Candace Urquhart (member of Quiet Skies Puget Sound; Des Moines; oral comments): • Because of money received for the 3rd runway, the Port can't make changes or otherwise will violate FAA rules that came with accepting the funding. o Constrains ability to restrict night flights, or make any other changes. • Congress is now owned by the oil industry. • Hopes that the SAMP will not be proposing the same thing. • Suggests we pay back the grants to allow ability to restrict night flights. 3. Marianne Markkanen (member of Quiet Skies Coalition; oral comments): • At last SAMP meeting, the Port stated that there are 46.9M passengers now, and projects 56M passengers, with no new runways. • Has flight traffic overhead every 30 seconds. • Referenced a Wall Street Journal article (from March 8, 2018) about the FAA and reducing noise significantly by reducing the speed of departures. FAA is working with Boston Logan to mitigate noise problem. Why are they not also working on something like this here? Provided additional statistics from article. • Has been involved for 12 years and the conversation is the same. 4. Larry Cripe (President of Quiet Skies Coalition; Burien; oral comments): • Brought image of westerly flight path over Burien in the form of a runway, since westbound traffic could be considered a "4th runway." June 2018 DRAFT StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary June 27, 2018 Page 8 • FAA made decision (arbitrary and capricious), with seven proposals in front of them, to select Seahurst and Burien as the new departure path as those communities would not have the funding or strength to fight the decision. • Group should be outraged that the FAA will not come and discuss this. Requests FAA members in attendance to tell Brad Tilden (CEO of Alaska) that he will be receiving a letter from the citizens of Burien and the FAA will be hearing from them. 5. Anne Kroeker (Des Moines; oral comments): • Doesn't see other affected communities such as Shoreline, Vashon Island, or Capitol Hill, at the table, but they are equally affected. All communities under the flight path should be represented. • In addition to near-term considerations, should also look at what is "least harm" to humans and natural environment. Asking for comments from the people at the table of how they can do less harm. • Requesting delay in SAMP because SAMP has not yet addressed any issues brought up from today or from the past 20 years. 6. Debi Wagner (Burien; oral comments): • Reverse Thrust-difficult to implement because the 3rd runway has short exits. Potential option to not use 3rd runway. It is harming a lot of people through the use of the 3rd runway at night, and it's possible to not do that. There's no mitigation around the 3rd runway like there is for the other two runways. • Airport neighborhood in Chicago has 20 families with cancer. Flights overhead (ORD) at 500 feet. Does not want this same impact to be occurring here. Does not want herself or anyone else in her neighborhood to be a victim to this. • FAA is hiding behind the ambiguity of 'there is no science' so we can't understand if it is legitimate at all. 7. Gigi Sather (Federal Way; written comments): • I am a NW lady, born in Seattle, moved to Federal Way 45 years ago. I live in Marine Hills, a community right next to Redondo Beach. I have raised my family here and life in my residence has been wonderful up to two years ago. We now do not have a life outside in the yard (no picnics, no conversation, etc.). It has been shocking. Each of us are only a product of our own life exper iences! The impact on our communities, our schools (two in my immediate neighborhood). These children are playing outside in this environment. The health issue is real! Why not fly over the Puget Sound water in the south end like you are in the north end? Are you really listening? Do you really care? This is solvable. Check again with Chris Hall (StART representative). He knows what he is talking about. He creates June 2018 DRAFT StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary June 27, 2018 Page 9 flight patterns for many airports in the U.S. He knows what he is talking about. It really is an easy fix if you would listen ... if you really cared. We are talking about · people and quality of life. Are you listening?! 8. Anonymous (written comments): • Short-term actions: o Change flights so that no flights depart or arrive after 10:00 pm or depart before 6:00 am. o FAA-stop flying turbo props and 737s over my bedroom and house. It disrupts my sleep. The jet fuel residue adds a layer of dark oil residue on my organic vegetable garden. STOP NOW! o Stop arrivals on Runway 3. The noise pollution rattles my windows. o Move cargo flights to Moses Lake. o Move all commuter flights to Paine Field o Move international flights to McChord. o Stop all flights on Runway 3 after 8:00 pm and until 7:00 am. June 2018 DRAFT StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary June 27, 2018 Page 10 StART ~ SEA-TAC STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY ROUND TABLE Meeting Agenda August 21, 2018 6:00 pm -8:00 pm Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Conference Center 17801 International Blvd. (Directions ) Meeting Objectives: To review and discuss information from the initial meeting of the Aviation Noise Working Group. To develop shared understanding of Seattle region's airspace and flight paths. 6:00 pm 6:10 pm 6:20 pm 7:05 pm 7:45 pm 7:55 pm Welcome • Member Introductions • Opening comments Facilitator's Update Aviation Noise Working Group Briefing and Discussion Presentation and Discussion: "Air Traffic Overview" Public Comment Meeting Wrap Up • Closing Comments • Meeting Evaluation Form Lance Lyttle, Sea-Tac Airport Director StART members Lance Lyttle, Sea-Tac Airport Director Phyllis Shulman Earnest Thompson, StART Member, Aviation Noise Working Group, StART Members Steve Vale, Air Traffic Manager, FAA and StART Members Public Lance Lyttle & StART Members Next Meeting: October 24 -6:00 pm -8:00 pm, Location tbd StART enhances cooperatwn between the Port of Seattle and the ne,ghbonng commun,t,e~ of Sea-Tac Airport StART ~ SEA-TAC STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY ROUND TABLE August 21, 2018 Recap The Sea-Tac Stakeholder Advisory Round Table (StART) meeting took place on August 21, 2018 with a focus on reviewing and discussing information from the initial meeting of the Aviation Noise Working Group as well as to develop shared understanding of Seattle region's airspace and flight paths. This voluntary, advisory roundtable, convened by Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Director, Lance Lyttle, is a venue for the Port of Seattle to engage with the communities of SeaTac, Burien, Des Moines, Normandy Park, Tukwila and Federal Way. Representatives from Delta Air Lines, Alaska Airlines, and Lynden Transport are also members. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) participates as a non-member. The Airport Director reiterated the StART objectives: to identify issues and to develop recommendations for relevant actions that could be implemented by the appropriate decision- makers. Subject matter experts will be brought on when needed. The Aviation Noise Working Group (Working Group) reported on their first meeting and solicited feedback and questions from StART participants. To assist the Working Group, the Port hired a technical consultant who specializes in airport noise and has experience working with stakeholder groups. The first meeting's main focus was to review, refine and/or expand upon the initial list of near-term strategies identified by StART at the June 27 StART meeting. Long-term potential strategies will be considered as part of a future work plan Potential strategies discussed at the first working group meeting and shared with the StART members on August 21 included: • Runway Use Agreement/ Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) • Nighttime Voluntary Curfew • Glide Slope & Optimized Profile Descent Analysis • Airfield Noise/ Reverse Thrust Assessment The Working Group members, Port staff and the consultant reviewed the potential strategies with the StART members. There was general concurrence that these potential strategies are worthy of further exploration. The FAA Tower Manager gave a presentation and fielded questions on airspace and runway use at Sea-Tac. There were several questions following his presentation regarding the Burien automatic turn for turbo-props, FAA consideration of community impacts and the process for changing flight paths. The presentation can be found here . Public comment was heard. The next meeting is scheduled for 6 p.m., October 24, at the Conference Center at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport. The public is invited to attend . StART meeting documents may be found on the Port of Seattle website . StART enhances cooperat,on between the Port of Seattle and the ne,ghbor,ng commun1t1es of Sea-Tac Airport StART ~ SEA-TAC STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY ROUND TABLE DRAFT StART FACILITATOR'S MEETING SUMMARY Tuesday, August 21, 2018 6:00-8:00 p.m., Conference Center Sea-Tac Airport Interest Member Represented John Parness Burien Terry Plumb Burien Brian Wilson Burien Lisa Marshall (Alt) Burien John Resing Federal Way Chris Hall Federal Way Varden Weidenfeld Federal Way Sheila Brush Des Moines Ken Rogers Des Moines Michael Matthias Des Moines Eric Zimmerman Normandy Park Earnest Thompson Normandy Park Mark Happen Normandy Park Jennifer-Ferrer-Normandy Park Santa Ines (Alt) Laura Sanders Lynden (air cargo) Non-Member Randy Fiertz Federal Aviation Agency Additional Participants: Steve Vale, FAA Stan Shepherd, Port of Seattle Vince Mestre, Aviation Noise Consultant Facilitator: Phyllis Shulman, Civic Alchemy Note Taker: Megan King, Floyd Snider Interest Member Represented -Tejvir Basra SeaTac X Robert Akhtar SeaTac X Joe Scarcia SeaTac -Steve Pilcher (Alt) SeaTac X Katrina (Trina) Cook Tukwila -Joan (Thomas) Lee Tukwila X Brandon Miles Tukwila X Lance Lyttle (phone) Port of Seattle X Mike Ehl Port of Seattle X Clare Gallagher (Alt) Port of Seattle -Marco Milanese Port of Seattle X Tony Gonchar Delta Airlines X Scott Ingham (Alt) Delta Airlines -Scott Kennedy Alaska Airlines X Matt Shelby (Alt) Alaska Airlines Non-Member X Joelle Briggs Federal Aviation Agency - - X X - - - X X X X - - X X X StART enhances cooperation between the Port of Seattle and the neighboring communities of Sea-Tac Airport Meeting Objectives To review and discuss information from the initial meeting of the Aviation Noise Working Group. To develop shared understanding of Seattle region's airspace and flight paths. Welcome Lance Lyttle, Sea-Tac Airport Director Lyttle reiterated the intent of the StART group is to bring together representatives from six neighboring communities along with representatives from the airlines, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and air cargo to brainstorm issues and to develop relevant actions that address these issues. StART is not intended to be a policy decision-making body, but the objective is to identify issues and develop recommendations to take to those bodies that have the responsibility and authority to make decisions. Lyttle stated that subject matter experts will be included as resources to StART and to StART subgroups. He expressed excitement that feedback from the first StART Aviation Noise Working Group was positive. Member Introductions StART Members All members and participants introduced themselves and their affiliations. Facilitator's Update Phyllis Shulman, Civic Alchemy The facilitator described the original intent of StART. It was established to provide a forum that fosters respect and goodwill, and improves working relationships while reaching tangible recommendations and solutions. In order to create a constructive environment that enhances cooperation, the facilitator stated that it is important that StART participants feel that their engagement is valued. StART members were asked to share what would help them to feel valued in this process. The range of answers included: seeing actual outcomes, providing for a range of perspectives to be heard, follow-up actions on issues, providing participants with an awareness of competing issues that may not match their own, the ability to have open dialogue among all parties, for all individuals to have a voice, and tangible operational improvements. StART participants were also asked to identify the conditions that support a constructive working environment for the group. Answers included: trust, right expertise around the table, answers about what can be done and not what can't, patience, attitude and willingness to move toward "how," integrity, honesty, meaningful responses from both sides, active listening, willingness to walk in others' shoes, open communication, and evidence of progress. An issue was raised regarding whether a StART community representative can designate an alternative when the representative cannot attend a StART meeting. The facilitator and Mr. Lyttle reviewed the operating procedures that state that community representatives are designated by their city and that there is no provision for a community representative to designate an alternative. City staff representatives do have an alternate designee. This issue will be discussed outside of the formal meeting time. August 2018 Final DRAFT StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary August 21, 2018 Page 2 Aviation Noise Working Group Briefing and Discussion Earnest Thompson, StART Member; Stan Shepherd, Port of Seattle; Vince Mestre, Consultant The StART Aviation Noise Working Group (Working Group) reported on their first meeting and solicited feedback and questions from StART participants. Shepherd explained that the Port of Seattle (Port) hired Vince Mestre as a technical noise consultant to assist with the Working Group. Mestre's qualifications were shared with the group. Thompson provided the following summary of the first Working Group. StART Aviation Noise Working Group Facilitators Meeting Summary Thursday, August 16, 2018 Meeting Objectives: • To establish the Working Group. • To begin discussion and prioritization of a list of potential actions for StART to explore related to preventing, reducing, and/or mitigating aviation noise. • To consider constructive next steps. Meeting Summary: The Working Group attendees included StART members, as well as resource representatives from the airlines, the FAA, and the Port. To assist the Working Group, the Port hired a technical consultant, Vince Mestre, who specializes in airport noise and has experience working with stakeholder groups. Vince introduced himself and shared information about his expertise. The meeting's main focus was to review, refine, and/or expand upon the initial list of near-term strategies identified by StART at the June 27 StART meeting. long-term potential strategies could also be identified and considered as part of a future work plan. The Working Group suggested that it is important to clarify and identify who has authority to influence/make decisions for each specific potential action. Port staff and the consultant provided context for each of the initial strategies including identifying relevant history, opportunities, challenges, and examples from other airports (domestic and international), including best practices. Potential strategies discussed included: • Runway Use Agreement/Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) • Nighttime voluntary curfew • Glide slope & optimized profile descent analysis • Airfield noise/reverse thrust assessment The Working Group members, as well as the resource representatives, reviewed the potential strategies and confirmed that these potential strategies are worthy of further exploration. Next Steps: The Working Group decided to meet monthly for at least the next three months. Members identified additional information to be brought to the next meeting including statistics August 2018 Final DRAFT StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary August 21, 2018 Page 3 on night operations (including arrivals, departures, carriers, aircraft type, and seasonal data}, clarification of what Port funds can be applied to noise mitigation, and examples of runway use agreements/MOUs. Suggested topics for the next meeting's agenda included: • • Review of a draft work program for the Working Group that identifies potential actions, additional analysis or information needed to evaluate each strategy, and who will follow up with each task. Suggestions for additional potential measures including best practices that the consultant may be aware of The Working Group members, Port staff, and Mestre reviewed the potential strategies with the StART participants. Shepherd and Mestre reviewed the initial potential strategies in more detail. Runway Use Agreement/MOU}: The Working Group will analyze 3rd runway use and identify if opportunities exist that can reduce the use of the 3rd runway during times of lower operation. Mestre gave examples of how MOUs are utilized for runway operations at other airports and explained that each airport is unique. Voluntary Nighttime Curfew: The Working Group will analyze night flights and determine what the parameters might be and what steps could be taken to explore a voluntary nighttime curfew. Mestre gave examples of how Fly Quiet programs have been utilized at other airports to help incentivize the reduction of nighttime air traffic. Glide Slope: The Working Group will expand their understanding of the airport's runway glide slopes and the implementation of Optimized Profile Descent and explore whether there are potential modifications that could help to reduce aviation noise. Airfield Noise: The Working Group will explore and expand their understanding of the range of activities, including reverse thrust, that may contribute to airfield noise. They will consider the sources of noise including time of day, originating locations, airfield operations, and community impacts, and will consider potential noise reduction strategies. StART members shared concerns, asked technical and operational questions, and discussed the information shared from the Working Group. There was general concurrence that these potential strategies are worthy of further exploration. Presentation and Discussion: Air Traffic Overview Steve Vale, Air Traffic Manager, FAA, StART Members Vale gave a presentation and fielded questions on airspace and runway use at Sea-Tac Airport. The presentation can be found here. His presentation covered a range of information. Highlights included: • At Sea-Tac Airport, the air traffic control tower controls flights up to 15,000 feet and a radius of approximately 40 miles. August 2018 Final DRAFT StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary August 21, 2018 Page 4 • The primary reason for the direction aircraft arrive and depart is due to the direction of the primary winds and how they affect safety. Aircraft take off and land into the wind during each operation. • Runway separation of 2,500 feet is required for simultaneous arrivals and departures. • There is a single taxiway on the south end of the airport. This can lead to congestion and to limitations on where planes can wait. • Sea-Tac Airport and Boeing Field (4 miles away) have to coordinate air traffic. Their proximity creates limitations. For example, when in north flow the air traffic controllers must visually separate arrivals and departures into and from both airports. When visibility is low due to weather or air quality, radar is utilized requiring a separation of 3 miles between airplanes. • Sea-Tac is slotted to receive Wake Turbulence Recategorization in October 2018, but minimal changes are expected. • Current formation, known as the four-post plan, is for airplane arrivals to enter from all four corners (SE, NE, SW, and NW) and departures to exit on the compass posts (N, S, E, and W). • Over time there have been changes to the fleet mix. There has been a decline in smaller prop planes and an increase in larger heavy jets. Larger jets require greater separation . Discussion and several questions followed his presentation regarding the Burien turn for turbo- props, missed approaches, air traffic control rules for freight-only flights, FAA consideration of community impacts, whether the FAA is involved in deciding when an airport has reached maximum capacity, who is involved in policy making, and the process for changing flight paths. Public Comment Compiled public comments are included here as Appendix A. Meeting Wrap Up Lance Lyttle & StART Members Lyttle thanked the members and the public for attending, and continuing to work toward solutions. He reiterated that the intent of StART is to bring parties together to identify practical solutions to issues. He also encouraged StART participants to continue working towards that goal. Next Meeting: October 24, 2018, 6:00 pm-8:00 pm Location: Conference Center Sea-Tac Airport August 2018 Final DRAFT StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary August 21, 2018 Page 5 MEETING EVALUATIONS # of responses _L 1. Overall Meeting Poor Fair Good Very Good Excellent Experience X Not Useful Somewhat Useful Very Useful 2. Presentations X Com~ents: FAA presentation was a little too technical. Not Useful Somewhat Useful Very Useful ~-Discussion X Comments: Need to know at start of the meeting how many public comments there are so we can adjust accordingly. 4. Overall Comments, Su11estions, or Questions: August 2018 Final DRAFT StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary August 21, 2018 Page 6 Appendix A Summary of Public Comments 1. David Goebel (Vashon Island; oral comments): • Commented on operations and flight paths and the current FAA NexGen Scorecard. 2. Bernedine Lund (Quiet Skies Puget Sound; oral comments): • Inquired as to StART's final goal, and what they want to have happen 20 years from now? Stated there are only so many planes that can operate within Sea-Tac's small footprint. 3. Sue Petersen (Quiet Skies Puget Sound; oral comments): • Suggested that instead of speculating on aviation noise it is better to listen to the community. She lives under the 3rd runway glide path, and the sound is deafening. 4. Debi Wagner (Quiet Skies Puget Sound; oral comments): • Played a recording of flights over her house and expressed frustration with being asked to be respectful during the meetings. Described daily abuse from airport as bullying. 5. Larry Cripe (Quiet Skies Puget Sound; oral comments): • Commented that In Burien the flight path decision was made assuming Burien could not fight back. 6. Alli Larkin (Quiet Skies Puget Sound; oral comments): • She has lived in Des Moines for 39 years. She read from a 2015 article that discussed aviation noise impacts . The article indicated that Next Generation procedures were a potential cause of increased aviation noise. • National Sky Justice had their first meeting last week and will be a force in addressing the issues. 7. Dr. Wendy Ghiora (oral comments): • The Port has a responsibility to the communities beneath the runway that are exposed to carcinogens, noise, and sleep deprivation. Please consider these before expanding the size of the airport. 8. Kent Palosaari (oral comments): • Children's health was not on the list of issues for StART to address and should be. • Asks that StART begin working with the community, rather than against it. There is still a trust problem for many in the communities. August 2018 Final DRAFT StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary August 21, 2018 Page 7 9 . Austin Smith (Normandy Park; oral comments): • Commenting on the meeting itself, at all of these meetings, for every one person that shows up there are hundreds that do not. Please do not forget to consider those that do not have the ability to be here in person. 10. Seth Osborn (oral comments): • When he goes outside to create his YouTube videos, he needs to pause and wait until the airplane noise subsides. He would like the group to take the concerns of the public into actual consideration. 11. J.C. Harris (oral comments): • There is no Memorandum of Agreement that could be signed that the public would think it was worth the paper it was signed on. • Do the people at the table have the stamina to fight this fight for years to come? 12. Anne Kroeker (oral comments): • She lives beneath two flight paths where planes operate at different altitudes. This parameter should also be addressed. • The carbon footprint of airport operations needs to also be addressed. She wants an explanation for the number of missed arrivals. 13. Dana Hollaway (oral comments): • Until impacts are evaluated and addressed, the Airport Master Plan should be rejected. It is unacceptable to the community. 14. Blanche Hill (oral comments): • She has lived under flight paths for many years. Particulate matter from the planes covers the streets. She believes what needs to happen is the development of a hyperloop as a transportation alternative. 15. Joe and Shirley Compos (written comments): • It is completely outrageous how many take-offs are diverting directly over Burien. We did not purchase our house 26 years ago to be directly in the flight path of all of the excessive flights being jammed into Sea-Tac's schedule. The noise of direct overhead jets and propeller flights impacts our peaceful neighborhood terribly. I also know this impacts pets, wildlife, and the general health of our community. • Also, we wonder what happens to and who reviews airport noise emails that are sent to noiseabatement@portseattle.org. We would also like accountability and action instead of finger pointing between the FAA, Port of Seattle, and Alaska/Delta Airlines. • It appears reverse thrust is being used unnecessarily as a general guideline, and far too much at night, which interferes with sleep, quiet time for neighborhoods as well as nighttime wildlife such as owls. Will all 3 runways ever be constantly used? How about if Sea-Tac Airport built a 20-foot high noise abatement wall as they do along highways? August 2018 Final DRAFT StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary August 21, 2018 Page 8 16. Susan Cwiertnia (written comments): • Dispersion concept is intriguing and I would like to see more progress in this area. We live in Des Moines area (Woodmont Beach/Marine View Dr.). This is directly under the approach for North Flow and we can read numbers on bottom of jets as they land. • The past few months we have noted jets landing overhead every 40 to 120 seconds. This is a very high and concentrated frequency directly overhead. The noise is indescribable and unhealthy. We can't even talk to our neighbors. Dispersing the flights in the corridor to lessen frequency would be a helpful start. Sad to say that when the planes were grounded during the Horizon Air incident the other week, the silence was deafening, but much appreciated. With the noise gone we actually had relaxation and quiet enjoyment of our home, beautiful community and nature. Dispersion is only near-term. Long-term should be a new airport. 17. Anonymous (written comments): • Keep to your N-S runway. STOP flying over Burien ... We are not "too poor and uneducated to stop you." • Stop reverse thrust between 10 pm and 7 am unless you are going to crash. • Stop adding more air traffic and freight to this airport: It's past capacity!!! Build an airport to the north. • Airport runoff is still killing the returning salmon in our local streams that run down to the cove in Normandy Park. The airport needs to haul off this tainted water and additives. • The airport air pollution causes cancer and lung problems and heart issues. This additional morbidity and mortality needs to be acknowledged. 18. Deborah Dennis (written comments): • I'm looking for real numbers in terms of projected growth; long-term realistic solutions for a wonderful area with a growing economy. I agree with Joe Scarcia that it's time to move to solutions. Let's start taking bites out of this apple before it takes a bite out of us. 19. Brooke (written comments): • I am concerned about planes veering due west from the runways over Lake Burien and my own home, 3 houses south of the lake. Flights over the lake are occurring daily and I do call "Quiet Skies" Hot Line to report them. How are these due west routes allowed by the FAA? 20. M.J. Weaver (written comments): • The Advisory Round Bd. is weak and needs to be more decisive. • The reason given "reverse thrust performance" may save money for the airlines, but the homeowners' value of their homes is devalued. • The taxes for us have not decreased. August 2018 Final DRAFT StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary August 21, 2018 Page 9 • This reason of "reverse thrust" should not be used unless it is an emergency. It is often used at nighttime. • Many citizens have called in at the time of excessive noise, identifying the airline and time, but nothing is accomplished. Our voices are not heard. • The people who can make decisions are not present here. Are we just beating the air? • The reverse thrust is not always N and S problem. The take-off goes west often and extremely noisy and low over Burien. The aircraft departing over Burien is most frequently Alaska. 21. Arut Fox (written comments): • I heard lots of comments about safety of airplane travel-what about the safety of those living below the airplanes who have flights going over every minute? We can't talk when we are outside until the flight goes over and then talk fast for 50 seconds until the next plane. We can't leave our windows open-even in this hot weather. We have to have tax relief-my property taxes wen~ up 32 percent. How can we be treated as mansions and have no sanity? I have spent thousands of dollars on new windows and insulation to no avail. Now I need an air conditioner because I can't open my windows if I want to sleep at night or talk on the phone. King County Assessor needs to be involved here! Property assessments have to include environment! State Reps and U.S. Senators and Congressional Representatives need to be involved! 22. Jean Hilde-Fulghum (Shoreline; written comments): • I'm Jean Hilde-Fulghum and I'm from Shoreline, which is 25 miles north of Sea-Tac. In its "Greener Skies Final Report," the FAA called Shoreline " ... central to the area where procedures would be changing north of the airport." We in the north-end have witnessed those changes and they are not good. • I've lived in my home since 1995. About three years ago, what had been a half-dozen planes a day turned into (seemingly overnight) a jet aircraft roaring overhead literally every 30 to 60 seconds, for hours at a time with no silence in between. This goes on from 5:00 a.m. until well after midnight on days when Sea-Tac is in south flow, about nine months out of the year. A single over-flight at the FAA's DNL of 65 may be just an annoyance. Hundreds of over-flights per day is cruel and unusual punishment. Roaring aircraft throughout the night causing sleep deprivation is nothing less than torture. • My understanding of what the FAA meant by "procedural changes" was the implementation of RNP procedures, which, for the sake of efficiency, re-route the majority of south-bound arrivals into a single narrow corridor rather than the conventional widespread approach patterns, every single aircraft taking the exact same approach. This "sacrificial" corridor goes right over my home and my neighborhood. • Thus, the aviation noise that used to be shared by the wider community is now entirely dumped onto the lower socioeconomic communities along the 1-5 corridor. We're getting all of the noise without any of the economic compensation that is said to come with airport growth. This concentration of aircraft is also unfairly dumping aviation pollution over our homes, pollution that is well known to cause numerous health problems. We're getting all of the downside with none of the upside. August 2018 Final DRAFT StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary August 21, 2018 Page 10 • This unjust noise dumping has robbed us of the peace of our own homes and yards. I cannot work in my beloved garden. I literally wear earplugs inside my home. We in the north-end are also being subjected to increasing traffic going into Paine and Boeing fields, traffic that is frequently at low altitude in order to accommodate southbound Sea-Tac aircraft. • My neighbors and I are suffering. Despite being 25 miles from Sea-Tac, we now have a virtual runway over our heads that operates on a 24/7 schedule. Our north-end communities are being severely impacted by NextGen changes and Sea-lac's growth. We, too, need to be included in these discussions. August 2018 Final DRAFT IDENTICAL DNL/CNEL LEVELS 1 E>1enr .D~y SEL 11.S .J ,tBA = DNL I CNEL 65 ..... 10 E~~nt~·o~·, SEL ,o.i 4 <1BA = DNL I CNEL 65 100 Evonl •I D»y S EL !14 • dB,'I. • D N L I C N EL 65 StART Facilitator's Meeting Summary August 21, 2018 Page 11 F-ou{ StART ~ SEA-TAC STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY ROUND TABLE Meeting Agenda October 24, 2018 6:00 pm -8:00 pm Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Conference Center 17801 International Blvd. (Directions Meeting Objectives: To review and discuss progress from the Aviation Noise Working Group. To develop understanding of forthcoming fleet changes and how those may impact aviation noise. 6:00 pm 6:10 pm 6:15 pm 6:25 pm 6:55 pm 7:40 pm 7:55 pm Welcome • Member Introductions • Opening comments Facilitator's Update FAA Reauthorization Update/ SAMP Update Aviation Noise Working Group Briefing and Discussion • Meeting Report Out • Draft Work Plan • Discussion Presentation: "Forthcoming Aircraft Fleet Changes (20 min.) • Delta Update (5 min.) • Discussion {20 min.) Public Comment Meeting Wrap Up • Closing Comments Lance Lyttle, Sea-Tac Airport Managing Director; StART members Lance Lyttle Phyllis Shulman Clare Gallagher, Director of Capital Project Delivery, Port of Seattle Joe Scarcia, Working Group member Stan Shepherd, Airport Noise Programs Manager, Port of Seattle StART Members Dr. Robert Stoker, Senior Manager of Flight Sciences -Noise, Vibration and Emissions, Boeing Company Tony Gonchar, Vice President, Seattle, Delta Air Lines StART Members Public Lance Lyttle & StART Members Next Meeting: December 19 -6:00 pm -8:00 pm, Location TBD StART enhances cooperation between the Port of Seattle and the ne,ghbonng communities of Sea-Tac Airport ' I SEA-TAC STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY ROUND TABLE Call In Option: Aviation Noise Working Group Inaugural Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 2:00 pm -4:00 pm Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Offices, Conference Room 4A 17801 International Blvd. (Di rect io ns ) If you are unable to attend in person you ma y call into the meeting : Dial: 605-472-5576 Access Code 833532 Meeting Objectives: To establish the StART Aviation Noise Working Group. To begin discussion and prioritization of a list of potential actions for StART to explore related to preventing, reducing, and/or mitigating aviation noise . To consider constructive next steps. 2:00 pm 2:15 pm 2:25 pm Welcome • Introductions • Introduction of Consultant o Experience o Role Facilitator's Introduction and Group Process • Purpose of working group • Meeting protocols • Notes All present Phyllis Shulman • Reporting to StART (identify who will do report backs) Discussion of "Work Program" Working Group and Consultant and Priorities • Review potential action items from StART • Initial focus is on near-term actions, but will also identify and consider long-term strategies StA RT enhances cooperat10n between the Port of Seattle and the ne,ghbonng commun1t1es of Sea-Tac Airport 3:30 pm 3:45 pm 3:55 pm StART ~ SEA-TAC STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY ROUND TABLE • Identify near-term actions o Port's ideas o Vince's ideas o Community Reps' ideas o Airlines' ideas o Decide which ideas to focus on first • • Identify long-term actions, if appropriate Constructive Next Steps: Working Group and Consultant • Identify additional information sharing, research, data collection, and/or field trips/experiences that would be helpful Future Meeting Dates/Times Working Group Meeting Wrap Up Phyllis Shulman, Working Group and Consultant Next Meeting: TBD StART enhances cooperat,on between the Port of Seattle and the ne1ghbor1ng communit,es of Sea-Tac A,rport StART ~ SEA-TAC STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY ROUND TABLE Call In Option: Aviation Noise Working Group Meeting Agenda September 24, 2018; 5:30 pm -7:30 pm Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Offices, Conference Room 4A 17801 International Blvd. (Directions ) If ou are unable to attend in call into the meetin : Dial: 605-472-5576 Access Code 833532 Meeting Objectives: To review data on nighttime flight operations and to discuss examples of Letters of Agreement from other airports. To discuss and consider constructive next steps. -, 5:30 pm 5:35 pm 5:40 pm 6:30 pm 7:00 pm 7:25 pm Welcome and Introductions All present Facilitator's Update Phyllis Shulman Data Sharing and Discussion of Tim Toerber, Port of Seattle, and Working Group Nighttime Flight Operations I Review and Discussion of Letters Vince Mestre and Working Group of Agreement Constructive Next Steps Working Group and Vince Mestre Meeting Wrap Up Phyllis Shulman, Vince Mestre, and Working Group Next Meeting: October 29, 2018; 5:30 pm-7: 30 pm at Sea-Tac International Airport Offices, Conference Room 4A StART enhances cooperation between the Port of Seattle and the ne1ghbanng communities of Sea-Tac Airport StART ~ SEA-TAC STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY ROUND TABLE Call In Option: Aviation Noise Working Group Meeting Agenda October 29, 2018; 5:30 pm -7:30 pm Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Offices, Conference Room 4A 17801 International Blvd. (Directions ) If ou are unable to attend in Dial: 605-472-5576 Access Code 833532 Meeting Objectives: To review and provide feedback on approaches to a voluntary night-time curfew and runway use agreement. To review analysis of night-time operations. To discuss and consider constructive next steps regarding noise abatement department procedures and a glide slope analysis. 5:30 pm 5:35 pm 5:40 pm 6:10 pm Welcome and Introductions Facilitator's Update/ Recap of 10/24 StART Meeting Voluntary Night-time Curfew and Runway Use Agreement • Definition and approaches • Aircraft noise profile comparison Night-time Operations • By runway • By type of aircraft • By airline All present Phyllis Shulman Vince Mestre Tom Fagerstrom, Port of Seattle StART enhances cooperation between the Port of Seattle and the neighboring communities of Sea-Tac Airport I 6:40 pm 7:05 pm 7:15 pm 7:20 pm StART ~ SEA-TAC STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY ROUND TABLE Discussion and Constructive Next Steps Noise Abatement Departure Procedures Introduction Preview of Glide Slope Analysis (34R) Meeting Wrap Up/Brief Overview of Draft Work Plan Working Group and Vince Mestre Vince Mestre Robert Tykoski, Port of Seattle Phyllis Shulman, Vince Mestre, and Working Group Next Meeting: November 261 2018; 5:30 pm-7: 30 pm at Sea-Tac International Airport O/fices1 Conference Room 4A StART enhances cooperation between the Port of Seattle and the ne1ghbor1ng commun1t1es of Sea-Tac A,rport "X ' -<-...0 Sea-Tac Nightti me Ope r ation s 1. Runway Use 2. Airlines and Aircraft 3. Departure Flight Paths Port ..... .,. of Seatt le Nighttime Operations Baseline Numbers-12:00am to 5:00am August sth thru September sth (32 nights) • 1560 total operations -an average of 48. 75 per night • 1385 passenger ops, 156 cargo ops, 19 general aviation ops • 190 large wide bc>dy aircraft -143 cargo and 4 7 passenger V, (t) QJ I ~ n :::c C: :::J ~ QJ '< C V, (t) Tota ll Runway Usage 8/8 thru 9/8 for all hours Take-offs: Third Runway 16R/34L -31 (all small GA aircraft) Center 1iunway 16C/34C -6,519 East Runway 16L/34R -13,882 Landings: Third Runway 16R/34L -17,600 Center Runway 16C/34C -254 East Runway 16L/34R -2,506 a1°1o of lancHngs o~curred on third r,unway Runway Usage at Night (August 8 thru September 8 from 12:00am to 5:00am) Take-offs (743 total): Third Runway 16R/34L -O Center Runway 16C/34C -169 East Runway 16L/34R -571 Unknown -.3 Landings (817 total): Third Runway 16R/34L.-298 (9-10 per night) Center Runway 16C/34C -146 East Runway 16L/34R -373 36°/o of landings occurred on thi.rd run way Breakdown of 298 Third Runway Landings at Night Time Total Landings on Third RWY ' 12am-lami* 214 lam-2am 47 2am-3am 3am-4am 4am-Sam 13 12 12 Majority of landings frorn lam to 5am occurred from August 20 through August 24 when the east runway was closed overnight for rubber removal. *A total of 287 landings occurred on all runways from 12am to 1am. *A total of 435 departures occurred during the hou rs of 12am to lam an average of 13 to 14 per night. )> ..... -, ~ ..... ::s (D V, QJ ::s Q., )> ..... -, n -, QJ ~ Aircraft Operating at Night August 8 thru September 8, 12am to Sam 32 nights, 1560 total operations 1370 narrow body operations B737 all variants -713 A320 all variants -356 87!;7 all variants -155* (*8757 ops include 13 FedEx cargo) 190 large wide body operations Cargo -143 Passenger -47 Large Aircraft Operating at Night August 8 thru September 8, 12am to 5am Aircraft Type Arrivals Departures A300 4 0 FedEx A330 7 1 Hawaiian B747-400 13 16 China Air Cargo (22) cargolux (7) 8747-8 5 5 Korean Air Cargo (S arrivals) Cargolux (5 departures) 13 68 Air Transport Intl' (66) Airborne Express (8) OmniAir (6) Delta (1) 8777 0 32 EVA Airways DClO 19 0 FedEx MD11 7 0 FedEx Airline Alaska Delta American United Spirit Air Transport Intl' JetBlue Horizon Frontier Southwest FedEx Compass EVA Airways China Air Cargo Sun Country Cargolux SkyWest Hawaiian Air Airborne Express Korean Air Cargo Airlines Operating at Night August l3 thru September 8, 12am to Sam Total Op.s Arrivals 439 302 207 120 155 78 140 63 99 46 66 (cargo) 1 63 33 63 13 56 14 51 44 43 (cargo) 42 38 12 32 0 22 (cargo) 10 12 2 12 (cargo) 3 9 1 8 7 8 (cargo) 8 5 (cargo) 5 .....- Departures 137 87 77 77 53 65 30 so 42 7 1 26 32 12 10 9 8 1 0 0 ·. Most Frequen t De stin ations for Nighttime Depar t ures • Alaska -Anchorage and Chicago (many others much less frequent) • Delta -Minneapolis and Detroit (many others much less frequent) • American -Dallas, Chicago and Charlotte • United -Chicago and Houston • Spirit -Chicago and Houston • Frontier -Denver • JetBlue -Boston • Horizon -Portland and many other regional cities • Compass -Vancouver and many other regional cities • Air Transport Intl' -Sacramento and Cincinnati • EVA Air -Taipei • China Air Cargo -Taipei China Air Cargo 747-400 South-flow Departures August 8 thru September 8, 12:00am to 5:00am ~ [6000 , 7000)ft ~ [SO , 5000) ft [3000 , 4000) ft ,,..,.. 12000 , 3000) ft /'V' 11000 I 2000) ft ..... [O , 1000) ft .. Red Lines= 5 nautical mile corridor EVA Airways 777 South-flow Departures A ug u st 8 thru September 8, 12:00am to 5:00am .r,/ [6000, 7000) ft A"' [5000 , 6'000) ft [ 4000 I 5000) ft [3000 , 4000) ft ~ [2-000, 3000) ft ) ft .,.._ [O, 1000) ft Red Lines= 5 nautical mile corridor Air Transport Intl' 767 South-flow Departures Au au st 8 thru September 8, 12:00am to 5:00am .rll" [60 )ft )ft [ 4000 , 5000} ft [3000 , 4000} ft ~ [2000 , 3000) ft /vi [1DOO , 2000) ft r~-[O , 1000) ft Red Lines= 5 nautical mile corridor Alaska Airlines 737 South-flow Departures Au a ust 8 thru Se 2tember 8, 12:00am to 5:00am /V (6000, 7000) ft ~ [50BO, 6000) ft [ 4000 , 5000} ft [3000, 4000) ft /V [2000, 3000) ft .,....,,,,. [ 1 000 , 2000 )· ft ,..,. [O , 1000} ft Red Lines= 5 nautical mile corridor Variations on tower agreements What is a voluntary curfew? Comparison of Aircraft Single Event Noise Noise Abatement Departure Procedures (an introduction) StART Noise Subcommittee October 29, 2018 ~ \J) ~ (\) J What is a voluntary curfew? • Curfews are severely limited by 1990 Airport Noise and Capacity Act • It is a request by the airport/community to limit night time operations -May not be mandatory in any form including increased fees. • Relies on the cooperation of the airlines/operators • Generally will rely on positive/negative publicity as primary incentive How To Implement Voluntary Curfew • Modify Fly Quiet Award Program to include curfew operations in the computations (midnight -Sam) • Develop Fly Quiet Brochure for use in talking to operators • Publish Fly Quiet results more prominently including a ranking of operators from best to worst • Goal: Have operators review .. their night operations -Type of aircraft, need Burbank Example • Burbank has long had a voluntary curfew • BUR sought a mandatory curfew through a Part 161 at great cost and it was denied • BUR still has a voluntary curfew and regularly reports compliance as part of their public noise reports -See chart 9102'.: v10c: E Cl) Z:TOC: ro QJ = OlOZ: \.0 s.... som: =, • +-' _..... I 91oi E s.... E I v t oc: 'l C:l OC: ro ro ro I 0 10(.'. u, c.. I" ~ sooz: I QJ E I/) 910Z: 0 a. > J vrnz: E 0 ro "'C ~ C: IOZ: ro ...-1 V " ...._, N I O tQC: Cl) > • 8 00C: Cl) L. Q) I,... QJ Q) 9102'. L. > = tdOZ: E C L. Q) ro = Z:lOZ: ro Q) M QJ u u • OIOZ: > L. C ., SOOC: > 0 ro ·-<( Cl ~ , 9TOC: I+,- u t>TOC: E 0 ro I.. ~ V) • c: me: N :, Q) .=: 0102'. 0 I. L. • 8002'. "i:::-:::J UJ -e 1 9l02'. It] QJ ro j v 102'. E >-~ a. l 2'.IOc It] Q) 1 010G ...... ~ 0 I 80oz: >-: 9102'. Si.- =, L. I vTOC:: E :::J : C:IOC: ro u 0 I O 10('. N ::r: J sooc: ...... -1-' I Q) ..c. O'I "i 9 IOC:: t:l.Q ~ -: v roe: E a. ·-Q) • llOZ: ..-1 z ~ : 0 1m: ...... .I 8002: a:: 9l02'. :::, vrnc: E -llOC: g cc = 0102'. ..-t -800Z: N 0 saJn:µedaa ,<.pnoH 400 350 300 2SC 200 150 100 SC D I BUR Night Curfew Effectiveness, Arrivals Commercial Arrivals -Yearly Total per Hour I I 11 . I I I .11 I I I i. I I --I I I I • Once every weekday I • -I 0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 ~ O 1 2 3 ~ 0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4 C l 4 0 1 2 4 O 1 2 4 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2C18 • 'ota! Variations on Tower Agreements • A review: • Letter of Agreement Between Airport and FAA • Letter of Agreement Between FAA Tower And FAA Tracon • Development coordinated by airport and FAA Tower • Airport negotiated changes to Tower operating procedures Letter of Agreement Between Airport and FAA • Advantages -Formal agreement that will live on after staff changes -Actions are incorporated in tower operating procedures • Disadvantages -Requires legal review by Port and FAA legal staff -Most time-consuming Letter of Agreement Between FAA Tower And FAA Tracon • Aqvantages -Actions are incorporated in tower operating procedures -Does not require legal review -Can be done more quickly • Disadvantages -No assurance it will not be changed without airport/community review Airport negotiated changes to Tower operating procedures • Advantages -Actions are incorporated in tower operating procedures -Does not require legal review -Can be done more quickly • Disadvantages -No assurance it will not be changed without airport/community review . Single Event Noise Comparison {90 SEL) Boeing B747~0 ~)- Boeing MD11-PW +=, Boeing 8777-200 + Airbus A30084-203 + Boeing 767-300 + Boeing 8787-8 + Boeing 8737-800 + Boeing 8737-800 MAX + * Note: May not be representative of actual weights flown at SEA B747-400 (90 SEL) Notes: 1. M ay not be representative of aircraft weights at SEA 2. Ap p roximate project that is not adjusted for runway length and not projected onto a curved surface. 3. 90 SEL (Sound Exposure Level) represe nts an awakening rate of 3% of the affected population. 747-400 3rd Runway and Inboard Runway • For and indoor observer the difference in perceived loudness is similar for either runway. • Indoor observer cannot tell which runway is being used. • Aircraft noise is well above ambient noise levels 737-800 vs 737-800MAX • Note that this is same scale as previous contours. • For quieter aircraft types noise levels are nearer ambient levels and perception may be different for those under flight track vs those to the side. Single Event Contour Summary, ie, Priorities • For louder aircraft, curfew and fleet mix are more important than runway use. -In other words, preferential runway use won't help much for the louder aircraft • For quieter aircraft runway use is important Noise Abatement Departure Procedures • Nomenclature -FAA Advisory Circular: • Close-in vs distant departure procedures -ICAO old: • ICAO A vs ICAO B -ICAO new: • Noise Abatement Departure Procedure (NADP) 1 vs noise abatement Departure Procedure (NADP) 2 Close-in vs Distant Departure Procedure • Close-in procedure -Benefit is for community very close to runway end • Generally within 10,000 feet from beginning of takeoff • roll -Results in higher noise levels for communities farther away • Distant procedure: -Benefit for communities several miles from airport -Results in higher noise for communities close-in Schematic of Close-in vs Distant Procedures JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT DEPARTURE PROCEDURES DEMONSTRATION JWA Example > rn ~ Quieter n Noisier Move the rest to November? Glide Slope Analysis St ep Down Approach Oakland Glide Slope Example 12000~--------------------- 10000 .. -. -. -. . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . ................ . 8000 6000 .......................... 4000~~e~~~~)~~~-~~-~1P!11~ ~~OQ' ..... 2000 · ....... -...... . I I 0 MITOE 1 O Silverlock JEN FR 0 20 Cumulative Flight Distance (Nautical Miles) SEA Glide Slope Example 12,000 Profile View Chart 10,000 I I I :.;, .,, 7 .-:-;:.-:-2:::::$.,..~ s.ooo I I g ] 6,000 I I ,, S72iiE --= < 4,000 I .fN 2,000 10 20 Dimm:e (NM) E \ght 0 Department of Commerce Seattle-Tacoma lntemational Airport-2018-2019 Study Implementation of Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill (ESSB) 6032-Section 127(63). 1) Introductions Meeting 6 October 15, 2018 1:00 PM -SeaTac City Hall AGENDA a. Objectives for this session 2) Preparations for open public meetings (40 min) a. Status of public representative recruitment b. Details for subsequent meetings (schedule?, location? notice? note taking?) c. Flow of information and operation 3) New draft work schedule (60 min) a. Review of priorities b. New deadline? c. Other elements to consider? 4) Next Steps (10 min) 0 Department of Commerce Seattle-Tacoma lntemational Airport-2018-2020 Study Implementation of Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill (ESSB) 6032-Section 127(63). 1) Introductions Meeting 7 October 29, 2018 1:00 PM -SeaTac City Hall AGENDA 2) Project Team Charter (40 min) a. Review of latest draft b. Input from new committee members c. Revisions, additions, finalization, 3) Statement of Work Development (60 min) a. Review of most recent draft b. Definitions and Terms c. Other elements to consider? 4) Next Steps DRAFT Federal Wav Talking Points October 26, 2018 NOTE: all comments related to scoping for the SAMP Near-Term Projects environmental review will be considered as part of the official scoping process. 1. Items we support a. City support for state legislation funding a second phase to the University of Washington study that would study the health effects of UFP (p 46) • Port supports this and recognizes that health impacts associated with exposure to UFP is an emerging field that needs additional study. • During 2017 WA Legislature budget discussions, Port agreed to provide half the funds needed for the Washington State Department of Health to conduct a review of the scientific literature related to potential health impacts associated with exposure to UFP. The results of the literature review would be used to determine if the results from the monitoring study could be evaluated further to examine potential health impacts. The literature review is due from WADOH in 2019. b. City support for efforts by Congressman Adam Smith for federql study of UFP (p 52) • Similar to previous support for state-led review of health impacts, the Port supports federal agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or the Centers for Disease Control's Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) to review the health literature associated with exposure to UFP and determine if enough information is available to identify potential health risks . • The Port supported Congressman Smith in his offer of specific legislative language asking forfederal review of the potential health impacts associated with UFP. c . City to encourage Port to support research into UFPs and aircraft (p 52) • See above. d. Raise the glides/ope on Runway 34R to 3 degrees (p15} • The Port supports this effort and plans to work with the FAA to determine the feasibility of moving critical ILS equipment to alternate locations, which will enable the ILS glideslope to be increased. This is also a topic the Port is supporting through the StART. e . Raise the glides/ope on other runways above 3 degrees (p15) Draft 10/26/18 • This action would require extensive analysis by the FAA, and the Port would support the study through the StART if the members agreed. The Port's ultimate position on this action would depend in part on the analysis findings. Glideslope equipment is owned and maintained by the FAA . Page 1 f Voluntary Curfew on cargo flights (pp35, 45) • The Port is currently discussing voluntary curfews on noisier aircraft (which would likely include certain cargo flights) in the StART Noise Working Group. g. Modify flight tracks (pp16, 18, other) • The report includes proposals for specific modifications to flight tracks for arriving and departing aircraft. Although we cann~t support the specific proposals in the report (see discussion topics below), we are open to exploring other noise reduction strategies through the StART or other process that includes stakeholders from all potentially affected comml!nities. 2. Items needing clarification a. Statement that Port staff (L Stanton) said that "the Port has incentivize[d] biofuel production in WA[shington]" (p52) • The Port gave a presentation to the Highline Forum in June 2017 entitled "Air Quality Initiatives at Sea" Tac," which included bullet points on a slide for the timeframe of "2015 to the present" which state "Support fuel integration & infrastructure, help with incremental cost of fuel, and incentivize biofuel production in WA." These are on-going efforts for the Port that include a strategic plan to bring sustainable aviation fuel {SAF) to the airport, evaluating the optimal locations to store and dispense SAF on airport property, and advocating for key legislation· such as a low carbon fuel standard in Washington State. The Airport dqes not purchase or use aviation fuel, so our strategies focus on advocating and providing support for SAF. b. "The study found a large proportion of local air pollution is caused by congestion from airports. In terms of the link between health and pollution, admissions for respiratory problems were strongly related to airplane emissions." (p46) • The study referenced in this statement1 correlates emergency room visits for asthma, respiratory, and heart-related hospital admissions with carbon r:nonoxide (CO) concentrations at monitors located near airports throughout California. While the Port supports evaluating th.e linkages between aircraft operations, ambient air concentrations,. and adverse health outcomes, the Port has a number of concerns about the approach used in this study, which call into question the findings, including: o The authors do not account for the fact that on-road vehicles are by far the largest sources of CO in the state, 2 and that the monitors are loc~ted in high traffic areas. CARS states:3'4'5 1 "Airports, air pollution, and contemporaneous health" by W.Schlenker and WR Walker. The Review of Economic Studies, 83(2), 768-809 . 2015. 2 The authors note that Los Angeles International Airport is the largest point sources of CO in California, but do not provide an estimate of annual emissions . Accordlng to the California Air Resources Board (CARB), on-road vehicles emitted approximately 6,524 tons/year of CO in 2005, which is 35 times the amount emitted from aircraft that same year (187 tons/year). See footnotes 3 and 4 below. Similarly, a number of the CO monitors located "near Draft 10/26/18 Page 2 o Carbon monoxide concentrations typically peak nearest a source, such as roadways, and decrease rapidly as distance from the source increases. The study did not find links between NOx or 03, which are also emitted from airports, and health outcomes. The authors note that CO could be a proxy for other pollutants but they didn't evaluate that in their study. a The study only looks at increases in taxi times between runways and the terminal, rather than total number of operations or other aircraft indicators to build the statistical relationships. The authors provide no discussion on why they selected delays rather than overall airport operations, which would be a better indicator of emissions a The study does not adequately consider a range of air emissions from on-road vehicles that could be the reason behind the observed correlation . In addition, the authors ignore the extensive body of literature that has been reviewed by USEPA, Cal EPA, and the World Health Organization which shows that particulate matter, including emissions from on-road sources such as diesel vehicles, are highly associated with and likely to cause adverse health impacts in sensitive individuals such as those in hospitals.6•7•8 3. Items for discussion a. "Port owes Federal Way noise mitigation for prior growth" (pp 10, 25) • The discussion on plO refers to a community impacts study conducted in 1997. That study was prepared, using a Stc:ite of Washington grant, to analyze the i mpacts of the third runway. The environmental review of the third runway, which used established methods of analysis and thresholds for significant, was upheld in court. • Sea-Tac Airport has updated its Part 150 Noise Compatibility Program several times, most recently in 2014. Federal funding for noise mitigation through Part 150 is ayailable only within the 65 DNL contour, and airports must abide by FAA policies and regulations if they use FAA grant funds for sound mitigation within the 65 DNL Contour. Noise "abatement" measures approved through a Part 150 airports" appear to be located nearer to major roadways than they ar-e to airports. For example, the CO monitors in LA County are located nearer to 1-405 and 1-710 than they are to LAX . 3 CARB : Gaseous Criteria Pollutants. https://www.arb.ca.gov/aaqm/criteria.htm 4 CARB : CEPAM: i016 SIP -Standard Emission Tool. https://www .arb.ca.go v/app/e rn si nv/fcemssu mc at/fcemss umcat2016.php 5 CARB: California Counties and Air Basins 6 https ://www.epa.gov/naaqs/particu late-matter-pm-air-quality~standa rds. 7 https://www.arb.ca.gov/research/health/pm-mort/pm-mort_arch.htm 8 World Health Organization. Health effects of particulate matter: Policy implications for countries in eastern Europe, CatJcasus and central Asia. 2013. ISBN 978 92 890 0001 7 Draft 10/26/18 Page3 Program must provide a benefit within the 65 lJNL Contour. Federal Way is not within the most recent (2018 forecast) Part 150 65 DNL Contour. • Other aspects of this issue will be covered as part of the consideration of SAMP NTP environmental review scoping comments. b. Changes to approaches: "Standard Approach with 3.1nm final roll out point for north flow flights from Alaska and Asia"; "New RNP north flow approaches from the south to follow 1-5"; "Suggested RNP with final turn 2.2 nm from EOR" (p16) • A change to the approach path would lead to a shifting of noise from one community to another, and could lead to a new population exposed to noise of 65 DNL and highl:!r. 'v'v'oulu also potentiall-y require other" cha11ges in flight paths of departing aircraft for separation purposes. At a minimum, study would be needed to understand the changes in impact. c. Changes to departures: "South flow departures turn west over Des Moines to the sound" (p18) • A change to the departure path would lead to a shifting of noise from one community to another, and could lead to a new population exposed to noise of 65 DNL and higher. Would also potentially require other changes in flight paths of arriving aircraft for separation purposes. At a minimum, study wouid be needed to understand the tradeoffs. d. Concerns about Airport cargo marketing (multiple cites) • The Port has posted factual information about its cargo facilities, including the facts that the facilities are open around the clock and d'o not have operational curfews. However, we would be open to hearing concerns about specific language on the web or in other publications. e. "Other Airports mitigate below 65 DNL" • We would like clarification on what Federal Way is proposing. The circumstances that other airports mitigate under 65 DNL vary by situation either litigation or absolute land use controls. Sea-Tac is abiding by the Part 150 regulation and its grant assurances. f. "City should engage with Rep Adam Smith to support his legislation" (p32) • The Port is not taking a position on this legislation. We realize that there is some very challenging language within the legislation that would require clarification. o The legislation included: • Making sotind insulation eligible for communities inside the 55 DNL contour -Mitigation within homes would be difficult to achieve any type of meaningful reduction at these lower noise levels. • Establish impacted communities where the aircraft are 3,000 feet or below and 1 mile either side of the flight track -This Draft 10/26/18 Page 4 would encompass a large portion of King County north and south of the airport. • Establish FAA community board meetings within the impacted communities -the FAA reauthorization bill provides that, within one year, each FAA region shall provide a Regional Ombudsman who shall: (1) serve as a regional liaison with the public, including community groups, on issues regarding aircraft noise, pollution, and safety; (2) make recommendations to the Administrator for the region to address concerns raised by the public and improve the consideration of public comments in decision-making processes; and (3) be consulted on proposed changes in aircraft operations affecting the region, including arrival and departure routes, in order to minimize environmental impacts, including noise. The Ombudsman could help address the community issues raised by the bill. • Allow communities to ask for additional noise monitoring equipment -Noise monitoring equipment in every neighborhood requesting it does not necessarily create any connection to noise contours or changes in noise levels. g. "City should assist Rep Adam Smith to pressure FAA on DNL and metrics evaluation" (p33) • The Port understands the FAA is evaluating the metrics, and now is subject to the language in the recent FAA reauthorization. We will abide by any future FAA guidance. h. "City should engage with FAA community engagement staff and insist that alternatives to DNL be examined" (p33) • This issue is being evaluated by the FAA at a national level. See above. i. "City should lobby FAA, POS, Congress to change glide slopes and flight paths" (p33) • Port is neutral on this subject, with the understanding of challenges of changing flight paths, which include shifting of noise and the need for standardized glideslopes. j. "City should support Pellicciotti noise abatement bill (p63) • The Port is not taking a position on this legislation. However, it does not address the challenges the Port faces in implementing noise measures outside the 65 DNL. k. "Voluntarily move cargo flights to other airports" (p45) Draft 10/26/18 • At the time of the report, the authors may not have been aware of the state air cargo study. The Port cannot "move" cargo flights to other airports; the state study will talk about steps other airports can take to attract cargo. This point was also included in the City's scoping comments and will be addressed through · that process. Page 5 I.· .'.'PQ_s~ib1~ Rr_essur~ o ri_P9 S !b ·conduct_F>art t6I stu _c!Y: (p46l _ • The Port does not support a Palit 161 study with the understanding that they_c1re near.ly impossible to implement and preliminary work needs to be completed bef(l)re a study could be initiated. m. "Use of 3rd Runway only during inclement weather" (p33) • Use of all rnnwa,ys (induding the 3rd runway) is being evaluated by the StART noise working group. However, res'l!ricting the use of the third runway to only il'ldementweather is not supported by the Port. Iii. "City to purnhase noise moni1iors1' ~pp32--33) • Neutral on the e1ty purchasing-noise· monitors. If there Is a concern aboul Lin~ placement of POS -r:1oise· monitors we can discuss. Dr:a.it 10/26/18 Page 6