HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-14-2011_Council Workshop Packet
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
WORKSHOP ITEMS ~ NO ACTION WILL BE TAKEN
1. (10 min) 173rd St Design ATTACHMENT A
2. (10 min) 173rd St Cultural resource Assessment ATTACHMENT B
3. (10 min) Stormwater Wetland Phase II Contract Award ATTACHMENT C
4. (10 min) Transportation Comprehensive Plan Consultant ATTACHMENT D
5. (10 min) Right-of-Way Issues ATTACHMENT E
- 166th Place – conversion of property to right of way
- 173rd property – conversion to right of way
- Walmart – accept 43rd Ave Right of Way
- Stillaguamish Tribe – accept easement
6. (5 min) Waterline Art Acceptance ATTACHMENT F
7. (5 min) Draco Final Short Plat ATTACHMENT G
8. (5 min) Vista Final Short Plat ATTACHMENT H
9. (5 min) Star Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Concurrent Rezone ATTACHMENT I
10. (5 min) Consultant Contract for West Arlington Form-Based Code/TDR ATTACHMENT J
11. (5 min) Arlington School District CFP for the TDR Grant ATTACHMENT K
12. (5 min) Lakewood School District CFP for the TDR Grant ATTACHMENT L
13. (5 min) Declaring old fire VHF radios and pagers as surplus ATTACHMENT M
14. (5 min) Interlocal Agreement For Automatic First Response ATTACHMENT N
and Mutual Assistance
15. (10 min)Hotel-Motel Grant Distribution ATTACHMENT O
16. Miscellaneous Council items
ADJOURNMENT
To open all attachments, click here
Arlington City Council Workshop
March 14, 2011 – 7 PM
City Council Chambers ~ 110 E. Third
City of Arlington
Council Agenda Bill
AGENDA ITEM:
ATTACHMENT A
COUNCIL WORKSHOP DATE:
March 14 , 2011
SUBJECT: Professional Services Agreement
with Perteet, Inc. for design of 173rd St.
DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN:
Public Works – Utilities Division
James Kelly
ATTACHMENTS:
• Cost Estimate
• Scope of Services
EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: $117,105.00
BUDGET CATEGORY: Transportation Improvement (310)
LEGAL REVIEW: Pending final review by City Attorney
DESCRIPTION – Proposal for traffic analysis and design, including intersection turning analysis,
noise analysis, lane configuration, sound attenuating structure analysis, and preparation of PSE,
for proposed 173rd St.
HISTORY: – Construction of 173rd Street, between Smokey Point Blvd. and 43rd Ave., has been
included in the City’s Comprehensive Plan as a needed roadway to alleviate traffic on 172nd and
to foster commercial development in the area immediately north of 172nd. In 2010 the City
purchased property for ROW at the west end of this proposed road, and currently two
developments, La Quinta hotel and the Smokey point Ambulatory Care Center, are planned for
construction on this road. This design proposal will allow the City to prepare and ready this
road for construction in 2012.
ALTERNATIVES:
Do not design 173rd
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Discussion only – no action will be taken.
City of Arlington
Scope of Work
173rd Place NE Extension
(Smokey Point Boulevard to 43rd Avenue NE)
February 28, 2011
2707 Colby Avenue, Suite 900
Everett, WA 98201
1.800.615.9900 / 425.252.7700
173rd Place NE Extension (Smokey Point Boulevard to 43rd Avenue NE)
Agreement with Perteet Inc.
City of Arlington Page 1 February 28, 2011
File location: X:\Arlington, City of\Promo Efforts\173rd Street\Project Management\Contract\Scope and Fee\Arlington_173rd Pl Extension
Scope of Services_V4.doc
INTRODUCTION
This Scope of Services describes transportation planning and conceptual design services to be provided
by Perteet, Inc. (herein referred to as the Consultant) to the City of Arlington (herein referred to as the
City) for the planned extension of 173rd Place NE from Smokey Point Boulevard to 43rd Avenue NE.
The City’s planning for the 173rd Place NE extension is underway. The Consultant’s services are
requested by the City to analyze potential changes as a result of the proposed street extension,
including vehicular traffic patterns, needed traffic controls at affected intersections, and noise conditions.
Additional services are included for the Consultant to prepare Plans, Specifications and Estimates for
Roadways and Intersections, Storm Design and Traffic Signal Design at 60% and 100%. A separate scope
of work and cost estimate was provided by Parsons Brinckerhoff for the noise impact analysis, and it has
been included in Perteet’s overall scope and cost estimate as requested by the City to allow a single city
contract.
1 – Project Management
The Consultant will provide project management and oversight of the scope of work, including the
traffic, air, and noise analyses; managing to the agreed schedule and budget; and preparing monthly
invoices and progress reports.
Deliverables:
Monthly project reports and invoices
2 – Review Previous Traffic Impact Analysis Reports
The Consultant will review the following studies and reports provided by the City to identify planned
changes in land use and related traffic conditions:
LaQuinta Traffic Analysis Report
Ambulatory Care Center Traffic Analysis Report
Community Transit Smokey Point Transit Center Traffic Analysis
Wal-Mart Traffic Analysis Report
Subarea Plan and related City materials
Deliverables:
None
3 – Conduct Existing Traffic Counts
The Consultant will obtain p.m. peak hour turning movement counts at four intersections including:
Smokey Point Boulevard/172nd Street NE
Smokey Point Boulevard/173rd Place NE
Smokey Point Boulevard/174th Place NE
172nd Street NE/43rd Avenue NE
173rd Place NE Extension (Smokey Point Boulevard to 43rd Avenue NE)
Agreement with Perteet Inc.
City of Arlington Page 2 February 28, 2011
File location: X:\Arlington, City of\Promo Efforts\173rd Street\Project Management\Contract\Scope and Fee\Arlington_173rd Pl Extension
Scope of Services_V4.doc
Deliverables:
Four (4) PM peak hour traffic counts
4 – Prepare 2032 Traffic Forecast
The Consultant will analyze the projected traffic associated with the existing and planned land use which
will be served by the proposed 173rd Place NE extension, including the Church of Latter Day Saints,
Ambulatory Care Center, and LaQuinta Motel. Using the trip generation and trip distribution data
produced by others for the planned land uses, as updated by current conditions, the Consultant will
estimate traffic flows for a 2032 forecast horizon, including turning movements at intersections and
major driveways.
Deliverables:
2032 Traffic Forecast
5 – Recommend Roadway Cross Section and Lane Geometry
The Consultant will prepare a recommended roadway cross section for the 173rd Place NE extension
roadway within a 60’ right of way to accommodate the projected traffic forecast for peak hour
conditions. The Consultant will prepare intersection levels of service (LOS) for existing and projected
2032 conditions at the four affected intersections (Smokey Point Blvd/172nd, Smokey Point Blvd/173rd,
Smokey Point Blvd/174th and 43rd Ave NE/173rd) for the recommended roadway cross section. The
recommended cross section will identify facility accommodations for pedestrians and bicycles, including
space for a landscape buffer within the right of way of the planned 173rd Place roadway extension. The
Consultant will prepare a conceptual channelization plan depicting proposed intersection geometry. The
Consultant will meet with City staff to review the draft recommendations prior to preparation of cost
estimates.
Deliverables:
Existing and Projected LOS at four affected intersections, and a recommended roadway cross
section including travel lanes, a non-motorized facility, and landscape buffer if possible. To be
delivered electronically.
6 – Planning Level Opinions of Cost
The Consultant will prepare planning level opinions of cost for the recommended roadway cross section
and lane geometry, and will provide documentation of estimated quantities and assumptions.
Deliverables:
Planning level opinions of cost with documentation of quantities and assumptions. To be
delivered electronically.
7 – Prepare Final Technical Report
The Consultant will prepare a technical report to document the findings and recommendations
developed in Tasks 2 – 6.
Deliverables:
173rd Place NE Extension (Smokey Point Boulevard to 43rd Avenue NE)
Agreement with Perteet Inc.
City of Arlington Page 3 February 28, 2011
File location: X:\Arlington, City of\Promo Efforts\173rd Street\Project Management\Contract\Scope and Fee\Arlington_173rd Pl Extension
Scope of Services_V4.doc
Technical report to be delivered electronically
8 – Roadway and Intersection PS&E
Perteet will prepare a 60% and 100% roadway plan submittal for 173rd Place NE. The roadway shall be
approximately 2,700 linear feet in length stretching from Smokey Point Boulevard to 43rd Avenue NE.
The plans will be initially developed as 11” x 17” plan sheets with a scale of 1” to 40’. Once approved
by the City, a final set shall be printed on 22” x 34” bond paper and stamped by the design professional
engineer. The roadway characteristics will generally consist of a two lane road with the potential of
turn pockets at the two far ends of the roadway; a landscape buffer between the roadway and homes to
the north; and a roadway section that slopes into a rain garden and underlying stormwater infiltration
system. The stormwater design will be scoped and budgeted under Task 9. The roadway will also
include a signal at 173rd Place NE and Smokey Point Boulevard. This signal will be scoped and budgeted
under Task 10.
The following plan sheets will be prepared for both the 60% and the 100% PS&E:
Cover Sheet C1 (1 sheet)
Abbreviations and Symbols A1 (1 sheet)
Roadway Typical Sections RS1 (1 sheet)
Site Preparations & TESC Details SP1 (1 sheet)
Paving & Channelization Plans P1 - P3 (3 sheets)
Drainage Details DD1 (1 sheet)
Landscaping Typical Details LS1 (1 sheet)
Signal Plans (173rd Place NE & Smokey Point Boulevard) S1 (1 sheet)
Signal Pole Schedule S2 (1 sheet)
Signal Wiring Plan S3 (1 sheet)
This plan set shall have a maximum of 12 plan sheets. The drainage and signal plan sheets will be
developed and budgeted under their respective design tasks. Profile sheets will not be developed for
this project in an attempt to keep design costs low.
Plan sheets that are excluded from this scope of work and budget that can be added as a supplement are
as follows:
Wall Plans & Details
Landscaping Plans
Irrigation Plans
Traffic Control Plans
Construction Phasing Plans
Separate Set of Drainage Plan & Profile Sheets
Only technical special provisions in WSDOT / APWA format will be prepared for this project. The City
of Arlington will prepare Division 1 of the special provisions, prepare the boiler plate contract forms,
173rd Place NE Extension (Smokey Point Boulevard to 43rd Avenue NE)
Agreement with Perteet Inc.
City of Arlington Page 4 February 28, 2011
File location: X:\Arlington, City of\Promo Efforts\173rd Street\Project Management\Contract\Scope and Fee\Arlington_173rd Pl Extension
Scope of Services_V4.doc
the bid proposal form, and assemble the overall Contract Provisions Manual. Perteet will also prepare
an opinion of probable construction cost in Excel per Perteet standard format. The items identified in
the opinion of probable construction costs will be the basis of the bid proposal form.
It is assumed that geotechnical data will be supplied by the City to support the roadway design, drainage,
and signal design work.
Deliverables:
60% Plans (12 plan sheets)
60% Technical Special Provisions
60% Opinion of Probable Construction Costs
100% Plans (12 plan sheets)
100% Technical Special Provisions
100% Opinion of Probable Construction Costs
9 – Stormwater Design
Perteet will prepare a brief stormwater analysis memo and PS&E level final drainage design to support
the construction of a 2,700 linear foot roadway known at 173rd Place NE. The roadway stormwater
improvements will consist of a rain garden, amended median zone, and an infiltrating gravel gallery that
parallels the new roadway. The Consultant shall coordinate with the City of Arlington to determine the
stormwater detention and water quality treatment design criteria to be applied to the project. One
meeting is assumed for this effort. This effort will include coordination to determine the specific
detention and water quality treatment design criteria to be used for the stormwater system design.
StormwaterTechnical Memorandum. The Consultant will prepare a Stormwater Technical Memorandum
for review and approval by the City. The memorandum will include stormwater detention and water
quality treatment facility design with the following elements:
Detention and water quality treatment volume calculations.
Plans and details for one typical detention and/or water quality treatment facility.
Stormwater PS&E. The Consultant will prepare 60% and 100% stormwater design plans, specifications,
and estimates consistent with the project Stormwater Technical Memorandum.
Work Elements:
Perform hydraulic analysis and prepare a Stormwater Technical Memorandum to document
existing and proposed site conditions.
Prepare 60% stormwater facility design.
Incorporate City review comments into Final design.
Prepare 100% stormwater facility design.
Assumptions:
The current versions of the City of Arlington Design and Construction Standards and
Specifications (July 2008) and the 2005 Department of Ecology Stormwater Manual for Western
173rd Place NE Extension (Smokey Point Boulevard to 43rd Avenue NE)
Agreement with Perteet Inc.
City of Arlington Page 5 February 28, 2011
File location: X:\Arlington, City of\Promo Efforts\173rd Street\Project Management\Contract\Scope and Fee\Arlington_173rd Pl Extension
Scope of Services_V4.doc
Washington have been assumed to be applicable for the purpose of providing this Scope of
Work.
Stormwater facilities will be shown on roadway plan sheets
Geotechnical data will be provided for the design of stormwater facilities including: soil
infiltration data, soil properties, ground water elevations, and lining design if needed.
Geotechnical data will need to be collected during preparation of the Stormwater Technical
Memorandum to allow the subsequent Draft stormwater design to move forward on schedule.
Planting/landscaping plans and details are not included in the Stormwater design tasks.
Deliverables:
Stormwater Technical Memorandum
60% Stormwater Plans
100% Stormwater Plans
10 – Signal Design
The Consultant shall prepare preliminary signal plans for the proposed traffic signal at the intersection of
Smokey Point Boulevard and 173rd Place NE. Preliminary signal design will include calculations
necessary for the design of the complete traffic signal installation. Traffic signal will utilize new mast arm
signal poles and PS, PPB, and Type I poles as necessary. The signal system will use new APS pushbuttons
and countdown type pedestrian heads. Preliminary signal plans will include layout of signal pole(s) and
appurtenances, junction box locations, conduit runs, conduit/wire schedule and callouts, controller and
service cabinet locations, and vehicle detection. Due to the proximity to other traffic signals,
interconnect cable may be installed between the signals at Smokey Point Drive and 172nd Street NE.
Work Elements:
Prepare preliminary signal plan modifications.
Coordinate with utility companies whose facilities are in conflict with new equipment.
Prepare signal calculations as necessary to complete preliminary signal plans.
Utilize AGi32 lighting software to determine street light locations.
Prepare signal cost estimate.
Assumptions:
Signals will be designed according to WSDOT NWR standards and guidelines with modifications
from the City of Arlington.
No physical modifications are necessary to the existing traffic signals at Smokey Point Drive and
172nd St NE to accommodate new traffic signal.
Existing signal controllers at Smokey Point Drive and 172nd St NE can accommodate
interconnect cable.
Traffic signal timing will be provided by others.
Vehicle detection type will be specified by the City of Arlington prior to beginning design.
Signal pole foundation depths will be based on recommendations from the project geotechnical
investigation.
If needed, electrical service application will be prepared by others.
173rd Place NE Extension (Smokey Point Boulevard to 43rd Avenue NE)
Agreement with Perteet Inc.
City of Arlington Page 6 February 28, 2011
File location: X:\Arlington, City of\Promo Efforts\173rd Street\Project Management\Contract\Scope and Fee\Arlington_173rd Pl Extension
Scope of Services_V4.doc
Deliverables:
60% Signal layout plan (1)
60% Signal wiring details (1)
60% Signal pole chart (1)
100% Signal Design
The Consultant shall prepare final signal plans incorporating comments received following the review of
the preliminary plans. Specifications will be developed based on WSDOT NWR guidelines.
Work Elements:
Prepare final signal plans
Prepare final special provisions
Update signal cost estimate.
Deliverables:
100% Signal layout plan (1)
100% Signal wiring details (1)
100% Signal pole chart (1)
11 - Noise Analysis (by Subconsultant)
The Consultant shall assess the potential noise impacts resulting from the proposed 173rd Place NE
Project from Smokey Point Boulevard to 43rd Avenue NE, following procedures outlined in WSDOT
Environmental Procedures Manual, Chapter 446. Work elements shall include conducting ambient noise
sampling at up to four sensitive receivers, modeling future year noise levels with and without project
improvements, and identifying noise abatement measures to mitigate identified impacts. (See attached
scope of work for additional detail.)
Deliverables:
Noise Technical Memo
Items to be Furnished by City of Arlington
AutoCAD base map of the site
Services Performed by Others
Construction Administration
Anticipated Future Assignments
Construction Administration Assistance
173rd Place NE Extension (Smokey Point Boulevard to 43rd Avenue NE)
Agreement with Perteet Inc.
City of Arlington Page 7 February 28, 2011
File location: X:\Arlington, City of\Promo Efforts\173rd Street\Project Management\Contract\Scope and Fee\Arlington_173rd Pl Extension
Scope of Services_V4.doc
Time for Completion
Tasks 1 through 7 and 11 will be completed in 60 calendar days from issuance of the notice to proceed.
Tasks 8 through 10 will be completed in 120 days once Tasks 1 through 7 have been completed and
approved by the City of Arlington.
Task Cost Estimate for Perteet, Inc.
Kris Liljeblad,
Associate
Darrell Smith,
Lead
Engineer
Jason
Shrope, Lead
Eng.
Stormwater
Bruce
Johnson,
Lead Eng.
Specs
Mike Hendrix,
Engineer 3
David
Schuurman,
Lead
Technician
Andy Yim,
Planner II
JJ Didier,
Engineer II
Travis
Rauscher,
Engineer I
Michele Jain,
Engineer II
Vismaya
Tata,
Engineer II
Donal Cales,
Lead
Technician
Denice Moan,
Accountant
Wendy
Nelson,
Clerical
Total Hours Total Labor
160.36$ 153.98$ 131.66$ 124.87$ 119.58$ 100.94$ 91.28$ 81.92$ 77.53$ 76.07$ 77.53$ 99.48$ 89.09$ 76.07$
Labor
10 6 16 2,138.17$
2 1 8 11 1,282.23$
2 2 201.88$
6 2 24 32 3,692.71$
8 8 8 12 6 8 20 70 7,436.45$
2 3 4 12 21 2,040.77$
12 4 6 8 4 34 4,180.50$
60 60 100 8 228 24,710.72$
20 2 22 2,649.54$
16 16 1,217.12$
40 40 100 2 182 19,536.15$
20 8 28 3,105.97$
12 12 912.84$
1 12 20 8 41 4,080.41$
2 16 24 16 58 5,866.99$
2 8 16 12 38 3,795.52$
4 20 24 3,007.49$
4 36 40 80 8,899.82$
2 16 40 58 6,200.30$
40 133 36 40 80 52 14 112 32 28 60 316 6 24 973
104,955.58$
Perteet Direct Expenses
Units Unit Cost
200 0.55 110.00$
3 105 315.00$
1 210 210.00$
-$
Perteet Direct Expenses 635.00$
11,514.00$
117,104.58$
ESTIMATE 117,104.58$
Labor
Subtotal Labor
Exhibit 2
City of Arlington: 173rd Place NE Extension, Smokey Point Blvd - 43rd Ave NE
Conduct Existing Traffic Counts
Task 8 - Roadway & Intersestion PS&E
Task 1 - Project Management
Task 2 - Review Previous Traffic Analysis
Task 5 - Roadway Cross Section & Lane Geometry
Task 6 - Planning Level Opinions of Cost
Task 3 - Conduct Existing Traffic Counts
Task 4 - Prepare 2032 Traffic Forecast
Signal Calculations
Total Cost Estimate
Job Classification
Planning Level Opinions of Cost
Prepare Traffic Technical Report
Traffic Counts by Others
Vehicle mileage
Roadway Cross Section & Lane Geometry
Project Management
Review Previous Traffic Analysis reports
Prepare 2032 Traffic Forecast
Noise Analysis (by PB as Sub-consultant)
Traffic Counts by Others
Task 7 - Prepare Trafic Technical Report
Billing Rate (including OH and Fee*)
60% Signal Design
100% Signal Design
Stormwater Analysis
60% Stormwater Plans
100% Stormwater Plans
Task 10 - Traffic Signal Design
Task 9 - Stormwater Analysis & Design
100% Opinion of Costs
60% Plans
60% Special Provisions
60% Opinion of Costs
100% Plans
100% Special Provisions
X:\Arlington, City of\Promo Efforts\173rd Street\Project Management\Contract\Scope and Fee\Arlington_173rd Pl Extension_Estimate_V4.xlsx
City of Arlington
Council Agenda Bill
AGENDA ITEM:
ATTACHMENT B
COUNCIL WORKSHOP DATE:
March 14, 2011
SUBJECT: Professional Services Agreement
with Northwest Archaeology for Cultural
Resource Assessment for 173rd St.
DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN:
Engineering - James Kelly
ATTACHMENTS:
• Scope of Work and Professional Services Agreement for a Cultural resource Assessment
EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: $12,535.00
BUDGET CATEGORY: Transportation Improvement (310)
LEGAL REVIEW: Pending final review by City Attorney
DESCRIPTION: Professional Services Agreement between the City and Northwest
Archaeological Associates (NWAA) for a cultural resource assessment.
HISTORY: Construction of 173rd Street, between Smokey Point Blvd. and 43rd Ave., has been
included in the City’s Comprehensive Plan as a needed roadway to alleviate traffic on 172nd
and to foster commercial development in the area immediately north of 172nd. In 2010 the City
purchased property for ROW at the west end of this proposed road, and currently two
developments, La Quinta hotel and the Smokey point Ambulatory Care Center, are planned for
construction on this road.
State law, Executive Order 05-05, requires that projects funded with any state or local public
funds complete a cultural resource assessment prior to design and construction of a public
project. This proposal allows the City to meet this requirement for the 173rd Street project.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Do not approve the PSA.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
No action being taken – discussion only.
City of Arlington
Council Agenda Bill
AGENDA ITEM:
ATTACHMENT C
COUNCIL WORKSHOP DATE:
March 14, 2011
SUBJECT: Stormwater Wetland Bid Results DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN:
Public Works – Utilities Division
James Kelly
ATTACHMENTS:
• None at this time – a Bid Tab will be handed out at the March 14, 2011 council workshop
EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: No Expenditure
BUDGET CATEGORY: Stormwater Capital Fund 409
LEGAL REVIEW: City Attorney will review bid tab
DESCRIPTION: Bid Tabulation showing all received bids for the Stormwater wetland, these
bids have not yet been qualified and are being presented for informational purposes only.
HISTORY: In 2000, the City purchased a 27 acre parcel, with over 1,400-feet of Stillaguamish
River frontage, for the creation Stormwater Wetland. Soon after acquiring the property, the
City began presenting this idea to the Department of Ecology and Snohomish Conservation
District. Both have agreed with the conceptual plan, and are in support of the City’s efforts.
With design and permitting now completed, this project is now ready to enter the construction
phase. The City has bid the Stormwater Wetland Project, and bids are due on March 4, 2011.
Staff will have final bid results and recommendation of award at the March 7, 2011 council
meeting.
ALTERNATIVES:
- Update for Council - Discussion only
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Discussion only – no action is being requested at this time. At the next Council Meeting staff
will provide a recommendation as to whom the contract should be awarded.
City of Arlington
Council Agenda Bill
AGENDA ITEM:
COUNCIL WORKSHOP DATE:
March 14 , 2011
SUBJECT: Proposal from Shea-Carr for
Transportation Comprehensive Plan Update
and Pavement Condition Analysis
DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN:
Public Works – Utilities Division
James Kelly
ATTACHMENTS:
• Handout at workshop
EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: Approximately $125,000
BUDGET CATEGORY: Transportation Improvement (310)
LEGAL REVIEW: Pending final review by City Attorney
DESCRIPTION – Proposal to update City’s Transportation Comprehensive Plan and perform a
pavement condition analysis.
HISTORY: – Preparation of a Transportation Comprehensive Plan (Transportation Element) is a
required element of City’s General Comprehensive Plan. The Transportation Comprehensive
Plan must be consistent with, and help implement, the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive
Plan. In addition, the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) requires every municipality to
prepare a Transportation Comprehensive Plan, in accordance with PSRC requirements, in order
to be eligible for transportation funding.
The City developed a Transportation Element in 2005, since then the City has grown
significantly. The growing population and changes in the City’s zoning result in a need, and
provides an opportunity, to systematically evaluate the City’s transportation system and plan for
the future.
This proposal Provides for the presentation of a Transportation Comprehensive Plan that will be
consistent with the all other City, county and regional Comprehensive plans, and also provides a
comprehensive pavement condition analysis for long term pavement management..
ALTERNATIVES:
Do not update Transportation Comprehensive Plan at this time
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Discussion only – no action will be taken.
City of Arlington
Council Agenda Bill
City of Arlington
Council Agenda Bill
AGENDA ITEM:
ATTACHMENT E
COUNCIL WORKSHOP DATE:
March 14, 2011
SUBJECT: Right of Way Issues regarding 173rd,
172nd, 43rd and 166th
DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN:
Public Works – Utilities Division
James Kelly
ATTACHMENTS: Maps Identifying Right of Way Locations as follows:
• 173td Place
• 166th Place
• 172nd Street (SR531)
• 43rd Street
EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: None
BUDGET CATEGORY: N/A
LEGAL REVIEW: Pending final approval by City Attorney
DESCRIPTION Council will be asked to approve the following right of way transactions at the
March 21, 2011 Council Meeting:
• 173td Place – Conversion from fee simple to right of way
• 166th Place – Conversion from fee simple to right of way
• 172nd Street (SR531) – Acceptance of Right of Way Dedication from Stillaguamish Dental
Clinic
• 43rd Street – Acceptance of Right of Way Dedication from Wal-Mart
HISTORY: The rights of way for 173rd and 166th were previously accepted by Council as fee
simple property and now need to be converted to right of way.
As a condition of development, right of way was required from the Stillaguamish Dental
Clinic. This ROW is now ready to be dedicated to the City.
Also as a condition of development Wal-Mart was required to construct and dedicate 43rd south
of 172nd. This ROW is now ready to be dedicated to the City.
ALTERNATIVES: No Action requested at this time.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Council Action will be requested at the March 21, 2011 meeting.
Smokey Point Blvd
166TH PL NE
168TH ST NE
40TH AVE NE
166t h Pl NEConversion to R OW
3/4/2011
lb
City of Arlington
1 inch = 200 feet
Legend
Area for Conver sion
County Parcels
City Limits
GIS parcel and stream data provided by Snohomish County Department of Information Services, 2009Maps and GIS data are distributed “AS-IS” without warranties of any kind, either express or implied, including but not limited to warranties of suitability for a particular purpose oruse. Map data are compiled from a variety of sources which may contain errors and users who rely upon the information do so at their own risk. Users agree to indemnify, defend,and hold harmless the City of Arlington for any and all liability of any nature arising out of or resulting from the lack of accuracy or correctness of the data, or the use of the datapresented in the maps.0 200 400100
Feet ±
Scale:
Date:
Cartographer:
File:
166thPl_ROW8.5x11_11
39TH DR NE
173RD PL NE
SR 531
40TH DR
TOTEM PARK LN
38TH DR NE
174TH PL
176TH PL NE
SMOKEY POINT BLVD
174TH PL NE
175TH PL NE
175TH PL NE
176TH PL NE
43RD AVE NE
172ND ST NESR 531
Propos ed 173rd Right o f Way
11/2/2010
kdk
City of Arlington
1 inch = 362 feet
Legend
Proposed
City purchased property
County Parcels
Public ROW
Private Roads
GIS parcel data provided by Snohomish County Assessor's Office, 2010.
Aerial photo flown in June 2009.
Maps and GIS data are distributed “AS-IS” without warrantiesof any kind, either express or implied, including but not limitedto warranties of suitability for a particular purpose or use. Mapdata are compiled from a variety of sources which maycontain errors and users who rely upon the information do soat their own risk. Users agree to indemnify, defend, and holdharmless the City of Arlington for any and all liability of anynature arising out of or resulting from the lack of accuracy orcorrectness of the data, or the use of the data presented inthe maps.
0 200 400100
Feet ±
Scale:
Date:
Cartographer:
File:
173rd_Prop_8.5x11_10.mxd
Right of Way (ROW)
172nd St NE / SR 531
43rd Ave NE
Exhibit :Walmart 43rd Ave N E ROW Dedic ation±
City of Arlington
Date:
File:
Cartographer:
Maps and GIS data are distributed “AS-IS” without w arranties of any k ind, either express or implied, including but notlimited to warranties of suitability for a particular purpose or use. M ap data are compiled from a variety of sources whic hmay contain errors and users who rely upon the inform ation do so at their own risk. Users agree to indem nify, defend,and hold harmless the City of Arlington for any and all liability of any nature arising out of or resulting from the lack ofaccuracy or correctness of the data, or the use of the data presented in the maps.
Current R OW LinesROW Dedication A re aCounty Parcels Scale:Walmart_ROW ded_43rd_11
2/16/2011 lb
1 inch = 150 feetLegend
Map disp lays 2009 aerial photo
172nd St NE / SR 531
43rd Ave NE
Exhibit :Stillaguamish Dental Office172nd Street ROW D edication±
City of Arlington
Date:
File:
Cartographer:
Maps and GIS data are distributed “AS-IS” without w arranties of any k ind, either express or implied, including but notlimited to warranties of suitability for a particular purpose or use. M ap data are compiled from a variety of sources whic hmay contain errors and users who rely upon the inform ation do so at their own risk. Users agree to indem nify, defend,and hold harmless the City of Arlington for any and all liability of any nature arising out of or resulting from the lack ofaccuracy or correctness of the data, or the use of the data presented in the maps.
Curren t R OW LinesROW Dedication Are aCounty P arcels Scale:Stilli Dental_R OWded _172nd_11
2/16/2011 lb
1 inch = 1 00 feetLegend
Ma p displa ys 2 009 aeria l ph oto
City of Arlington
Council Agenda Bill
AGENDA ITEM:
ATTACHMENT F
COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
March 14, 2011
SUBJECT:
Proposal from the Arlington Arts Council to
install “Waterline” granite sculptures at
Lebanon Park
DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN:
Executive
Contact: Sarah Higgins, 360-403-3448
ATTACHMENTS:
Letter from Arlington Arts Council President, Sarah Arney, and photo of artwork.
EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: $800 concrete pad for artwork, and labor to
install concrete pad.
BUDGET CATEGORY: N/A
LEGAL REVIEW: N/A
DESCRIPTION:
The Arlington Arts Council is requesting to donate a major piece of art to the City using
proceeds from the 2010 Art Auction. The artwork “Waterline” includes 3 boulders sculpted by
Verena Schwippert. The request is to place this art at Lebanon Park near the Labyrinth.
HISTORY:
The Arlington Arts Council’s mission is to provide public art for Arlington. They have donated
several pieces of artwork to the City. The PARC Commission is recommending that this
artwork be approved as part of the public art collection.
ALTERNATIVES:
Do not accept Arlington Arts Council Proposal.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
No action at this time. Council will be asked to accept the Arlington Arts Council proposal at
the March 21, 2011 meeting.
City of Arlington
Council Agenda Bill
AGENDA ITEM:
ATTACHMENT G
COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
March 14, 2011
SUBJECT:
Draco Final Short Plat (File No. PLN20110015)
DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN:
Community Development
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Final Plat Map received by the City on February 17, 2011.
EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: N/A
BUDGET CATEGORY: N/A
LEGAL REVIEW: N/A
DESCRIPTION:
Draco Northwest, LLC, requests final short plat approval of the Plat of Draco Townhomes for
development of a 6-lot subdivision (3 duplexes, zero lot line single-family residences). The plat
is located on approximately .34 acres. Access will be from Division Street.
HISTORY:
The subject final short plat application was received by the City of Arlington on February 17,
2011, and was deemed complete on February 23, 2011. The Draco Northwest LLC Preliminary
Short Plat (PLN20100024) for 6 lots received a zoning permit on January 3, 2011.
ALTERNATIVES:
N/A
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
None at this time. Draco Final Short Plat (PLN20110015) will be presented to Council at the
March 21, 2011 meeting.
City of Arlington
Council Agenda Bill
AGENDA ITEM:
ATTACHMENT H
COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
March 14, 2011
SUBJECT:
Vista Final Short Plat (File No. PLN20110016)
DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN:
Community Development
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Final Plat Map received by the City on February 17, 2011.
EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: N/A
BUDGET CATEGORY: N/A
LEGAL REVIEW: N/A
DESCRIPTION:
Vista Properties NW, LLC, requests final short plat approval of the Plat of Vista Townhomes for
development of a 6-lot subdivision (3 duplexes, zero lot line single-family residences). The plat
is located on approximately .32 acres. Access will be from Division Street.
HISTORY:
The subject final short plat application was received by the City of Arlington on February 17,
2011, and was deemed complete on February 23, 2011. The Vista Properties Northwest LLC
Preliminary Short Plat (PLN20100023) for 6 lots received a zoning permit on January 3, 2011.
ALTERNATIVES:
N/A
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
None at this time. Vista Final Short Plat (PLN20110016) will be presented to Council at the
March 21, 2011 meeting.
City of Arlington
Council Agenda Bill
AGENDA ITEM:
ATTACHMENT I
COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
March 14, 2011
SUBJECT:
Star Comprehensive Plan Amendment and
Concurrent Rezone (PLN20110010 &
PLN20110012)
DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN:
Community Development – David Kuhl,
Todd Hall
ATTACHMENTS:
1. City Council Workshop Memo
2. Star Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Concurrent Rezone – Proposed Land Use
and Zoning Maps.
EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: N/A
BUDGET CATEGORY: N/A
LEGAL REVIEW: N/A
DESCRIPTION:
This is a request from two private parties for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Land
Use Map and rezone request of the Official Zoning Map. The applicants, Gray1 Washington
and Equity Funding, submitted applications to modify the pre-zoning and land use
designations of two parcels located on the southeast corner of SR 9 & 172nd St. NE. See attached
memo and maps for details.
HISTORY:
The applicant’s Comprehensive Plan and rezone requests were received by the City on January
28, 2011. The deadline for the 2011 Comprehensive Plan docket was January 31, 2011. The
requests will be reviewed by the Planning Commission on March 15, 2011. The requests will be
presented at the April 5, 2011 Planning Commission public hearing and at the April 18, 2011
City Council public hearing.
ALTERNATIVES:
N/A
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
None at this time. A public hearing will be held at the April 18th City Council meeting and the
Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezone requests will be considered for adoption at that
time.
City Council Workshop Memo
Date: March 14, 2011
To: City Council
From: David Kuhl, AICP, Community Development Director
Todd Hall, Associate Planner
Re: Star Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Concurrent Rezone
(PLN20110010 & PLN20110012)
This is a request from two private parties for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Land Use
Map and rezone request of the Official Zoning Map. The applicants, Gray1 Washington and Equity
Funding, submitted applications to modify the pre-zoning and land use designations of two parcels
located on the southeast corner of SR 9 & 172nd St. NE.
The request is as follows:
Parcel 1: (Parcel #31052500200100 – northern parcel) (Gray1) Change land use and pre-
zoning designations of eastern portion from Residential High Density (RHD) to entirely GC.
Parcel 2: (Parcel #31052500201800 – southern parcel) (Equity Funding) Change land use
and pre-zoning designations of western portion from GC to RHD.
Currently, both parcels are located within Snohomish County jurisdiction but are located within the
Arlington UGA. The current County zoning and land use is Planned Community Business (PCB)
(northern) and Low Density Multi-family Residential (LDMR) (southern).
Parcel 1 is heavily impacted by a large wetland area located in the central portion of the parcel,
which will have an impact on the development potential of the area. In addition, future commercial
traffic would be routed through the current RHD zone and thus limiting residential function.
Therefore, the designation of Parcel 2 as RHD would offset this loss of residential density on Parcel
1 due to the wetland impacts, and Parcel 2 would allow for a more contiguous residential site plan
without commercial traffic impacts. Additionally, there would be no net loss in site density and
respective zone designation.
Next Steps: Staff will present the Star Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Concurrent Rezone at
the March 15th Planning Commission meeting. The amendment is scheduled to be presented to
Planning Commission on April 5th and to City Council on April 18th for consideration of adoption.
Community Development
Planning Division
March 14, 2011 City Council Workshop
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Attachments:
Star Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Concurrent Rezone – Proposed Land Use and
Zoning Maps
Cc: Ron Thomas, 23515 NE Novelty Hill Rd., Ste. B221 #237, Redmond, WA 98052
Michael Lawrence, 12505 Bel-Red Rd., Ste. 200, Bellevue, WA 98005
UV9
!"`$
?Ó
?Ô
SR
53
0
51
S
T
A
V
E
N
E
SR 530
E BURKE AVE
N
O
L
Y
M
P
I
C
A
V
E
211TH PL NE E HIGHLAND DR
47
T
H
A
V
E
N
E
PIONEER HWY E
186TH ST NE
204TH ST NE
67TH
AVE
NE
188TH ST NE
SR 531
CEMETERY RD
59
T
H
A
V
E
N
E
MC
E
L
R
O
Y
R
D
SR 531
N
W
E
S
T
A
V
E
SM
O
K
E
Y
P
O
I
N
T
B
L
V
D
SM
O
K
E
Y
P
O
I
N
T
B
L
V
D
SR
9
SR
9
TVEIT RD
TVEIT
RD
BURN RD
North Fork
Stillaguamish River
Stillaguamish River North Fork Stillaguamish River
Olson Lake
City of Arlington
Cartographer:
File Name:
UGALandUseAmend_24x36_11(Star).mxd
Maps and GIS data are distributed “AS-IS” without warranties of any kind, either express or implied, including but not limited to warranties of suitabilityfor a particular purpose or use. Map data are compiled from a variety of sources which may contain errors and users who rely upon the information do so at their own risk. Users agree to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City of Arlington for any and all liability of any nature arising out of or resulting from the lack of accuracyor correctness of the data, or the use of the data presented in the maps.
Proposed Land Use MapAmendments
Date:
Stream courses, waterbodies (2009) Snohomish County Dept of Information Systems GIS dataset.
Parcels downloaded from Snohomish County Assessor's FTPsite 2010.
Legend
SR
9 172ND ST NESR 531
GCRLMD
P/SP
GC
RHD
RHD
SR
SR
T4-NG
Current City and UGA Land Use
Amend land use designation of eastern portion of Parcel 1 from RHD to GC and western portion of Parcel 2 from GC to RHD. 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 D D D D
D D D D D
D D D D D 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
Boundaries & Transportation
Arlington_polygon
State Highway
State Route
Arterial
Collector
Arlington UGA
th
2/14/11
Area of Interest
Parcel 1
RHD to GC
GC to RHD
Parcel 2
UV9
!"`$
?Ó
?Ô
SR
53
0
51
S
T
A
V
E
N
E
SR 530
E BURKE AVE
N
O
L
Y
M
P
I
C
A
V
E
211TH PL NE E HIGHLAND DR
47
T
H
A
V
E
N
E
PIONEER HWY E
186TH ST NE
204TH ST NE
67TH
AVE
NE
188TH ST NE
SR 531
CEMETERY RD
59
T
H
A
V
E
N
E
MC
E
L
R
O
Y
R
D
SR 531
N
W
E
S
T
A
V
E
SM
O
K
E
Y
P
O
I
N
T
B
L
V
D
SM
O
K
E
Y
P
O
I
N
T
B
L
V
D
SR
9
SR
9
TVEIT RD
TVEIT
RD
BURN RD
North Fork
Stillaguamish River
Stillaguamish River North Fork Stillaguamish River
Olson Lake
City of Arlington
Cartographer:
File Name:
UGAZoningAmend_24x36_11(Star).mxd
Maps and GIS data are distributed “AS-IS” without warranties of any kind, either express or implied, including but not limited to warranties of suitabilityfor a particular purpose or use. Map data are compiled from a variety of sources which may contain errors and users who rely upon the information do so at their own risk. Users agree to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City of Arlington for any and all liability of any nature arising out of or resulting from the lack of accuracyor correctness of the data, or the use of the data presented in the maps.
Proposed StarPreZoningAmendments
Date:
Stream courses, waterbodies (2009) Snohomish County Dept of Information Systems GIS dataset.
Parcels downloaded from Snohomish County Assessor's FTPsite 2010.
Legend
SR
9 172ND ST NESR 531
GCRLMD
P/SP
GC
RHD
RHD
SR
SR
T4-NG
Current City and UGA Zoning
Amend prezoning designation of eastern portion of Parcel 1 from RHD to GC and western portion of Parcel 2 from GC to RHD. 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 D D D D
D D D D D
D D D D D 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
Boundaries & Transportation
Arlington_polygon
State Highway
State Route
Arterial
Collector
Arlington UGA
th
2/14/11
Area of Interest
Parcel 1
Parcel 2
RHD to GC
GC to RHD
City of Arlington
Council Agenda Bill
AGENDA ITEM:
ATTACHMENT J
COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
March 14, 2011
SUBJECT:
Consultant Contract – West Arlington Sub Area
Form-Based Code/TDR Project
DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN:
Community Development – Bill Blake
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Consultant Contact
EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: -0-
BUDGET CATEGORY: N/A
LEGAL REVIEW:
N/A
DESCRIPTION: Consultant contract for MAKERS Architecture & Urban Design for consultant
services to complete the Form-Based Code (FBC) and Transfer or Development Rights (TDR)
project for the West Arlington Sub Area.
HISTORY: The City was awarded a $130,000 grant from the Department of Commerce for the
completion of the FBC and TDR project for West Arlington. A request for proposals was issued
in December 2010 and MAKERS Architecture and Urban Design, a private-consulting firm
located in Seattle, was chosen to be the prime consultant. The project is scheduled to begin in
April and completed in summer 2012.
ALTERNATIVES:
No action.
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
None proposed at this time. The final contract will be presented to City Council at their next
meeting.
Concnslt98
AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT is entered into the date last below written between the City of Arlington,
Washington (“City”) and (“Contractor”).
1.0
SERVICES BY CONTRACTOR
1.1 Contractor shall perform the services described in the Scope of Work attached hereto as
Attachment A.
2.0
PAYMENT
2.1 City shall pay Contractor for such services: (check one)
Hourly: $ per hour, plus actual expenses, but not more than a total of $ .
Fixed Sum: A total amount of $ .
Other:
for all work performed and expenses incurred under this Contract.
2.2 If required, Contractor shall maintain time and expense records and provide them to the City monthly,
along with monthly invoices in a format acceptable to the City for work performed to the date of the invoice.
2.3 All invoices shall be paid by mailing a City warrant within 30 days of receipt of a proper invoice.
2.4 Contractor shall keep cost records and accounts pertaining to this Agreement available for
inspection by the City representatives for three (3) years after final payment. Copies shall be made
available on request.
2.5 If the services rendered do not meet the requirements of the Agreement, Contractor will correct or
modify the work to comply with the Agreement. City may withhold payment for such work until the
work meets the requirements of the agreement.
3.0
DISCRIMINATION AND COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS
3.1 Contractor agrees not to discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment or any
other person in the performance of this agreement because of race, creed, color, national origin, marital
status, sex, age, physical or other motor handicap, or other circumstance prohibited by federal, state or
local law or ordinance, except for a bona fide occupational qualification.
3.2 Contractor shall comply with all Federal, State and local laws and ordinances applicable to the
work to be done under this agreement.
Agreement for Services
Page 2
ConCnslt98
3.3 Violation of this Paragraph 3 shall be a material breach of this Agreement and grounds for
cancellation, termination or suspension of the Agreement by City, in whole or in part, and may result in
ineligibility for further work for City.
4.0
TERM AND TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT
4.1 This agreement shall remain in effect until completion of the services described in Attachment A
and final payment therefore.
4.2 This Agreement may be terminated by either party without cause upon thirty days written notice,
in which event all finished or unfinished documents, reports, or other material or work of Contractor
pursuant to this Agreement shall be submitted to City, and Contractor shall be entitled to just and
equitable compensation at the rate set forth in Paragraph 2 for any satisfactory work completed prior to
the date of termination.
5.0
OWNERSHIP OF WORK PRODUCT
5.1 All data, materials, reports, memoranda and other documents developed under this Agreement
whether finished or not shall become the property of City, shall be forwarded to City at its request and
may be used by City as it sees fit. City agrees that if it uses products prepared by Contractor for purposes
other than this intended in this Agreement, it does so at its sole risk and it agrees to hold Contractor
harmless therefore.
6.0
GENERAL ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT
6.1 The Director of the Department of the City of Arlington or his/her
designee, shall be City’s representative, and shall oversee and approve all services to be performed,
coordinate all communications, and review and approve all invoices, under this Agreement.
The Director’s Designee shall be:
7.0
HOLD HARMLESS
7.1 Contractor shall protect, defend, indemnify and save harmless City, its officers, employees and
agents from any and all costs, claims, judgments or awards of damages, arising out of or in any way
resulting from the negligent acts or omissions of Contractor, its officers, employees and agents in
performing this Agreement.
7.2 City shall protect, defend, indemnify, and save harmless Contractor, its officers, employees and
agents from any and all costs, claims, judgments or awards of damages, arising out of or in any way
resulting from the negligent acts or omissions of City, its officers, employees and agents in performing
this Agreement.
Agreement for Services
Page 3
ConCnslt98
8.0
INSURANCE
8.1 Contractor shall procure and maintain, for the duration of this Agreement, insurance against claims
for the injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the
performance of the work thereunder by the Contractor, his agent, representatives, employees or
subcontractors. The cost of such insurance shall be paid by the Contractor.
8.2 Minimum Limits of Insurance
Contractor shall maintain limits no less than:
a. Commercial General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for injury and $2,000,000 General
Aggregate.
b. Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit per accident, covering owned and
non-owned vehicles.
c. Worker's Compensation coverage as required by the Worker's Compensation Act of the State
of Washington.
d. Consultant’s errors or omissions or professional liability applying to all professional activities
performed under this contract: $1,000,000 per claim and $1,000,000 policy aggregate limit.
8.3 The Policies are to contain, and be endorsed to contain the following provisions:
a. General Liability
1. The City, its officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as additional
insured as respect to liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the
Contractor.
2. Contractor's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its
officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by
the City, its officials, employees and volunteers shall be excess of the Contractor's
insurance and shall not contribute with it.
3. Any failure to comply with the reporting provisions of all policies shall not affect the
coverage provided to the City, its officials, employees or volunteers.
b. All Coverage
Each insurance policy required by this clause shall state that coverage shall not be suspended,
voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days prior
written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City.
8.4 Acceptability of Insurers Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a Best's rating of no less than
A:XIII, or with an insurer acceptable to the City.
8.5 Verification of Coverage Contractor shall furnish the City with certificates of insurance effecting
coverage required by this clause. The certification for each insurance policy is to be signed by a person
authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The certificates are to be received and approved by
Agreement for Services
Page 4
ConCnslt98
the City before work commences. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all
required insurance policies, at any time.
8.6 Subcontractors Contractor shall include all subcontractors as insured under its policies or shall
furnish separate certificates for each subcontractor. All coverage for subcontractors shall be subject to all the
requirements stated herein.
9.0
SUBLETTING OR ASSIGNING CONTRACT
9.1 Neither City nor Contractor shall assign, transfer, or encumber any rights, duties or interests
accruing from this Agreement without express prior written consent of the other.
10.0
FUTURE SUPPORT
10.1 City makes no commitment and assumes no obligation for the support of contractor’s activities
except as set forth in this Agreement.
11.0
INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
11.1 Contractor is and shall be at all times during the term of this Agreement an independent
contractor.
12.0
EXTENT OF AGREEMENT/MODIFICATION
12.1 This Agreement, together with attachments or addenda, represents the entire and integrated
Agreement between the parties hereto and superseded 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 both parties hereto.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of 20 .
CONTRACTOR CITY OF ARLINGTON
By: By:
Name:
Title:
City of Arlington
Council Agenda Bill
AGENDA ITEM:
ATTACHMENT K
COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
March 14, 2011
SUBJECT:
Arlington School District Capital Facilities
Plan Comprehensive Plan Amendment
(PLN20110008)
DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN:
Community Development – David Kuhl,
Todd Hall
ATTACHMENTS:
1. City Council Workshop Memo
2. Arlington Public Schools Capital Facilities Plan 2010-2015
EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: N/A
BUDGET CATEGORY: N/A
LEGAL REVIEW: N/A
DESCRIPTION:
This is a request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to revise the Capital Facilities Element
to update the Arlington School District Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) to the 2010-2015 version.
This amendment would also modify the impact fee schedule to conform to this latest CFP.
Based on this CFP, the Arlington School District would charge no impact fees for either single-
family or multi-family residences.
HISTORY:
The School District’s request to amend the Comprehensive Plan was received by the City on
January 25, 2011. The deadline for the 2011 Comprehensive Plan docket was January 31, 2011.
Environmental review was conducted by the Arlington School District and a DNS was issued
on August 12, 2010. The Capital Facilities Plan will be reviewed by the Planning Commission
on March 15, 2011. The Plan will be presented at the April 5, 2011 Planning Commission public
hearing and at the April 18, 2011 City Council public hearing.
ALTERNATIVES:
N/A
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
None at this time. A public hearing will be held at the April 18th City Council meeting and the
CFP will be considered for adoption at that time.
City Council Workshop Memo
Date: March 14, 2011
To: City Council
From: David Kuhl, AICP, Community Development Director
Todd Hall, Associate Planner
Re: Arlington School District Capital Facilities Plan Comprehensive Plan Amendment
(PLN20110008)
This is a request for an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to revise the Capital
Facilities Element to update the Arlington School District Capital Facilities Plan (CFP). The
District’s 2010-2015 plan includes and introduction, district educational program
standards, capital facilities inventory, student enrollment projections, capital facilities
needs, capital facility financing plan, and school impact fees. Pursuant to Chapter 20.90
Part II, Concurrency and Impact Fees – School Impact Fees, this amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan would revise the Capital Facilities Element to update the Arlington
School District CFP, with a corresponding modification to the impact fee schedule to
conform to this latest CFP. Environmental review was conducted by the School District,
and a Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) was issued. The Arlington School Board
approved the 2010-2015 CFP on September 13, 2010.
The CFP proposes update school impact fees for the Arlington School District as follows:
Current Proposed
Single-family $4,444 No fee ($0)
Multi-family (1 bedroom) No fee ($0) No fee ($0)
Multi-family (2 bedroom) $4,546 No fee ($0)
An application for an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan is a public hearing review
process. It requires a public hearing before the Planning Commission, after which the
Community Development
Planning Division
March 14, 2011 City Council Workshop
Commission’s recommendations on the application are forwarded to the City Council. The
Council may hold its own public hearing on the amendment to the Comprehensive Plan
before making the decision on the application. A Notice of Public Hearing for the April 5,
2011 Planning Commission public hearing and the April 18, 2011 City Council public
hearing will be published and posted on the City’s official notification boards on March 23,
2011.
Per LUC section 20.96.070, Ultimate Issue Before Council on Amendments, in deciding
whether to recommend approval of a proposed amendment, the central i ssue is whether
the proposed amendment advances the public health, safety, or welfare. All other issues
are irrelevant.
Next Steps: Staff will present the Arlington School District CFP Comp Plan Amendment at
the March 15, 2011 Planning Commission meeting and on April 5, 2011 at the Planning
Commission public hearing. The amendment is scheduled to be presented to City Council
at the April 18, 2011 meeting for consideration of adoption.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Attachments:
Arlington Public Schools Capital Facilities Plan 2010-2015
Cc: Deborah Borgens, 135 S. French Ave., Arlington, WA 98223
City of Arlington
Council Agenda Bill
AGENDA ITEM:
ATTACHMENT L
COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
March 14, 2011
SUBJECT:
Lakewood School District Capital Facilities
Plan Comprehensive Plan Amendment
(PLN20110009)
DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN:
Community Development – David Kuhl,
Todd Hall
ATTACHMENTS:
1. City Council Workshop Memo
2. Lakewood School District Capital Facilities Plan 2010-2015
EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: N/A
BUDGET CATEGORY: N/A
LEGAL REVIEW: N/A
DESCRIPTION:
This is a request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to revise the Capital Facilities Element
to update the Lakewood School District Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) to the 2010-2015 version.
This amendment would also modify the impact fee schedule to conform to this latest CFP.
Based on this CFP, the Lakewood School District would change the single-family impact fee
from $1,906 to $1,780. The multi-family (1 bedroom) fee would not change, from $0. And the
multi-family (2 bedroom) fee would change from $2,121 to $1,379.
HISTORY:
The School District’s request to amend the Comprehensive Plan was received by the City on
January 27, 2011. The deadline for the 2011 Comprehensive Plan docket was January 31, 2011.
Environmental review was conducted by the Lakewood School District and a DNS was issued
on August 2, 2010. The Capital Facilities Plan will be reviewed by the Planning Commission on
March 15, 2011. The Plan will be presented at the April 5, 2011 Planning Commission public
hearing and at the April 18, 2011 City Council public hearing.
ALTERNATIVES:
N/A
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
None at this time. A public hearing will be held at the April 18th City Council meeting and the
CFP will be considered for adoption at that time.
City Council Workshop Memo
Date: March 14, 2011
To: City Council
From: David Kuhl, AICP, Community Development Director
Todd Hall, Associate Planner
Re: Lakewood School District Capital Facilities Plan Comprehensive Plan Amendment
(PLN20110009)
This is a request for an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to revise the Capital
Facilities Element to update the Lakewood School District Capital Facilities Plan (CFP). The
District’s 2010-2015 Plan includes an introduction, district educational program standards,
capital facilities inventory, student enrollment projections, capital facilities needs, capital
facility financing plan, and school impact fees. Pursuant to Chapter 20.90 Part II,
Concurrency and Impact Fees – School Impact Fees, this amendment to the Comprehensive
Plan would revise the Capital Facilities Element to update the Lakewood School District
CFP, with a corresponding modification to the impact fee schedule to conform to this latest
CFP. Environmental review was conducted by the School District, and a Determination of
Nonsignificance (DNS) was issued. The Lakewood School District Board approved the
2010-2015 CFP on August 18, 2010.
The CFP proposes to update school impact fees for the Lakewood School District as follows:
Current Proposed
Single-family $1,906 $1,780
Multi-family (1 bedroom) No fee ($0) No fee ($0)
Multi-family (2 bedroom) $2,121 $1,379
An application for an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan is a public hearing review
process. It requires a public hearing before the Planning Commission, after which the
Community Development
Planning Division
March 14, 2011 City Council Workshop
Commission’s recommendations on the application are forwarded to the City Council. The
Council may hold its own public hearing on the amendment to the Comprehensive Plan
before making the decision on the application. A Notice of Public Hearing for the April 5,
2011 Planning Commission public hearing and April 18, 2011 City Council public hearing
will be published and posted on the City’s official notification boards on March 23, 2011.
Per LUC section 20.96.070, Ultimate Issue Before Council on Amendments, in deciding
whether to recommend approval of a proposed amendment, the central issue is whether
the proposed amendment advances the public health, safety, or welfare. All other issues
are irrelevant.
Next Steps: Staff will present the Lakewood School District CFP Comp Plan Amendment at
the March 15, 2011 Planning Commission meeting and the April 5, 2011 Planning
Commission public hearing. The amendment is scheduled to be presented to City Council
at the April 18, 2011 meeting for consideration of adoption.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Attachments:
Lakewood School District No. 306 Capital Facilities Plan 2010-2015
Cc: Fred Owyen, Lakewood School District, PO Box 222, N. Lakewood, WA 98259
LAKEWOOD SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 306
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2010-2015
APPROVED:
AUGUST 18,2010
LAKEWOOD SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 306
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2010-2015
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
KEN CHRISTIANSEN
OSCAR ESCALANTE
GREGORY JENSEN
LARRY BEAN
KELLY ALLEN
SUPERINTENDENT
DR.DENNIS HADDOCK
For information regarding the Lakewood School District Capital Facilities Plan, contact the Office of the Superintendent,
Lakewood School District, P.O. Box 220, North Lakewood, WA 98259-0220. Tel: (360) 652-4500 or Fax: (360) 652-4502.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Section 1.Introduction .............................................................................................................1
Section 2.District Educational Program Standards .................................................................4
Section 3.Capital Facilities Inventory .....................................................................................8
Section 4.Student Enrollment Projections .............................................................................11
Section 5.Capital Facilities Needs .........................................................................................13
Section 6.Capital Facilities Financing Plan ...........................................................................16
Section 7.School Impact Fees ................................................................................................19
Appendix A ……………………………………………………Population and Enrollment Data
Appendix B ………………………………………………...Student Generation Factor Review
Appendix C …………………………………………………….School Impact Fee Calculations
INTRODUCTION
A.Purpose of the Capital Facilities Plan
The Washington State Growth Management Act (the “GMA”) includes schools in the category
of public facilities and services. School districts have adopted capital facilities plans to satisfy
the requirements of the GMA and to identify additional school facilities necessary to meet the
educational needs of the growing student populations anticipated in their districts.
The Lakewood School District (the “District”) has prepared this Capital Facilities Plan (the
“CFP”) to provide Snohomish County (the “County”) and the cities of Arlington and Marysville
with a description of facilities needed to accommodate projected student enrollment and a
schedule and financing program for capital improvements over the next six years (2010-2015).
In accordance with the Growth Management Act, adopted County Policy, the Snohomish County
Ordinance Nos. 97-095 and 99-107, the City of Arlington Ordinance No. 1263, and the City of
Marysville Ordinance Nos. 2306 and 2213, this CFP contains the following required elements:
·Future enrollment forecasts for each grade span (elementary, middle, and
high school).
·An inventory of existing capital facilities owned by the District, showing
the locations and capacities of the facilities.
·A forecast of the future needs for capital facilities and school sites.
·The proposed capacities of expanded or new capital facilities.
·A six-year plan for financing capital facilities within projected funding
capacities, which clearly identifies sources of public money for such
purposes. The financing plan separates projects and portions of projects
which add capacity from those which do not, since the latter are generally
not appropriate for impact fee funding.
·A calculation of impact fees to be assessed and supporting data
substantiating said fees.
In developing this CFP, the District followed the following guidelines set forth in the Snohomish
County General Policy Plan:
·Districts should use information from recognized sources,such as the U.S.
Census or the Puget Sound Regional Council. School districts may
generate their own data if it is derived through statistically reliable
methodologies. Information must not be inconsistent with Office of
Financial Management (“OFM”) population forecasts. Student generation
rates must be independently calculated by each school district.
·The CFP must comply with the GMA.
·The methodology used to calculate impact fees must comply with the
GMA. The CFP must identify alternative funding sources in the event that
-2-
impact fees are not available due to action by the state, county or cities
within the District.
·The methodology used to calculate impact fees also complies with the
criteria and the formulas established by the County.
B.Overview of the Lakewood School District
The Lakewood School District is located along Interstate 5, north of Marysville, Washington,
primarily serving unincorporated Snohomish County and a part of the City of Arlington and the
City of Marysville. The District is bordered on the south by the Marysville School District, on
the west and north by the Stanwood School District, and on the east by the Arlington School
District.
The District serves a student population of 2,436 (October 1, 2009 FTE Enrollment) with three
elementary schools, one middle school, and one high school.
-3-
FIGURE 1
MAP OF FACILITIES
-4-
SECTION 2
DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM STANDARDS
School facility and student capacity needs are dictated by the types and amounts of space
required to accommodate the District’s adopted educational program. The educational program
standards which typically drive facility space needs include grade configuration, optimum
facility size, class size, educational program offerings, classroom utilization and scheduling
requirements, and use of relocatable classroom facilities (portables), as well as specific and
unique physical structure needs required to meet the full access needs of students with special
needs.
In addition to factors which affect the amount of space required, government mandates and
community expectations may affect how classroom space is used. Traditional educational
programs offered by school districts are often supplemented by nontraditional, or special
programs such as special education, expanded bilingual education, remediation, migrant
education, alcohol and drug education, AIDS education, preschool and daycare programs,
computer labs, music programs, and others. These special or nontraditional educational
programs can have a significant impact on the available student capacity of school facilities, and
upon planning for future needs.
Special programs offered by the District at specific school sites include, but are not limited to:
Lakewood Elementary School (Preschool through 2nd Grade)
•Bilingual Education Program
•Title I Remedial Services Program
•P –2nd Grade Counseling Services
•Speech and Language Disorder Therapy Program
•Early Childhood Education and Assistance Program (ECEAP)
•Developmentally Delayed Preschool Program -Ages 3 to 5
•K-2nd Grade Special Education Resource Room Program
•Learning Assistance Program -Remedial Services
•Occupational Therapy Program
•K-2nd Grade Autism Program
•Kindergarten Boost Program
English Crossing Elementary School (3rd through 5th Grades)
•3rd through 5th Grade Special Education Resource Room Program
•After School Tutoring Program
•Bilingual Education Program
•3rd –5th Grade Counseling Services
-5-
•Speech and Language Disorder Therapy Program
•Learning Assistance Program -Tutorial Services
•Occupational Therapy Program
•Special Education EBD Program
Cougar Creek Elementary School (Kindergarten through 5th Grades)
•Bilingual Education Program
•Title I Remedial Services Program
•Speech and Language Disorder Therapy Program
•Learning Assistance Program –Remedial Services (Learning Lab)
•Occupational Therapy Program
•After School Tutoring Program
•K –5th Grade Special Education Resource Room Program
•K –5th Grade Special Education Life Skills Program
•K –5th Grade Counseling Services
•Grades 3-5 Highly Capable/Enrichment Program
Lakewood Middle School (6th through 8th Grades)
•Speech and Language Disorder Therapy Program
•6th-8th Grade Special Education Resource and Inclusion Program
•After School Tutoring Program
•Bilingual Education Program
•Learning Assistance Program -Tutorial Services
•Occupational Therapy Program
•6th –8th Grade Counseling Services
Lakewood High School
•9th-12th Grade Special Education Resource Room and Transition Program
•6th-12th Grade Special Education Life Skills Program
•Bilingual Education Program
•Occupational Therapy Program
•Speech and Language Disorder Program
•9th –12th Grade Counseling Program
-6-
Variations in student capacity between schools may result from the special or nontraditional
programs offered at specific schools. Some students, for example, leave their regular classroom
for a short period of time to receive instruction in these special programs. Schools recently added
to the District’s inventory have been designed to accommodate many of these programs.
However, existing schools often require space modifications to accommodate special programs,
and in some circumstances, these modifications may affect the overall classroom capacities of
the buildings.
District educational program standards may change in the future as a result of changes in the
program year, special programs, class sizes, grade span configurations, use of new technology,
and other physical aspects of the school facilities. The school capacity inventory will be
reviewed periodically and adjusted for any changes to the educational program standards. These
changes will also be reflected in future updates of this Capital Facilities Plan.
The District educational program standards which directly affect school capacity are outlined
below for the elementary, middle, and high school grade levels.
Educational Program Standards For Elementary Schools
•Class size for grades K –4th will not exceed 26 students.
•Class size for grades 5th –8th will not exceed 28 students.
•All students will be provided library/media services in a school library.
•Special Education for students may be provided in self-contained or specialized
classrooms.
•All students will be provided music instruction in a separate classroom.
•All students will have scheduled time in a computer lab, or time in which a mobile lab
will be assigned to each classroom, for those buildings that have mobile computer labs.
Each classroom will have access to computers and related educational technology.
•Optimum design capacity for new elementary schools is 475 students. However, actual
capacity of individual schools may vary depending on the educational programs offered.
•All students will be provided physical education instruction in a gym or in a multipurpose
room.
Educational Program Standards For Middle and High Schools
•Class size for middle school grades will not exceed 28 students.
•Class size for high school grades will not exceed 30 students.
•As a result of scheduling conflicts for student programs, the need for specialized rooms
for certain programs, and the need for teachers to have a work space during planning
periods, it is not possible to achieve 100% utilization of all regular teaching stations
throughout the day. In updating this Capital Facility Plan, a building review of classroom
use was conducted in order to reflect the actual classroom utilization in the high school
and middle school. Therefore, classroom capacity should be adjusted using a utilization
factor of 86% at the middle school and 83% at the high school to reflect the use of
-7-
classrooms for teacher planning. Special Education for students will be provided in self-
contained or specialized classrooms.
•All students will have scheduled time in a computer lab, or time in which a mobile lab
will be assigned to each classroom, for those buildings that have mobile computer labs.
Each classroom is equipped with access to computers and related educational-technology.
•Identified students will also be provided other nontraditional educational opportunities in
classrooms designated as follows:
Counseling Offices
Resource Rooms (i.e. computer labs, study rooms)
Special Education Classrooms
Program Specific Classrooms (i.e. music, drama, art, home-economics,
physical education, Industrial Arts and Agricultural Sciences).
•Optimum design capacity for new middle schools is 600 students. However, actual
capacity of individual schools may vary depending on the educational programs offered.
•Optimum design capacity for new high schools is 800 students. However, actual capacity
of individual schools may vary depending on the educational programs offered.
Minimum Educational Service Standards
The District will evaluate student housing levels based on the District as a whole system and not
on a school by school or site by site basis. This may result in portable classrooms being used as
interim housing, attendance boundary changes or other program changes to balance student
housing across the system as a whole, while meeting the District’s paramount duties under the
State Constitution. A boundary change or a significant programmatic change would be made by
the District’s Board of Directors following appropriate public review and comment.
The District has set minimum educational service standards based on several criteria. Exceeding
these minimum standards will trigger significant changes in program delivery. Minimum
standards have not been met if, on average using current FTE figures: K-4 classrooms have 26
or more students per classroom, 5-8 classrooms have 28 or more students per classroom, or 9-12
classrooms have 30 or more students per classroom. For purposes of this determination, the term
“classroom” does not include special education classrooms or special program classrooms (i.e.
computer labs, art rooms, chorus and band rooms, spaces used for physical education and other
special program areas). Furthermore, the term “classroom”does not apply to special programs
or activities that may occur in a regular classroom.
The minimum educational service standards are not District’s desired or accepted operating
standard.
-8-
SECTION 3
CAPITAL FACILITIES INVENTORY
The facilities inventory serves to establish a baseline for determining the facilities necessary to
accommodate future demand (student enrollment) at acceptable levels of service. This section
provides an inventory of capital facilities owned and operated by the District including schools,
relocatable classrooms, undeveloped land, and support facilities. Facility capacity is based on
the space required to accommodate the District’s adopted educational program standards. See
Section 2. Attached as Figure 1 is a map showing locations of District facilities.
A.Schools
The District maintains three elementary schools, one middle school, and one high school.
Lakewood Elementary School accommodates grades K-2, Cougar Creek Elementary School
accommodates grades K-5, and English Crossing Elementary School accommodates grades 3-5.
Lakewood Middle School serves grades 6-8, and Lakewood High School serves grades 9-12.
School capacity was determined based on the number of teaching stations within each building
and the space requirements of the District’s adopted educational program. It is this capacity
calculation that is used to establish the District’s baseline capacity, and to determine future
capacity needs based on projected student enrollment. The school capacity inventory is
summarized in Table 1.
Relocatable classrooms are not viewed by the District as a solution for housing students on a
permanent basis. Therefore, these facilities were not included in the school capacity calculations
provided in Table 1.
Table 1
School Capacity Inventory
Elementary School
Site Size
(Acres)
Building Area
(Square Feet)
Teaching
Stations
Permanent
Capacity
Year Built or
Remodeled
English Crossing *41,430 18 479 1994
Cougar Creek 10**44,217 19 500 2003
Lakewood *45,400 16 416 1998/1997
TOTAL *131,047 53 1,395
Middle School
Site Size
(Acres)
Building Area
(Square Feet)
Teaching
Stations
Permanent
Capacity
Year Built or
Remodeled
Lakewood Middle *62,835 25 602 1971, 1994,
and 2002
High School
Site Size
(Acres)
Building Area
(Square Feet)
Teaching
Stations
Permanent
Capacity
Year Built or
Remodeled
Lakewood High *79,422 24 598 1982
*Note: All facilities are located on one 89-acre campus
**The Cougar Creek site is approximately 22 acres; however, the presence of critical areas on the site does not
allow full utilization.
-9-
B.Relocatable Classrooms
Relocatable classrooms are used on an interim basis to house students until funding can be
secured to construct permanent classrooms. The District currently uses 29 relocatable
classrooms at various school sites throughout the District to provide additional interim capacity.
A typical relocatable classroom can provide capacity for a full-size class of students. Current use
of relocatable classrooms throughout the District is summarized in Table 2. Table 2 includes
only those relocatable classrooms used for regular capacity purposes.
Table 2
Relocatable Classroom (Portable) Inventory
Elementary School Relocatables
Interim
Capacity
English Crossing 5 135
Cougar Creek 0 0
Lakewood 7 182
SUBTOTAL 12 317
Middle School Relocatables
Interim
Capacity
Lakewood Middle 10 241
SUBTOTAL 10 241
High School Relocatables
Interim
Capacity
Lakewood High 7 174
SUBTOTAL 7 174
TOTAL 29 732
-10-
C.Support Facilities
In addition to schools, the District owns and operates additional facilities which provide
operational support functions to the schools. An inventory of these facilities is provided in
Table 3.
Table 3
Support Facility Inventory
Facility
Building Area
(Square Feet)
Administration 1,384
Business and Operations 1,152
Storage 2,456
Bus Garage 5,216
Maintenance Shop 4,096
Stadium 14,500
D.Land Inventory
The District does not own any sites which are developed for uses other than schools and/or
which are leased to other parties.
-11-
SECTION 4
STUDENT ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS
The District’s October 1, 2009 FTE enrollment was 2,436. Enrollment projections are most
accurate for the initial years of the forecast period. Moving further into the future, more
assumptions about economic conditions and demographic trends in the area affect the projection.
Monitoring birth rates in Snohomish County and population growth for the area are essential
yearly activities in the ongoing management of the capital facilities plan. In the event that
enrollment growth slows,plans for new facilities can be delayed. It is much more difficult,
however, to initiate new projects or speed projects up in the event enrollment growth exceeds the
projection.
A.Six Year Enrollment Projections
Two enrollment forecasts were conducted for the District: an estimate by OSPI based upon the
cohort survival method; and an estimate based upon County population as provided by OFM
(“ratio method”).
Based on the cohort survival methodology, a total of 2,279 FTE students are expected to be
enrolled in the District by 2015, a decrease from the October 2009 enrollment levels. Notably,
the cohort survival method does not anticipate new students from new development patterns.
This is particularly true of new development resulting from annexation and rezoning (both of
which have recently occurred in the City of Marysville).
OFM population-based enrollment projections were estimated for the District using OFM
population forecasts for the County. The County provided the District with the estimated total
population in the District by year. In 2009, the District’s average student enrollment constituted
approximately 17.9% of the total population in the District. Assuming that between 2010 and
2015, the District’s enrollment will constitute 17.9% of the District’s total population and using
OFM/County data, OFM/County methodology projects a total enrollment of 2,632 FTEs in 2015.
Table 4
Projected Student Enrollment
2010-2015
Projection
Oct.
2009*2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Change
2010-15
Percent
Change
2010-15
OFM/County 2,436 2,469 2,502 2,535 2,568 2,601 2,632 196 8.0%
OSPI**2,436 2,405 2,372 2,336 2,329 2,302 2,279 (157)(6.5%)
* Actual FTE, October 2009
**Based upon the cohort survival methodology; complete projections located at Appendix A.
-12-
In addition to the OFM population-based enrollment projections, the District is aware of pending
development within the District’s portion of the City of Marysville.This information is based on
development applications filed with the City and does not consider additional projects that may
be submitted to the City within the six years of this plan period.
Given the relative uncertainty of these pending developments, the District has chosen to rely on
the OFM population-based enrollment projections for purposes of planning for the District’s
needs during the six years of this plan period. Future updates to the Plan may revisit this issue.
B.2025 Enrollment Projections
Student enrollment projections beyond 2015 are highly speculative. Using OFM/County data as
a base, the District projects a 2025 student FTE population of 3,154. This is based on the
OFM/County data for the years 1990 through 2009 and the District’s average fulltime equivalent
enrollment for the corresponding years (for the years 1990 to 2009, the District’s actual
enrollment averaged 18.95%of the OFM/County population estimates). The total enrollment
estimate was broken down by grade span to evaluate long-term needs for capital facilities.
Projected enrollment by grade span for the year 2025 is provided in Table 5. Again, these
estimates are highly speculative and are used only for general planning purposes.
Table 5
Projected Student Enrollment
2025
Grade Span FTE Enrollment –
October 2009
Projected Enrollment 2025*
Elementary (K-5)1,043 1,347
Middle School (6-8)599 789
High School (9-12)794 1,018
TOTAL (K-12)2,436 3,154
*Assumes that percentage per grade span will remain constant through 2025.
Note: Snohomish County Planning and Development Service provided the underlying data for
the 2025 projections.
-13-
SECTION 5
CAPITAL FACILITIES NEEDS
The projected available student capacity was determined by subtracting projected FTE student
enrollment from permanent school capacity (i.e. excluding portables) for each of the six years in
the forecast period (2010-2015).
Capacity needs are expressed in terms of “unhoused students.”
Projected future capacity needs are depicted on Table 6-A and are derived by applying the
projected enrollment to the capacity existing in 2010. The method used to define future capacity
needs assumes no new construction. For this reason, planned construction projects are not
included at this point. This factor is added later (see Table 7).
This table shows actual space needs and the portion of those needs that are “growth related” for
the years 2010-2015.
Table 6-A*
Additional Capacity Needs
2009-2015
Grade Span 2009**2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Pct.
Growth
Related
Elementary (K-5)
Total
Growth Related
0
--
0
--
0
--
0
--
0
--
0
--
0
--0%
Middle School (6-8)
Total
Growth Related***
0
--
15
15
24
24
32
32
40
40
48
48
57
57 100%
High School
Total
Growth Related***
196
--
200
4
210
14
221
25
231
35
242
46
252
56 22.2%
*Please refer to Table 7 for capacity and projected enrollment information.
**Actual October 2009 FTE Enrollment
***This figure does not include growth-related needs from recent development activity within the District.Therefore, the District’s
growth-related needs are much higher. For example, the 2008 Capital Facilities Plan shows that, based on October 2007 FTE enrollment, the
District’s growth needs include an additional 9 students at the middle school level and an additional 29 students at the high school level. The
actual growth-related needs are higher than even the 2008 base figures when considering recent development activity and its impact on District
facilities.
-14-
By the end of the six-year forecast period (2015), additional permanent classroom capacity will
be needed as follows:
Table 6-B
Unhoused Students
Grade Span Unhoused Students
/Growth Related in
Parentheses)
Elementary (K-5)0 / (0)
Middle School (6-8)57 / (57)
High School (9-12)252 / (56)
TOTAL UNHOUSED
(K-12)309 / (113)
It is not the District’s policy to include relocatable classrooms when determining future capital
facility needs; therefore interim capacity provided by relocatable classrooms is not included in
Table 6-B. However, Table 6-C incorporates the District’s current relocatable capacity (see
Table 2) for purposes of identifying available capacity.
Table 6-C
Unhoused Students –Mitigated with Relocatables
Grade Span 2015 Unhoused Students
/Growth Related in
Parentheses)
Relocatable Capacity Unhoused Students*
Elementary (K-5)0 / (0)182 -----
Middle School (6-8)57 / (57)241 -----
High School (9-12)252 / (56)174 78
Importantly, Table 6-C does not include relocatable adjustment that may be made to meet
capacity needs. For example, the relocatable classrooms currently designated to serve
elementary school needs could be used to serve high school capacity needs. Therefore, assuming
no permanent capacity improvements are made, Table 6-C indicates that the District will have
adequate interim capacity with the use of relocatable classrooms to house students during this
planning period.
Projected permanent capacity needs are depicted in Table 7. They are derived by applying the
District’s projected number of students to the projected capacity. Planned improvements by the
District through 2015 are included in Table 7 and more fully described in Table 8.
-15-
Table 7
Projected Student Capacity
2010-2015
Elementary School Surplus/Deficiency
Oct 2009
FTE
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Existing Capacity 1,395 1,395 1,395 1,395 1,395 1,395 1,395
Added Permanent
Capacity
Total Capacity 1,395 1,395 1,395 1,395 1,395 1,395 1,395
Enrollment 1,043 1,054 1,068 1,082 1,097 1,111 1,123
Surplus (Deficiency)
352 341 327 313 298 284 272
Middle School Surplus/Deficiency
Oct 2009
FTE
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Existing Capacity 602 602 602 602 602 642 727
Added Permanent
Capacity*
85
Added Alternative
Program Capacity*
40
Total Capacity 602 602 602 602 642 727 727
Enrollment 599 617 626 634 642 650 659
Surplus (Deficiency)3 (15)(24)(32)--77 68
*See Section 6 for project information.
High School Surplus/Deficiency
Oct 2009
FTE
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Existing Capacity 598 598 598 598 598 658 823
Added Permanent
Capacity*
165
Added Alternative
Program Capacity*
60
Total Capacity 598 598 598 598 658 823 823
Enrollment 794 798 808 819 829 840 850
Surplus (Deficiency)(196)(200)(210)(221)(171)(17)(27)
*See Section 6 for project information.
See Appendix A for complete breakdown of enrollment projections.
See Table 6-A for a comparison of additional capacity needs due to growth versus existing deficiencies.
-16-
SECTION 6
CAPITAL FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN
A.Planned Improvements
In March 2000, the voters passed a $14,258,664 bond issue for school construction and site
acquisition. A new elementary school and a middle school addition were funded by that bond
measure. These projects are complete. Based upon current needs, the District anticipates that it
may need to consider the following acquisitions and/or improvements within the six years of this
Plan:
Projects Adding Permanent Capacity:
·Acquisition of a new 10 to 15 acre Elementary School site within the
District’s service boundaries and dependent on growth needs;
·Acquisition of a new high school or middle school site within the
District’s service boundaries and dependent on growth needs;
·An eighty-five (85) student expansion at the Lakewood Middle School;
·A one hundred sixty-five (165) student expansion at Lakewood High
School; and
·Acquisition and siting of portable facilities to accommodate growth needs.
Projects Adding Program Capacity:
·Lease space for a new alternative program, providing program capacity for
forty (40) middle school students and sixty (60) high school students.
Non-Capacity Adding Projects:
·High School modernization and improvements;
·Middle School modernization and improvements;
·Lakewood Elementary School modernization;
·Replacement of 11 relocatable classrooms;
·Bus Garage improvements;
·Replace Administration Building; and
·Replace Business Office Building.
In the event that planned construction projects do not fully address space needs for student
growth and a reduction in interim student housing, the Board could consider various courses of
action, including, but not limited to:
·Alternative scheduling options;
·Changes in the instructional model;
·Grade configuration changes;
·Increased class sizes; or
·Modified school calendar.
-17-
Funding for planned improvements is typically secured from a number of sources including voter
approved bonds, State Match funds, and impact fees. The District would need to request voter
authorization of a bond issue within the six years of this Plan to fund the above projects and/or
find other capital funding sources (including the use of school impact fees). The potential
funding sources are discussed below.
B.Financing for Planned Improvements
1.General Obligation Bonds
Bonds are typically used to fund construction of new schools and other capital
improvement projects. A 60% voter approval is required to approve the issuance of bonds.
Bonds are then retired through collection of property taxes. In March 2000, District voters
approved a $14,258,664 bond issue for school construction and site acquisition, which included
funding of the recently completed elementary school. The District is considering a request for
voter authorization of a bond issue within the six-years of this Plan to fund the school
construction projects identified in this plan. Additional details regarding the bond issue will be
included in future updates.
2.State School Construction Assistance
State School Construction Assistance funds come from the Common School Construction
Fund (the “Fund”). Bonds are sold on behalf of the Fund, and then retired from revenues
accruing predominantly from the sale of timber from common school lands. If these sources are
insufficient, the Legislature can appropriate funds or the State Board of Education can change
the standards. School districts may qualify for State School Construction Assistance funds for
specific capital projects based on a prioritization system. The District is eligible for State School
Construction Assistance funds for new schools at the 53.12% funding percentage level.
3.Impact Fees
Impact fees are a means of supplementing traditional funding sources for construction of
public facilities needed to accommodate new development. School impact fees are generally
collected by the permitting agency at the time plats are approved or building permits are issued.
4.Six Year Financing Plan
The Six-Year Financing Plan shown in Table 8 demonstrates how the District intends to
fund new construction and improvements to school facilities for the years 2010-2015. The
financing components include a bond issue, impact fees, and State Match funds. Projects and
portions of projects which remedy existing deficiencies are not appropriate for impact fee
funding. Thus, impact fees will not be used to finance projects or portions of projects which do
not add capacity or which remedy existing deficiencies.
-18-
Table 8
Capital Facilities Plan
Improvements Adding Permanent Capacity (Costs in Millions)
Project 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Total
Cost
Bonds/
Levy
State
Match
Impact
Fees
Elementary School
Site Acquisition
$1.5000
$1.5000 X
Middle School
Lakewood Middle
Addition $1.56625 $1.56625 $3.13251 X X X
High School
Lakewood High
Addition $3.03125 $3.03125 $6.06252 X X X
Secondary
Site Acquisition $4.5000 $4.5000 X X
Improvements Not Adding Capacity (Costs in Millions)
Project 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Total
Cost
Bonds/
Levy
State
Match
Impact
Fees
Elementary
Lakewood Elem 2.0000 $2.0000
Middle School
Lakewood Middle $6.00125 $6.00125 $12.0025 X X
High School
Lakewood High $15.74875 $15.74875 $31.4975 X X
11 Relocatables
Replaced
$1.1000 $1.1000 X
Bus Garage $1.4361 $1.4361 X
Admin Area $0.6564 $0.6564 X
Business Office $0.7612 $0.7612 X
Total Permanent Improvements (Costs in Millions)
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Total
Cost
Bonds/
Levy
State
Match
Impact
Fees
TOTAL $28.9475 $28.3475 $2.8537 $64.6487 X X X
Leased Program Facilities (Costs in Millions)
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Total
Cost
Bonds/
Levy
State
Match
Impact
Fees
Alternative Program
(Grades 6-12)$1.1203 X
1 Includes a portion of capacity-related improvements related to core gymnasium/ancillary space. Remaining costs included in “Improvements Not Adding
Capacity.”
2 Includes a portion of capacity-related improvements related to core gymnasium/ancillary space and performance arts space. Remaining costs included in
“Improvements Not Adding Capacity.”
3 Tenant Improvement Costs. Does not include annual lease costs.
-19-
SECTION 7
SCHOOL IMPACT FEES
The GMA authorizes jurisdictions to collect impact fees to supplement funding of
additional public facilities needed to accommodate new development. Impact fees cannot be
used for the operation, maintenance, repair, alteration, or replacement of existing capital facilities
used to meet existing service demands.
A.School Impact Fees in Snohomish County
The Snohomish County General Policy Plan (“GPP”) which implements the GMA sets
certain conditions for school districts wishing to assess impact fees:
·The District must provide support data including: an explanation of the
calculation methodology, a description of key variables and their
computation, and definitions and sources of data for all inputs into the fee
calculation.
·Such data must be accurate, reliable and statistically valid.
·Data must accurately reflect projected costs in the Six-Year Financing
Plan.
·Data in the proposed impact fee schedule must reflect expected student
generation rates from the following residential unit types: single family;
multi-family/studio or 1-bedroom; and multi-family/2-bedroom or more.
Snohomish County established a school impact fee program in November 1997, and
amended the program in December 1999. This program requires school districts to prepare and
adopt Capital Facilities Plans meeting the specifications of the GMA. Impact fees calculated in
accordance with the formula, which are based on projected school facility costs necessitated by
new growth and are contained in the District’s CFP, become effective following County Council
adoption of the District’s CFP.
B.Methodology and Variables Used to Calculate School Impact Fees
Impact fees have been calculated utilizing the formula in the Snohomish County Impact
Fee Ordinance. The resulting figures are based on the District’s cost per dwelling unit to
purchase land for school sites, make site improvements, construct schools, and purchase/install
relocatable facilities that add interim capacity needed to serve new development. As required
under the GMA, credits have also been applied in the formula to account for State Match funds
to be reimbursed to the District and projected future property taxes to be paid by the dwelling
unit. The costs of projects that do not add capacity are not included in the impact fee
calculations. Furthermore, because the impact fee formula calculates a “cost per dwelling unit”,
an identical fee is generated regardless of whether the total new capacity project costs are used in
-20-
the calculation or whether the District only uses the percentage of the total new capacity project
costs allocated to the Districts growth-related needs, as demonstrated in Table 6-A. For purposes
of this Plan, the District has chosen to use the full project costs in the fee formula. Furthermore,
impact fees will not be used to address existing deficiencies. See Table 8 for a complete
identification of funding sources.
The following projects are included in the impact fee calculation:
·A capacity addition at Lakewood Middle School; and
·A capacity addition at Lakewood High School.
Please see Table 8 and page 21 for relevant cost data related to each capacity project.
-21-
FACTORS FOR ESTIMATED IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS
Student Generation Factors –Single Family Average Site Cost/Acre
Elementary .269
Middle .125
Senior .197
Total .591
Temporary Facility Capacity
Student Generation Factors –Multi Family (1 Bdrm)Capacity
Elementary .000 Cost
Middle .000
Senior .000 State Match Credit
Total .000 Current State Match Percentage 53.12%
Student Generation Factors –Multi Family (2+ Bdrm)Construction Cost Allocation
Elementary .322 Current CCA 180.17
Middle .107
Senior .078 District Average Assessed Value
Total .507 Single Family Residence $323,833
Projected Student Capacity per Facility District Average Assessed Value
Middle School (new capacity) –85
High School (new capacity) -165
Multi Family (1 Bedroom)$90,329
Multi Family (2+ Bedroom)$131,359
Required Site Acreage per Facility
SPI Square Footage per Student
Facility Construction/Cost Average Elementary 90
Middle (Addition) $3,132500 Middle 108
High School (Addition) $6,062,500 High 130
District Debt Service Tax Rate
Current/$1,000 $1.417
Permanent Facility Square Footage General Obligation Bond Interest Rate
Elementary 113,472 Current Bond Buyer Index 4.00%
Middle 62,835
Senior 79,422 Developer Provided Sites/Facilities
Total 93.15%255,729 Value 0
Dwelling Units 0
Temporary Facility Square Footage
Elementary 8,960
Middle 6,272
Senior 3,584
Total 6.85%18,816
Total Facility Square Footage The total costs of the school construction projects
Elementary 122,432 and the total capacities are shown in the fee calculations.
Middle 69,107 However, new development will only be charged for the
Senior 83,006 system improvements needed to serve new growth.
Total 100.00%274,545
-22-
C.Proposed Lakewood School District Impact Fee Schedule
Using the variables and formula described in subsection B, impact fees proposed for the
District are summarized in Table 9A. See also Appendix C.
Table 9A
School Impact Fees
Snohomish County,City of Arlington, City of Marysville
Housing Type Impact Fee Per Dwelling Unit
Single Family $1,780
Multi-Family (1 Bedroom)$0
Multi-Family (2+ Bedroom)$1,379
APPENDIX A
POPULATION AND ENROLLMENT DATA
A-1
Table A-1
HISTORICAL STUDENT ENROLLMENT 2001-2009
ACTUAL ENROLLMENTS ON OCTOBER 1st*
GRADES 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
K 96 99 100 102 98 89 95 86 97
1st Grade 159 201 204 193 200 205 186 186 175
2nd Grade 185 174 201 189 194 204 189 190 184
3rd Grade 197 196 174 197 190 204 199 189 183
4th Grade 223 196 204 183 202 200 200 209 194
5th Grade 180 234 214 205 177 200 194 192 210
6th Grade 186 197 242 220 193 184 200 191 212
7th Grade 206 201 204 222 222 198 183 189 190
8th Grade 187 218 189 199 216 215 207 185 197
9th Grade 202 211 214 187 199 227 221 203 189
10th Grade 174 200 190 202 158 188 218 212 205
11th Grade 157 162 178 180 171 157 184 203 196
12th Grade 153 163 163 172 175 171 161 188 204
Total
Enrollment 2,305 2,452 2,477 2,451 2,395 2,442 2,437 2,423 2,436
* FTE enrollment.
A-2
Table A-2
PROJECTED STUDENT ENROLLMENT 2009-2015
Based on OSPI Cohort Survival*
GRADES ACTUAL
FTE
October 2009
ESTIMATE
FTE
2010-2011
ESTIMATE
FTE
2011-2012
ESTIMATE
FTE
2012-2013
ESTIMATE
FTE
2013-2014
ESTIMATE
FTE
2014-2015
ESTIMATE
FTE
2015-2016
K 97 89 88 86 85 83 81
1st Grade 175 197 181 178 175 172 169
2nd Grade 184 174 195 179 176 174 171
3rd Grade 183 184 174 195 179 176 174
4th Grade 194 188 189 179 200 184 181
5th Grade 210 190 184 185 175 196 180
3-5 Total 1,043 1,022 1,011 1,002 990 985 956
6th Grade 212 213 193 187 188 177 199
7th Grade 190 211 212 192 186 187 176
8th Grade 197 192 213 214 194 187 188
6-8 Total 599 616 618 593 568 551 563
9th Grade 189 200 195 216 217 197 190
10th Grade 205 178 189 184 204 205 186
11th Grade 196 192 166 177 172 191 192
12th Grade 204 197 193 167 178 173 192
9-12 Total 794 767 743 744 771 766 760
Total
Enrollment 2,436 2,405 2,372 2,339 2,329 2,302 2,279
* The cohort survival method of predicting future enrollment does not consider enrollment attributable to new development in the District. Enrollment
projections are most accurate for the initial years of the forecast period.
A-3
Table A-3
AVERAGE PERCENTAGE ENROLLMENT BY GRADE SPAN
(OSPI Enrollment Projections)
Enrollment by
Grade Span
Oct.
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Elementary (K-5)1,043 1,022 1,011 1,002 990 985 956
Middle School (6-8)599 616 618 593 568 551 563
High School (9-12)794 767 743 744 771 766 760
TOTAL 2,436 2,405 2,372 2,339 2,329 2,302 2,279
Percentage by
Grade Span
Oct.
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Elementary (K-5)43%42%43%43%43%43%42%
Middle School (6-8)25%26%26%25%24%24%25%
High School (9-12)32%32%31%32%33%33%33%
TOTAL**100%100%100%100%100%100%100%
Average Percentage
by Grade Span
Elementary (K-5)42.7%
Middle School (6-8)25.0%
High School (9-12)32.3%
TOTAL 100%
A-4
Table A-4
AVERAGE PERCENTAGE ENROLLMENT BY GRADE SPAN
(COUNTY/OFM Enrollment Projections)***
Enrollment by
Grade Span
Oct.
2009
Avg.
%age 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Elementary (K-5 1,043 42.7%1,054 1,068 1,082 1,097 1,111 1,123
Middle School (6-8)599 25.0%617 626 634 642 650 659
High School (9-12)794 32.3%798 808 819 829 840 850
TOTAL**2,436 100%2,469 2,502 2,535 2,568 2,601 2,632
*Actual October 2009 Enrollment.
** Totals may vary due to rounding.
***Using average percentage by grade span.
APPENDIX B
STUDENT GENERATION FACTOR REVIEW
B-1
B-2
APPENDIX C
SCHOOL IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Arlington
Council Agenda Bill
AGENDA ITEM:
ATTACHMENT M
COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
March14, 2011
SUBJECT:
Declaring old fire VHF radios and pagers
as surplus
DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN:
Fire
ATTACHMENTS:
-Proposed Resolution
-List of items for surplus
EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: N/A
BUDGET CATEGORY: N/A
LEGAL REVIEW:
N/A
DESCRIPTION: The department has approximately 40 VHF radios (29 portable & 11 mobile) and
30 Minitor pagers that where replaced three years ago by the 800 megahertz radio system. This
would include chargers and other miscellaneous parts.
HISTORY: Through a federal grant process and with Snohomish County issuing General
Obligation Bonds, all of Snohomish County Fire Departments changed from VHF to the 800
megahertz radio system in 2006. Because of this change, our old VHF radios and pagers are no
longer of use by our fire department. However, the Emergency Management Coordinator was
issued a number of the better condition radios for use by Public Works during an Emergency.
COMMITTEE REVIEW AND ACTION: The Fire Department would like to surplus the
radios/pagers while there is still a market for them. In addition, the department recommends
the resulting revenue to be equally split between the general & EMS funds. It is also requested
that those funds be authorized for additional and essential Fire Department training and request
that the total amount be included in the 2011 year-end budget supplement.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Table for additional review
2. Deny request, hold onto the radios
RECOMMENDED MOTION: No action requested at this time. This will be brought back to the
March 21st meeting for approval.
RESOLUTION NO. 2011-xxx
RESOLUTION NO. 2011-xxx
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ARLINGTON DECLARING CERTAIN
PROPERTY AS SURPLUS AND AUTHORIZING ITS SALE
WHEREAS, the City has purchased the equipment listed on the attached Exhibit
“A”; and
WHEREAS, the equipment identified on Exhibit “A” is surplus to the needs of
the City; and
NOW, THEREFORE, the City of Arlington, acting by and through its City
Council, does hereby resolve as follows:
1. The equipment/property described on the attached Exhibit “A” is declared
surplus to the needs of the City.
2. Staff is instructed to sell all items for the best available price or properly
dispose of items that it is unable to sell.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Arlington at a regular meeting on the
____ day of ________________, 2011.
________________________________
Margaret Larson, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________
Kristin Banfield, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
___________________________
Steven J. Peiffle, City Attorney
ID #Item Manufacturer Model Model #Low High Comments Condition Condition
1A Transistor tone encoder Plectron G21C2 5 15 Includes remote switch Good, dusty
1B Power supply, 5 amp Astron RS-7B 30 50
1C VHF Radio Kenwood TK-720 50 100 Includes KPS-10A amp
1 Tone pager Motorola Minitor 3 50 100 Missing battery cover
2 Tone pager Motorola Minitor 4 A03KUS7239BC 75 100 2 freq Good
3 Tone pager Motorola Minitor 2 H03UMC1222AC 15 30 154.43; "Bell, 1, 2"Good
4 Tone pager Motorola Minitor 2 H03UMC1222AC 15 30 154.43; "Bell, 1, 2"Good
5 Tone pager Motorola Minitor 2 15 30 154.43; "Bell, 1, 2"; embossed; no dust plug Good
6 Tone pager Motorola Minitor 2 15 30 154.43; "Bell, 1, 2"; embossed, no dust plug Good
7 Tone pager Motorola Minitor 2 15 30 154.43; "Bell, 1, 2"Good
8 Tone pager Motorola Minitor 2 15 30 154.43; "Bell, 1, 2"; embossed, older style charger Good
9 Tone pager Motorola Minitor 4 A03KUS7239BC 75 100 2 freq, Crack at clip-case interface
10 Tone pager Motorola Minitor 3 A03YMS7238AC 50 100 No volume knob; 154.43
11 Tone pager Motorola Minitor 2 H03UMC1222AC 25 75 154.43; "Bell, 1, 2"Good, little dirty
12 Tone pager Motorola Minitor 2 25 75 Red top; no dust plug; small crack in back
13 Tone pager Motorola Minitor 2 H03UMC1222AC 25 75 Clip broken; 154.43 Good
14 Tone pager Motorola Minitor 2 H03UMC1222AC 25 75 Good
15 Tone pager Motorola Minitor 2 H03UMC1222AC 25 75 154.43, 154.175; "Bell, 1, 2"; embossed; no dust plug Good
16 Portable radio car cradle Motorola NTN1340C 25 75 Unit and mic only. Works with HT1000, JT1000, MT2000, MTS2000, MTX8000, MTX838, MTX9000
17 Mobile radio Kenwood TK-730 50 100 Has some mounting bracket, with mic, no power cable
85 Mobile radio Kenwood TK-730?10 20 Head only, with mic
86 Mobile radio Kenwood TK-730?10 20 Head only, with mic
Mobile radio Kenwood TK-730 50 100 Head only, so far
18 Nextel Motorola i355 10 20 With wall and car charger, no charger dust plug
19 Nextel Motorola i355 10 20 With wall and car charger, no charger dust plug
20 Nextel Motorola i355 10 20 With wall and car charger
21 Head unit keylock Motorola Keylock HLN6372A 10 15
22 Head unit keylock Motorola Keylock HLN6372A 10 15
23 Head unit keylock Motorola Keylock HLN6372A 10 15
24 Portable radio Motorola Radius GP300 P93YPCZ0C1AA 20 50 Vehicle or wall mount, no power bug, has speaker mic Fair
25 Portable radio Motorola HT1000 H01KDC9AA3DN 50 100 Sticker residue, mic cover, no battery, cracked antenna Good
26 Portable radio Motorola HT1000 H01KDC9AA3AN 50 100 Sticker residue, no mic cover, no battery, engraving Good
27 Portable radio Motorola HT1000 H01KDC9AA3BN 50 100 Clean, nice, no mic cover Good
28 Portable radio Motorola HT1000 H01KDC9AA3DN 50 100 Sticker residue, no mic cover, bent antenna Good
29 Portable radio Motorola HT1000 H01KDC9AA3DN 50 100 Clean, nice, no mic cover Good
30 Portable radio Motorola HT1000 H01KDC9AA3DN 50 100 Sticker residue, no mic cover, no battery Fair
31 Portable radio Motorola HT1000 H01KDC9AA3BN 50 100 Sticker residue, no mic cover, no battery Good
32 Portable radio Motorola HT1000 H01KDC9AA3DN 50 100 Small sticker residue, mic cover +Good
33 Portable radio Motorola HT1000 H01KDC9AA3BN 50 100 Small sticker residue, no mic cover, cracked antenna Good
34 Portable radio Motorola HT1000 H01KDC9AA3DN 50 100 Sticker residue, no mic cover, bent antenna Fair
35 Portable radio Motorola HT1000 H01KDC9AA3DN 50 100 Velcro on front, no mic cover Good
36 Portable radio Motorola HT1000 H01KDC9AA3AN 50 100 Sticker residue, no mic cover, no battery Good
37 Portable radio Motorola HT1000 H01KDC9AA3DN 50 100 Sticker residue, no mic cover, no battery Good
38 Tone pager Motorola Minitor 2 AZ489FR3688 25 75 No dust plug, has charger Good With charger
39 Tone pager Motorola Minitor 2 AZ489FR3688 25 75 Good, a little dirty With charger
40 Tone pager Motorola Minitor 2 AZ489FR3740 25 75 Red top With charger
41 Tone pager Motorola Minitor 3 A03YMS7239BC 50 100 \Good, sticker on side No charger
42 Tone pager Motorola Minitor 3 A03YMS7238BC 50 100 No dust plug, no charger Good No charger
43 Tone pager Motorola Minitor 3 A03YMS7238AC 50 100 Missing dust plug and vol knob, no charger Good No charger
44 Tone pager Motorola Minitor 4 136WEN25V5 75 100 With charger Good With charger
45 Tone pager Motorola Minitor 4 A03YMS7238BC 75 100 With charger Good With charger
46 Tone pager Motorola Minitor 4 A03YMS7238BC 75 100 Good condition, with charger
47 Tone pager Motorola Minitor 4 A03YMS7238BC 75 100 Good, charger has some battery corrosion With charger
48 Tone pager amplifier Motorola Minitor 2 amplifier NYN8348A 10 25 No battery cover Good
49 Tone pager amplifier Motorola Minitor 2 amplifier NYN8348A 10 25 No battery cover Good
50 Tone pager amplifier Motorola Minitor 2 amplifier NYN8348A 10 25 Good
51 Tone pager Motorola Minitor 2 AZ489FR3688 25 75 Red top, broken clip, with charger Good With charger
52 Mobile radio Wilson WH2516 20 50 12v
53 Mobile radio Johnson 20 50 Unknown model
54 Mobile radio Wilson WH2510 20 50 No mic
55 Mobile radio Wilson WH2510 20 50 Poss problem with 1 channel
56 Portable radio Motorola HT600 H43SVU7160BN 10 25 Antenna condition poor, engraving on front Good With charger
57 Speaker Motorola Remote speaker 5 15 Aligator clips on wire
58 Tone pager charger Motorola Minitor 2 charger 10 25
59 Tone pager charger Motorola Minitor 2 charger 10 25
60 Tone pager charger Motorola Minitor 2 charger 10 25
61 Tone pager charger Motorola Minitor 2 charger 10 25
62 Tone pager charger Motorola Minitor 2 charger 10 25
63 Tone pager charger Motorola Minitor 2 charger 10 25
64 Charger accessory Impress AT-2060 5 10 11 total HT750/1250/1550, CT250,XTS2500,GP320/360,MTX850/8250/LS/9250, 7.5v
65 Portable radio Motorola HT50 H43BEU7120AN 30 50 Good condition, antenna cracked at base, comes with case
66 Portable radio Motorola MT1000 H43GCU7100CN 30 50 Top only, no battery Good, some minor scratches
67 Portable radio Motorola MT1000 H43GCU7100CN 30 50 Top only, no battery, missing cover for ext mic Good
68 Portable radio Motorola MT1000 H43GCU7100CN 30 50 Top only, no battery, missing cover for ext mic
69 Portable radio Motorola HT1000 H01KDC9AA3DN 50 100 Sticker on front, engraving on back, no mic cover, with chargerGood
70 Portable radio Motorola HT1000 H01KDC9AA3AN 50 100 Sticker on front, beat up speaker, no mic cover Good
71 Portable radio Motorola HT1000 H01KDC9AA3DN 50 100 Sticker on front, engraving on back, no mic cover, with chargerGood
72 Portable radio Motorola HT1000 H01KDC9AA3BN 50 100 Sticker on front, engraving on back, no mic cover, with chargerGood
73 Portable radio Motorola HT1000 H01KDC9AA3DN 50 100 Clean, engraving on back, with charger Good
74 Portable radio Motorola HT1000 H01KDC9AA3AN 50 100 Sticker on front, engraving on back, no mic cover, with chargerGood
75 Portable radio Motorola HT1000 H01KDC9AA3DN 50 100 Clean, engraving on back, with charger Good
76 Portable radio Motorola HT1000 H01KDC9AA3BN 50 100 Sticker on front, engraving on back, no mic cover Good
City of Arlington
Council Agenda Bill
AGENDA ITEM:
ATTACHMENT N
COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
March 21, 2011
SUBJECT: Interlocal Agreement - with
other governmental agencies of Snohomish
County (Fire)
DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN:
Fire
ATTACHMENTS:
Interlocal Agreement For Automatic First Response and Mutual Assistance
EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: N/A
BUDGET CATEGORY: N/A
LEGAL REVIEW:
Agreement reviewed by City Attorney with no
comments or concerns
DESCRIPTION: The Interlocal Agreement for Automatic First Response and Mutual Assistance
allows for Mutual Aid, Automatic Aid, Special Services, Command Responsibilities, Temporary
use of equipment, Training and piggy-back purchasing with our neighboring agencies.
HISTORY: In 2008, it was determined that many fire agencies throughout Snohomish County
were participating in Automatic Aid and Mutual Aid type incidents, without having current
Interlocal agreements in place. Realizing this, the Snohomish County Fire Chiefs developed the
attached agreement to address these issues, but also to include Special Services (Haz Mat,
Rescue) Responses, Command Responsibilities, Temporary use of equipment, Training and
piggy-back purchasing. In 2008, the Interlocal Agreement was adopted by all but three
departments in Snohomish County.
COMMITTEE REVIEW AND ACTION: This Agreement will contractually/legally allow our
department to request man power, equipment and specialized teams during an emergency or
training exercise. It will additionally provide a benefit option for joint purchasing of fire, rescue and
EMS equipment. This will have a positive impact on firefighter safety, incident effectiveness and
reduce liability to the city.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Table for additional review
2. Deny request
RECOMMENDED MOTION: There is no action requested at this time.
City of Arlington
Council Agenda Bill
AGENDA ITEM:
ATTACHMENT O
COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
March 14, 2011
SUBJECT:
Hotel Motel Tax Distributions for 2011
DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN:
Executive/Finance
CONTACT: Allen Johnson, 403-3443
Jim Chase, 403-3422
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Spreadsheet listing applications and funding recommendations
2. Copy of sample contract
EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: $ 138,268
BUDGET CATEGORY: Hotel-Motel Tax Fund
LEGAL REVIEW: City Attorney will review the proposed
contracts before they are signed
DESCRIPTION:
For the 2011 funding process, 11 applications were received totaling $ 138,268. The Hotel-Motel
Tax Fund will be able to provide funding for all applications and have approximately $25,450
remaining in the fund at year end. The Lodging Tax Advisory Committee met on February 25
to review and make recommendation regarding the applications. Copies of the minutes of that
meeting are attached. Organizations who are awarded funds will be required to enter into a
contract with the city to receive the funds and abide by the terms.
Per the AMC 3.42.060, the committee is comprised of two members representing an event that
would be eligible to apply for grant funds, two members representing an Arlington hotel or
motel and one member from the City Council (nominated by the Mayor and confirmed by the
Council). There is currently one vacant board position. One member, who was one of the
lodging establishment appointees to the board, is no longer employed by a local lodging
establishment. The AMC states the council shall solicit recommendations from organizations
representing businesses that collect the tax and organizations that are authorized to receive
funds under this chapter.
HISTORY: State law authorizes cities and counties to impose hotel-motel taxes. Revenues
generated from the tax are to be used for tourism promotion and tourism-related facilities. The
City began collecting a 2% hotel-motel tax in 2005. Cities with population over 5,000 are
required to establish a Lodging Tax Advisory Committee prior to imposing the tax. The
committee is charged with making recommendations to the full council for allocation of
available funds.
City of Arlington
Council Agenda Bill
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Table for additional review
2. Take no action
RECOMMENDED ACTION: There is no action requested at this time. This will be submitted
for approval at the March 21st Council meeting.
Hotel / Motel
Project Project Total Sponsor Tax Committee
Sponsor/Contractor Title Project Match Request Recommends
Arlington EAA Fly-in Promotion/advertising fly-in 101,500.00$ 71,000.00$ 30,500.00$ 30,500.00$
Arlington Arts Council AAC's popular music concert's at BPAC 7,500.00$ 2,500.00$ 5,000.00$ 5,000.00$
Downtown Arlington Merchants Assoc.
Brochures,advertising, marketing, web-
site 19,000.00$ 4,750.00$ 14,250.00$ 14,250.00$
Arlington/Smokey Point C of C Visitor Information Center 22,800.00$ 11,400.00$ 11,400.00$ 11,400.00$
Arlington/Smokey Point C of C
2010 Fourth of July Events, Peddle
Paddle Puff Triathlon and Fireworks
Show 8,190.00$ 3,190.00$ 5,000.00$ 5,000.00$
Olympic Ballet Theatre The Nutcracker in Arlington 90,000.00$ 86,000.00$ 4,000.00$ 4,000.00$
City of Arlington Visitor Kiosks for the Centenial Trail 7,740.00$ 2,240.00$ 5,500.00$ 5,500.00$
City of Arlington Summer Outdoor Recreation Events 10,010.00$ 2,710.00$ 7,300.00$ 7,300.00$
City of Arlington Legion Park "Train Depot" Restrooms 72,000.00$ 24,000.00$ 48,000.00$ 48,000.00$
Red Rooster Route Red Rooster Route Days 5,750.00$ 1,900.00$ 3,850.00$ 3,850.00$
Stillaguamish Valley Pioneer Association Pioneer Museum Brochures 4,931.00$ 1,463.00$ 3,468.00$ 3,468.00$
TOTALS 349,421.00$ 211,153.00$ 138,268.00$ 138,268.00$
2010 Bal. in the H/M Tax Fund 95,233.00$
2010 Reimb. Paid in Jan. 2011 (2,715.00)
2011 projected Tax Receipts 70,000.00
2011 projected Interest Income 1,200.00
Amount to carry over to 2012 25,450.00$
Hotel / Motel Funding Applications for 2011
Hotel / Motel
Project Project Total Sponsor Tax Committee
Sponsor/Contractor Title Project Match Request Recommends
Arlington EAA Fly-in Promotion/advertising fly-in 101,500.00$ 71,000.00$ 30,500.00$ 30,500.00$
Arlington Arts Council AAC's popular music concert's at BPAC 7,500.00$ 2,500.00$ 5,000.00$ 5,000.00$
Downtown Arlington Merchants Assoc.
Brochures,advertising, marketing, web-
site 19,000.00$ 4,750.00$ 14,250.00$ 14,250.00$
Arlington/Smokey Point C of C Visitor Information Center 22,800.00$ 11,400.00$ 11,400.00$ 11,400.00$
Arlington/Smokey Point C of C
2010 Fourth of July Events, Peddle
Paddle Puff Triathlon and Fireworks
Show 8,190.00$ 3,190.00$ 5,000.00$ 5,000.00$
Olympic Ballet Theatre The Nutcracker in Arlington 90,000.00$ 86,000.00$ 4,000.00$ 4,000.00$
City of Arlington Visitor Kiosks for the Centenial Trail 7,740.00$ 2,240.00$ 5,500.00$ 5,500.00$
City of Arlington Summer Outdoor Recreation Events 10,010.00$ 2,710.00$ 7,300.00$ 7,300.00$
City of Arlington Legion Park "Train Depot" Restrooms 72,000.00$ 24,000.00$ 48,000.00$ 48,000.00$
Red Rooster Route Red Rooster Route Days 5,750.00$ 1,900.00$ 3,850.00$ 3,850.00$
Stillaguamish Valley Pioneer Association Pioneer Museum Brochures 4,931.00$ 1,463.00$ 3,468.00$ 3,468.00$
TOTALS 349,421.00$ 211,153.00$ 138,268.00$ 138,268.00$
2010 Bal. in the H/M Tax Fund 95,233.00$
2010 Reimb. Paid in Jan. 2011 (2,715.00)
2011 projected Tax Receipts 70,000.00
2011 projected Interest Income 1,200.00
Amount to carry over to 2012 25,450.00$
Hotel / Motel Funding Applications for 2011