HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-20-10 Council Meeting
Arlington City Council
September 20, 2010 - 7 PM
City Council Chambers
110 E. Third
SPECIAL ACCOMMODATIONS: The City of Arlington strives to provide accessible meetings for people with disabilities. Please contact the ADA
coordinator at (360) 403-3441 or 1-800-833-8388 (TDD only) prior to the meeting date if special accommodations are required.
CALL TO ORDER / PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/ROLL CALL
APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS
1. Scott Munson and Adam Lingenfelter, Pro Build
2. Ryann Reece ~ Girl Scouts Silver Award
PUBLIC COMMENT For members of the public to speak to the Council regarding matters NOT on the agenda.
Please limit remarks to three minutes
CONSENT AGENDA
1. Minutes of the September 7 and 13, 2010 meetings ATTACHMENT A
2. Accounts Payable
PUBLIC HEARING
1. Proposed Minor Zoning and Land Use Map Amendments ATTACHMENT B
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS
1. Contract with RH2 for study and analysis of 67th Trunk Sewer Line ATTACHMENT C
2. Supplement #3 to the HDR Engineering Contract for final design of the ATTACHMENT D
67th Avenue Reconstruction Project, Phase III
3. 67th Phase III – Local Agency Agreement Supplement #2 ATTACHMENT E
~Obligating Final Design Grant Funding
4. IMCO Change Order No. 7 for installation of reclaimed water pipeline ATTACHMENT F
5. Fiber Agreement for Fire Station #48 ATTACHMENT G
6. Proposed Resolution for Adoption of CEMP ATTACHMENT H
7. Interlocal with Fire District #19 for equipment use ATTACHMENT I
8. MOU with the State for a Disaster Staging Area ATTACHMENT J
9. PUD Easement on 51st ATTACHMENT K
10. Adoption of the Snohomish County Cities Legislative Agenda ATTACHMENT L
11. Ordinance adopting revisions to AMC – Title 1 ATTACHMENT M
12. Ordinance adopting revisions to AMC – Chapter 2.04 ATTACHMENT N
13. Interlocal Agreement between SR9 Coalition Cities for Lobbying Services ATTACHMENT O
14. Joint Public Hearing with Snohomish County Council ATTACHMENT P
~ Open Space Designation Application
SPECIAL ACCOMMODATIONS: The City of Arlington strives to provide accessible meetings for people with disabilities. Please contact the ADA
coordinator at (360) 403-3441 or 1-800-833-8388 (TDD only) prior to the meeting date if special accommodations are required.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
INFORMATION
ADMINISTRATOR & STAFF REPORTS
MAYOR’S REPORT
COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS – OPTIONAL
EXECUTIVE SESSION
RECONVENE
ADJOURNMENT
To download all attachments, click here
DRAFT
Page 1 of 4
Council Chambers
110 East Third
September 7, 2010
City Council Members Present by Roll Call: Dick Butner Sally Lien, Scott Solla, Marilyn
Oertle, Chris Raezer, and Steve Baker
Council Members Absent: Linda Byrnes (excused)
City Staff Present: Mayor Larson, Allen Johnson, Kristin Banfield, Jim Chase, Police Chief
Robert Sullenberger, Police Commanders Brian DeWitt and Terry Quintrall, Sergeants Mark
Pennington, Jonathan Ventura, and Kay Schander, Officers Rory Bolter, Mike Phillips, Peter
Barrett, Curtis Hirotaka, Mike McQuoid, Jason Rhodes, Ronnie Johnstone, Seth Kinney and
Mike Gilbert, PSO Elizabeth Chamberlin, Jim Kelly, Rob Fire Chief Jim Rankin, Paul Ellis, Chris
Badger, Cristy Brubaker, Julie Good, Dennis Kelly, Police Volunteer Coordinator, Jan Bauer,
Steve Peiffle – City Attorney.
Also Known to be Present: Ray Harmon – Distinguished Senior Citizen, Adam Rudnick –
Arlington Times, Michael Prihoda – Arlington/Smokey Point Chamber of Commerce, Bea
Randall Community Garden/Food Bank, Nola Smith Downtown Business Association, and
Sarah Arney – North County Outlook
Mayor Larson called the meeting to order at 7:00PM, and the pledge of allegiance to the flag
followed.
Steve Baker moved to approve the Agenda. Chris Raezer seconded the motion which passed
with a unanimous vote.
APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
Recognition of Howard Christianson
INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS
Mayor Larson honored former Mayor Howard Christianson for his service to our nation and the
community of Arlington. He was then presented a plaque of appreciation by Mayor Larson and
he spoke a few words.
Cornerstone Award for Minifie Investments, LLC
Paul Ellis presented the Cornerstone Award to Jim and Kim Minifie, and with the use of a power
point presentation Mr. Ellis showed improvements in the building throughout the years. At this
time Mr. Minifie spoke and was then presented the Cornerstone Award.
Nola Smith, speaking for the Arlington Downtown Business Association, gave an update of
recent and upcoming events. Scott Solla congratulated Ms. Smith and the Chamber on the
number of backpacks presented and their participation in community events.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Minutes of the Arlington
City Council Meeting
Minutes of the City of Arlington City Council Meeting DRAFT September 7, 2010
Page 2 of 4
Br Nagy, 425 876 7749, is concerned about receiving parking tickets and having his car towed.
Bea Randall – Community Garden and Food Bank
Ms. Randall spoke in concern of the theft from community gardens for produce destined for
Arlington’s Food Bank and she requested a designating sign.
CONSENT AGENDA
Steve Baker moved and Marilyn Oertle seconded the motion to approve the Consent Agenda
which was unanimously carried to approve the following Consent Agenda items:
1.Minutes of the August 16 and 23, 2010 meetings
2.Accounts Payable
Claims Checks # through # in the amount of $ and
Payroll Checks # through # in the amount of $
3. M3 Financial Utility Easement
4. Surplus WWTP Belt Filter Press
5. Division Street Dedication
6. Bulldog Basketball League Agreement
7. Library Drop Box
8. National Preparedness Month Proclamation
There was no Public Hearing.
PUBLIC HEARING
There was no Unfinished Business.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS
Fire Chief Jim Rankin spoke to the importance of having a Hazard Mitigation Plan in place
before a circumstance took place in which it would be needed. He then asked for Council
approval.
Resolution Adopting the Arlington Annex to the County Mitigation Plan
Sally Lien moved to approve the City of Arlington Annex to be placed into the Snohomish
County Hazard Mitigation Plan of 2010 which will be updated each year for the next 4 years and
require a full re-write and review process in the 5th year. Marilyn Oertle seconded the motion
that passed with a unanimous vote.
Public Works Director Jim Kelly addressed the Change Order.
IMCO Change Order #6 for WWTP Project
Dick Butner moved to approve the Change Order No. 6 to the IMCO WWTP Upgrade and
Expansion construction contract. Chris Raezer seconded the motion that passed with a
unanimous vote.
Mr. Kelly noted the new 4-year Mitigation Agreement. Both Mr. Kelly and City Attorney Steve
Peiffle answered Council questions.
North County Transfer Station Mitigation Agreement
Minutes of the City of Arlington City Council Meeting DRAFT September 7, 2010
Page 3 of 4
Dick Butner moved to approve the Traffic Mitigation Agreement between the City of Arlington
and Snohomish County for the North County Recycling and Transfer Station (NCRTS). Sally
Lien seconded the motion that passed with a unanimous vote.
Mr. Kelly spoke to the Waste Management Contract Agreement and answered Council
concerns and comments. Emily Niguidula from Waste Management also answered Council
questions.
Waste Management Contract
Dick Butner moved to approve the contract renewal with Waste Management subject to final
review by the City Attorney. Chris Raezer seconded the motion that passed with a unanimous
vote.
Finance Director Jim Chase answered Council questions.
Ordinance to Change Gambling Tax Reporting Requirements from Quarterly to Monthly
Steve Baker moved to accept the proposed Ordinance changing the Gambling Tax reporting
requirements from Quarterly to Monthly. Sally Lien seconded the motion that passed with a
unanimous vote.
Mr. Chase also addressed this change in the Tax reporting requirements. There were no
Council questions.
Ordinance to Change Occupation Taxes Reporting Requirements from Quarterly to
Monthly
Steve Baker moved to adopt the proposed Ordinance to change the Occupation Taxes reporting
requirements from Quarterly to Monthly. Dick Butner seconded the motion that passed with a
unanimous vote.
Paul Ellis gave a brief description of services provided by Mr. Ericson.
Professional Services Agreement with V. Ericson
Chris Raezer moved to approve the Professional Services Agreement with Vic Ericson. Sally
Lien seconded the motion that passed with a unanimous vote.
Assistant City Administrator Kristin Banfield gave a brief description of changes in the Rules of
Procedure.
Revision to the City Council Rules of Procedure – Mayor Pro Tem & Alternate Mayor Pro
Tem
Dick Butner moved to approve the updated Council Rules of Procedure as presented. Steve
Baker seconded the motion that passed with a unanimous vote.
City Administrator Allen Johnson gave a brief summary of Chief Sullenberger’s resignation and
the upcoming employment with Nelson Beazley to serve as Arlington Police Chief.
Employment Agreement with N. Beazley
Sally Lien moved to authorize the Mayor to sign an Employment Agreement with Nelson
Beazley to serve as the City’s Police Chief. Dick Butner seconded the motion that passed with
a unanimous vote.
Minutes of the City of Arlington City Council Meeting DRAFT September 7, 2010
Page 4 of 4
Mr. Beazley introduced himself to the Council, received a plaque in appreciation for his service
to the City of Arlington, and spoke a few words.
Officer Rory Bolter publicly thanked Chief Sullenberger for his service and presented him with a
token of appreciation from his police staff. He then thanked the City for their quick replacement
action.
Mayor Larson gave a brief report.
MAYOR’S REPORT
Sally Lien gave a brief report, while Dick Butner, Scott Solla, Marilyn Oertle, Chris Raezer and
Steve Baker had nothing to report at this time.
COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS
City Attorney announced that there would not be the need for an Executive Session.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
With no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 8:04PM.
ADJOURNMENT
____________________________
Margaret Larson, Mayor
DRAFT
Page 1 of 3
Council Chambers
110 East Third Street
September 13, 2010
Dick Butner Sally Lien, Scott Solla, Marilyn Oertle, Chris Raezer, Linda Byrnes, and Steve
Baker, Mayor Larson, Allen Johnson, Kristin Banfield, Jim Kelly, Eric Scott, Fire Chief Jim
Rankin, David Kuhl, Bryan Terry, Julie Good, Jan Bauer, Steve Peiffle – City Attorney
Council Members Absent: All Council members were present.
Also Known to be Present: Sarah Arney – North County Outlook
Mayor Larson called the meeting to order at 7:00PM and the pledge allegiance to the flag
followed.
Steve Baker moved to approve the Agenda, and Sally Lien seconded the motion, which passed
with a unanimous vote approving the following Workshop Agenda.
Review of AMC Title 10 Parking Regulations
WORKSHOP ITEMS – NO ACTION WAS TAKEN
Due to the fact that one of the participants was not available, this item was not addressed.
RH2 Study of 67th Trunk Infrastructure Proposal
Public Works Director Jim Kelly addressed sewer service and the proposed study by RH2. Mr.
Kelly addressed Council questions at the conclusion of his presentation.
67th Ave, Phase 3 Presentation by HDR
Jim Kelly introduced Eric Dawson and with the use of a power point presentation, Mr. Dawson,
P.E. from HDR Engineering, 500 108th Avenue NE, Suite 1200, Bellevue, WA, addressed the
67th
Avenue Phase 3 Reconstruction Project, giving a history of the project, alternatives
analysis, final design, funding issues, and the final design schedule. At the conclusion of his
presentation, Mr. Dawson answered Council questions. Mr. Kelly will present the contract at the
next meeting which will enable the process to begin.
Stormwater Wetland Project Update and Contract
With the use of a power point presentation Mr. Kelly presented the September 13, 2010
Stormwater Wetland Project Update. He included the project history, completed work to date, a
stormwater conceptual design, a wetland plan view, water surface from weekly and 10 year
storm events, and phase funding. Throughout the presentation Mr. Kelly answered Council
questions.
Minutes of the Arlington
City Council Workshop
Minutes of the City of Arlington City Council Meeting DRAFT September 13, 2010
Page 2 of 3
Fiber Agreement for Fire Station 48
Information Services Manager Bryan Terry gave the background for the request and addressed
the proposed Fiber Agreement with Blackrock. This will be addressed at the next Council
meeting.
Fire Interlocal for equipment Use
Fire Chief Jim Rankin spoke to the Equipment Loan Agreement and then answered Council
questions. This will be addressed at the next Council meeting.
Memorandum of Understanding with the State for a Disaster Staging Area
Jim Rankin spoke of the request for approval of a Memorandum of Understanding with
Washington State to use the Airport as a disaster staging area. He then addressed the
advantages to Arlington, should this be approved. Mr. Rankin answered Council questions
throughout his presentation.
Snohomish County Legislative Agenda
Assistant City Administrator Kristin Banfield spoke to the need for Snohomish County to
demonstrate a united front in their legislative items for the 2011 Legislative session.
AMC – Title 1
Ms. Banfield noted recently proposed updates of Title 1. City Attorney Steve Peiffle gave Latin
definitions regarding infractions with and without intent.
AMC – Chapter 2.04
Ms. Banfield pointed out changed language reflecting changes.
AMC – Chapter 2.xxx – BVFF
Ms. Banfield addressed this new chapter which would create a volunteer fire fighter board of
trustees.
AMC – Chapter 2.xxx – LEOFF Board
Ms. Banfield explained the request for a LEOFF Disability Board.
PUD Easement on 51st
Ms. Banfield addressed the request from the PUD for an easement on 51st
Street.
Joint Public Hearing with Snohomish County Council - Open Space Designation
Application
City Attorney Steve Peiffle reviewed the need for the appointment of three Arlington Council
members to attend a Public Hearing with the County Council to decide whether or not to accept
the application for an open space designation. Mr. Peiffle then answered Council questions.
Councilmembers Baker, Solla, and Oertle volunteered to attend the joint meeting.
Interlocal Agreement between the SR9 Coalition Cities for Lobbying Services
City Administrator Allen Johnson addressed the advantages for an Interlocal agreement
between the cities of Arlington, Lake Stevens and Marysville along Highway 9. Discussion
followed.
Miscellaneous Council items
Mayor Larson and Chris Raezer discussed a recent request they had concerns about.
Minutes of the City of Arlington City Council Meeting DRAFT September 13, 2010
Page 3 of 3
The meeting was adjourned at 8:29PM.
____________________________
Margaret Larson, Mayor
City of Arlington
Council Agenda Bill
AGENDA ITEM:
Public Hearing
ATTACHMENT B
COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
September 20, 2010
SUBJECT:
PUBLIC HEARING –
Proposed Minor Zoning and Land Use Map
Amendments
DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN:
Community Development – David Kuhl, Todd Hall
ATTACHMENTS:
1. City Council Staff Report
2. Proposed Zoning Map
3. Proposed Land Use Map
EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: -0-
BUDGET CATEGORY: N/A
LEGAL REVIEW:
N/A
DESCRIPTION: Attached are working drafts of the zoning and land use maps, which are being
revised to adopt administrative changes. Specifically, the proposed maps are to “fill-in” gaps
between current zoning districts and land use designations and the current Urban Growth
Boundary, as well as update the signature blocks to include the current Assistant City
Administrator/City Clerk, Kristin Banfield. Further details regarding these changes are
described in the attached memorandum, as well as on the Proposed UGA Zoning and Land Use
documents (attached).
HISTORY: This is a City-initiated proposal to amend the City’s zoning and land use maps. The
amendments were presented at the August 23, 2010 Council workshop and were recommended
for adoption by the Planning Commission a public hearing on September 9, 2010.
COMMITTEE REVIEW AND ACTION: Planning Commission recommended adoption by the
City Council at the September 9, 2010 public hearing.
ALTERNATIVES: No action.
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Move to approve the amended Official Zoning and Land Use Maps as presented by Community
Development staff and recommended for approval by the Planning Commission.
City Council Public Hearing
Date: September 20, 2010
To: City Council
From: David Kuhl, Community Development Director
Todd Hall, Associate Planner
Re: Proposed Amendments to the Official Zoning and Land Use Maps
Attached are working drafts of the zoning and land use maps, which are being revised to adopt
administrative changes. Specifically, the proposed changes to the maps will “fill-in” gaps
between current zoning districts and land use designations and the current Urban Growth
Boundary, as well as update the signature blocks to include the current Assistant City
Administrator/City Clerk, Kristin Banfield. Further details regarding these changes are
described below, as well as on the Proposed UGA zoning and Land Use documents (attached).
On August 23, 2010, the City Council discussed the amendments at the workshop and
recommended that the Planning Commission hold a public hearing on the revised zoning and
land use maps. The Planning Commission approved the changes at a public hearing on
September 9, 2010, and made a recommendation that City Council consider adoption of the
proposed amendments at their next meeting. Staff requests the City Council consider adoption
of the map amendments as proposed below.
____________________________________________________________________________
Amendment #1
: “Fill-in” undesignated UGA north of City limit between SR 530 and Alcazar
Avenue. Designate as Old Town Business District 3 (OTBD-3).
Revision extends the OTBD-3 district into the currently undesignated UGA.
Staff Comment
Community Development
Planning Division
September 20, 2010 City Council Public Hearing
Amendment #2
: “Fill-in” undesignated UGA north of City limit between ordinary high water mark
(OHWM) of S. Fork Stillaguamish River, SR 530 and Centennial Trail. Designate as
Public/Semi-Public (P/SP).
Revision designates the lowland properties along the river front to be preserved
as open space.
Staff Comment
Amendment #3
: “Fill-in” undesignated UGA between City limit and west right-of-way of SR 9,
between W. Division Street and midpoint of SR 9/Stillaguamish River bridge span. Designate
as Public/Semi-Public (P/SP).
Revision designates the SR 9 right-of-way to P/SP as described above. Limited
future uses would be proposed since the majority of the property is located within
State right-of-way.
Staff Comment
Amendment #4: “Fill-in” undesignated UGA between City limit and west side of North Street,
between W. 5th Street alignment (if extended) and W. 3rd
Street alignment (if extended).
Designate as Old Town Business District-2 (OTBD-2).
Revision extends OTBD-2 district into this currently undesignated UGA. Limited
future uses would be proposed since the majority of the property is located within
State and/or County right-of-way.
Staff Comment
Amendment #5: “Fill-in” undesignated UGA between City limit and west side of SR 9, between
W. 2nd
Street alignment (if extended) and Maple Street alignment (if extended). Designates Old
Town Business District-2 (OTBD-2).
Revision extends OTBD-2 district into this currently undesignated UGA. Limited
future uses would be proposed since the majority of the property is located within
State right-of-way.
Staff Comment
Amendment #6
: “Fill-in” undesignated UGA between City limit and west right-of-way of
Interstate 5. Designate as Highway Commercial (HC).
Revision extends HC zone adjacent to the interstate. Limited future uses would be
proposed since the majority of the property is located within Interstate 5 right-of-
way.
Staff Comment
September 20, 2010 City Council Public Hearing
Amendment #7: “Fill-in” undersigned UGA between City limit and east side of SR 9 right-of-
way, between 176th Place and 179th
Place, adjacent to Gleneagle development. Designate as
Low to Moderate Density Residential (RLMD).
Revision extends RLMD district into this currently undesignated UGA. No future
uses would be proposed since the property is located within SR 9 right-of-way.
Staff Comment
Amendment #8
: Revise City Clerk signature blocks to include current city clerk.
Signature blocks revised as Kristin Banfield, Assistant City Administrator/City
Clerk.
Staff Comment
ORDINANCE NO. _____ 1
ORDINANCE NO.
2010-xxx
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ARLINGTON, WASHINGTON
AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP AND
LAND USE MAP OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
WHEREAS, the City of Arlington, Washington has the authority to enact laws to promote the
health, safety and welfare of its citizens as a way of controlling the use and development of property
within its jurisdiction; and
WHEREAS, the City of Arlington has the authority to update the Official Zoning Map within
the City, pursuant to §20.36.110; and
WHEREAS, may also update the Land Use Map of the City of Arlington Comprehensive
Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered these amendments at their August 23, 2010
workshop and the Planning Commission considered these amendments at their September 9, 2010
public hearing and recommended to the City Council to adopt the amendments, and determined
approving the amendments was in the best interest of the City and its citizens; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the proposed Official Zoning Map and Land
Use Map amendments and finds the same to be consistent with city and state law and in the best
interests of the citizens;
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Arlington do hereby ordain as follows:
Section 1. Official Zoning Map and Land Use Map Amendments
. The City of
Arlington Official Zoning Map, pursuant to AMC §20.36.100, and Land Use
Map of the Comprehensive Plan shall be amended as shown on the updated
maps and recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at a public
hearing on September 9, 2010.
Section 2. Effective Date
. A summary of this Ordinance consisting of its title shall be
published in the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in
full force five (5) days of the date of publication.
PASSED BY the City Council and APPROVED by the Mayor this day of
________________, 2010.
ORDINANCE NO. _____ 2
CITY OF ARLINGTON
____________________________
Margaret Larson, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Kristin Banfield, City Clerk
APPROVED TO AS FORM:
__________________________
Steven J. Peiffle, City Attorney
SR
HC
BP
LI
GC
HC
OTRD
GI
RHD
RLMD
GC
RMD
P/SP
RLMD
RHD
RMD
RMD
GI
RHD
P/SP
MS
P/SP
GC
P/SP
RHD
NC
RHD
GC
BP
NC
RMD
RLMD
GC
P/SP
P/SP
NC
LI
OTBD - 1
P/SP
RHD
GC
RHD
NC
P/SP
LI
P/SP
RMD
P/SP
P/SP
P/SP
P/SP
P/SP
P/SP
P/SP
MS
RLMD
P/SP
RLMD
RHD
RHD
RLMD
BPRMDBP
GC
GC RHD
HC
RMD
RMD
GC
GI
LI
GCNC
P/SP
P/SP
P/SP
P/SP
RHD
RLMD
RLMD
AF
OTBD - 2
OTBD - 3
RLMD
RLMD
RMD RLMD
GCSR
RLMD
P/SP
HC
RLMD
RLMD
«D
«C
«A
«B
«B
«C
«C
«D
MPNTDR
GleneagleContract Rezone
Pioneer MeadowsContract Rezone
MPN
Boundary Follows Top of Bank
from center line
«5
«3
«2
«1
«2
«4
«3 «3
«1
«2
«4
«4
«2
«3
«3
«3
«1
«2
«1
«2
«5
«3
1200 '
850 '
800 '
!"`$
?Ó
?|
?Ô
51ST
AVE
NE
S
OLYMPIC
AVE
47TH
AVE
NE
PIONEER HWY E
172ND ST NE
186TH ST NE
204TH ST NE
67TH AVE NE
188TH ST NE
SR 530
SMOKEY
POINT BLVD
SR 531
CEMETERY RD
59TH
AVE
NE
MCELROY RD
TVEIT RD
BURN RD
SR 530
SR 9
1 inch = 2,600 feet
Zoning_11x17_10.mxd 09/08/2010
Maps and GIS data are distributed “AS-IS” without warranties of any kind, either express or implied, including but not limitedto warranties of suitability for a particular purpose or use. Map data are compiled from a variety of sources which may containerrors and users who rely upon the information do so at their own risk. Users agree to indemnify, defend, and hold harmlessthe City of Arlington for any and all liability of any nature arising out of or resulting from the lack of accuracy or correctness ofthe data, or the use of the data presented in the maps.
APD Safety Zones
A B C D
Rail-line
City Limits
Urban G rowth Area
Primary Roads
State Highways
APD Subdistricts
THIS IS A COPY OF THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF ARLINGTON,PURSUANT TO AMC §20.36.100, WHICH WAS ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON20 MARCH 2006 PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE NO. 1389 AND BECAME EFFECTIVE 27MARCH 2006.
Margaret LarsonMayor
Contract Rezone
TDR Overlay Zone
MPN = Master Planned Neighborhood Overlay Zone
Zoning
SR = Surburban Residential
RLMD = Low to Moderate Density Residential
RMD = Moderate Density Residential
RHD = High Density Residential
OTRD = Old Town Residential District
NC = Neighborhood Commercial
OTBD - 1 = Old Town Business District 1
OTBD - 2 = Old Town Business District 2
OTBD - 3 = Old Town Business District 3
GC = General Commercial
HC = Highway Commercial
BP = Business Park
LI = Light Industrial
GI = General Industrial
P/SP = Public/Semi-Public
MS = Medical Services
AF = Aviation Flightline
"
C it y o f A r lin gt onZoning M a p
Scale:
File:Date:
Kristin BanfieldCity Clerk
SR
HC
BP
LI
GC
HC
OTRD
GI
RHD
RLMD
GC
RMD
P/SP
RLMD
RHD
RMD
RMD
GI
RHD
P/SP
MS
P/SP
GC
P/SP
RHD
NC
RHD
GC
BP
NC
RMD
RLMD
GC
P/SP
P/SP
NC
LI
OTBD - 1
P/SP
RHD
GC
RHD
NC
P/SP
LI
P/SP
RMD
P/SP
P/SP
P/SP
P/SP
P/SP
P/SP
P/SP
MS
RLMD
P/SP
RLMD
RHD
RHD
RLMD
BPRMDBP
GC
GC RHD
HC
RMD
RMD
GC
GI
LI
GCNC
P/SP
P/SP
P/SP
P/SP
RHD
RLMD
RLMD
AF
OTBD - 2
OTBD - 3
RLMD
RLMD
RMD RLMD
GCSR
RLMD
P/SP
HC
RLMD
RLMD
«D
«C
«A
«B
«B
«C
«C
«D
«D
MPNTDR
GleneagleContract Rezone
Pioneer MeadowsContract Rezone
MPN
Boundary Follows Top of Bank
from center line
«5
«3
«2
«4
«1
«2
«4
«3 «3
«1
«2
«4
«4
«2
«3
«3
«3
«1
«2
«1
«2
«5
«3
1200 '
850 '
800 '
!"`$
?Ó
?|
?Ô
51ST
AVE
NE
212TH ST NW
47TH
AVE
NE
172ND ST NE
67TH
AVE
NE
3RD AVE NE
LAKEWOOD RD HWY 531 SR 531
CEMETERY RD
59TH
AVE
NE
SR 530
TVEIT RDPIONEER HWY E
SMOKEY POINT BLVD
140TH ST NW
FORTY FIVE RD
MCELROY RD
BURN RD
SR 530
SR 9
1 inch = 3,500 feet
LandUse_11x17_10.mxd 09/08/2010
Maps and GIS data are distributed “AS-IS” without warranties of any kind, either express or implied, including but not limitedto warranties of suitability for a particular purpose or use. Map data are compiled from a variety of sources which may containerrors and users who rely upon the information do so at their own risk. Users agree to indemnify, defend, and hold harmlessthe City of Arlington for any and all liability of any nature arising out of or resulting from the lack of accuracy or correctness ofthe data, or the use of the data presented in the maps.
APD Safety Zones
A B C D
Rail-line
City Limits
Urban G rowth Area
Primary Roads
State Highways
APD Subdistricts
Margaret LarsonMayor
Contract Rezone
TDR Overlay Zone
MP N = Master Planned Neighborhood Overlay Zone
Land Use
SR = Surburban Residential
RLMD = Low to Moderate Density Residential
RMD = Moderate Density Residential
RHD = High Density Residential
OTRD = Old Town Residential District
NC = Neighborhood Commercial
!!!
!!!
!!!OTBD - 1 = Old Town Business District 1
OTBD - 2 = Old Town Business District 2
D D D
D D D OTBD - 3 = Old Town Business District 3
GC = General Commercial
HC = Highway Commercial
BP = Business Park
LI = Light Indus trial
GI = General Indus trial
P/SP = Public/Semi-Public
MS = Medical Services
AF = Aviation Flightline
"
C it y o f A r lin gt onLand U s e M ap
Scale:
File:Date:
Kristin BanfieldCity Clerk
THIS IS A COPY OF THE OFFICIAL LAND USE MAP OF THE CITY OFARLINGTON, WHICH WAS ADOPTED AS PART OF THE COMPREHENSIVEPLAN BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON 5 DECEMBER 2005 PURSUANT TOORDINANCE NO. 1375.
Coordinated Water Service Area
Future Planning Area
City of Arlington
Council Agenda Bill
AGENDA ITEM:
New Business #1
ATTACHMENT C
COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
September 20, 2010
SUBJECT:
67th Ave Trunk Sewer Assessment
DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN:
Public Works Administration
ATTACHMENTS:
• Contract with RH@ for study and analysis of 67th Trunk Sewer Line
EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: $ 17,581.00
BUDGET CATEGORY: Sewer Utility CIP fund
LEGAL REVIEW: Pending review by City Attorney
DESCRIPTION: Approval of proposal for consulting work to perform a study and prepare a report
on recommended action for improving and increasing capacity in the 67th Ave trunk sewer line.
HISTORY: The City’s trunk sewer (main sewer line) is a 24-inch sewer that travels south from the
treatment plant along 67th Ave.; the 24-inch sewer reduces to a 15-inch sewer at 211th St. This sewer is
the City’s main sewer line that collects effectively 95% of Arlington’s wastewater flows.
Recent flow studies show that the sewer line is flowing at over 85% capacity at times; most of these
instances correlate to when lift stations are on-line. However, with future growth in the SR-9/172nd
St. area and in the Breakhaus-Beach area; the City trunk sewer line does not have the capacity to
accommodate the increase flow.
The proposed study and sewer main improvements have been addressed as a needed capital
improvement in the 2008 Sewer Comprehensive Plan. This proposed study will examine loading and
flows generated by future growth, propose sewer improvement projects, estimate costs for such
improvements, and identify ways to fund such improvements (low cost loan, recovery contract, LID,
etc.).
ALTERNATIVES:
• Remand to staff for additional information
• Table pending further discussion
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to approve the RH2 scope of work and for consulting work to perform a study of the 67th Ave
trunk sewer line and authorize the mayor to sign the contract.
City of Arlington
Council Agenda Bill
AGENDA ITEM:
New Business #2
ATTACHMENT D
COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
September 20, 2010
SUBJECT:
Supplement No. 3 to the HDR Engineering
Contract for final design of the 67th Avenue
Reconstruction Project, Phase III
DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN:
Public Works Administration
ATTACHMENTS:
• Supplement No. 3 to the HDR Engineering Contract for 67th Avenue Reconstruction Project
EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: $ 570,629.46
BUDGET CATEGORY: Transportation Improvement
LEGAL REVIEW: Pending final review by the City Attorney
DESCRIPTION: Request for approval of HDR Engineering scope of work , schedule and budget for
contract to bring the design work to completion.
HISTORY: In May of 2009 Council authorized staff to contract with HDR Engineering for
Completion of a 30% design for Phase III reconstruction of 67th Avenue NE from 204th Street NE to
Olympic Avenue and West Avenue.
The 30% design is nearing completion and the City is now preparing to move forward with the final
design of the project. This project is funded through grant funding and transportation mitigation.
ALTERNATIVES:
• Remand to staff for additional information
• Table pending further discussion
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to approve Supplement No. 3 to the HDR Engineering Contract for 67th Avenue Reconstruction
Project authorizing HDR Engineering to complete the final design of the 67th Phase III Reconstruction
Project.
Exhibit A‐1, Scope of Services Page 1
67th Avenue Phase III Reconstruction
City of Arlington, Washington
Supplement 3 Scope of Services – Final Design
Introduction
During the term of this Agreement, HDR Engineering, Inc., (CONSULTANT) shall
perform professional services for the City of Arlington (CITY) in connection with the
67th Avenue Phase III Reconstruction Project (PROJECT). This Scope of Services shall
be used to plan, conduct, and complete the work on the PROJECT as described herein or
as amended by written Agreement between the CONSULTANT and CITY.
The PROJECT shall include topographic basemapping, geotechnical investigation,
roadway alternatives design, right-of-way services, public involvement, environmental
investigation and permit preparation, wetland mitigation, railroad coordination, utilities
coordination, illumination, traffic signal design, utilities design and coordination, fish
passable culverts, storm drainage, structures, and plans, specifications, and estimate.
Task A - Project Management
1. Meetings and Project Reporting
Progress meetings with the CITY shall be conducted on bi-weekly basis.
CONSULTANT shall provide the CITY with an agenda before each progress
meeting. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for taking minutes at progress
meetings and shall supply the CITY with a copy of the meeting notes.
CONSULTANT shall prepare and submit a Progress Report with each invoice.
The Progress Report shall summarize:
Work accomplished during the billing period
Work planned during the next billing period
Meetings attended
Issues encountered and recommendations for addressing issues
Potential impacts to scope, schedule or budget
Monthly invoices for work completed shall be submitted to the CITY.
CONSULTANT shall be proactive in discussing project issues or potential project
issues, and shall present alternatives or make recommendations to address the
issues.
An Earned Value Worksheet shall be updated and submitted by CONSULTANT
with each invoice. The purpose of the Earned Value Worksheet is to help
effectively manage and track schedule and budget. An assessment of the
percentage of work completed for each task shall be made by CONSULTANT for
each invoice.
Assumptions:
Project duration for this supplement shall be 8 months
16 1-hour progress meetings shall occur (6 in-person, 10 conference call)
Exhibit A‐1, Scope of Services Page 2
Deliverable(s):
Monthly invoices and progress reports (1 hard copy)
Meeting minutes from progress meetings (1 electronic PDF copy)
2. Schedule
A baseline critical path schedule shall be developed by CONSULTANT for the
PROJECT. The schedule shall incorporate CITY review times and other
timeframes that require CITY action or approval. The schedule shall be used to
manage project work and help keep the CITY informed about project progress.
Assumptions:
Schedule shall be developed and maintained in MS Project
Deliverable(s):
One electronic and one hardcopy of the following:
Draft PROJECT schedule (1 hard copy and 1 electronic PDF copy)
Final/Baseline PROJECT Schedule (1 hard copy and 1 electronic PDF
copy)
Monthly updates to the PROJECT schedule (1 electronic PDF copy)
3. Subconsultant Management
It is the responsibility of CONSULTANT to manage the consultant team.
Subconsultants shall report directly to CONSULTANT for PROJECT direction
and management. CONSULTANT shall:
Establish, maintain, and administer agreements with subconsultants, and
ensure contractual requirements are met.
Provide regular direction to CONSULTANT team.
Conduct internal coordination meetings between PROJECT team
members as appropriate to control the work.
Monitor the planned versus actual rate of expenditure for each Task and
take corrective actions, if and when necessary.
Monitor the planned versus actual rate of progress for each Task and take
corrective actions, if and when necessary.
Inform the PROJECT team of issues to be resolved, the schedule for
resolution, and the potential impacts to the successful completion of the
PROJECT.
Monitor in-house and subconsultant work for adherence to scope,
schedule, budget, and quality standards.
Manage integration of the subconsultant’s work.
Monitor and confirm that PROJECT work is being performed and
prepared in compliance with the stated PROJECT standards. Verify that
the documents and electronic files generated for the PROJECT are being
Exhibit A‐1, Scope of Services Page 3
documented and retained in PROJECT files consistent with CITY and
CONSULTANT requirements.
Assumptions:
None
Deliverables:
CONSULTANT team management
Task B - Quality Assurance/Quality Control
CONSULTANT shall have an independent senior staff member perform a quality
control review prior to the submittal of deliverables to the CITY. This effort shall
consist of a review of PROJECT plans, estimates and reports for constructability
and consistency.
Assumptions:
HDR’s QA/QC program shall be used
Deliverables:
Completed QA/QC form with each submittal (1 hard copy and 1 electronic
PDF copy)
Task D - Basemapping
1. Survey
A. Supplemental Survey
(i) During preparation of the final design PS&E, two additional days of
survey shall be performed to pick up additional topographic features
identified by the CITY and/or CONSULTANT.
(ii) Additional survey of Prairie Creek to a location that is approximately 100’
south of 204th Street to include top of bank, OHWM, water surface
elevation, toe of bank, thalweg, and sufficient ground shots to create a 1-
foot contour map.
(iii)An additional 200’ of utility surveying south of 204th Street on 67th
Avenue.
3. Right-of-Way
Survey right-of-way (ROW) monuments around the PROJECT site in order to
determine the ROW lines.
4. Basemap Preparation
Create an AutoCAD basemap depicting the topography collected above
Update the digital terrain model based on the supplemental survey as
necessary, showing 1’ contour lines.
Exhibit A‐1, Scope of Services Page 4
Assumptions:
CONSULTANT surveyors shall request informal permission from
property owners in the field to survey on private property. If informal
permission is not granted, the CITY shall be responsible for obtaining
formal Right-of-Entry onto the adjacent private property, so that
CONSULTANT can perform the survey.
Coordinate system shall be State Plane North Zone (horizontal) &
NAVD88 (vertical).
Basemap shall be created using AutoCAD LDD 2006.
Basemap shall use APWA standards for linetypes and symbology.
Deliverables:
AutoCAD topographic basemap (electronic)
AutoCAD LDD digital terrain model (electronic)
Task E - Geotechnical Investigation and Report
Services shall include borings and analysis for stream culvert foundations and
pedestrian bridge foundation, and provide three monitoring wells for determination of
ground water levels at infiltration pond locations.
1. Field Investigation
Consultant shall provide borings and analysis for the stream culvert
foundations and pedestrian bridge.
Three borings shall be drilled at candidate stormwater infiltration sites and
shall be completed as monitoring wells in accordance with Ecology
requirements. The wells shall be completed at the ground surface in flush-
mounted monument covers.
2. Design Recommendations
Provide recommendations for pedestrian bridge foundation support.
Provide conclusions regarding dewatering requirements for fish passage
culvert construction, and recommendations for culvert foundations.
Assumptions:
The CITY shall be responsible for obtaining Right-of-Entry onto the
adjacent private property where required
The CITY shall provide a street use permit for borings without a fee
Deliverables:
Updated Geotechnical Report (1 hard copy and 1 electronic PDF copy
each)
Task G - Right-of-Way
Services shall include appraisal and acquisition services to WSDOT LAG Manual
standards as defined in the following work elements.
Exhibit A‐1, Scope of Services Page 5
General Assumptions for All Right-of-Way Work Elements
CONSULTANT shall follow the Uniform Relocation Act, WSDOT LAG manual
guidelines, applicable state and local laws and CITY administrative rules for right
of way acquisition for real estate services provided for this project.
CITY shall pre-approve real estate forms used for this project prior to
CONSULTANT’S use.
CITY agrees to provide CONSULTANT with the CITY’s state-approved right-of-
way procedures, environmental documentation, and any pre-approved CITY
right-of-way forms.
There are a maximum of ten (10) parcels to be acquired for this project requiring
five (5) appraisals, five (5) complex acquisitions and five (5) temporary
easements or low impact acquisitions.
1. Task Management and Pre-Acquisition Services
The CONSULTANT shall provide overall project management and quality control
for right-of-way services, develop a tracking spreadsheet to manage schedule for
appraisal and acquisition activities, prepare a review memo for title reports on parcels
to be acquired, review preliminary construction and right-of-way plans, attend
necessary project team and client meetings, participate in public or early landowner
meetings and prepare files and diaries for the anticipated acquisitions.
Assumptions:
A monthly ROW appraisal and acquisition tracking report shall be
supplied to CITY beginning when appraisals are ordered and concluding
at the end of the project.
A QC checklist shall be completed for each appraisal or acquisition
deliverable and placed in the appropriate project file.
CONSULTANT shall order and prepare a review memo for a maximum
of 10 title reports with the fees for each report being invoiced to the CITY
as a direct expense.
A review of both preliminary and final Construction and ROW plans shall
be done by CONSULTANT to identify and mitigate ROW acquisition
concerns.
There shall be a maximum of 12 project team or client meetings.
There shall be a maximum of 10 public or early landowner meetings.
CONSULTANT shall have a minimum of one and a maximum of two
staff attending any scheduled meetings.
A hard copy and electronic file and diary shall be prepared for each
acquisition parcel.
Deliverables:
Management of right of way services and monthly ROW tracking report
(1 hard copy and 1 electronic PDF copy each)
QC Checklists (1 hard copy and 1 electronic PDF copy each)
Exhibit A‐1, Scope of Services Page 6
Title Review Memos and Title Reports (1 hard copy and 1 electronic PDF
copy each)
Comments memo or redline of Construction and ROW Plan review (1
hard copy and 1 electronic PDF copy each)
Project team and client meeting participation (1 hard copy and 1 electronic
PDF copy each)
Public and early landowner meeting participation (1 hard copy and 1
electronic PDF copy each)
Parcel diary and file preparation (1 hard copy and 1 electronic PDF copy
each)
2. Project Funding Estimate and Administrative Offer Summaries
CONSULTANT shall prepare a project funding estimate (PFE) using available
assessment data and other public records and appraisal data collected as part of the
appraisal process. The PFE shall consist of a brief narrative, comparable sales sheet,
individual worksheets and overall cost spreadsheet. Administrative offer summary
(AOS) reports shall be prepared for uncomplicated low value acquisitions.
Assumptions:
There shall be a maximum of one PFE for a maximum of 10 parcels
prepared
The PFE shall be based on readily available public and market data
There shall be a maximum of 5 AOS reports prepared
The AOS reports shall be prepared based on the market data collected
through the PFE and appraisal process
Deliverables:
PFE Report (1 hard copy and 1 electronic PDF copy each)
AOS Reports (1 hard copy and 1 electronic PDF copy each)
3. Appraisal, Appraisal Review and Appraisal Management
The CONSULTANT shall manage the appraisal and appraisal review process and
prepare appraisals and reviews. This shall include development of individual
appraisal scope and an appraisal schedule, assembling and disseminating needed
project data to the appraiser, drafting and delivery of landowner contact letters for
affected parcels, preparation of an appraisal QC checklists and delivery of an
appraisal and appraisal review for each appraised parcel.
Assumptions:
CONSULTANT shall manage their appraisal staff to develop the most
expeditious schedule for delivery of appraisals
CITY shall establish just compensation to be offered each owner by
executing the Determination of Value Statement on the Appraisal Reviews
in a timely manner
CITY shall provide any available information to CONSULTANT that is
needed to complete the assigned appraisals
Exhibit A‐1, Scope of Services Page 7
There shall be a maximum of 5 parcels to be appraised and reviewed
The appraisal costs were estimated on limited data assuming primarly land
valuations with no major impacts to existing buildings and will need to be
updated if major property impacts occur.
Deliverables:
Appraisal management (1 hard copy and 1 electronic PDF copy each)
Appraisal scope and schedule (1 hard copy and 1 electronic PDF copy
each)
Landowner Contact letters (1 hard copy and 1 electronic PDF copy each)
A QC Checklist for each appraisal completed (1 hard copy and 1
electronic PDF copy each)
Appraisal Reports and Appraisal Reviews (1 hard copy and 1 electronic
PDF copy each)
4. ROW Acquisitions and Negotiations
CONSULTANT shall develop an acquisition schedule, review survey legal
descriptions and exhibits, prepare offer packages, present offers and negotiate
purchases, prepare administrative settlement memos and condemnation packages,
prepare executed documents for agency approval, process executed documents and
manage the escrow closing process. At the end of the project acquisition files shall be
transmitted to the CITY with original documents.
Assumptions:
CITY will have sufficient funding to pay for the acquisition of any parcel
assigned.
CITY shall approve acquisition forms prior to their use.
Legal descriptions shall be stamped by the project surveyor and include an
exhibit.
CONSULTANT shall coordinate with CITY to determine
CONSULTANT’s settlement authority with justification over the
approved offer for each.
Parcels shall be closed in escrow.
CITY will be responsible for a risk decision on encumbrances to be
cleared or accepted.
There shall be a maximum of 10 parcels to be acquired.
If after a maximum of four (4) meaningful contacts (meaningful contact
being an in-person meeting or detailed phone conversation, email or
written correspondence with landowner) have been made without reaching
settlement then CITY and CONSULTANT agree to meet and develop an
appropriate acquisition strategy for any unsettled parcel.
CONSULTANT’S acquisition duties shall be deemed complete if any of
the following occur: a negotiated settlement approved by the CITY is
reached and the necessary documents are executed; a paid P&U is secured
and the acquisition file is transmitted to CITY; an impasse in negotiations
is reached and the parcel is submitted for condemnation; a landowner
Exhibit A‐1, Scope of Services Page 8
requests an appraisal for any AOS parcel; the acquisition type, impacts or
area is changed after the appraisal is ordered; or the offer to purchase is
rescinded.
Deliverables:
Acquisition schedule (1 hard copy and 1 electronic PDF copy each)
Review of Survey legal descriptions and exhibits
Completed Acquisition Documents (1 hard copy and 1 electronic PDF
copy each)
Negotiation Services
Administrative Settlement Memos (1 hard copy and 1 electronic PDF copy
each)
Completed acquisitions or condemnation packages (1 hard copy and 1
electronic PDF copy each)
Escrow management
Completed files (1 hard copy)
5. Prepare ROW Certification Package
CONSULTANT shall prepare files for certification to the standards of the
Washington State Department of Transportation LAG manual and prepare a
certification memo for CITY. The completed files shall be organized to facilitate easy
review by the LPA Reviewing Agent and CONSULTANT shall provide one Senior
Agent to participate with CITY during the certification review process.
Assumptions:
There will be a maximum of 10 acquisition files
There will be a maximum of one certification memo prepared
There will be a maximum of one certification review meeting of two (2)
hour duration
Deliverables:
Certification files (1 hard copy)
Final Certification Memo (1 hard copy and 1 electronic PDF copy each)
Participation in LPA Certification Reviews
6. Right-of-Way Plans
A. Prepare Right-of-Way Plans for the Project Corridor which includes
ownership tables that identify the necessary easements and fee takes.
B. Prepare exhibits and legal descriptions for takes and easements.
Assumptions:
CITY to provide title reports for parcels needing easements or fee takes.
Ten exhibits including legal descriptions are assumed for the Project.
Right-of-Way Plans shall be prepared for the 60% Submittal. Only one
revision shall be necessary after that.
Exhibit A‐1, Scope of Services Page 9
Deliverables:
Complete Right-of-Way Plans prepared by a land surveyor licensed in
Washington State.
Task H - Public Involvement
CONSULTANT shall support the CITY to engage in an open dialogue with the
community about improvements being planned for the PROJECT. CONSULTANT
shall work closely with the CITY staff to develop a tailored public outreach program
to maximize citizen awareness and understanding of the PROJECT and involvement
in the development of the PROJECT final design. The CITY will be responsible for
scheduling and reserving ADA- and transit-accessible meeting venues, providing
refreshments and attending any community events. The CITY will be billed directly
for the cost of any printed display or informational materials.
1. Comment and Contact Database
CONSULTANT shall maintain an existing MS Excel project database to track public
comments and responses, contact information for interested parties and key
stakeholders, and activities and meetings held.
Assumptions:
None
Deliverables:
Comment/contact database in MS Excel (electronic copy)
Monthly database reports (electronic copy)
2. Public Open House
A. Meeting Logistics
CONSULTANT shall prepare and provide equipment for, support, set up and
orchestrate (including active facilitation if necessary) one public open house. It is
assumed that the public open house will last up to four hours and will be a
combination of information sharing and dialogue through an open house format,
presentation, and informal opportunities for the public to provide input to team
members and CITY staff present at each meeting. The public open house will be
held near the end of the final design development process, to present and receive
public input on the final 100% design concept. CONSULTANT shall provide a
summary of both the verbal and written comments received at the public open
house. The CITY will be responsible for scheduling and reserving ADA- and
transit-accessible meeting venues, providing refreshments and attending each
meeting.
B. Meeting Advertisements for Public Open House
CONSULTANT shall prepare a display advertisement announcing the public
open house to be placed in publications by the CITY and on the CITY’s project
Web page. CONSULTANT shall also prepare and distribute flyers advertising the
public events, to be placed at local gathering spaces.
Exhibit A‐1, Scope of Services Page 10
Assumptions:
Meeting advertisements to be placed and paid for by the CITY
Deliverables:
Public meeting display advertisement (1 electronic copy)
Public meeting flyer (1 electronic copy)
C. Meeting Displays and Materials for Public Open House
CONSULTANT shall coordinate and support the development and graphic design
for up to 15 10 display boards to provide information about the project issues,
benefits, and design. CONSULTANT shall also prepare comment forms and a
take-away fact sheet about the project and next steps.
Assumptions:
CONSULTANT shall coordinate printing of materials, to be paid for
directly by the CITY
Deliverables:
Draft and final meeting plan for the public open house; includes meeting
agenda, format, roles and responsibilities, and meeting logistics (1 hard
copy and 1 electronic PDF copy each)
Draft and final project fact sheet (1 hard copy and 1 electronic PDF copy
each)
Draft and final display boards (up to 15 10 total) and meeting materials
(comment form and handouts) (1 hard copy and 1 electronic PDF copy
each)
Draft and final meeting summary for the public open house (1 hard copy
and 1 electronic PDF copy each)
3. Stakeholder Interviews
CONSULTANT shall prepare for, support, schedule and conduct stakeholder
interviews and meetings (up to 12 6 total). Interviews will be held throughout the
final design development process with key stakeholders along the project corridor, as
identified by CONSULTANT and CITY staff. The interviews will provide an
opportunity to address issues as they arise, discuss stakeholder questions and
concerns, and inform the final design.
It is assumed that each stakeholder interview will last approximately 60 minutes.
CONSULTANT shall provide a written summary of each stakeholder interview.
Assumptions:
CONSULTANT to attend stakeholder interviews. CITY staff to also
attend, when determined appropriate by the CITY.
Exhibit A‐1, Scope of Services Page 11
Deliverables:
Agendas and discussion questions for each stakeholder interview (1 hard
copy and 1 PDF electronic copy each)
Project fact sheet for distribution at each stakeholder interview (1 hard
copy and 1 electronic PDF copy each)
One draft and one final summary for each stakeholder interview (1 hard
copy and 1 electronic PDF copy each)
4. City Council Meetings
CONSULTANT shall provide support to attend, draft materials for, and write a
summary of City Council meetings and/or workshops to review and approve the final
design concept.
Assumptions:
CITY to arrange for Council Chambers or another room of the CITY’s
choosing for four hours.
Deliverables:
Attendance at up to two City Council meetings and/or workshops
Support to develop up to two informational packets for City Council
meetings and/or workshops
Summaries of project specific discussion at City Council meetings and/or
workshops, including public comments
5.4.Web page
CONSULTANT shall coordinate with the CITY Web site manager to maintain and
update a project Web page that features information about the project, key milestones,
informational materials (including materials provided at public meetings), upcoming
opportunities for public input, and contact information for the project team. The site
will be developed and managed by the CITY.
Assumptions:
Web page content to be developed by CONSULTANT and reviewed by
the CITY
We page will be hosted and managed by the CITY
Deliverables:
Draft and final Web page content
Up to three Web page updates as necessary
6.5.Public Outreach and Comment Summary
CONSULTANT shall develop one draft and one final summary of public outreach
activities conducted and issues identified during this phase of the project.
Assumptions:
None
Exhibit A‐1, Scope of Services Page 12
Deliverables:
One draft and one final public involvement summary (1 hard copy and 1
electronic PDF copy each)
Task I - Environmental Investigation and Permit Preparation
1. Permits
Permits shall be required for in-water construction, wetland fill, and critical area
modification. Preparation of federal, state, and local agency permit application forms,
graphics, and compilation of required documents or plans for the permits identified
below shall be completed as part of this phase of work. Development of supporting
narratives or criteria justification is also anticipated and included in this scope. Permit
support such as response to CITY review and Agency comments (not to exceed 15
comments) coordinated shall be prepared by the CONSULTANT.
Assumptions:
Upon completion of 30% design, a mitigation site shall have been chosen
and documented in a conceptual mitigation report.
Mitigation design shall be limited to one site that incorporates the
necessary elements to cover both the wetland and stream mitigation
requirements.
Permits for construction such as clear and grade, right-of-way, and
NPDES, are not included with this scope of work.
Rights of entry to potential off-site wetland mitigation sites shall be
coordinated by the CITY.
A mitigation site has yet to be selected. Additional cultural resources,
wetland delineation field work, and survey would be required if an off-site
location is chosen outside of the PROJECT area in the 30% design. Funds
to cover that extra effort would need to be in a separate authorization from
the CITY.
The CITY will handle work related to issuing a SEPA determination prior
to submittal of permit applications.
Permit application packages shall be prepared by the CONSULTANT.
The CITY will be sign required forms, prepare submittal letters, and be
responsible for formal submittal to the agencies.
The CITY will pay any and permit in-take fees.
Deliverables/Permit Applications:
Draft and Final – Final Mitigation Report (1 hard copy and 1 electronic
PDF copy each)
JARPA with figures for submittal to Corps (1 hard copy and 1 electronic
PDF copy each)
JARPA with figures for submittal to WDFW (1 hard copy and 1 electronic
PDF copy each)
Local permit application for critical area modifications (1 hard copy and 1
electronic PDF copy each)
Exhibit A‐1, Scope of Services Page 13
Task J - BNSF Coordination
1. Agency Coordination
Schedule two additional meetings with BNSF prior to 100% design submittal.
2. Agreement Review and Delivery
CONSULTANT shall assist the CITY in its review of the Construction and
Maintenance Agreement (BNSF uses a boilerplate agreement). CONSULTANT shall
coordinate with BNSF in its review and delivery of the construction and maintenance
agreement. The maximum number of hours for this task is 20.
3. Design Review
Provide Quality Control of Railroad plan and easement exhibits
Assumptions:
BNSF will prepare the Construction and Maintenance Agreement for
CITY’s review and execution
Deliverables:
BNSF Meeting minutes (1 hard copy and 1 electronic PDF copy each)
Fully executed Construction and Maintenance Agreement and waiver of
WUTC petition (1 hard copy and 1 electronic PDF copy each)
Railroad plan and easement exhibits (1 hard copy and 1 electronic PDF
copy each)
Task M - Utilities Coordination and Design
Design of utility improvements shall be provided to support the proposed roadway
development. Anticipated utility design services include a CITY fiber optic duct, a
new 6-inch PVC reclaimed water pipe along the entire project corridor, upsizing of
approximately 1,400 lf of sanitary sewer pipe, and associated adjustments to existing
water, sewer, and storm drainage facilities. Coordination shall be provided with the
CITY and utility purveyors to support required adjustments to other utilities,
including power, natural gas, traffic signal, and communications facilities.
Assumptions:
Existing utilities shall remain in their current location and condition as
practicable and reasonable to support the proposed roadway
improvements. Wholesale replacement of existing utility installations is
not anticipated.
Assume two site visits (5 hours each) and corresponding meetings with
CITY officials to coordinate utility adjustments.
CITY fiber optic duct design shall include alignment of conduit, pull
boxes, and ancillary structures as needed to provide adequate duct for
future wire installations. Wire and wire pulling shall be provided by the
CITY, and not included in this scope.
Exhibit A‐1, Scope of Services Page 14
Reclaimed water facilities for this project include a single 6” PVC purple
pipe, including fittings, valves and fixtures, extending the length of the
project corridor. Pipe shall be capped and marked with terminal end
markers in the right-of-way.
Sewer line replacement shall be coordinated with replacement of the fish
passage culverts. Inverted siphons or other extraordinary measures shall
not be required to cross the stream culverts.
Deliverables:
Deliverables included in PS&E tasks
Task N - Fish Passable Culverts
This section of the scope applies to the development of fish passage at Prairie and
Porter Creek crossings as well analysis of the additional culverts to support proposed
widening and placement of bridge foundation outside of 100-year floodway. Design
includes resolution of new WDFW coordination for determination of culvert width
based on new WDFW methodology.
Assumptions:
Coordinate new design methodology for determining culvert size with
WDFW. Update fish passage culvert designs as necessary.
The proposed location of new trail crossing of Prairie Creek shall be at an
existing driveway location. The existing prism shall not be changed at this
location, therefore replacement of the existing culvert is not required as
part of this project.
The proposed location of the new trail crossing of Portage Creek shall be
accomplished using a pre-fabricated single span bridge; therefore culvert
design at this location shall not be required for the PROJECT.
Hydraulic modeling using HEC-RAS, Version 4.1.0 shall be performed
along Prairie Creek from 204th Street to 100 feet upstream of the crossing
of 206th Place NE. Model shall be used to determine water surface
elevations and flow velocities before and after proposed culvert
replacement at 67th Avenue NE crossing, and to determine potential
increase in water surface elevations on private property located adjacent to
67th Avenue NE.
Hydraulic modeling using HEC-RAS, Version 4.1.0 shall be performed
along reach of Portage Creek from immediately upstream of BNSF
railroad crossing to Pond B located on the Stillaguamish Pioneer Valley
Museum Property. Model shall be used to determine water surface
elevations and flow velocities before and after proposed culvert
replacement at 67th Avenue NE crossing, and to determine the 100-year
water surface elevation at proposed bike path crossing.
Hydraulic modeling results shall be presented in a brief 4-5 page
Hydraulic Modeling Analysis Technical Memorandum to be included in
hydraulic report as appendix.
Exhibit A‐1, Scope of Services Page 15
Review survey for completeness and geotechnical information for
recommendations. Provide comments on draft and back check final
products. Incorporate geotechnical recommendations on foundation and
dewatering into project design.
Assume that wingwalls shall not be required for stream simulation culvert.
Hydrology is based upon regression equations to include standard error of
estimate to insure culvert is not undersized.
Stream diversion plan for each crossing to be designed by the Contractor
as a part of construction bid.
Assume stream channel restoration is not required.
Deliverables:
Hydraulic Modeling Analysis Technical Memorandum
HEC-RAS Model of Prairie and Portage Creeks
New culvert design for Prairie and Portage Creeks included in PS&E tasks
Task O - Storm Drainage
Stormwater facilities shall be upgraded to support the proposed roadway
improvements within the project area. Upgrades shall be developed in accordance
with State and local guidelines to provide updated conveyance and storm water
treatment features as needed to adequately manage project runoff. Infiltration BMPs
and Low Impact Development methods shall be evaluated and used where
appropriate for treatment. Design activities shall include hydrologic and hydraulic
analyses, documentation, permitting support, and production of plans, specifications,
and cost estimates.
Assumptions:
Stormwater solutions shall be developed to manage project site runoff.
Regional solutions to address wide scale basin or watershed issues shall
not be addressed as part of this scope.
Much of the existing drainage system on 67th Avenue NE is antiquated
and/or does not meet current development standards. Existing stormwater
facilities shall be replaced as needed to provide for updated design and
treatment configurations. Where reasonable and practicable, existing
drainage facilities shall remain in their current locations and condition.
Stormwater design criteria shall be developed from the Washington
Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for Western
Washington, and CITY standards.
Deliverables:
Deliverables included in PS&E tasks
Task P - Structures
Provide wall design for cast-in-place concrete wall with fascia attachment.
Exhibit A‐1, Scope of Services Page 16
Assumptions:
Wall design and detailing shall be performed for the single selected wall
type shown in the 30% submittal only. Wall designs for additional or
optional wall types not selected as the preferred alternative shown in the
30% submittal shall be considered extra work.
Retaining wall(s) are anticipated to be non-standard cast-in-place concrete
walls requiring specific design and detailing for up to three different wall
height variations (±2 ft).
Up to three special details may be required to accommodate existing and
planned utility crossings.
Cast-in place fascia attachment details shall be provided for existing
concrete retaining wall, provided the City elects to pursue this work.
Existing concrete wall shall have to be checked for stability and structural
code compliance in accordance with the applicable design standards since
modifications are anticipated to the existing wall that shall increase the
dead load and, thereby, the overturning moment of the existing wall,
provided the City elects to pursue this work.
Deliverables:
Design calculations stamped by a professional civil engineer licensed in
the state of Washington.
Task R - Signal Design at 211th Place NE
CONSULTANT shall design a new traffic signal at the intersection of 67th Avenue
NE and 211th Place NE. The signal shall be designed per WSDOT and CITY
standards.
Assumptions:
The design shall be coordinated with the City Traffic Engineer
One full design 3-way traffic signal
No additional traffic analysis or warrant study shall be required
No traffic counts are necessary and are not included in this scope
The design shall include:
o NEMA traffic signal controller
o Illumination at the intersection
o Video detection
o Emergency vehicle pre-emption
o ADA audible ped buttons
o Countdown ped heads
o Unlighted street name signs
o Traffic signal radio interconnection
Deliverables:
Deliverables included in PS&E tasks
Exhibit A‐1, Scope of Services Page 17
Task S - Plans, Specifications, and Estimate
1. Plans
CONSULTANT shall prepare plan sheets using CITY standard sheet layout and
drafting standards. Plans shall be prepared using AutoCAD with such provisions and
in such detail as to permit layout in the field for construction and other purposes. The
plans shall be prepared in Agency's format to the level of competency presently
maintained by practicing professionals in the field of transportation engineering in the
Puget Sound region.
Plans shall include details for the construction of the proposed improvements
including details for the new road improvements for 67th Avenue NE and 69th
Avenue NE, new signal at the 211th Place NE intersection, retaining walls, paving,
concrete curb and gutter, concrete sidewalks, asphalt trail, the installation of a storm
drainage system, new utilities, utility adjustments, illumination, channelization, and
signing.
2. Specifications
The CONSULTANT shall prepare Contract Provisions ("Specifications") for the
project based on the WSDOT/APWA Standard Specifications, 2010, and applicable
Local Agency Guidelines (LAG) standards. These shall include Special Provisions
for the items of work which are not covered by the current WSDOT/APWA Standard
Specifications, including any Agency General Requirements, and bid and contract
forms. Agency will furnish examples of the contract documents to CONSULTANT.
3. Estimates
The CONSULTANT shall prepare an estimate of probable construction costs as
follows:
Calculate quantities.
Prepare bid items and quantities for contract proposal.
Prepare estimate of construction costs base upon the approved construction
plans, bid item quantities, and current unit bid prices.
In providing opinions of cost, financial analyses, economic feasibility projections,
and schedules for the PROJECT, CONSULTANT shall have no control over cost or
price of labor and materials, unknown or latent conditions of existing equipment or
structures that might affect operation or maintenance costs, competitive bidding
procedures and market conditions, time or quality of performance by operating
personnel or third parties, and other economic and operational factors that might
materially affect the ultimate PROJECT cost or schedule. The CONSULTANT,
therefore, shall not warranty that the actual PROJECT costs, financial aspects,
economic feasibility, or schedules shall not vary from CONSULTANT’S opinions,
analyses, projections, or estimates.
4. Construction Schedule
The CONSULTANT shall develop a critical path method construction schedule. The
Construction Schedule shall show the sequencing and durations of construction
activities. Constraints, such as wet weather conditions, utility work coordination, etc.,
Exhibit A‐1, Scope of Services Page 18
shall be identified and factored in the schedule. The number of working days for the
construction contract shall be based on the overall construction duration shown in the
schedule.
5. Submittals
Each plan submittal shall include a round table discussion between the CITY and the
CONSULTANT. The CONSULTANT shall brief the CITY on the design progress,
outstanding issues, elaborate on major items from prior submittal reviews, and answer
any questions or concerns posed by the CITY. The CITY members shall have the
opportunity to brief the CONSULTANT on their review comments.
Completion of the Quality Assurance Checklist and the Review Ledger shall be part
of each plan submittal review process.
Each submittal shall include drawings, quantities, the specification package and
special provisions, and the engineer’s estimate. Previous submittal comments shall be
incorporated into the submittal. The CITY shall review the submittal and return the
Review Ledger to the CONSULTANT.
Assumptions:
CITY review of each submittal will take two weeks
The CITY will provide review comments on the CONSULTANT
provided comment Review Ledger
CITY will provide one Review Ledger for each submittal with comments
consolidated into one set
Bid documentation is not included
Deliverables:
Design Plan Submittal, Special Provisions and Engineer’s Estimate (60%)
and response to 30% comments (1 11x17 hard copy and 1 electronic PDF
copy each)
Design Plan Submittal, Special Provisions and Engineer’s Estimate (90%)
and response to 60% comments (1 11x17 hard copy and 1 electronic PDF
copy each)
Final Plan Submittal, Special Provisions and Engineer’s Estimate (100%)
and response to 90% Comments (1 11x17 hard copy and 1 electronic PDF
copy each)
Final Plans and Special Provisions (1 11x17 hard copy, 1 22x34 hard copy
(bond) and 1 electronic PDF copy each)
Backup Calculations for Engineer’s Estimates (1 hard copy and 1
electronic PDF copy each)
Exhibit A‐1, Scope of Services Page 19
Anticipated sheet list:
Sheet
Number Description
1 Cover sheet with vicinity map and index
2 Legend and Abbreviations
3 Typical Roadway Sections
4 Alignment Plan/Survey Control
5-15 Plan and Profile
16-26 Utility Plans
27-37 Wall Plans
38-40 Wall Profiles
41-42 Wall Details
43-46 Storm Details
47-48 Fish Passage Details
48-52 Wetland Mitigation
53-63 Channelization, Signing and Illumination
64-67 Signal Plans
68-70 Driveway Profiles
71-91 Mitigation Plans
92 Trail Details
91-96 Miscellaneous Details
97 Planting Details
Project Estimate Spreadsheet
Project Name City of Arlington 67th Ave. Phase III Reconstruction Final Design
Fee Estimate by Elements 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Work Element Title Total HDR MCR Lin Geo EnviroIssues Appraisal Tim Ryan
SCOPE OF SERVICES
A Project Management
Grand Total 1.0 Hours 188.00 188
Amount 23,615.10 23,615.10$
B Quality Assurance/Quality Control
Grand Total 2.0 Hours 91.00 91
Amount 14,479.57 14,479.57$
D Basemapping
Grand Total 4.0 Hours 471.00 21 450
Amount 47,521.24 2,557.24$ 44,964.00$
E Geotechnical Investigation and Report
Grand Total 5.0 Hours 14.00 5 9
Amount 4,744.48 548.48$ 4,196.00$
G Right of Way
Grand Total 7.0 Hours 1,335.00 625 400 250 60
Amount 146,158.86 75,185.86$ 39,973.00$ 25,000.00$ 6,000.00$
H Public Involvement
Grand Total 8.0 Hours 252.00 6 246
Amount 20,701.64 767.21$ 19,934.43$
I Environmental Permitting
Grand Total 9.0 Hours 130.00 130
Amount 14,996.10 14,996.10$
J BNSF Coordination
Grand Total 10.0 Hours 60.00 6 54
Amount 5,267.21 767.21$ 4,500.00$
M Utilities Coordination
Grand Total 13.0 Hours 184.00 184
Amount 23,671.76 23,671.76$
N Fish Passable Culverts
Grand Total 14.0 Hours 172.00 172
Amount 18,558.46 18,558.46$
O Storm Drainage
Grand Total 14.0 Hours 288.00 288
Amount 34,314.05 34,314.05$
p Structures
Grand Total 14.0 Hours 40.00 40
Amount 6,896.52 6,896.52$
R Signal Design at 211th Place NE
Grand Total 14.0 Hours 180.00 180
Amount 16,413.95 16,413.95$
S Plans, Specifications, and Estimate
Grand Total 14.0 Hours 1,530.00 1,530
Amount 179,853.80 179,853.80$
Amount 113,000.05 113,000.05$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Grand Total Project Hours 4,935 3,466 54 850 9 246 250 60
Amount 557,193 412,625 4,500 84,937 4,196 19,934 25,000 6,000
Total Labor Costs(included 3% labor escalation-$8,280.)420,362.03 $420,362 $4,500 $84,937 $4,196 $19,934 $25,000 $6,000
Direct Costs 5,700.00 5,700 0 0 0
Total Fee 426,062.03 $426,062 $4,500 $84,937 $4,196 $19,934 $25,000 $6,000
Grand Total 570,629.46 $426,062 $4,500 $84,937 $4,196 $19,934 $25,000 $6,000
Project Estimate Spreadsheet
Project Name City of Arlington 67th Ave. Phase III Reconstruction Final Design Firm:HDR
OH Rate:164.22%
Fee Rate:30.0%
Fee Estimate
Labor Category (Hours)65.32 43.46 39.88 30.63 46.2 44 58.6 60.5 34.78 65.8 37.35 26.4 34.43 47.3 57.65 51.68 25 34.5 36.28 33.4 26 36.17
Rob Gorman Eric Dawson Todd LivingstonBrian Gardner Cary Stewart Hua Wang Rob Richardson Jeff Hamlin Jonathan Brown Jim Prossick Teresa Weaver Joe Looney Megan Erhart Matt Gray Mike WitterKarissa KawamotoJeff Buchanan Landen Grant Barb Whiton Carlos Wilcox
Maureen
Finn
Liya Huang-
Bardley
Work
Element Title Pr
i
n
c
i
p
a
l
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
Ma
n
a
g
e
r
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
De
s
i
g
n
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
Sr
.
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
Sr
.
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
Sr
.
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
RO
W
Ma
n
a
g
e
r
Sr
.
R
O
W
A
g
e
n
t
RO
W
Te
c
h
n
i
c
i
a
n
En
v
i
r
o
m
e
nt
a
l
Sc
i
e
n
t
i
s
t
Sr
.
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
Sr
.
En
v
i
r
o
m
e
nt
a
l
S
c
i
En
v
i
r
o
m
e
nt
a
l
Pl
a
n
n
e
r
CA
D
D
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
Ed
i
t
o
r
CA
D
D
Su
p
p
o
r
t
Ad
m
i
n
i
s
t
r
at
o
r
Se
n
i
o
r
Ad
m
i
n
i
s
t
r
at
o
r
To
t
a
l
s
SCOPE OF SERVICES
Task A Project Management
1 Meetings and Project Reporting 4 56 4 12 12 16 2 42 148
2 Schedule 12 4 2 18
3 Sub-Consultant Management 12 2 8 22
0
Total Task A hrs 4 80 0 0 0 0 4 12 12 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 50 188
amount 261.28 3,476.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 234.40 726.00 417.36 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 946.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 156.00 1,808.50 8,026
Task B Quality Assurance/Quality Control
1 QA/QC 2 28 11 45 5 91
0
Total Task B hrs 2 0 0 0 28 0 11 45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 91
amount 130.64 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,293.60 0.00 644.60 2,722.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.00 0.00 4,921
Task D Basemapping
1 Survey 2 2 2 6
3 Right-of-Way 2 2 4
4 Basemap Preparation 2 2 2 4 1 11
0
Total Task D hrs 0 6 0 6 0 0 2 2 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21
amount 0.00 260.76 0.00 183.78 0.00 0.00 117.20 121.00 139.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 47.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 869
Task E Geotechnical Investigation and Report
1 Field Investigation 0
2 Design Recommendations 4 1 5
0
Total Task E hrs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
amount 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 139.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 47.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 186
Task G Right of Way
1 Task Management and Pre-Acquisition Services.96 30 64 2 192
2 Funding Estimate and Administrative Offer Summaries.4 0 6 10
3 Appraisal, Appraisal Review and Appraisal Management 14 5 5 24
4 ROW Acquisitions and Negotiations 15 290 72 377
5 Prepare ROW Certification Package 8 9 5 22
0
Total Task G hrs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 137 334 152 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 625
amount 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9,014.60 12,474.90 4,012.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 52.00 0.00 25,554
Task H Public Involvement
1 Comment and Contract Database 0
2 Public Open House 2 2
3 Stakeholder Interviews 2 2
4 City Concil meetings 2 2
5 Web Page 0
6 Publci Outreach and Comment Surmmary 0
0
Total Task H hrs 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6
amount 0.00 260.76 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 261
Task I Environmental Permitting
Permits 94 36 130
0
Total Task I hrs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 94 0 0 36 0 0 0 0 0 0 130
amount 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3,236.42 0.00 0.00 1,860.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5,097
Task J BNSF Coordination
1 Agency Coordination 2 2
2 Agreement review and delivery 2 2
3 Design Review 2 2
0
Total Task J hrs 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6
amount 0.00 260.76 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 261
Task M Utilities Coordination
1 Design Development - Fiber Optic Duct 4 24 28
2 Design Development - Santitary Sewer Upgrade 24 40 64
3 Design Development - Reclaimed Water 24 40 64
4 Site Visits and Meetings 12 16 28
0
Total Task M hrs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 64 120 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 184
amount 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3,872.00 4,173.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8,046
Task N Fish Passable Culverts
Site Visit 10 10 20
Existing Conditions Hydraulic Model for Prairie Creek 32 4 36
Proposed Conditions Hydraulic Model for Prairie Creek 16 2 18
Existing Conditins Hydraulic Model for Portage Creek 32 4 36
Proposed Conditions Hydraulic Model for Portage Creek 16 2 18
Hydraulic Analysis Results Techncial Memo 40 4 44
0
Total Task N hrs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 146 0 0 0 0 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 172
amount 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5,077.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,229.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6,308
Task O Storm Drainage
1 Design Development - Conveyance System 24 80 104
2 Design Development - Stormwater Treatment Measures 24 120 144
3 Permitting Support 8 16 24
4 Coordination meetings with City 8 8 16
0
Total Task O hrs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 64 224 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 288
amount 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3,872.00 7,790.72 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11,663
Task P Structures
1 Structural Design 40 40
0
Total Task P hrs 0 0 0 0 0 0 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 40
amount 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,344.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,344
Task R Signal Design at 211th Place NE
1 Signal Design 24 96 60 180
0
Total Task Q hrs 0 0 0 0 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 96 60 0 0 0 0 180
Project Estimate Spreadsheet
Project Name City of Arlington 67th Ave. Phase III Reconstruction Final Design Firm:HDR
OH Rate:164.22%
Fee Rate:30.0%
Fee Estimate
Labor Category (Hours)65.32 43.46 39.88 30.63 46.2 44 58.6 60.5 34.78 65.8 37.35 26.4 34.43 47.3 57.65 51.68 25 34.5 36.28 33.4 26 36.17
Rob Gorman Eric Dawson Todd LivingstonBrian Gardner Cary Stewart Hua Wang Rob Richardson Jeff Hamlin Jonathan Brown Jim Prossick Teresa Weaver Joe Looney Megan Erhart Matt Gray Mike WitterKarissa KawamotoJeff Buchanan Landen Grant Barb Whiton Carlos Wilcox
Maureen
Finn
Liya Huang-
Bardley
Work
Element Title Pr
i
n
c
i
p
a
l
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
Ma
n
a
g
e
r
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
De
s
i
g
n
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
Sr
.
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
Sr
.
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
Sr
.
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
RO
W
Ma
n
a
g
e
r
Sr
.
R
O
W
A
g
e
n
t
RO
W
Te
c
h
n
i
c
i
a
n
En
v
i
r
o
m
e
nt
a
l
Sc
i
e
n
t
i
s
t
Sr
.
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
Sr
.
En
v
i
r
o
m
e
nt
a
l
S
c
i
En
v
i
r
o
m
e
nt
a
l
Pl
a
n
n
e
r
CA
D
D
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
Ed
i
t
o
r
CA
D
D
Su
p
p
o
r
t
Ad
m
i
n
i
s
t
r
at
o
r
Se
n
i
o
r
Ad
m
i
n
i
s
t
r
at
o
r
To
t
a
l
s
SCOPE OF SERVICES
amount 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,108.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,400.00 2,070.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5,579
Task S Plans, Specifications, and Estimate
1 Plans 90 280 128 35 200 172 20 112 180 1,217
2 Specifications 36 4 16 22 66 16 8 168
3 Estimate 14 36 4 7 48 11 11 131
4 Construction Schedule 4 4
5 submittals 2 8 10
0
Total Task Q hrs 0 146 0 328 0 0 148 64 314 0 0 0 172 47 112 0 0 0 8 191 0 0 1,530
amount 0.00 6,345.16 0.00 10,046.64 0.00 0.00 8,672.80 3,872.00 10,920.92 0.00 0.00 0.00 5,921.96 2,223.10 6,456.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 290.24 6,379.40 0.00 0.00 61,129
Grand Total Project Hrs 6 244 0 334 52 0 205 251 824 137 334 152 266 95 112 36 96 60 8 191 13 50 3,466
Grand Total Project Amount 391.92 10,604.24 0.00 10,230.42 2,402.40 0.00 12,013.00 15,185.50 28,658.72 9,014.60 12,474.90 4,012.80 9,158.38 4,493.50 6,456.80 1,860.48 2,400.00 2,070.00 290.24 6,379.40 338.00 1,808.50 140,244
6 244 0 334 52 0 205 251 824 137 334 152 266 95 112 36 96 60 8 191 13 50 3,466
391.92 10604.24 0 10230.42 2402.4 0 12013 15185.5 28658.72 9014.6 12474.9 4012.8 9158.38 4493.5 6456.8 1860.48 2400 2070 290.24 6379.4 338 1808.5 140,244
Total labor cost 140,243.80 143,499.86$
months estimate %
Total Direct Labor Cost in 2010 3 37.50%140,243.80
3% esclation for year 2011 5 62.50%2,629.57
8 Total direct labor 142,873.37 142,873.371
Overhead Rate 164.22%234,626.65 222,424.783
Total Direct labor and overhead 377,500.02
Fee Rate on Direct labor 30%42,862.01
Total HDR 420,362.03 365,298.154
Direct Expenses:
Printing cost 1,500.00
InterCall 200.00
Mileage 0.5 per mile 3,500.00
Other Misc. Expenses 500.00 18,524.200
MCR 4,500.00
10,200.00 383,822.354
HDR Total 430,562.03 4,500 426,062
42,240
Subconsultants:9.91%
Lin and Assoc.84,937.00
GeoEngineers 4,196.00
EnviroIssues 19,934.43
Appraisal Group of the NW 25,000.00
Tim Ryan (Appraisal Review)6,000.00
Subconsultant Total 140,067.43
Projec Grand Total 570,629.46
ID Task Name Working Days Start Finish Predecessor
1 Notice to Proceed 0 days Thu 5/28/09 Thu 5/28/09
2 Review of Existing County Information 5 days Thu 5/28/09 Wed 6/3/09 1
3 Preliminary Survey 348 days Mon 5/11/09 Fri 9/24/10
4 Initial Field Survey 5 days Thu 5/28/09 Wed 6/3/09 1
5 Basemap Preparation 10 days Thu 6/4/09 Wed 6/17/09 4
6 Wetland/Stream Survey 10 days Fri 8/7/09 Thu 8/20/09 65
7 Supplemental Survey 5 days Thu 6/3/10 Wed 6/9/10 34FS+10 da
8 Supplemental Survey 2 10 days Mon 5/11/09 Fri 5/22/09
9 Right of Way Survey 14 days Tue 9/7/10 Fri 9/24/10
10
11 Conceptual Layout of 3 Alternatives 69 days Thu 6/18/09 Thu 9/24/09
21
22 Conceptual Layout of 3 "East" Alternatives 160 days Fri 9/25/09 Tue 5/18/10
35
36 Geotechnical Investigation 37 days Wed 7/7/10 Thu 8/26/10
37 Exploration Plan 2 days Wed 7/7/10 Thu 7/8/10 132FS+10 d
38 Exploration Plan Approval 5 days Fri 7/9/10 Thu 7/15/10 37
39 Field Investigation 5 days Fri 7/16/10 Thu 7/22/10 38
40 Wall Type Technical Memo 10 days Fri 7/23/10 Thu 8/5/10 39
41 Draft Geotech Report 12 days Fri 7/30/10 Mon 8/16/10 40FS-5 days
42 City Review Draft Geotech Report 5 days Tue 8/17/10 Mon 8/23/10 41
43 Final Geotech Report 3 days Tue 8/24/10 Thu 8/26/10 42
44
45 Evaulate Right-of-Way Impacts 32 days Thu 8/19/10 Mon 10/4/10
46 Quantify Impact Areas 3 days Thu 9/2/10 Tue 9/7/10 134
47 Property Cost Research 18 days Thu 8/19/10 Tue 9/14/10 134FS-10 da
48 Preliminary ROW Cost Estimate 3 days Wed 9/15/10 Fri 9/17/10 47
49 Draft Appraisal and Acquisition Plan Technical Memo 3 days Mon 9/20/10 Wed 9/22/10 48
50 City Review Appraisal and Acquisition Plan Technical Memo 5 days Thu 9/23/10 Wed 9/29/10 49
51 Final Appraisal and Acquisition Plan Technical Memo 3 days Thu 9/30/10 Mon 10/4/10 50
52
53 Public Involvement 258 days Fri 6/26/09 Tue 7/6/10
60
61 Environmental Investigation and Permit Preparation 452 days Wed 6/17/09 Thu 3/31/11
62 Environmental Kick-off 1 day Thu 6/18/09 Thu 6/18/09 5
63 Wetland/Stream Delineation 280 days Thu 6/18/09 Wed 7/28/10
64 Review Existing Documents 5 days Thu 6/18/09 Wed 6/24/09 5
65 Complete Field Studies 30 days Thu 6/25/09 Thu 8/6/09 64
66 Supplemental Field Studies for Preferred Alternative 25 days Wed 5/19/10 Tue 6/22/10 34
67 Wetland Technical Memo 15 days Wed 6/23/10 Tue 7/13/10 6,17FF+2 da
68 Wetland/Stream Conceptual Mitigation Plan 26 days Wed 6/23/10 Wed 7/28/10 132
69 Corps Jurisdictional Determination 1 day Fri 9/4/09 Fri 9/4/09 65FS+20 da
70 Critical Area Report 55 days Wed 7/14/10 Wed 9/29/10 67
71 Endangered Species Act Compliance 325 days Wed 6/17/09 Wed 9/29/10
72 Biological Assessment 44 days Thu 7/29/10 Wed 9/29/10 68
73 ESA Listings 1 day Wed 6/17/09 Wed 6/17/09 64FF-5 days
74 Phase I ESA 70 days Wed 6/23/10 Wed 9/29/10 132
75 Section 4(f) Technical Memo 18 days Fri 9/3/10 Wed 9/29/10 74FF
76 Environmental Justice Technical Memo 18 days Fri 9/3/10 Wed 9/29/10 74FF
77 Section 106 Compliance 30 days Wed 8/18/10 Wed 9/29/10 74FF
78 NEPA ECS 18 days Wed 9/22/10 Fri 10/15/10 74FF+12 da
79 City Review of WSDOT submittal 10 days Mon 10/18/10 Fri 10/29/10 78,77,76,75,
80 Revise WSDOT submittal 4 days Mon 11/1/10 Thu 11/4/10 79
81 WSDOT Review of NEPA ECS 20 wks Fri 11/5/10 Wed 3/30/11 80
82 NEPA Approval 1 day Thu 3/31/11 Thu 3/31/11 81
83
84 Railroad Coordination 89 days Wed 5/19/10 Tue 9/21/10
85 BNSF Review of 10% Alternatives 15 days Wed 5/19/10 Tue 6/8/10 34
86 Resolve Lebanon Easement Issue 23 days Wed 7/7/10 Fri 8/6/10 133
87 On-Site Review with BNSF and WUTC 1 day Mon 8/9/10 Mon 8/9/10 86
88 Submit WUTC Crossing Petition 1 day Mon 8/9/10 Mon 8/9/10 87FF
89 Crossing Petition Review 6 wks Tue 8/10/10 Tue 9/21/10 88
90 Easement Negotiations with BNSF 6 wks Tue 8/10/10 Tue 9/21/10 88
91
92 Illumination Design 10 days Wed 6/23/10 Tue 7/6/10 132
93 Traffic Analysis 10 days Thu 6/18/09 Wed 7/1/09 5
94 Signal Design 20 days Wed 6/23/10 Tue 7/20/10 132
95
96 Utility Coordination and Design 299 days Thu 5/28/09 Tue 8/3/10
97 Obtain Existing Information 20 days Thu 5/28/09 Wed 6/24/09 1
98 Conceptual Relocation Design 30 days Wed 6/23/10 Tue 8/3/10
99 Conceptual Plans 10 days Wed 6/23/10 Tue 7/6/10 132
100 Utilities Technical Memo 5 days Wed 7/7/10 Tue 7/13/10 99
101 30% Plans 15 days Wed 7/14/10 Tue 8/3/10 100
102
103 Fish Passable Cuverts 251 days Fri 8/21/09 Thu 8/19/10
104 Planning Level 231 days Fri 8/21/09 Thu 7/22/10
105 Analyze Existing Conditions 10 days Fri 8/21/09 Thu 9/3/09 6
8/8 8/22 9/5 9/19 10/3 10/17 10/31 11/14 11/28 12/12 12/26 1/9 1/23 2/6 2/20 3/6 3/20 4/3 4/17 5/1 5/15 5/29
st 1 September 1 October 1 November 1 December 1 January 1 February 1 March 1 April 1 May 1 June 1
Task Critical Task Milestone Summary Rolled Up Task Rolled Up Critical Task Rolled Up Milestone
Page 1
Project: Arlington k2 revised
Date: Thu 8/26/10
ID Task Name Working Days Start Finish Predecessor
106 Conceptual Alternatives 22 days Wed 6/23/10 Thu 7/22/10 132,105
107 30% Design 20 days Fri 7/23/10 Thu 8/19/10 106
108
109 Storm Drainage 321 days Thu 6/18/09 Fri 9/24/10
110 Planning Level 17 days Thu 6/18/09 Mon 7/13/09
115 Conceptual Design 38 days Wed 6/30/10 Fri 8/20/10
120 30% Design 34 days Mon 8/9/10 Fri 9/24/10
121 30% Plans 18 days Mon 8/9/10 Wed 9/1/10 118FS-5 day
122 Draft Stormwater Management Report 10 days Mon 8/23/10 Fri 9/3/10 121SS+10 d
123 City Review Draft Stormwater Management Report 10 days Tue 9/7/10 Mon 9/20/10 122
124 Final Stormwater Management Report 4 days Tue 9/21/10 Fri 9/24/10 123
125
126 Structures 42 days Wed 6/23/10 Thu 8/19/10
127 East Side Retaining Wall Design 12 days Wed 6/23/10 Thu 7/8/10 132
128 30% Plans 30 days Fri 7/9/10 Thu 8/19/10 127
129
130 30% Design Report 81 days Thu 6/10/10 Fri 10/1/10
131 Design Report 81 days Thu 6/10/10 Fri 10/1/10
132 Revise Design for Alternative 2 9 days Thu 6/10/10 Tue 6/22/10 7
133 30% Plans for Lebanon Crossing 10 days Wed 6/23/10 Tue 7/6/10 132
134 30% Plans 25 days Thu 7/29/10 Wed 9/1/10 101FF,107F
135 30% Cost Estimate 3 days Thu 9/2/10 Tue 9/7/10 134
136 Draft Design Report 5 days Wed 9/8/10 Tue 9/14/10 135
137 City Review of Design Report 10 days Wed 9/15/10 Tue 9/28/10 136
138 WSDOT Review of Design Report 10 days Wed 9/15/10 Tue 9/28/10 136
139 Final Design Report 3 days Wed 9/29/10 Fri 10/1/10 138,137
140
141 Environmental 156 days Mon 11/22/10 Mon 7/4/11
142 Permit Preparation 26 days Mon 11/22/10 Thu 12/30/10
143 COE 25 days Mon 11/22/10 Wed 12/29/10 162
144 Section 401 25 days Tue 11/23/10 Thu 12/30/10 154
145 HPA 25 days Tue 11/23/10 Thu 12/30/10 154,158
146 Local Critical Area Alteration 20 days Mon 11/22/10 Tue 12/21/10 162
147 Agency Revie 26 wks Mon 1/3/11 Mon 7/4/11 143,144,145,
148 Permits Approved 0 days Mon 7/4/11 Mon 7/4/11 147
149
150 60% Contract Plans 79 days Mon 10/4/10 Wed 1/26/11
151 60% Roadway and Trail Layout 15 days Mon 10/4/10 Fri 10/22/10 139
152 Signal Design 20 days Mon 10/25/10 Fri 11/19/10 151
153 Illumination Design 20 days Mon 10/25/10 Fri 11/19/10 151
154 Stormwater 21 days Mon 10/25/10 Mon 11/22/10
155 Conveyance 14 days Mon 10/25/10 Thu 11/11/10 151
156 Treatment 14 days Wed 11/3/10 Mon 11/22/10 155FS-7 day
157 Flow Control 14 days Wed 11/3/10 Mon 11/22/10 155FS-7 day
158 Fish Passable Culverts 20 days Mon 10/25/10 Fri 11/19/10 151
159 Utility Design 20 days Mon 10/25/10 Fri 11/19/10 151
160 Structures 20 days Mon 10/25/10 Fri 11/19/10 151
161 Right of Way Plans 21 days Mon 10/4/10 Mon 11/1/10 139,9
162 Wetland/Stream Mitigation 20 days Mon 10/25/10 Fri 11/19/10 151
163 60% Plans 9 days Tue 11/23/10 Tue 12/7/10 152,153,154,
164 60% Specifications 9 days Tue 11/23/10 Tue 12/7/10 163SS
165 60% Construction Cost Estimate 5 days Wed 12/8/10 Tue 12/14/10 163
166 60% QC/QA 8 days Wed 12/15/10 Mon 12/27/10 163,164,165
167 60% PS&E Submittal 1 day Tue 12/28/10 Tue 12/28/10 166
168 60% WSDOT/City Review 20 days Wed 12/29/10 Wed 1/26/11 167
169
170 90% Submittal 57 days Thu 1/27/11 Fri 4/15/11
171 Address City 60% Comments 10 days Thu 1/27/11 Wed 2/9/11 168
172 Meeting to Discuss Proposed Revisions 1 day Thu 2/10/11 Thu 2/10/11 171
173 90% Plans 20 days Fri 2/11/11 Thu 3/10/11 172
174 90% Specifications and Project Manual 20 days Fri 2/11/11 Thu 3/10/11 172
175 90% Construction Cost Estimate 20 days Fri 2/11/11 Thu 3/10/11 172
176 90% QC/QA 10 days Fri 3/11/11 Thu 3/24/11 173,174,175
177 90% PS&E Submittal 1 day Fri 3/25/11 Fri 3/25/11 176
178 90% WSDOT/City Review 15 days Mon 3/28/11 Fri 4/15/11 177
179
180 Final Submittal 16 days Mon 4/18/11 Mon 5/9/11
181 Address 90% Comments 10 days Mon 4/18/11 Fri 4/29/11 178
182 Final QC/QA 5 days Mon 5/2/11 Fri 5/6/11 181
183 Final Submittal 1 day Mon 5/9/11 Mon 5/9/11 182
184
185 Right of Way 128 days Mon 9/27/10 Tue 3/29/11
186 Complicated appraisal exhibits 5 days Mon 9/27/10 Fri 10/1/10 9
187 Appraisals/AOS 25 days Mon 10/4/10 Fri 11/5/10 186,188FF
188 Landowner Condemnation Public Meeting 1 day Fri 11/5/10 Fri 11/5/10
189 All Offers Made 6 days Mon 11/8/10 Mon 11/15/10 187
190 Settlement/Condemnation/ Paid P&U decision 52 days Tue 11/16/10 Tue 2/1/11 189
191 Possession through court action 6 wks Wed 2/2/11 Tue 3/15/11 190
192 ROW Certification 10 days Wed 3/16/11 Tue 3/29/11 191
8/8 8/22 9/5 9/19 10/3 10/17 10/31 11/14 11/28 12/12 12/26 1/9 1/23 2/6 2/20 3/6 3/20 4/3 4/17 5/1 5/15 5/29
st 1 September 1 October 1 November 1 December 1 January 1 February 1 March 1 April 1 May 1 June 1
Task Critical Task Milestone Summary Rolled Up Task Rolled Up Critical Task Rolled Up Milestone
Page 2
Project: Arlington k2 revised
Date: Thu 8/26/10
City of Arlington
Council Agenda Bill
AGENDA ITEM:
New Business #3
ATTACHMENT E
COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
September 20, 2010
SUBJECT: 67th Phase III – Local Agency
Agreement Supplement #2
DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN:
Public Works – James Kelly
ATTACHMENTS:
• Local Agency Supplement Agreement – Draft
EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: $ 763,695
BUDGET CATEGORY: STP Grant (Transportation Improvement Fund)
LEGAL REVIEW: Pending final review by City Attorney
DESCRIPTION: Supplement #2 to a WSDOT standard form for a Local Agency Agreement
obligating additional grant funding amount of $ 763,695 for the 67th Phase III project.
HISTORY: The City of Arlington has been successful in obtaining $ 1,977,447 in PSRC Surface
Transportation Program grants for the 67th Phase III project. Previously, $627,230 of this grant
was obligated for preliminary design of the 67th Ave Rehabilitation Project, Phase 3.
Supplement #2 will obligate an additional $ 763,695 for completion of the final design. The
attached document has been reviewed and approved by WSDOT Local Programs
ALTERNATIVES:
• Remand to staff for additional information
• Table pending additional discussion
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to approve Supplement #2 to the Local Agency Agreement with WSDOT obligating
additional grant funding for the 67th Phase III Reconstruction Project.
City of Arlington
Council Agenda Bill
AGENDA ITEM:
New Business #4
ATTACHMENT F
COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
September 20, 2010
SUBJECT: IMCO General Contractors –
Change Order No. 7 for installation of
reclaimed water pressure a pipe and gravity
pipe.
DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN:
Public Works Administration
ATTACHMENTS:
• None
EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: $ 385,278.05
BUDGET CATEGORY: WWTP Fund (408)
LEGAL REVIEW: Pending final review by City Attorney
DESCRIPTION: This is Change Order #7 to the IMCO WWTP contract for the installation of reclaimed
water pressure a pipe and the installation of a gravity pipe for conveyance both reclaimed water and
stormwater.
HISTORY: The WWTP project is ready to install a reclaimed water pipe that will be able to divert
effluent of reclaimed water quality to the proposed stormwater wetland. This work consists of the
below two tasks. This work will be accomplished under Change Order #7, which is currently being
drafted with the City Attorney.
WORK ITEM COST
1 Install a 12-inch reclaimed water line from effluent pumps to
the SW diverter manhole.
$62,716.00
2 Install a 36" storm pipe underneath SR-9, complete outlet
structure and energy dissipating pool.
$292,052.00
Subtotal $354,768.00
Tax (8.6%) $30,510.05
Total $385,278.05
ALTERNATIVES:
• Table pending further discussion
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to approve Change Order No. 7 to the IMCO WWTP Upgrade and Expansion construction
contract, subject to final approval by the City Attorney.
City of Arlington
Council Agenda Bill
AGENDA ITEM:
New Business #5
ATTACHMENT G
COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
September 20, 2010
SUBJECT:
To sign Fiber Agreement from Blackrock for
Fiber to Station 48.
DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN:
CONTACT: Bryan Terry, IT 403-4610
ATTACHMENTS: Blackrock Dark Fiber Optic Lease Agreement.
EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: $690.00/month lease charge – 3 year lease
BUDGET CATEGORY: To be determined
LEGAL REVIEW: City Attorney has reviewed contract
DESCRIPTION: Staff is proposing leasing fiber from Blackrock Cable to connect Station 48 to the rest of
the City Network. The expenditure includes fiber installation from the closest splice case that is located
on the utility poles running down Smokey Point Blvd into the building. This will allow access to the City
network, and lays the groundwork to do teleconferencing between stations for training, so that the crews
don’t have to leave their respected station. This will also better enhance the users experience when
connecting to the City network. Chief Rankin has identified funding in the Fire and EMS budgets to
support this.
HISTORY: Fire Station 48 was relocated to the current location on Smokey Point Blvd. to support the
newly annex Island Crossing. When the Fire Department moved in, there wasn’t an available fiber
connection from Blackrock. When we approached Blackrock at that time, the installation charge was
going to be $45,000. Since then, Blackrock has installed fiber down the Boulevard to support other
businesses, so the installation charges have dropped. We are currently using other solutions to provide
connectivity, but they have been unsatisfactory.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Table for additional review
2. Do nothing
RECOMMENDED ACTION:. Authorize the Mayor to sign the Dark Fiber Lease Agreement with
Blackrock Cable.
CityofArlingtonFiberLease-FireHall18824SPB-20100907.docx Page 1 of 7 9/7/2010
DARK FIBER OPTIC LEASE AGREEMENT
This Dark Fiber Optic Lease Agreement (“Agreement”) is made and entered into this
1st day of August, 2010, (“Execution Date”) by and between City of Arlington,
(“Customer”) and Black Rock Cable, a Nevada Corporation DBA Black Rock Cable,
Inc., registered as a foreign corporation in the State of Washington (“Black Rock”).
Whereas, Black Rock has the authority under various municipal and county franchise
ordinances to construct and maintain various wire line facilities within the rights-of-way
of certain counties and municipalities;
Whereas, Black Rock is offering for compensation unrestricted bandwidth dark fiber
optic connectivity (“Fiber”) to customers;
Whereas, the Customer desires to obtain from Black Rock certain Fiber connectivity
between locations within Black Rock’s franchise authority. Black Rock is willing to do so
under the terms and conditions set forth herein.
Accordingly, in consideration of the mutual benefits and obligations set forth herein, the
parties agree as follows:
1. BLACK ROCK RESPONSIBILITIES FOR FIBER FACILITY
Black Rock shall arrange for the installation and shall install, own, operate and maintain
the facility necessary to provide Fiber to the Customer between the demarcation point at
the locations, under specific terms and conditions for each such location, described in
Exhibit A attached to and made part of this Agreement.
The demarcation point shall be the termination cabinet at each Customer location and
shall be the point of separation of responsibility between Black Rock and the Customer.
Black Rock shall be responsible for everything including operations and maintenance
between the demarcation points and the Customer shall be responsible for everything
including operations and maintenance on the Customer side of each demarcation point.
During the term of this Agreement, Black Rock will be responsible for securing and
maintaining any and all necessary franchises, permits, easements or agreements
necessary for the use of public and private property and the use of utility poles for the
construction and maintenance of the Fiber facility. Black Rock will deploy a standard
single mode fiber optic product and will perform all work using industry standards.
2. FIBER ROUTE AND LOSS BUDGET
Black Rock at all times maintains the discretion to choose the route of the fiber optic
lines and such route may not be the most direct route between the locations desired by
the Customer. Prior to the execution of this Agreement, Black Rock shall notify the
Customer of the proposed fiber footage distance between the locations and the
maximum loss budget, which shall be included on Exhibit A to this Agreement. Black
Rock reserves the right to change the route of the Fiber that is used for the Customer’s
connections, provided that the actual optical loss for the re-routed connection is less
than the maximum loss budget, which shall be included on Exhibit A to this Agreement.
CityofArlingtonFiberLease-FireHall18824SPB-20100907.docx Page 2 of 7 9/7/2010
3. DELIVERY OF FIBER FACILITY
When required by Black Rock, the Customer shall promptly facilitate Black Rock’s
access to the Customer buildings to construct and maintain the Fibers. Black Rock
shall notify the Customer in writing that the Fiber has been placed and is ready for use.
The date of such notification (“Start Date”) shall be the first day that the Customer
must pay Black Rock a payment under this Agreement for the Fiber.
Black Rock shall provide the Fiber to the Customer within the following time frame: By
the 30th day after contract signing but in any event no later than the 45th day after
contract signing. If Black Rock cannot provide the Fiber to the Customer within the
aforementioned time frame, the Customer will have the option to void this Agreement
and all terms conditions and payments required herein, provided that the reason for
Black Rock’s inability to deliver the Fiber within the time frame was not force majeure,
pursuant to this Agreement.
4. TERM
The Term of this Agreement (“Term”) shall be for three (3) year(s) from the Start Date of
this Agreement.
This Agreement shall automatically renew for additional one (1) year terms (“Extension
Term”) unless either party gives written notice to the other party at least ninety (90) days
prior to the expiration of the existing Term or Extension Term.
5. COMPENSATION
Customer will be billed for Fiber service from the Start Date on a monthly basis. If
necessary, the first invoice for service commencing on the Start Date shall be prorated.
Thereafter, monthly lease payments will be invoiced at the beginning of each monthly
period. Such payment will be due in fifteen (15) days from the date of the invoice.
Exhibit A shall contain the monthly lease payment amount and amounts for all non-
recurring charges. Payments received after the fifteen (15) day period are subject to a
2% penalty on the total including taxes and fees. If payment is not received for any
given month within forty-five (45) days of invoice, Fiber connectivity will be subject to
suspension for non-payment.
6. FIBER CONNECTIVITY RESTORATION, REPAIR & MAINTENANCE
Black Rock must maintain continuity of the Fiber at all times. If the Customer becomes
aware that Fiber continuity is lost between locations (“Failure Event”), the Customer
shall notify Black Rock immediately. Once Black Rock has been notified, Black Rock
will inspect the Fiber and report back to the Customer within four (4) hours after gaining
access to each terminated end of the Fiber. Black Rock must reestablish continuity of
the Fiber as soon as possible or notify the Customer that problems encountered are not
due to lack of Fiber continuity. If Black Rock cannot provide continuity within twenty-four
(24) hours after notification by the Customer, then the Customer will be allowed a credit
equaling two times the effective outage length. This is the Customers sole remedy for
loss of continuity.
Black Rock must have the ability to perform emergency and regular maintenance of the
Fiber. Such maintenance may require that the Fiber continuity be disrupted for a period
CityofArlingtonFiberLease-FireHall18824SPB-20100907.docx Page 3 of 7 9/7/2010
of time. Black Rock shall coordinate with the Customer to schedule regular
maintenance at times that are mutually convenient to both parties.
Within fourteen (14) days of the Failure Event the Customer shall document in a written
notice to Black Rock the date, time and duration of the Failure Event.
If during a thirty (30) day period there is one (1) Failure Event not caused by emergency
and or regular maintenance of the Fiber the customer shall give written notice to Black
Rock within fourteen (14) days of the latest Failure Event documenting the Failure
Event.
During the term of this Agreement, Black Rock will provide all outside plant
maintenance of the Fiber at no additional cost to the Customer. If maintenance is
required due to any acts of the Customer or employees or agents of the Customer, the
Customer will be responsible for all costs of maintenance related to the specific act.
Black Rock will need access to interior areas to access the demarcation points. The
customer shall provide 24/7 escorted access as necessary to repair and maintain the
Customer Fiber.
7. CREDITS FOR LOSS OF CONTINUITY
Credits for loss of continuity will not be issued by Black Rock, if failure to restore
connectivity is attributable to any of the following: (a) unavailability during any regular
maintenance of the Fiber; (b) unavailability caused by the Customer's applications,
equipment, or facilities; (c) unavailability due to acts or omissions of a Customer; (d)
unavailability due to electronics associated with the actual transport or conversion of
information moving through the Fiber; (e) unavailability due to any other factor other
than unavailability due solely and directly as a result of the physical facilities comprising
the Fiber; or (f) unavailability due to reasons of Force Majeure.
8. TERMINATION FOR REPEATED LOSS OF CONTINUITY
After giving written notice of three (3) Failure Events in a three month period, the
Customer shall have the option to terminate this Agreement if the Failure Events are not
attributable to any of the following: (a) unavailability during any regular scheduled
maintenance of the Fiber; (b) unavailability caused by the Customer's applications,
equipment, or facilities; (c) unavailability due to acts or omissions of a Customer; (d)
unavailability due to electronics associated with the actual transport or conversion of
information moving through the Fiber; (e) unavailability due to any other factor other
than unavailability proximately caused by Black Rocks breach of an obligation under
this agreement; or (f) unavailability due to reasons of Force Majeure. If the Customer
exercises this option to terminate this agreement because of repeated Failure Events
then the Customer must within thirty (30) days of latest Failure Event provide written
notice to Black Rock of its intent to terminate and Black Rock shall provide the Fiber to
the Customer for up to sixty (60) days in order that the Customer may transition to
another provider or service, provided that the Customer is otherwise in compliance with
this Agreement. If the Customer does not provide written notice of its intent to exercise
the option to terminate within thirty (30) days, the Customer shall lose its option to
terminate this Agreement only with respect to any previous loss or Failure Events.
CityofArlingtonFiberLease-FireHall18824SPB-20100907.docx Page 4 of 7 9/7/2010
9. LIMITATIONS OF LIABILITY
Notwithstanding any provision of this Agreement to the contrary, except to the extent
caused by its own willful misconduct, neither party shall be liable to the other party for
any special, incidental, indirect, punitive or consequential damages including, but not
limited to, loss of profits or revenue, cost of capital, or claims of customers, (whether
arising out of transmission interruptions or problems, any interruption or degradation of
service or otherwise), whether foreseeable or not, arising out of, or in connection with
either party’s performance or non performance of its respective obligations under this
Agreement or any other cause or nature whatsoever and all claims with respect to
which such special, incidental, indirect, punitive or consequential damages are hereby
specifically waived.
10. CUSTOMER RESTRICTIONS ON USE OF FIBER
Black Rock will provide dark Fibers to the Customer with no bandwidth restrictions. The
Customer warrants that it will use the dark Fiber only for legal and authorized purposes.
The Fiber optic line will be provided as a discrete and dedicated connection for the
Customer. The Customer must use the Fiber for internal purposes only and cannot
resell the dark Fiber to any other without the written consent of Black Rock.
During the term of this Agreement Customer agrees to inform Black Rock at least 30
days in advance of its plans to use the Fiber for 10 Gbps or greater bandwidth levels.
11. INDEMNIFICATION
Subject to the provisions of this Agreement, Black Rock hereby releases and agrees to
indemnify, defend, protect and hold harmless Customer, its directors, officers,
stockholders, agents, and employees, and its respective successors or permitted
assigns from and against: (i) any and all causes of action, demands, claims, suits,
losses, judgments or costs (collectively “Damages”) which may be brought by or
asserted by any third party against Customer related to Black Rock’s design,
construction, maintenance or operation or use of the Fiber, or (ii) each and every
breach, or material default by Black Rock of any of its covenants, agreements, duties or
obligations hereunder, or (iii) any violation by Black Rock of any regulation, rule, statute
or court order of any local, state or federal governmental agency, court or body in
connection with Black Rock’s performance of its obligations under this Agreement, or
(iv) damages directly attributable to the negligent act or omission or willful misconduct of
Black Rock.
Subject to the provisions of this Agreement, Customer hereby releases and agrees to
indemnify, defend, protect and hold harmless Black Rock, its directors, officers,
stockholders, agents, and employees, and its respective successors or permitted
assigns from and against: (i) any and all causes of action, demands, claims, suits,
losses, judgments or costs (collectively “Damages”) which may be brought by or
asserted by any third party against Black Rock related to Customer’s maintenance,
operation or use of the Fibers, or (ii) each and every breach, or material default by
Customer of any of its covenants, agreements, duties or obligations hereunder, or (iii)
any violation by Customer of any regulation, rule, statute or court order of any local,
state or federal governmental agency, court or body in connection with Customer’s
performance of its obligations under this Agreement, or (iv) damages directly
attributable to the negligent act or omission or willful misconduct of Customer.
CityofArlingtonFiberLease-FireHall18824SPB-20100907.docx Page 5 of 7 9/7/2010
12. RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES
The parties shall attempt to resolve by negotiation and compromise any disputes as to
the validity or enforcement of any term or provision of this Agreement. Failing such
compromise, such claim or assertion shall be settled by binding arbitration. Venue of
any such proceeding shall be in Snohomish Whatcom County, Washington. There shall
be one arbitrator agreed upon by the parties, or if the parties cannot agree on that
arbitrator within two (2) days of the initial arbitration demand, either party may apply for
the appointment of an arbitrator pursuant to the Washington Uniform Arbitration Act,
RCW Chapter 7.04A. Any arbitration shall follow the Act’s rules except as agreed upon
by the parties. . The arbitrator may award injunctive relief or any other remedy
available from a judge, including temporary restraining orders or injunctions or the
joinder of parties or consolidation of the arbitration proceedings with any other
proceedings involving common issues of law or fact or which may promote judicial
economy. Pending appointment of an arbitrator, any party to a claim or assertion may
apply to a court of competent jurisdiction for such interim order or relief as may be
appropriate, including temporary restraining orders or injunctions, provided that once
the arbitrator is appointed, all further interim relief, including temporary restraining
orders or injunctions, shall be awarded by the arbitrator whose powers in that regard
shall include the power to vary or dissolve any temporary order or relief granted by the
court. The arbitrator in such proceedings shall award to the substantially prevailing
party reasonable attorney’s fees and costs incurred by the substantially prevailing party
in conjunction with such dispute.
13. ASSIGNMENT & TRANSFER
The covenants and conditions herein contained shall apply to and bind the heirs,
successors, executors, administrators and assigns of all of the parties hereto and all of
the parties shall be jointly and severally liable hereunder. The Customer may not
assign this Agreement without the written consent of Black Rock, which consent shall
not be unreasonably withheld.
14. REPRESENTATION & WARRANTY
The signatories of this Agreement represent and warrant that they are authorized to
execute this Agreement on behalf of the entities which are party to this Agreement, bind
their respective entities to this Agreement; that the parties are registered to do business
in the State of Washington and that the execution of this Agreement has been approved
by the governing boards, members or partners, if any, of the parties to this Agreement.
15. FORCE MAJEURE
Neither party shall be in default under this Agreement if, and to the extent that, any
failure or delay in such party’s performance of one or more of its obligations hereunder
is caused by any of the following conditions, each of which shall constitute a force
majeure, and the affected party shall be released from liability and shall suffer no
prejudice for the failure of performance of its obligation or obligations, and, if the
construction schedule is affected, the Start Date shall be excused and extended for and
during the period of any such delay: any circumstance beyond the reasonable control of
the affected party, including without limitation, any change of circumstances not
reasonably foreseen at the time this Agreement was executed which is beyond the
reasonable control of the affected party, and which materially affects the ability of the
CityofArlingtonFiberLease-FireHall18824SPB-20100907.docx Page 6 of 7 9/7/2010
affected party to perform its obligations hereunder; any act of God; fire; flood; lack of or
delay in transportation; the adoption or amendment of government codes, ordinances,
laws, rules, regulations or restrictions that materially impair the affected party’s
performance hereunder; war or civil disorder; strikes, lock-outs or other labor disputes;
failure of a third party to grant or recognize an obligation to Black Rock (provided Black
Rock has made timely and reasonable commercial efforts to obtain the same).
16. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
This Agreement constitutes the full and final agreement between the parties hereto and
incorporates and supersedes all prior agreements and negotiations. It may not be
modified or supplemented in any manner whatsoever, except upon the written
agreement of all parties hereto.
FOR
CUSTOMER
___________________________
Signature
___________________________
Printed Name
___________________________
Title
____________________________
Date
FOR
BLACK ROCK CABLE, INC.
____________________________
Signature
____________________________
Printed Name
____________________________
Title
____________________________
Date
CityofArlingtonFiberLease-FireHall18824SPB-20100907.docx Page 7 of 7 9/7/2010
EXHIBIT A
TO DARK FIBER OPTIC LEASE AGREEMENT
BETWEEN BLACK ROCK CABLE, INC. AND
CUSTOMER
LOCATIONS / WORK PROVIDED
The Customer has indicated a desire for one (1) strand of single mode fiber optic connectivity
between the main building demarcs located at:
City of Arlington
238 N Olympic
Arlington, WA
and
Fire Dept
18824 Smokey Pt Blvd
Arlington, WA
FIBER DISTANCE AND LOSS BUDGET
The proposed distance of the Fiber will be 17 km and the maximum loss budget at 1310 nm will
be 16 db.
INSTALLATION CHARGES
The one-time charge to install the Fiber shall be as follows:
238 N Olympic N/C
18824 Smokey Pt Blvd N/C
PRICING
The monthly price for the lease of the facility and maintenance is $690.00 plus applicable fees,
utility taxes and other taxes (currently franchise fee of 5%). Taxes and fees are added on
invoices to both monthly and non-recurring charges and are subject to change.
Any additional building entry fees charged by the building owner or property management will
be the responsibility of the Customer. Further, the Customer will be responsible for providing
Black Rock written permission for installation and building access.
City of Arlington
Council Agenda Bill
AGENDA ITEM:
New Business #6
ATTACHMENT H
COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
September 20, 2010
SUBJECT: Resolution adopting the
Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN:
FIRE
ATTACHMENTS:
Resolution adopting the Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan.
EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: None
BUDGET CATEGORY: DNA
LEGAL REVIEW: Completed
DESCRIPTION: The Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP) is an all hazards
plan that provides the structure and mechanisms for policy and operational coordination for
emergency management. This plan is consistent with the National Incident Management
System (NIMS) and parallels the Snohomish County’s CEMP.
HISTORY: The City’s CEMP was last updated in 2003. The revised CEMP was presented to the
Council at a workshop on May 24, 2010 and August 9, 2010. The revised CEMP was delivered
to the Council via our MyState notification system. The only remaining issue is to insert the
final wording regarding the selection of the alternate Mayor Pro-Tem in the event that the
Mayor and Mayor Pro-Tem are not available during an emergency event. As soon as the
alternate Mayor Pro-Tem selection process is adopted it can be inserted into the CEMP and the
CEMP can be forwarded to the Washington Emergency Management Department for approval.
ALTERNATIVES:
Continue to function under the County’s CEMP as an advisory member of the Department of
Emergency Management.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Authorize the Mayor to sign Proposed Resolution adopting the 2010 Comprehensive
Emergency Management Plan and authorize staff to submit the CEMP to the State for approval.
RESOLUTION NO. 2010-XXX
RESOLUTION NO. 2010-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ARLINGTON, WASHINGTON
_____
ADOPTING A COMPREHENSIVE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PLAN
WHEREAS the potential exists and may in the future increase for the occurrence of a
disaster of unprecedented size and destructiveness; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Arlington did make Emergency Management
one of its significant 2010 Goals at the City Council retreat; and
WHEREAS, in order to insure that preparations of the City would be adequate to deal
with such disasters as may occur and to protect the public peace, health and safety, and to
preserve the lives and property of the people of the City of Arlington and infrastructure within
the City;
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Arlington, as
follows:
1. The City of Arlington Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan, a true copy of
which is attached hereto, shall be and hereby is adopted, and the Emergency
Management Organization created therein using the National Incident Management
System is approved by this adoption.
2. The Emergency Management Organization created in the attached Comprehensive
Emergency Management Plan shall be headed by the Emergency Management
Coordinator, who shall be appointed by and directly responsible to the Mayor of the
City of Arlington.
3. The Emergency Management Coordinator shall be directly responsible for the
organization, administration, and operation of the Emergency Operations Center in
compliance with the City of Arlington Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
and following the National Incident Management System.
Passed and approved by the City Council this 20th
CITY OF ARLINGTON
day of September, 2010.
____________________________________
Margaret Larson, Mayor
RESOLUTION NO. 2010-XXX
ATTEST:
_________________________________
Kristin Banfield, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________________
Steven J. Peiffle, City Attorney
City of Arlington
Council Agenda Bill
AGENDA ITEM:
New Business #7
ATTACHMNENT I
COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
September 20, 2010
SUBJECT:
Interlocal with Fire District 19 for Equipment
Use
DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN:
Fire
Contact: Jim Rankin, 360-403-3600
ATTACHMENTS:
Proposed Interlocal Agreement
EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: NONE
BUDGET CATEGORY: NONE
LEGAL REVIEW: Completed
DESCRIPTION:
The proposed Equipment Loan Agreement is intended to provide a process for temporarily
loaning or borrowing equipment between the City and Fire District 19 in the event that either
agency experiences depletion of their resources due to mechanical breakdowns. The proposed
agreement sets general framework and mechanism to allow the action to take place. A written
request will identify the specific piece of equipment to be borrowed and set forth the expected
time line for the loan.
HISTORY:
Current mutual and/or automatic aid agreements have been used for this purpose in the past
but those agreements have not specifically or adequately addressed liability, repair or
maintenance issues.
The City Council reviewed this item at the September 13, 2010 Council Workshop and
recommended placement on the September 20, 2010 Council agenda for action.
ALTERNATIVES:
Do not authorize the Mayor to sign the Interlocal Agreement.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
I move that Council authorize the Mayor to sign the Interlocal Agreement with Fire District 19
for Equipment Use.
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
FOR TEMPORARY USE OF
VEHICLES or EQUIPMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF ARLINGTON and
SILVANA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT 19
WHEREAS, THIS INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is entered into by and
between the City of Arlington (“City”), a municipal corporation and Silvana Fire Protection
District 19 (“District”), also a municipal corporation, under the authority of RCW 52.12.031 and
Chapter 39/34 RCW (the “Interlocal Cooperation Act”) to assist each other in providing
emergency apparatus, tools, and equipment; and
WHEREAS, the City and the District occasionally have a need to loan or borrow fire
apparatus and equipment; and
WHEREAS, each party to this agreement is willing to furnish such a vehicle or
equipment for temporary use;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and mutual promises herein
contained,
IT IS AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
1. Term. This agreement shall commence on ____________________, 20___ and continue
in effect until terminated by either party. Either party may terminate this agreement by
giving not less than thirty (30) days’ written notice to the other party at the address set
forth below.
2. Definitions.
a. Owner Agency: the agency who is the legal owner of the vehicle or equipment.
b. Receiving Agency: the agency initiating the request.
3. Request for Loan. When it becomes necessary to borrow a vehicle or any equipment,
either Fire Chief has the authority to request such a loan and the approval to grant the
request. The request should be in written form and shall identify the type of equipment
needed and the anticipated time for the need. If it is not practical to make a written
request due to an emergency or need, the time is outside of normal office hours a
telephone request is acceptable with the written request to be submitted as soon as
practical.
4. Duties.
a. The receiving agency shall exercise reasonable care in the use, maintenance and
upkeep of the vehicle or equipment in their possession. The receiving agency
shall ensure that only qualified and, where required, licensed operators trained in
the use of the equipment operate said equipment.
b. The receiving agency shall be responsible for the regular or routine maintenance
of the loaned vehicle or equipment; such as fuel, oil, minor repairs.
c. The vehicle or equipment shall be returned in a clean condition and in the same
condition as when it was borrowed.
d. The receiving agency shall bear all costs of damage to the vehicle or equipment
caused by the receiving agency’s personnel during the use of the vehicle or
equipment.
e. In the event the receiving agency, through its officers, shall determine that a
major repair is reasonably necessary the receiving agency shall notify the owning
agency of such need.
5. Liability Insurance
a. The receiving agency shall have no responsibility to maintain insurance coverage
on the vehicle or equipment.
b. The agency owning the vehicle or equipment shall maintain and keep in effect at
all times public liability insurance or its equivalent for the protection of the public
within the limits of liability of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) and
an aggregate of two million ($2,000,000), combined single limits per occurrence
for bodily and personal injury and property damage.
6. Liability and Indemnification
a. Each party shall protect, save harmless, indemnify and defend, at its own expense,
the other party, their elected and appointed officials, officers, employees, part-
time employees and agents from any loss or claim from damages of any nature
whatsoever arising out of the negligent or tortious actions or inactions of its own
employees, agents, part-time employees or volunteers. Such liability shall be
apportioned among the parties or defendants in accordance with the laws of the
State of Washington.
b. Nothing in this agreement shall be interpreted to waive any defense arising out of
RCW Title 51, nor shall anything herein be interpreted as limiting the ability of
either participant to exercise any right, remedy or defense with respect to third
parties or the person(s) whose action or inaction cause or gave rise to any loss,
claim or liability, including but not limited to the assertion that said person wa
acting beyond the scope of his/her employment.
7. Entire Agreement. This Interlocal Agreement represents the entire agreement between the
parties concerning the matters addressed herein. No other modification of the terms of
this agreement shall be effective unless in writing and signed by an authorized
representative of each party hereto.
CITY OF ARLINGTON SILVANA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT #19
____________________________ _____________________________________
Margaret Larson, Mayor Chair, Board of Commissioners
ATTEST: ATTEST:
____________________________ ________________________________
Kristin Banfield, City Clerk District Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
________________________________
Steve Peiffle, City Attorney
ADDRESS FOR NOTICE PURPOSES: ADDRESS FOR NOTICE PURPOSES:
City of Arlington Silvana Fire Protection District #19
Attn: City Clerk Attn: Fire Chief
238 N. Olympic Ave PO Box 129
Arlington, WA 98223 Silvana, WA 98287
City of Arlington
Council Agenda Bill
AGENDA ITEM:
New Business #8
ATTACHMENT J
COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
Sept 20, 2010
SUBJECT: Approval for a MOU with
Washington State to use the Airport as staging
area.
DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN:
Airport/Fire
ATTACHMENTS: Copy of the MOU
EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: None
BUDGET CATEGORY: N/A
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes, comments have been incorporated
DESCRIPTION: Washington State Emergency Management recently did a site assessment of
Arlington Airport as a potential staging area if an emergency event occurred. The primary
factor the State was looking for was a large useable asphalt area for parking trucks. Our closed
runway more than qualified for that type of use. Having large open areas helped as well.
HISTORY: The City of Arlington has been diligently working on upgrading its emergency
preparedness ability. Having the airport as part of the State emergency planning efforts only
strengthens our own position. By being identified means that the State will be studying and
planning on how to get material into and out of Arlington, as well as what assets are available.
That information can be helpful even in a more localized emergency. The MOU was discussed
at the September 13, 2010 council workshop.
ALTERNATIVES: Approve staff recommendations with modifications
Table
Deny
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Authorize the Mayor to sign the Memorandum of Understanding between the City and
Washington Emergency Management Department to use the City’s airport as a staging area
during a major emergency event.
City of Arlington
Council Agenda Bill
AGENDA ITEM:
New Business #9
ATTACHMENT K
COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
September 20, 2010
SUBJECT:
Easement Requests from PUD
DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN:
Airport
Contact: Rob Putnam, 360-403-3470
ATTACHMENTS:
Agreement to Purchase
Site Map showing the Locations
EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: N/A
BUDGET CATEGORY: None
LEGAL REVIEW: Legal review has been completed
DESCRIPTION:
The PUD has some upgrade projects planned for 172nd and 51st. The improvements along 51st
will be 15’ adjacent to the existing easement, and include installation of two vaults. The PUD
will pay the Airport $3,320 for the easement.
HISTORY:
These improvements are part of the PUD improvements that have already occurred on 188th,
59th Ave and along 172nd.
ALTERNATIVES:
Approve with modification
Table
Deny
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
I move Council authorize the Mayor to grant the requested easement to Snohomish PUD and
sign all associated paperwork.
City of Arlington
Council Agenda Bill
AGENDA ITEM:
New Business #10
ATTACHMENT L
COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
September 20, 2010
SUBJECT:
Snohomish County Legislative Agenda
DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN:
Executive
Contact: Kristin Banfield, 360-403-3444
ATTACHMENTS:
- Snohomish County Legislative Agenda
EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: -0-
BUDGET CATEGORY: N/A
LEGAL REVIEW: N/A
DESCRIPTION:
The Snohomish County Managers and Administrators group (MAG) has prepared a proposed
Legislative Agenda for the upcoming 2011 Legislative session. The concept is to have all cities
in Snohomish County demonstrate a united front to our local legislators on key issues.
MAG prepared the agenda based on advice from State Representative Mark Ericks and State
Senator Mary Margaret Haugen. Both Representative Ericks and Senator Haugen have
encouraged the cities in Snohomish County to provide a united agenda for upcoming
legislative sessions that focuses just on the key items.
HISTORY:
The cities of Snohomish County have not been united in the past at the state Legislature. As a
result, we have not been able to advance our requests for legislation.
The Council reviewed the proposed Legislative Agenda at the September 13, 2010 Council
Workshop and requested placement on the September 20 Council agenda for action.
ALTERNATIVES:
Do not adopt the proposed Snohomish County Legislative Agenda
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
I move that Council adopt the Snohomish County Legislative Agenda as presented.
CITIES OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY
2011-2013 State Legislative Agenda
This Legislative Agenda, which reflects input from the Cities of Snohomish County, expresses a
collective position on key items that are expected to arise in the form of legislation, budget decisions, or
policy decisions in the upcoming Session of the Legislature.
• Support the Washington Aerospace Partnership and other stakeholder groups in developing a unified
strategy (e.g., training & education, research & development, Office of Aerospace and Defense,
unemployment insurance tax, worker’s compensation, transportation infrastructure) to ensure that
Washington State remains the leading location in the world for aerospace. Led by The Boeing
Company, the aerospace industry within Snohomish County employs as many as 45,000 people,
while one out of every three to six Washington State jobs is supported either directly or indirectly by
the aerospace industry.
Aerospace Industry
• Support “tax-increment financing (TIF)”, which is a tool used by most other states to foster economic
and community development to allow cities to proactively implement their Comprehensive Plans and
to ensure local, regional and national competitiveness.
Economic Development
• Support additional financial resources for Local Revitalization Financing (LRF) program and Local
Infrastructure Finance Tool (LIFT) to allow those cities who currently qualify to participate.
• Support legislation such as a transportation revenue package that ensures local distribution and local
funding options to provide cities sustainable and adequate funding for vital infrastructure investments
that is capable of promoting economic growth and prosperity to the cities of Snohomish County.
Local Transportation and Capital Facilities
• Fully fund Public Works Trust Fund (PWTF) and Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) programs
to provide cities funding for infrastructure and economic development purposes; no additional
diversion or ‘sweeping’ of capital accounts such as the Public Works Trust Fund.
• Support the creation of a street maintenance utility to provide cities funding in support of street
preservation and maintenance within an identified street utility service area.
• Support investment in key transportation corridors such as U.S. 2, SR-9, and I-5, which are critical to
the quality of life and the movement of people and goods throughout Snohomish County.
• Reform of annexation statutes and those dealing with the role of cities, counties and special purpose
districts in urban areas to include: require joint planning in unincorporated urban growth areas;
removing referendum from annexation process; limiting the authority of boundary review boards; and
legislation that allows counties the ability to levy a utility tax, if it is restricted to unincorporated areas
and there are accommodations for the needs of cities, in those areas, such as annexation financing
assistance.
Growth Management Act
• Strongly oppose any legislation that: imposes an “unfunded mandate” without additional funding to
support these programs; attempts to erode local revenue or tax authority such as local state-shared
revenues that are critical to the financial health of cities; and pre-empts local authority over any
policy or operational matter traditionally and historically vested with local government.
Unfunded Mandates and Preemption of Local Authority
CITIES OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY
2011-2013 State Legislative Agenda
City of Arlington
Kristin Banfield
Assistant City Administrator
360-403-3441
City of Brier
City of Bothell
Town of Darrington
City of Edmonds
City of Everett
City of Gold Bar
Brent Kirk, Public Works Supervisor
360-691-6441
City of Index
City of Lake Stevens
Jan Berg, City Administrator
425-377-3230
City of Lynnwood
City of Marysville
City of Mill Creek
City of Monroe
Gene Brazel, City Administrator
360-794-7400
City of Mountlake Terrace
John Caulfield, City Manager
425-744-6205
City of Mukilteo
Joe Marine, Mayor
425-263-8018
City of Snohomish
Larry Bauman, City Manager
360-568-3115
City of Stanwood
City of Sultan
Town of Woodway
City of Arlington
Council Agenda Bill
AGENDA ITEM:
New Business #11
ATTACHMENT M
COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
September 20, 2010
SUBJECT:
Ordinance adopting revisions to Arlington
Municipal Code Title 1
DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN:
Executive
Contact: Kristin Banfield, 360-403-3444
ATTACHMENTS:
- Ordinance adopting revisions to AMC Title 1
EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: -0-
BUDGET CATEGORY: N/A
LEGAL REVIEW: City Attorney has reviewed the proposed
changes
DESCRIPTION:
Staff is proposing minor changes to AMC Chapter 1.01 to clean up gender references and
grammar.
Additional language is proposed to be added to AMC Chapter 1.04 regarding penalties for civil
infractions. During the course of the AMC Update project, City staff discovered numerous
references to “civil infractions” and different classes of these civil infractions. Upon further
review of the AMC, we discovered that we did not have a definition for a civil infraction nor
did we have definitions for the different classes of civil infractions that are interspersed
throughout the code. To correct this deficiency, staff is proposing new language in AMC
Chapter 1.04.
HISTORY:
The City has been updating the Arlington Municipal Code over the course of the past year. The
project should be complete and the AMC completely updated in a searchable format by the end
of 2010.
ALTERNATIVES:
Remand to staff for further revision. Council is requested to provide specific guidance should
further revision be requested.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
I move that Council approve the Ordinance adopting revisions to Arlington Municipal Code
Title 1 as presented.
ORDINANCE NO. 2010-XXX 1
ORDINANCE NO.
2010-xxx
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ARLINGTON, WASHINGTON
AMENDING CERTAIN SECTIONS OF ARLINGTON MUNICIPAL
CODE TITLE 1 RELATING TO GENERAL PROVISIONS OF THE
ARLINGTON MUNICIPAL CODE AND ADDING TWO NEW
SECTIONS TO TITLE 1 OF THE ARLINGTON MUNICIPAL CODE
RELATING TO PENALTIES FOR CIVIL INFRACTIONS
WHEREAS, the City of Arlington, Washington has the authority to adopt ordinances for
the general welfare of its citizens; and
WHEREAS, certain provisions of the Arlington Municipal Code are outdated and require
revision; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Arlington has requested revisions be made to
Title 1, relating to general provisions of the Arlington Municipal Code;
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Arlington, Washington does hereby
ordain as follows:
Section 1. Arlington Municipal Code Section 1.01.040 is amended to read as follows:
1.01.040 Definitions
The following words and phrases whenever used in this code shall be construed as
defined in this section unless from the context a different meaning is intended or unless
different meaning is specifically defined and more particularly directed to the use of such
words or phrases:
.
(a) "City" means the city of Arlington, Washington, or the area within the territorial
limits of the city of Arlington, Washington, and such territory outside of the city over
which the city has jurisdiction or control by virtue of any constitutional or statutory
provision;
(b) "Council" means the city council of the city of Arlington, Washington. "All its
members" or "all councilmen" mean the total number of council members provided by
the general laws of the state of Washington;
(c) "County" means the county of Snohomish, Washington;
(d) "Law" denotes applicable federal law, the constitution and statutes of the state of
Washington, the ordinances of the city of Arlington, Washington, and when appropriate,
any and all rules and regulations which may be promulgated thereunder;
(e) "Oath" includes affirmation;
ORDINANCE NO. 2010-XXX 2
(f) "Officer--Office." The use of the title of any officer, employee, or any office, or
ordinance, or section of this code means such officer, employee, office, or ordinance of
Arlington, or section of this code unless otherwise specifically designated;
(g) "Ordinance" means a law of the city, provided, that a temporary or special law,
administrative action, order or directive may be in the form of a resolution;
(h) "Person" means any natural person, joint venture, joint stock company, partnership,
association, club, company, corporation, business trust, organization, or the manager,
lessee, agent, servant, officer or employee of any of them;
(i) "State" means the state of Washington;
(j) "Street" shall include all streets, highways, avenues, lanes, alleys, courts, places,
squares, curbs, or other public ways in this city which have been or may hereafter be
dedicated and open to public use, or such other public property so designated in any law
of this state;
(k) "May" is permissive;
(1) "Must" and "shall" are each mandatory;
(m) "Written" includes printed, typewritten, mimeographed or multigraphed.
Section 2. A new section 1.04.020 is hereby added to Arlington Municipal Code
Chapter 1.04:
1.04.020
Any person violating any provision or failing to comply with any mandatory
requirements of this code which is designated an infraction shall be assessed the
following monetary penalty unless another penalty is provided:
Penalty for violation – Definition of infraction
(a) The maximum penalty and the default amount for a Class 1 civil infraction shall
be two hundred fifty dollars ($250.00), not including statutory assessments;
(b) The maximum penalty and the default amount for a Class 2 civil infraction shall
be one hundred twenty five dollars ($125.00), not including statutory assessments;
(c) The maximum penalty and the default amount for a Class 3 civil infraction shall
be fifty dollars ($50.00), not including statutory assessments; and
(d) The maximum penalty and the default amount for a Class 4 civil infraction shall
be twenty five dollars ($25.00), not including statutory assessments.
Infractions are civil rather than criminal offenses and proof of the commission of an
infraction is by a preponderance of the evidence. It is never necessary to demonstrate
scienter or mens rea for the finding that an infraction has been committed.
ORDINANCE NO. 2010-XXX 3
Section 3. A new section 1.04.030 is hereby added to Arlington Municipal Code
Chapter 1.04:
1.04.030
A person is guilty of a separate offense for each day or any portion thereof in which a
violation of any provision of this Code is committed, continued or permitted and may be
punished accordingly.
Continuing Offenses.
Section 4. Severability
. If any provision, section, or part of this ordinance shall be
adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the
ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or
unconstitutional.
Section 5. Effective Date
. A summary of this Ordinance consisting of its title
shall be published in the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force
five (5) days after the date of publication.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Arlington and APPROVED by the Mayor
this ______ day of _____________________, 2010.
CITY OF ARLINGTON
____________________________________
Margaret Larson, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________________
Kristin Banfield, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
___________________________________
Steven J. Peiffle, City Attorney
City of Arlington
Council Agenda Bill
AGENDA ITEM:
New Business #12
ATTACHMENT N
COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
September 20, 2010
SUBJECT:
Ordinance adopting revisions to Arlington
Municipal Code Chapter 2.04
DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN:
Executive
Contact: Kristin Banfield, 360-403-3444
ATTACHMENTS:
- Ordinance adopting revisions to Arlington Municipal Code Chapter 2.04
EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: -0-
BUDGET CATEGORY: N/A
LEGAL REVIEW: City Attorney has reviewed the proposed
changes
DESCRIPTION:
Staff is proposing additional updates to AMC Chapter 2.04 regarding the City Council. Staff is
proposing adding language to reflect our current use of workshops, clarifying language in the
expense reimbursement section, and updating the order of the agenda to reflect current
practice.
Staff also fixed a number of gender references to make them gender neutral.
HISTORY:
Title 2 of the AMC was updated last fall. The City has been updating the Arlington Municipal
Code over the course of the past year. The project should be complete and the AMC completely
updated in a searchable format by the end of 2010.
ALTERNATIVES:
Remand to staff for further revision. Council is requested to provide specific guidance should
further revision be requested.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
I move that Council adopt the Ordinance adopting revisions to Arlington Municipal Code
Chapter 2.04 as presented.
ORDINANCE NO. 2010-XXX 1
ORDINANCE NO.
2010-xxx
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ARLINGTON, WASHINGTON
AMENDING CERTAIN SECTIONS OF ARLINGTON MUNICIPAL
CODE CHAPTER 2.04 RELATING TO THE CITY COUNCIL
WHEREAS, the City of Arlington, Washington has the authority to adopt ordinances for
the general welfare of its citizens; and
WHEREAS, certain provisions of the Arlington Municipal Code are outdated and require
revision; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Arlington has requested revisions be made to
Chapter 2.04, relating to the City Council;
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Arlington, Washington does hereby
ordain as follows:
Section 1. Arlington Municipal Code Section 2.04.020 is amended to read as follows:
2.04.020 Meetings--Time and place--When meetings fall on legal holidays
The city council shall hold its regular meetings on the first and third Mondays of each
month, and its workshops on the second and fourth Mondays of each month; provided,
however, that whenever such regular meeting falls upon a Monday declared in RCW
1.16.050 now or in the future as a legal holiday, then the regular meeting of the city
council shall be held upon the following Tuesday. All meetings shall begin at seven p.m.
Meetings shall be held at the Arlington Police Station/City Hall Annex, 110 E. 3rd St.,
Arlington, Washington.
.
Section 2. Arlington Municipal Code Section 2.04.025 is amended to read as follows:
2.04.025
Each city council member will be paid two hundred dollars for each regular meeting of
the city council attended by such council member, not to exceed four hundred dollars per
calendar month. The mayor will be paid one thousand five hundred dollars for each
calendar month during which the mayor performs his or her duties.
Compensation.
ORDINANCE NO. 2010-XXX 2
Section 3. Arlington Municipal Code Section 2.04.027 is amended to read as follows:
2.04.027
(a) In addition to the compensation provided for by AMC 2.04.025, the mayor and
council members will be entitled to reimbursement for reasonable and necessary
expenses incurred in attendance at meetings required by virtue of their office. Such
reimbursement shall include a per meeting expense as authorized by RCW 35A.12.070 in
the amount of fifty dollars per meeting for attendance of city council members or the
mayor at the following meetings, excluding regular city council meetings and city council
work sessions immediately preceding or immediately after regular city council meetings,
but in any event not to exceed eight meetings in any month for a council member and
twenty meetings in any month for the mayor:
Expense reimbursement.
(1) Attendance at official functions of the following organizations to which the
city belongs: National League of Cities, Association of Washington Cities,
Snohomish County Association of Cities and Towns, and Snohomish County
Tomorrow;
(2) Attendance at meetings where the council member or mayor is appointed or
elected to attend by the mayor, city council, Snohomish County association of
cities and towns, the Snohomish county executive, Snohomish county council, the
Governor, or State Legislature, if the reason for the appointment was because of
the individual's status as an elected official;
(3) City council retreats, emergency city council meetings, or city council
workshops; provided, that no reimbursement shall occur for these meetings when
they occur immediately before or immediately after regularly scheduled council
meetings;
(4) Any function at which the individual is representing the city at the request of
the mayor or by action of the city council;
(5) City facility dedications and city-sponsored graduations and award
ceremonies;
(6) City council subcommittee meetings; and
(b) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a), reimbursement will not be
authorized by virtue of this section for attendance at political functions.
Section 4. Arlington Municipal Code Section 2.04.030 is amended to read as follows:
2.04.030 Procedures
Ordinances and resolutions may be offered for consideration by the mayor or by any
council member at any meeting of the city council. The presiding officer will recognize
any motion made and seconded from the council for the adoption of an ordinance or
resolution. No ordinance or resolution will be adopted without the same having first been
.
ORDINANCE NO. 2010-XXX 3
submitted to the city attorney for his or her approval as to form. It will be unnecessary to
read the full text of any such ordinance or resolution and it will be sufficient that the
same be read by reading aloud the title only, provided:
(1) That copies of the full text thereof will have been previously furnished to
each member of the city council present at the meeting where the same may be
offered;
(2) That copies of the full text of the same are available for examination by any
member of the public present at the meeting where the same may be offered; and
(3) Upon demand of any council member the full text of the same will be read
aloud before adoption.
Section 5. Arlington Municipal Code Section 2.04.050 is amended to read as follows:
2.04.050 Transaction of business--Procedure
The following rules will govern the proceedings of the city council. A quorum being
present, the council will proceed to transact the business before it in the following
manner, unless the same be temporarily suspended by unanimous consent:
.
(1) Call to order;
(2) Roll call of members;
(3) Public comment, for members of the public to speak to the council regarding
matters not on the agenda;
(4) Consent agenda and approval of claims;
(5) Public hearing;
(6) Unfinished business;
(7) New business;
(8) Discussion items;
(9) Information items;
(10) Administrator and staff reports;
(11) Mayor's report;
(12) Council member reports (optional);
(13) Executive session (optional).
Section 6. Severability
. If any provision, section, or part of this ordinance shall be
adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the
ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or
unconstitutional.
Section 7. Effective Date
. A summary of this Ordinance consisting of its title
shall be published in the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force
five (5) days after the date of publication.
ORDINANCE NO. 2010-XXX 4
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Arlington and APPROVED by the Mayor
this ______ day of _____________________, 2010.
CITY OF ARLINGTON
____________________________________
Margaret Larson, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________________
Kristin Banfield, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
___________________________________
Steven J. Peiffle, City Attorney
City of Arlington
Council Agenda Bill
AGENDA ITEM:
New Business #13
ATTACHMENT O
COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
September 20, 2010
SUBJECT:
Interlocal Agreement to jointly fund lobbying
activities for the SR 9 Coalition
DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN:
Executive
Contact: Allen Johnson, 360-403-3441
ATTACHMENTS:
- Interlocal Agreement to jointly fund the costs of lobbying activities for the SR 9
Coalition.
- Memo from Snohomish City Manager Larry Bauman outlining the details of the
agreement.
EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: Phase I: $437.50 per month
Phase II: $875 per month
BUDGET CATEGORY:
LEGAL REVIEW: City Attorney has reviewed the agreement
DESCRIPTION:
As previously discussed with the Council, the City Attorney for the city of Snohomish prepared
an Interlocal Agreement to jointly fund the costs of lobbying activities for the SR 9
Coalition. The parties to the agreement are the cities of Arlington, Lake Stevens, Marysville, and
Snohomish.
Upon execution of the Interlocal Agreement, the City of Marysville will to enter into a
professional services agreement with Strategies 360 for the purpose of obtaining effective
lobbying services to help secure funding for the Highway 9 improvements. The Interlocal
provides for an equal split of the lobbying costs between the four cities.
HISTORY:
The SR 9 Coalition was formed in order to secure funding for the necessary improvements to
SR 9 and ensure that our best interests are represented in the decision-making processes of the
Washington State Legislature and the Washington State Department of Transportation. Council
member Byrnes and Public Works Director Jim Kelly serve on the SR 9 Coalition.
ALTERNATIVES:
Do not authorize the Mayor to sign the Interlocal Agreement.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
I move that the Council authorize the Mayor to sign Interlocal Agreement jointly fund lobbying
activities for the SR 9 Coalition.
/SN/S-10-040 Hwy9/ILA.082710
1
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR LOBBYING SERVICES
THIS INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR LOBBYING SERVICES (“Agreement”) is entered
into by and between the City of Arlington, a Washington municipal corporation (“Arlington”), the
City of Marysville, a Washington municipal corporation (“Marysville”), the City of Lake Stevens, a
Washington municipal corporation (“Lake Stevens”), and the City of Snohomish, a Washington
municipal corporation (“Snohomish”) (collectively referred to hereinafter as the “Cities”).
WHEREAS, the Interlocal Cooperation Act, RCW Chapter 39.34, provides that public
agencies may enter into agreements for joint or cooperative action; and
WHEREAS, the Cities believe that certain improvements to Washington State Highway 9
are necessary and in the best interests of their respective communities; and
WHEREAS, the Cities desire to secure funding for the necessary improvements to Highway
9 and ensure that the best interests of their respective community is represented in the decision-
making processes of the Washington State Legislature with regard to this matter; and
WHEREAS, the City of Marysville is willing to enter into a professional services agreement
with Strategies 360 for the purpose of obtaining effective lobbying services to help secure funding
for the Highway 9 improvements; and
WHEREAS, the Cities further desire to enter into this Agreement for the purpose obtaining
lobbying services to help in securing funding for the Highway 9 improvements and to reimburse the
City of Marysville for the costs of said lobbying services; and
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants, conditions, promises, and
agreements set forth herein, it is agreed by and between the Cities as follows:
1. LOBBYING SERVICES
Contingent upon approval and execution of this Agreement, the City of Marysville shall enter into a
professional services agreement with Strategies 360 for the purpose of obtaining effective lobbying
services to help secure funding for the Highway 9 improvements. The scope of these lobbying
services is described in attached and incorporated Exhibit A. These lobbying services are divided in
Phase I and Phase II. Strategies 360 shall not proceed with Phase II until directed to do so by the
City of Marysville with the written concurrence of the Cities participating in this Agreement. Said
written concurrence may be provided by the Chief Administrative Officer of each participating City
in the form of a letter, memorandum or email without the need for further action by the City Council
of the respective City.
/SN/S-10-040 Hwy9/ILA.082710
2
2. PAYMENT
The City of Marysville shall pay Strategies 360 on a monthly basis in accordance with the
professional services agreement for all lobbying services performed on behalf of the Cities. During
Phase I, Marysville shall pay Strategies 360 One Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty Dollars
($1,750.00) per month. During Phase II, Marysville shall pay Strategies 360 Three Thousand Five
Hundred Dollars ($3,500.00) per month. Marysville shall also pay Strategies 360 for reasonable
expenses incurred in carrying out these lobbying services, including but not limited to travel
expenses, mileage, and mailing costs. The total costs to be paid by Marysville to Strategies 360 under
said professional services agreement shall not exceed Forty Five Thousand Dollars ($45,000.00).
Each participating City shall be responsible for an equal share of the costs, including said expenses,
due to the Consultant for each monthly invoice during each phase and shall reimburse the City of
Marysville for their respective monthly share of the costs and shall do so within thirty (30) calendar
days of receipt of appropriate documentation from the City of Marysville.
3. TERM AND TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT
A. This Agreement shall become effective upon execution by the Cities and shall continue in
effect unless terminated as provided below.
B. Any City may withdraw from and terminate participation under this Agreement upon the
giving of thirty (30) calendar days advance written notice of intent to withdraw/terminate to the other
Cities. A withdrawing City shall be responsible for its proportionate share of compensation due the
City of Marysville under Section 2 for the month when the City’s withdrawal/termination is
effective.
C. A majority of the participating Cities may terminate this Agreement at any time. Such
termination shall be set forth in a document signed by the authorized Chief Executive Officer or
designee of a majority of the participating Cities.
4. EXTENT OF AGREEMENT/MODIFICATION
This Agreement, together with attachments or addenda, represents the entire and integrated
Agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, or agreements,
either written or oral. This Agreement may be amended, modified or added to only by written
instrument properly signed by all participating Cities.
5. SEVERABILITY
A. If a court of competent jurisdiction holds any part, term or provision of this Agreement to be
illegal or invalid, in whole or in part, the validity of the remaining provisions shall not be affected,
and the parties’ rights and obligations shall be construed and enforced as if the Agreement did not
contain the particular provision held to be invalid.
B. If any provision of this Agreement is in direct conflict with any statutory provision of the
State of Washington, that provision which may conflict shall be deemed inoperative and null and
/SN/S-10-040 Hwy9/ILA.082710
3
void insofar as it may conflict, and shall be deemed modified to conform to such statutory provision.
/SN/S-10-040 Hwy9/ILA.082710
4
6. NOTICES
Unless otherwise directed in writing, notices, reports, invoices, payments and other documents shall
be delivered to each City as follows:
City of Arlington City of Lake Stevens
Attn: Attn:
Arlington WA 98223 Lake Stevens WA 98258
City of Marysville City of Snohomish
Attn: Attn:
Marysville WA 98270 Snohomish WA 98290
Notices mailed by any party shall be deemed effective on the date mailed. Any party may change its
address for receipt of reports, notices, invoices, payments and other documents by giving the other
parties written notice of not less than seven (7) calendar days prior to the effective date.
7. GOVERNING LAW
This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of
Washington.
8. VENUE
The venue for any action to enforce or interpret this Agreement shall lie in the Superior Court of
Washington for Kitsap County, Washington.
9. COUNTERPARTS
This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an
original, but all of which shall constitute one and the same Agreement.
10. FILING.
As provided by RCW 39.34.040, this Agreement shall be filed prior to its entry in force with the
respective City Clerk of each participating City and the Snohomish County Auditor, or, alternatively,
listed by subject on the website of each participating City and the County.
/SN/S-10-040 Hwy9/ILA.082710
5
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of , 2010.
CITY OF ARLINGTON
CITY OF LAKE STEVENS
____________________________ ___________________________
Margaret Larson, Mayor Vern Little, Mayor
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
____________________________ _____________________________
Kristin Banfield, City Clerk Norma Scott, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM APPROVED AS TO FORM
______________________________ ____________________________
Steven Peiffle, City Attorney Grant K. Weed, City Attorney
CITY OF MARYSVILLE
CITY OF SNOHOMISH
____________________________ ___________________________
Jon Nehring, Mayor Larry Bauman, City Manager
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
____________________________ _____________________________
Tracy Jeffries, City Clerk Torchie Corey, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM APPROVED AS TO FORM
______________________________ ____________________________
Grant K. Weed, City Attorney Grant K. Weed, City Attorney
Date: September 21, 2010
To: City Council
From: Larry Bauman, City Manager
Subject: Authorization for City Manager to Execute an Interlocal Agreement for
Lobbying Services Regarding Funding for State Route 9 Projects
The purpose of this agenda item is Council consideration of an interlocal agreement
(Attachment A) for lobbying services regarding funding for SR 9 improvements. As the
City Council has authorized in the past, members of City Council and staff have been
involved in helping to form and support a collection of government, business, education,
transit and other agencies in an organization known as the State Route 9 Coalition. The
State Route 9 (SR 9) Coalition’s mission is to secure funding for projects identified by
the State Transportation Department’s SR 9 Corridor Working Group and the Route
Development Plan to improve SR 9 in Snohomish County for capacity and safety as a
highway transportation corridor serving the needs of motorists, commerce, transit and
non-motorized uses.
The Route Development Plan (RDP) developed by WSDOT contains six separate
packages of improvements that are currently estimated to cost $367 million. It is
assumed that these projects would not be funded entirely in one state budget but would be
funded as packages incrementally over a number of years. At this time, however, the vast
majority of these project costs are not funded by the state. While WSDOT staff is
permitted under state law the role of providing information to legislators regarding
project costs and scopes of work, the staff is not permitted to advocate for these
improvements in the way lobbyists are used to promote legislative priorities. The
Coalition has established a primary goal of supporting these project goals in the RDP
through various forms of lobbying. While Councilmembers and staff working within the
Coalition have made direct contact with legislators to support these objectives, it is
understood that more constant presence and persistent effort is required during the
legislative session in order to ensure funding of these projects in future years. Such effort
normally requires the services of a professional lobbyist.
As a result, Coalition member cities—Arlington, Marysville, Lake Stevens and
Snohomish—have discussed the potential for collective support to hire a lobbying firm to
represent the Coalition during the legislative session in 2011. As part of the process to
explore this option, the Coalition’s Steering Committee interviewed four lobbying firms
and is recommending that Strategies 360 be selected for this contract (see proposal,
Attachment B). The concept for this service is that the City of Marysville would serve as
contract administrator, contracting directly with Strategies 360 and billing the other three
cities for equal shares of costs. In order to support this concept, an interlocal agreement
is needed to commit the partner cities to their share of costs and provide for means to
terminate or modify their involvement as necessary.
Funding for new transportation projects is uncertain at this time. Given the projected
decline in gas taxes and other sources of transportation revenues, it is assumed that
funding for new major projects will require the creation of new revenue sources. The
proposed service contract (see draft scope of work, Attachment C) for Strategies 360
would provide for two separate scenarios or phases as well as different costs that would
allow the Coalition to pursue its objectives through two different assumptions of potential
legislative action regarding revenues:
The initial lobbying effort and scope of work would be conducted under the
expectation that no new transportation revenue source is identified by the legislature
in 2011. Under this assumption, the scope of work would primarily be directed to
educating key legislators about the Coalition’s objectives and the specific benefits of
the RDP’s packages of future projects. Under this scope of work, the monthly
retainer to Strategies 360 would be $1,750, with each city paying an equal share of
$437.50. Travel and other approved expenses would also be shared equally.
Phase I:
The potential would exist—with agreement of all four cities—to increase the level of
effort for lobbying services with evidence that the legislature would be likely to
develop new transportation project revenues that would potentially provide funding
for new SR 9 projects. Under this scope of work, the monthly retainer to Strategies
360 would be $3,500, with each city paying an equal share of $875. Travel and other
approved expenses would also be shared equally.
Phase II:
Under this interlocal agreement, each City would need to decide whether to support the
increase in services and costs in Phase II. The City Manager would intend to consult
with the City Council prior to authorizing such a change in services and shared costs.
While the City of Marysville City Council has not yet approved the service contract with
Strategies 360, staff recommends approval of the interlocal agreement with Marysville
and the other two cities at this time in order to be prepared to begin the lobbying effort as
soon as these agreements are executed by all parties.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council AUTHORIZE the City Manager to
execute an interlocal agreement with the cities of Arlington, Marysville and Lake
Stevens to support lobbying services for the State Route 9 Coalition.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Interlocal Agreement
B. Strategies 360 Proposal
C. Draft Scope of Work for Professional Services Agreement
City of Arlington
Council Agenda Bill
AGENDA ITEM:
New Business #14
ATTACHMENT P
COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
September 20, 2010
SUBJECT:
Joint Public Hearing with Snohomish County
Council - Open Space Designation Application
DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN:
Executive / Legal
Contact: Kristin Banfield, 360-403-3444 or
Steve Peiffle
ATTACHMENTS:
- Snohomish County Current Use Assessment and Staff Recommendation
EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: -0-
BUDGET CATEGORY: N/A
LEGAL REVIEW:
DESCRIPTION:
The County has received an application from an Arlington property owner to have their
property designated Open Space. According to the state statute, the City and County Councils
have to hold a Joint Public Hearing on the matter. We need 3 members from the Arlington City
Council and 3 members from the County Council to hold the Public Hearing and make a
decision on whether to accept the application or not.
The Council must appoint 3 members to represent the City during this Joint Public Hearing.
The Council has 2 options for holding the Joint Public Hearing:
Option #1: Hold the Public Hearing in conjunction with a County Council session in October or
November. This would be held on a Wednesday in the County Council Chambers at 10:30am.
Option #2: Hold the Public Hearing in conjunction with one of the City’s Council meetings.
This would involve the County Council coming to us and carving a portion of one of our
Council meetings to hold the Joint Public Hearing, either in October or November.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The Council is asked to provide direction to the City Clerk on which 3 Council members will
represent the City and which meeting option we would prefer.