11-17-2020 Link ExtensionSOUND TRANSIT
FEDERAL WAY LINK EXTENSION
FWLE Development Agreement Alteration No. 1
November 17, 2020 City Council
Policy Question
Should the City Council approve the change to the Federal Way Link
Extension Project Development Agreement between the Central
Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority (Sound Transit) and the City
of Federal Way?
Project History –Federal Way Link Extension:
•Sound Transit 2 passed in 2008 approving the project
•2015: Resolution 15-686 recommending I-5 alignment
•Sound Transit 3 passed in 2016 approving project funding
•2017: Interstate 5 Project alignment selected by Sound Transit Board
•2017-2018: Letters of concurrence and partnership during Sound
Transit pre-engineering efforts
•2019: Transit Way Agreement executed
•2019: City adopts the Project Development Agreement permitting
the project to proceed as a Design-Build project.
•2019: Selected Kiewit Infrastructure West as Design/Build Contractor
and issue NTP
The Issue:
•The City granted Sound Transit a code modification to not have
active uses on the ground floor of the parking garage. As
mitigation for not having active uses, Sound Transit agreed to
install a City fiber optic line for the length of the alignment.
•The Development Agreement includes a conceptual alignment and
description about how the fiber optic would meet City
Development Standards.
•The Design/Build Contractor was instructed to include the fiber
optic in their design. However, as design progressed some issues
became apparent.
•Design options either created access issues for the City, did not
meet Sound Transit requirements, or resulted in greater costs
through impacts to wetlands, walls, or other project elements.
Fiber Optic Route Change Overview
Concept that was
the Basis of the
City Estimate:
Current Route Follows
the Alignment:
The Proposed Change:
•Fee amount is $2,647,985. This amount is based on a cost
estimate prepared by the City and agreed to by Sound
Transit.
•The pathway shown on the previous slide is conceptual and
demonstrates that the fee in-lieu is an amount that covers
the design and construction of a fiber optic pathway that
provides functionality comparable to the originally planned
pathway.
•Having the City take lead on implementing the project will
allow the City to build a better product for our needs and
provide Sound Transit with certainty in their design effort.
This is a mutually beneficial solution to the design
challenges.
Key Facts & Findings:
•Implementing the fiber optic as envisioned in the Project
Development Agreement was found to be infeasible or result in
greater development impacts than originally anticipated.
•The fee in-lieu amount is based on a construction estimate
prepared by the City and not adjusted following Sound Transit’s
review and internal cost estimating. The amount includes an
allowance for design and engineering.
•Designing a custom fiber optic path compared to one that is
limited to the Sound Transit guideway alignment can provide a
better benefit to the City and resolves design challenges.
•The original intent of the Project Development Agreement is
maintained and all other effects, conditions, and requirements
of the Agreement remain unchanged by this action.
Process:
•Section 25.8 of the Development Agreement states the
Agreement can only be amended or altered by written
authorization by both parties.
•FWRC 19.85.200 states that a change to the content of the
Development Agreement must be enacted following the same
process as a new Development Agreement.
•Sound Transit has to complete the contract change order and
approve this change to the Project Development Agreement
consistent with their own policies.
•When the document is executed, the City will no longer
require Sound Transit to build fiber optic as part of the Project
and Sound Transit will pay the fee in-lieu amount agreed to.
Summary:
•In 2019, following execution of the Project Development
Agreement with the City, Sound Transit instructed their
Design/Build Contractor to design the new City fiber optic
per the Agreement.
•In the design stage, significant challenges emerged that
resulted in the parties exploring other options.
•Having the City construct a fiber optic path in existing ROW
emerged as an alternate solution to achieve comparable
functionality.
•The question before City Council is whether to enact an
ordinance allowing this change to the Agreement.
Options Considered
1.Approve the proposed ordinance, forwarding the proposed
ordinance to the City Council for a second reading on
December 1, 2020.
2.Reject the proposed ordinance and provide direction to staff.
Mayor’s Recommendation
The Mayor recommends Option 1 to approve the proposed
ordinance.
QUESTIONS?