The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About05-16-2011_Council Meeting Packet Arlington City Council May 16, 2011 – 7 PM City Council Chambers 110 E. Third SPECIAL ACCOMMODATIONS: The City of Arlington strives to provide accessible meetings for people with disabilities. Please contact the ADA coordinator at (360) 403-3441 or 1-800-833-8388 (TDD only) prior to the meeting date if special accommodations are required. CALL TO ORDER / PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS 1. Community Transit Update, Todd Morrow 2. National Public Works Week Recognition PUBLIC COMMENT For members of the public to speak to the Council regarding matters NOT on the agenda. Please limit remarks to three minutes CONSENT AGENDA 1. Minutes of the May 2 & 9, 2011 meetings ATTACHMENT A 2. Accounts Payable 3. National Public Works Week Proclamation ATTACHMENT B 4. Proclamation for Arlington Relay for Life, June 4-5, 2011 ATTACHMENT C PUBLIC HEARING UNFINISHED BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS 1. Resolution to surplus 1994 ambulance and sell to Fire District #24 ATTACHMENT D 2. Authorization to accept the Pacific Mobile proposal for the ATTACHMENT E Utility Administration Office Building 3. Authority to Bid Cemetery Office Remodel & approve Water Rights sale ATTACHMENT F 4. Authority to Bid Washington/Lenore ATTACHMENT G 5. Authority to Bid Stillaguamish Avenue Paving Project ATTACHMENT H 6. Authority to Contract with Snohomish County for the ATTACHMENT I Stillaguamish Avenue Cape Seal 7. Resolution to reject all Slurry Seal Bids and Authorize staff to Rebid ATTACHMENT J 8. Authority for the Mayor to sign the Skagit Valley Humane Society Animal ATTACHMENT K Shelter Contract 9. Authority for the Mayor to sign the renewal of the Snohomish Regional ATTACHMENT L Drug Taskforce ILA 10. Resolution to Surplus Police Department Cars ATTACHMENT M DISCUSSION ITEMS INFORMATION ADMINISTRATOR & STAFF REPORTS MAYOR’S REPORT COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS – OPTIONAL EXECUTIVE SESSION RECONVENE ADJOURNMENT DRAFT Page 1 of 3 Council Chambers 110 East Third May 2, 2011 City Council Members Present by Roll Call: Dick Butner Sally Lien, Scott Solla, Marilyn Oertle, Chris Raezer, Linda Byrnes, and Steve Baker Council Members Absent: There were no Council members absent. City Staff Present: Mayor Larson, Allen Johnson, Kristin Banfield, Paul Ellis, Jim Chase, Police Chief Nelson Beazley and Officer Hirotaka, Fire Chief Bruce Steadman and Fire Personnel Davies, Nyblod, Hillis, Hestikind, Asher, Smith, Abrahamson, Hunsaker, Dickison, Wilburn, Cooper, Beam and Normand, Jim Kelly, Jan Bauer, Steve Peiffle – City Attorney Also Known to be Present: Mike Hopson, Barbara Tolbert, Kari Ilonummi and Ken Klein Mayor Larson called the meeting to order at 7:00PM, and the pledge of allegiance to the flag followed. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA Steve Baker moved to approve the Agenda. Scott Solla seconded the motion which passed with a unanimous vote. INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS Chief Bruce Stedman & Barb Tolbert ~ EMS Levy Report & EMS Week Chief Steadman and Barbara Tolbert talked about efforts regarding the recently passed EMS levy, the National EMS Week Proclamation, and a personal invitation for the May 15 Public Safety Expo at Fire House #48. At this time the firefighters present shook hands with all Council members and staff. Chief Nelson Beazley ~ National Police Week Chief Beazley congratulated those for their efforts on the EMS Levy. Chief Beazley then reminded us of those who give their lives for their community and of the importance of a protective police presence. PUBLIC COMMENT Kari Ilonummi spoke to the recent increase of drastic geological events and asked how the Country is prepared in the case of a devastating disaster. Finance Director Jim Chase noted that this week is National Prayer Week and Thursday is a National Day of Prayer. He stated that this Saturday there will be a time of prayer at 11:00PM, which is the beginning of Saturday’s Relay for Life events. CONSENT AGENDA Steve Baker moved and Sally Lien seconded the motion to approve the Consent Agenda which was unanimously carried to approve the following Consent Agenda items: 1. Minutes of the April 18 and 25, 2011 meetings A 2. Accounts Payable EFT Payments and Claims Checks #73230 through #73394 dated April 19, 2011 through May 2, 2011, in the amount of $980,154.67, and EFT Payments and Payroll Checks #27178 through #27209 and Electronic Payments for the period April 1, 2011 through April 30, 2011 in the amount of $1,219,045.34 Minutes of the Arlington City Council Meeting Minutes of the City of Arlington City Council Meeting DRAFT May 2, 2011 Page 2 of 3 3. Relay for Life “Paint the Town Purple” Proclamation 4. National Police Week Proclamation May 15-21, 2011 5. EMS Week Proclamation May 15-21, 2011 6. National Public Service Week Proclamation May 1-7, 2011 7. Juror Appreciation Week Proclamation, May 1-7, 2011 8. Cemetery Board renewal for Christie Christianson to 4-1-2015 PUBLIC HEARING There was no Public Hearing. UNFINISHED BUSINESS There was no Unfinished Business. NEW BUSINESS WWTP Change Order #9 Public Works Director Jim Kelly addressed the Change Order, which he hopes would be the last. He also presented a summary of the contract changes which amount to less than ½ of 1% of the cost. Mr. Kelly then answered a question regarding the overall project funding, as raised at the last Council Workshop meeting. Discussion and clarification followed. Dick Butner moved to approve Change Order No. 9 to the IMCO WWTP Upgrade and Expansion construction contract, pending final review by the City Attorney. Sally Lien seconded the motion that passed with a unanimous vote. Authority for Mayor to sign $195K DOE Grant Agreement Mr. Kelly requested permission for the Mayor to accept $195,000 for the wetland project. Dick Butner moved to accept the $195,000 from the Stormwater Retrofit and LID Competitive Grant Program and authorize the Mayor to sign the Grant Agreement, pending final review by the City Attorney. Sally Lien seconded the motion that passed with a unanimous vote. Fire Station 46 Change Orders #1 & 2 Capital Projects Manager Paul Ellis addressed the two requested Change Orders and gave an update on the construction process and cost. Sally Lien moved to authorize the Mayor to sign change orders one and two in the amount of $7,581.00 for the Station 46 renovation project. Dick Butner seconded the motion that passed with a unanimous vote. Janitorial Contract Mr. Ellis noted that this re-bid would be a cost savings to the City. Scott Solla moved to authorize the Mayor to sign a Professional Services agreement with SMS Cleaning to provide janitorial services in City facilities. Marilyn Oertle seconded the motion that passed with a unanimous vote. ADMINISTRATOR & STAFF REPORTS City Administrator Allen Johnson noted a formal request to allow golf carts within the Gleneagle golf community. Conditions for that to happen are forthcoming. MAYOR’S REPORT Mayor Larson stated that it is great to be back at work. COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS – OPTIONAL Dick Butner, Sally Lien, Scott Solla, Marilyn Oertle, Chris Raezer, Linda Byrnes, and Steve Baker gave brief reports. Minutes of the City of Arlington City Council Meeting DRAFT May 2, 2011 Page 3 of 3 EXECUTIVE SESSION City Attorney Steve Peiffle requested a 20 minute Executive Session, with no action to be taken during or after the meeting and with a 5-minute break beforehand, to review collective bargaining negotiations, grievances, or discussions regarding the interpretation or application of a labor agreement [RCW 42.30.140(4)] and to discuss pending or potential litigation [RCW 42.30.110(1)(i)]. The Council recessed into Executive Session at 7:57PM. The meeting was reconvened at 8:23PM, and with no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was immediately adjourned. ____________________________ Margaret Larson, Mayor DRAFT Page 1 of 2 Council Chambers 110 East Third Street May 9, 2011 Dick Butner, Sally Lien, Scott Solla, Marilyn Oertle, Chris Raezer, Linda Byrnes, Steve Baker, Mayor Larson, Allen Johnson, Kristin Banfield, Jim Chase, Police Chief Nelson Beazley, Fire Chief Bruce Steadman, Jim Kelly, David Kuhl, Cristy Brubaker, Paul Ellis, Kris Wallace, Brian Dewitt, Eric Scott, Roxanne Guenzler, and Steve Peiffle – City Attorney Council Members Absent: All members were present. Also Known to be Present: Michael Hopson Mayor Larson called the meeting to order at 7:00PM. Steve Baker moved to approve the Agenda, and Sally Lien seconded the motion, which passed with a unanimous vote approving the Workshop Agenda. WORKSHOP ITEMS ~ NO FINAL ACTION WAS TAKEN Utility Admin Office Building Special Projects Manager Paul Ellis and Public Works Director Jim Kelly gave background for the roposed Utility Admin Building. Jim Kelly then distributed a memo from Richard Warren outlining he building costs, size and funding. Council members suggested community outreach on the roject to let citizens know that building funds were not from the Utility Rate increases. Throughout he Presentation Mr. Ellis and Mr. Kelly answered Council questions. 67th Ave. Amenities Presentation Mr. Kelly gave power point presentation on the 67th Avenue Project and explained retaining wall options/costs and options for street furniture on 67th Avenue. Authority to Bid Cemetery Office Remodel Jim Kelly reviewed the proposed expansion of the current Cemetery Office. This will move forward to next Council meeting. Authority to Bid Washington/Lenore Jim Kelly explained cost/budget for the Washington St. and Lenore St. Water Main Replacement project. This will move forward to next meeting. Authority to Bid Stillaguamish Avenue Paving Project Jim Kelly addressed the Stillaguamish Avenue Paving Project also the partnering with Cascade Valley Hospital and the Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians on the project. Minutes of the Arlington City Council Workshop Minutes of the City of Arlington City Council Meeting DRAFT May 9, 2011 Page 2 of 2 Authority to Contract with Snohomish County for the Stillaguamish Avenue Cape Seal Jim Kelly spoke to the project and presented an explanation of the cape seal process, stating that the design is complete and ready to bid. Request to Reject All Slurry Seal Bids Jim Kelly is requesting that the Council rejects all bids received for the Slurry Seal Project, as there was only one bid. AMC Land Use Code to Address How Comp Plan Docket is Approved by Council Community Development Director David Kuhl addressed the proposed Minor Land Use Code Amendments Annual Docketing Process for Comp Plan Amendments and answered Council questions. Skagit Valley Humane Society Animal Shelter Contract Police Chief Nelson Beazley reviewed the contractual agreement between the City of Arlington and the Humane Society of Skagit Valley, stating that staff is pleased with the service that the City is receiving. He recommends renewal of the contract. Renewal of the Snohomish Regional Drug Taskforce ILA Chief Beazley addressed the renewal of the Interlocal Agreement with Snohomish Regional Drug and Gang Task Force and stated that the partnership provides essential assistance to the Police Department, especially in the area of training and undercover operations. Resolution to Surplus Police Department Cars Chief Beazley spoke to the surplus of two motor vehicles no longer viable for fleet use because of mechanical condition and the need for them to be sold as surplus. Resolution to Surplus 1994 Ambulance and Sell to Fire District #24 (Darrington) Fire Chief Bruce Stedman addressed the proposed Resolution to surplus a 1994 Ford ambulance and possibility sell to Snohomish County Fire Protection District #24 (Darrington) for $1.00. The ambulance is currently in storage and no longer in service. Chief Stedman then answered council questions. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:39 PM. __________________________ Margaret Larson, Mayor City of Arlington Council Agenda Bill AGENDA ITEM: New Business #1 ATTACHMENT D COUNCIL MEETING DATE: May 16 , 2011 SUBJECT: Approval of a proposed Resolution to surplus a 1994 Ford ambulance and sell to Snohomish County Fire Protection District #24 (Darrington) for $1.00 DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN: Fire Contact: Bruce Stedman, 360-403-3601 ATTACHMENTS: - Proposed Resolution to authorize staff to surplus a 1994 Ford ambulance and sell it to Snohomish County Fire Protection District #24 (Darrington) for $1.00 EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: None BUDGET CATEGORY: None LEGAL REVIEW: City Attorney reviewed the proposed resolution DESCRIPTION: The Arlington Fire Department has a 1994 Ford ambulance that is no longer in service. Snohomish County Fire Protection District #24 (Darrington) has an immediate need to put an ambulance to provide BLS services to the Town of Darrington and the area covered by Fire District #24. The Fire Department would like to surplus the ambulance and sell it to Fire District #24 for $1.00. ALTERNATIVES: Do not approve the proposed resolution. RECOMMENDED ACTION: I move Council approves the proposed Resolution to surplus the 1994 Ford ambulance and sell it to Snohomish County Fire Protection District #24 (Darrington) for $1.00. RESOLUTION NO. 2011-010 RESOLUTION NO. 2011-010 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ARLINGTON DECLARING CERTAIN PROPERTY AS SURPLUS AND AUTHORIZING ITS SALE TO SNOHOMISH COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT #24 (DARRINGTON) FOR $1.00 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 described on the attached Exhibit “A” is declared surplus to the needs of the City. 2. Staff is instructed to sell the equipment to Snohomish County Fire Protection District #24 (Darrington) for $1.00 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 Exhibit A 1994 Ford Ambulance VIN #1FDKE30M7RHB49143 City of Arlington Council Agenda Bill AGENDA ITEM: New Business #2 ATTACHMENT E COUNCIL MEETING DATE: May 16 , 2011 SUBJECT: Purchase of Modular Building from Pacific Mobile for PW Utility Administration DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN: Public Works – Utilities Division James Kelly ATTACHMENTS: • Memorandum summarizing procurement process and Lease vs. Own options • Value Engineering Study EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: $1,030,000 (Est, includes building, tax, and KCDA fee) BUDGET CATEGORY: Water Capital Fund, Sewer Capital Fund, WWTP Fund, Storm Fund LEGAL REVIEW: Pending Final Review by City Attorney DESCRIPTION – Proposal from Pacific Mobile for the fabrication and construction of a modular office building to house the Public Works Utility Administration office. HISTORY: – The PW Utilities Administration offices are currently housed in a leased modular building that was leased from William-Scotsman in 2004. The lease will expire in October 2011 and the building is in such poor condition that it needs to be replaced. Staff has researched several different building construction options including, stick built, prefabricated, and modular construction. Of the various building construction options, modular construction is the lowest cost per square foot and the best overall value. Staff worked with the new Haller Park design and began looking for a larger, permanent modular office building to provide a park presence, a large community meeting room (Stilly Conference Room), and offices for Utility & PW Admin staff (see attached floor plan). The City solicited comparable proposals from William-Scotsman and Pacific Mobile for the new office; Pacific Mobile provided a price quote that was more than 20% lower. Pacific Mobile is under the KCDA purchasing plan and the City will procure the building through KCDA with a 2% processing fee. ALTERNATIVES: • Renew lease for modular office RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion authorizing the mayor to sign a purchase contract with KCDA Purchasing for the procurement and installation of a modular office building from Pacific Mobile that will house the Public Works Utility Administration Department. City of Arlington Public Works Memo To: Mayor Larson and City Council From: James Kelly cc: Allen Johnson, Paul Ellis, Kris Wallace, Eric Scott, Dick Warren Date: May 2, 2011 Re: Utility Administration Building Project recommendation Realizing that the lease on the current Public Works (PW) Utility Administration building was set to expire in October 2011 and, due to the buildings condition and the fact that the lease was not going to be renewed, the PW Utility Administration staff began planning for construction of a new permanent Utility Administration building in the summer of 2010. The project was funded in the City’s 2011 capital budget in the amount of $900,000; $450,000 from Water CIP and $450,000 from Sewer CIP. The purpose of this memorandum is to provide a summary as to the status of the PW Utility Administration building project regarding design, procurement and construction, and to evaluate the purchase of a new building versus the continuation of a lease of a modular type office. This information is presented in the following sections of this memorandum: 1. History 2. Project Team 3. Selection of Building Construction Type 4. Space Planning 5. Identification of Modular Building Contractors and Solicitation of Quotations 6. Building Floor Plan and Exterior Design 7. Building Cost Savings 8. Other Construction Costs 9. Total Project Cost Summary 10. Funding Summary 11. Rent vs. Own Analysis 12. Value Engineering Study 1. History  Page 2 The existing PW Utility Administration building is a 5-module, 3,360 square foot assembly of mobile structures that was first leased from William Scotsman in 2003 and occupied by the Utility Administration department in 2004. This building is a used modular structure that was previously occupied by one of the refineries in Anacortes; as such, the City was able to obtain a below market lease for the building. Since the 2003 original lease signing, the PW Utility Administration department has paid over $220,000 in lease payments for this building; the current lease rate is $0.71 per square foot per month. This is a very below market lease that will expire in October 2011; current market rates for buildings of similar construction is $1.39 per square foot per month. In the summer of 2010 the PW Utility Administration department began planning for construction of a new permanent PW Utility Administration building by October 2011. The PW Utility Administration office is a crucial piece of utility infrastructure providing a very much needed service to the City’s utility departments necessary to keep them operating in a financially solvent manner and in compliance with all necessary state and federal regulations. Given its need for successful utility operation, both the water utility comprehensive plan (2011) and sewer utility comprehensive plan (2008) identified construction of a new PW Utility Administration building in their long range capital improvement program. This project has been funded in the amount of $900,000 through the Council approved 2011 Water Utility and Sewer Utility capital budgets. 2. Project Team Following the approved funding for 2011 construction of a new PW Utility Administration building, a City project team was selected for this project. This team consists of Paul Ellis, Linda Taylor, and Jim Kelly. Outside consultant Dick Warren, was brought in to provide Value Engineering (VE) on this analysis and recommendation; the VE report is an independent study submitted under separate cover. 3. Selection of Building Construction Type The city's project team first evaluated three different types of construction for the new PW Utility Administration building. These types of construction included architectural design/stick built construction, prefabricated building, and modular construction. - Custom Design Construction : Custom Design Construction, also referred to as architecturally designed/stick built construction, allows an office building to be designed specific for the office function and site location. However, of the three building construction types investigated, this type is the most expensive per square foot and has the longest lead time. Many of the tasks that contribute to the high cost and long lead time include selecting an architect, coordinating design, bidding the project and selecting a general contractor. Typical costs for similar office construction per RS Means cost estimation data, 2009 Seattle area average is $170.00 per square foot.  Page 3 - Prefab Steel Building : Prefabricated steel buildings are standardized, predesigned structures that are fabricated in a factory, transported to a building site, and assembled or reconstructed on the building site. The prefabricated buildings that were researched by the project team were too industrial to be set in the Haller Park environment and did not meet the functional requirements of the Utility Administration Department. The average cost range for a prefab steel building is $130.00 to 160.00 per square foot. - Modular Construction : With modular construction, a building is constructed (or assembled) in a factory, trucked to a building location, and erected on site. Modular office buildings have come a long way over the years in design and construction, permanent modular construction does not look like the mobile trailers of yesterday. The prefab buildings of today function just as well as their conventional counterparts and can be customized to almost any specification the City needs. The cost savings and quality in construction of modular buildings is achieved by doing a vast amount of the construction work in a factory, with our building being constructed in Marysville. The pieces of the office will be built off site and then later assembled at our building location on West Cox Ave. Overall, this type of construction leads to a faster project schedule, which keeps costs down, and increases building quality with regular code compliance by state inspectors. Typically, it takes 12 to 20 weeks to construct the building in a factory and less than three weeks to erect it on site (complete build-out). The average building cost per sq ft for modular construction is $130.00 to $150.00 per square foot. - Recommendation: This construction process is the lowest cost and provides the best value to the City for a permanent, long term Utility Administration Building. When compared to traditional construction, modular construction is usually 20 to 30 percent lower than other types of construction. After evaluating the available types of construction, the project team recommended that this project move forward with the modular type construction . 4. Space Planning After selecting a building construction type (modular), the next phase was to review space planning needs for the new building. This involved an evaluation of the internal building space needs as well as the space planning and external construction needs the building would require as part of the Haller Park environment. During the planning phase the following functions were identified for the PW Utility Administration building: • Provide for a Parks & Recreation Office • Be a City presence at Haller Park • Provide a large public meeting area • Provide for future expansion • Provide for an IT center (IT is running out of space in its current location)  Page 4 The minimum internal space needs of the PW Utility Administration building include a minimum of seven offices, one or two conference rooms, a lunchroom/breakroom and restrooms for employees, and a file room sized sufficient to accommodate 52 file cabinets. In addition, since this building was to be part of the Haller Park environment, we need to provide a public use portion of the building. To that extent, the building needs to have a large public meeting area that would be sized sufficiently to accommodate public meetings and sized to accommodate professional meetings for the Public Works Department (Utilities, Engineering, M&O, etc.). After evaluating all the requirements of Haller Park and the Utility Administration building, the project team came up with the following minimum space requirements: Room L W Area File room 20 28 560 52 file cabinets, 2 flat files, and rolled paper files Large Conference 30 40 1200 conf room, open for public meetings, multi media Small Conf Room (2) 20 12 480 Two conf rooms, white board, 8-10 people Breakroom/Kitchen 20 16 320 Table, counter, sink, coffee maker, fridge, oven etc Copier/Plotter/Printer 10 15 150 General purpose with supplies Public Restrooms (2) 15 15 450 Two stall with dual sink, ADA compliant Employee Restroom (2) 12 10 240 Restroom with shower Foyer/Entry 20 25 500 General meeting area for public Parks & Rec Office 20 15 300 Office with table for meetings PW Director (Jim) 20 15 300 Office with table for meetings Water Resources (Mike) 10 13 130 Standard office Staff Accountant (Kris) 15 15 225 Standard office (includes space for additional files) Stormwater Utility (Ken) 10 13 130 Standard office Utility Spec (Reta) 10 13 130 Standard office CCC Office (Gus) 10 13 130 Standard office Admin (Linda) 10 13 130 Open area near Jims office (with glass walls) GIS (Abe) 40 20 800 Set up for four cubicles (pod style) Utility Manager 10 13 130 Vacant, for future Vacant (spare) 9 12 108 TBD Vacant (spare) 9 12 108 TBD Telecom/Comp Closet 10 8 80 Telecom, security, wireless network Mechanical room 8 8 64 Plumbing, HVAC Janitorial Closet 6 8 48 Cleaning supplies, mop sink Walking Space (8%) Estimate for halls & open space 522 7,235 Office Space 2,621sf Employees 9 current 291 SF per person Employees 15 future 175 SF per person  Page 5 This space plan was provided to the modular contractors as a guide to assemble modules that would fit the City’s need. Based on the modular contractor’s recommendation, staff elected to move forward with the new PW Utility Administration building having approximately 7,480 square feet. 5. Identification of Modular Building Contractors and Solicitation of Quotations The project team evaluated how to best proceed with procuring the modular type construction for the utility administration building. After reviewing available options, it was decided that the easiest method would be to select a modular building contractor that was included on the KCDA purchasing contract. By selecting a modular building contractor that was listed on the KCDA purchasing contract, the City would eliminate the need to prepare a bid specification package, eliminate the need for public advertising, and eliminate the need to prepare a contract. With the contractor listed on the KCDA vendor list, the unit costs for construction have already been bid and negotiated, and the supplier is under a master agreement. To purchase a building through KCDA, the City would work with the modular contractor for a building design to meet the Utility Administration needs (space, room layout, finishings, etc.) and request a quotation based on the KCDA pricing. The City would then issue a Purchase Order to KCDA for the building, KCDA would require a 2% handling fee. The city identified two modular building contractors that were on the KCDA purchasing list, one was William Scotsman Company and the other was Pacific Mobile Construction. The project team first approached William Scotsman and outlined our requirements for the new building – internal requirements and external requirements. We also discussed our accelerated timeframe to have the building erected. Williams Scotsman company provided the city with a draft floor plan and a quotation for a building that met all of our needs (please see attached Williams Scotsman). After speaking with the William Scotsman Company, the project team met with Pacific Mobile and requested a quotation for the same exact building; every specification requested from Pacific Mobile was the same as requested from Williams Scotsman. Pacific Mobile provided a quotation that was approximately 20% lower than the quotation provided by William Scotsman (please see attached Pacific Mobile quotation). A summary of the two quotations, including sales tax at 8.6% and 2% KCDA fee is provided below: William Scotsman Pacific Mobile Base Price $ 1,081,522.00 $ 889,020.00 Sales tax $ 93,010.90 $ 76,455.72 KCDA Fee $ 21,630.44 $ 17,780.40 Total $ 1,196,163.34 $ 983,256.12  Page 6 After evaluating the two costs, the two designs, and the two contractors; the project team elected to move forward with Pacific Mobile as the preferred modular building contractor for the PW Utility Administration building. 6. Building Floor Plan and Exterior Design The City worked with Pacific Mobile to refine the floor plan and to develop a building exterior that matched all of the requirements developed in the City’s space planning analysis. The below are preliminary designs, more detailed designs will be prepared as the design phase progress:  Page 7 7. Building Cost Savings Following the April 25, 2011 Council Workshop, staff returned to the building construction detail and eliminated options saving $55,299 in building costs. A summary of the eliminated items is summarized in the below table: Do not upgrade floor to 1 1/8” T & G plywood with 1/2” hardie underlayment Eliminated Options - 13,565.00 Keep standard ceiling tiles to 2’x2’ Tegular USG Radar fine fissured tiles - 9,994.00 Remove KMC DDC Controls to HVAC System for the operation of HVAC and heat pumps - 16,677.00 Keep Hardiplank Siding, do not install Board and Batt siding - 5,660.00 Do not Upgrade Canopies on two main entry points (see below drawing) - 22,968.00 TOTAL Savings on Options $ 68, 864 8. Other Construction Costs In addition to the building cost, the following costs are also required for this project: - Utility Service (water, sewer, gas) - : The project team also investigated utility service for the new building. Water and sewer service is in the road and available to the building. After meeting with Cascade Natural Gas, service is nearby and available, it just needs to be extended to the building; City crews will excavate and trench for new gas service. Electric Service - : Electric service for the new Utility Administration building will be provided from the utility plant distribution system. This will allow the building to be connected to the Plant’s emergency generator and have a back-up power source in the event of a power failure. Power is available at the building site will be 500 amp 120/208 volt service, actual power load to be determined as design moves forward. Telephone and IT service: Telecom service will remain a combination of fiber optic and 100- pair copper wire. Costs for the telecom service will be for splicing and extending fiber to the new office. The communication closet will be large enough to house an expansion for the City’s IT Department server system.  Page 8 - Site improvements (landscaping, sidewalks, parking lot) : Project costs also include funding for site improvements associated with the new building. These improvements include storm drainage, new sidewalks, a parking lot, and landscaping (by City’s M&O crew). Design of the site improvements will be completed in-house and be coordinated with the modular building contractor’s foundation plan. 9. Total Project Cost Summary The total project cost summary for the construction of the Utility Administration building, utilities, and site improvements, is summarized in the below table. Modular Building Construction & Finishing $930,069.00 Tax $79,986.00 Permitting $19,000.00 KDCA $18,601.00 Site Survey $4,200.00 Water and Sewer $2,300.00 Electric Utilities $23,000.00 Communication Utilities and Communication System $3,000.00 Site work (concrete, paving, parking lot, landscaping) $12,344.00 Misc tasks $7,500.00 Total $1,100,000.00 10. Funding summary The utility funding for the Utility Administration project comes from several sources, as summarized below: PW Utility Admin Building Funding Summary Water Utility CIP (2011 budget) $ 450,000.00 Sewer Utility CIP (2011 budget) $ 450,000.00 Storm Utility $ 50,000.00 WWTP Fund $ 150,000.00 Total Funding $ 1,100,000.00 11. Rent vs Own cost Analysis A “Lease vs. Own” analysis was performed to look at the net present value of continuing a lease for a similar building, a lease for a similar building with more area, and construction of a modular permanent office as described above. A 30 year and 40 year time frame were evaluated. Option #1 NPV = $ 1,100,000 (actual cost estimate for building, utilities and site work) – Procure permanent modular building  Page 9 Option #2 - Interior layout to include 8 offices, 1 fax room (small), 1 storage room, 1 telecom/elec closet, 2 bathrooms (male/female), and a plan lay down area – Lease 3,600 sf building, this option assumes: - Monthly lease $6,350.00; setup fee $16,940 (quote attached to memorandum) - Annual lease escalation is 1.0% and cost of funds at 2.2% NPV (30 years) = $ 1,973,653 NPV (40 years) = $ 2,476,937 Option #3 - Interior layout to include 8 offices, 1 fax room (small), 1 storage room, 1 telecom/elec closet, 2 bathrooms (male/female), 1 conference room, a plan lay down area, and a breakroom – Lease 5,040 sf building, this option assumes: - Monthly lease $8,000.00; setup fee $16,940 (quote attached to memorandum) - Annual lease escalation is 1.0% and cost of funds at 2.2% NPV (30 years) = $ 2,489,243 NPV (40 years) = $ 3,123,301 12. Value Engineering The City coordinated with Dick Warren to perform a value Engineering (VE) for this analysis; this study is not attached to this memorandum and is being submitted under separate cover. In general, the VE study concluded that the option with the best value is Option 1. 1 MEMO To: Allen Johnson May 5, 2011 City Manager City of Arlington, WA CC: Jim Kelly Director of Public Works From: Richard E Warren, P.E. Prothman Company Re: Proposed Utility Administration Building As per your request I have reviewed the planning related to the proposed Utility Administration Building as summarized in Jim Kelly’s memo dated May 2, 2011. My comments on the several aspects of the proposed building follow: GENERAL An administrative office is an essential part of an efficient public works operation. It has long been my contention that public buildings should be treated as critical “equipment” and “rented” by each City function just like the equipment in the City’s vehicle replacement fund. In the case of the present Utility Administration Building, the City has been paying rent not to themselves but to a private provider. Owning your own building and paying yourself rent makes sense financially. At the time of the design of the recent wastewater treatment plant upgrade, the VE team suggested that a new utility administration building be included in the plan. The building was differed due to site and grant issues and has now come up for action. The present building is fairly old for a prefabricated structure and, as the lease is about to expire, the City could face a substantial increase in the annual lease fee to renew the lease or procure a different leased building. As 2 a result, this appears to be a reasonable time to move ahead with a City owned building. BUILDING SIZE Jim’s analysis of space requirements is conservative. The allocated offices are small. The large meeting room might be questioned, but it is assumed it will be useful to the public and other City departments. In my experience, a public works office is always short of meeting and training space. I suggest that Jim’s floor plan be adopted. That said, I would make the suggestion that the engineering staff be relocated to the new building. There is available space by using the reserve space for cubicles, creating six work stations at only the cost of furnishings. BUILDING COSTS The firm cost available for the modular building type gives some confidence in the overall project cost estimate. The proposed total project cost gives a gross square foot cost of $140-$150/sf which in today’s market is about what one would expect. There is no doubt that an architect designed, contractor built structure would cost somewhat more and take considerably longer complete resulting in additional lease costs for the present building. METHOD OF PROCUREMENT Being able to use the KCDA procurement process will save time and money. Buying a modular building in this manner is much like the design-build public works contracting method. It appears that the KCDA process is suitable for this project and the only way to avoid delays and potential lease issues. PROJECT FUNDING The proposal is to have each City utility contribute to the cost of the new Utility Administration Building based on their use of the space. This is the way the current building lease and operating costs are shared and is a reasonable and equitable way to allocate cost between the utilities. 3 The proposal is to have each utility pay into the new building fund from existing cash reserves. In this way no City borrowing is required and the new building will not have an impact on City utility rates. The contribution from each utility can be considered prepaid rent over the life of the project resulting in savings to each utility annually compared to continuing the present lease arrangement. Another option would be to consider each utility contribution as a loan. This is an internal decision that I defer to the Finance Director. RECOMMENDATIONS Due to the upcoming lease expiration and the condition of the existing building I recommend that the City proceed as proposed with the purchase of a modular building through the KCDA process. Since further delay will increase the City’s costs I suggest that the City act a quickly as possible. END City of Arlington Council Agenda Bill AGENDA ITEM: New Business #3 ATTACHMENT F COUNCIL MEETING DATE: May 16, 2011 SUBJECT: Cemetery Office Remodel & Approve Water Rights Sale DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN: Public Works – Jim Kelly ATTACHMENTS: • Proposed Layout/Design EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: $34,000 BUDGET CATEGORY: Cemetery Improvement Fund 116 LEGAL REVIEW: Pending review by City Attorney DESCRIPTION: Expand the Cemetery Office to include waiting area, display area, office/meeting room, and private consultation room. HISTORY: The current Cemetery Office is a small room situated in the cemetery maintenance building. Since this is the main sales office for the Cemetery, the office area needs to be updated and remodeled in order to provide a more comfortable and professional environment for Cemetery clientele. The Cemetery Board has requested that staff upgrade and expand the existing Cemetery Office in 2011. Staff generated in-house conceptual drawings for the Cemetery office upgrade and expansion. Preliminary discussions with contractors indicate that the cost of expansion will be approximately $34,000. Though this was not a 2011 budgeted item, the Cemetery has pre-sold 23 acre feet of its water rights to the Water Utility. Funding from the pre-sale of water rights will pay for capital improvements. This work will be offer to firms listed on the City’s Small Works Roster. ALTERNATIVES: Defer to staff for additional design/planning. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion authorizing staff to advertise for construction services to remodel the Cemetery Office building and approving the sale of 23 acre feet of Cemetery water rights to the Water Utility at a price of $2,000.00 per acre foot to finance the Cemetery Office Remodel and other Cemetery capital expenditures. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ Office Display Room Meetin gRoom Storage ExistingStorage Kitchen/Lunch room ExistingBathroom GarageCovered Storage 17' 0" 11' 6" 4' 6" 8' 0" Electrical Panel DRAFT 0 105 Feet" City of Arlington Municipal C em eteryOffice Building LayoutMaps and GIS data are distributed “AS -IS” without warranties of any kind, either express or im plied, including but not limited to warranties of suitability for a particular purpose or use. Map data are compiled from a variety of sources which may contain errors and users who rely upon the inform ation do so at their own risk. Users agree to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City of Arlington for any and all liabili ty of any nature arising out of or resulting from the l ack of accuracy or correctness of the data, or the use of the data presented in the maps.Scale: Date: File Name: Carto gra pher:5/5/2011 lb CemeteryB ldgLayout11x17_1 11 inch = 6 feet Legend Walls Counter Furn ature Dimension Door \\Ga rag e Door Op en Applia nce Fixture Temporary Com ponent Window City of Arlington Council Agenda Bill AGENDA ITEM: New Business #4 ATTACHMENT G COUNCIL MEETING DATE: May 16, 2011 SUBJECT: Washington St. and Lenore St. Water Main Replacement Project DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN: Public Works – Water ATTACHMENTS: • None EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: $400,000 ($250,000 was budgeted in 2011, but project expansion has increased cost) BUDGET CATEGORY: Water Capital Improvement Fund 405 LEGAL REVIEW: City Attorney will review all contract documents prior to Bid Advertisement. DESCRIPTION: Request for authorization to advertise for the construction of the Washington St. and Lenore St. Water Main Replacement Project. HISTORY: Arlington has numerous section of old asbestos concrete (AC) pipe in the Old Town area. This pipe performs poorly in acidic soils and is under sized for today’s needs. As such, the current Water Comprehensive Plan identifies replacement of AC water main as a needed capital improvement project. In 2010, the Water Utility began planning for the replacement of AC water main on Washington St. and Lenore St.; a line item was included in the 2011 Water CIP budget in the amount of $250,000.00 to fund this work. As the planning and design phase progressed, additional pipe was identified in the area that also needed to be replaced – the additional water main replacement is in 1st St and in Stillaguamish Ave. Though the requested amount exceeds the 2011 budgeted amount for this project, there are sufficient funds in the Water Capital Improvement Fund. In addition, these additional pipe sections were scheduled for replacement within the next three years. It is intended to have this work completed before installing a cape seal on Stillaguamish Ave and before school starts. ALTERNATIVES: Defer to staff for additional design/planning. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion authorizing staff to advertise for construction of the Washington St. and Lenore St. Water Main Replacement Project. City of Arlington Council Agenda Bill AGENDA ITEM: New Business #5 ATTACHMENT H COUNCIL MEETING DATE: May 16, 2011 SUBJECT: Stillaguamish Avenue Paving Project – Authority to Bid DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN: Public Works – Jim Kelly ATTACHMENTS: • None EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: $150,000 (a 2011 budgeted item; costs to be shared with Stillaguamish Tribe) BUDGET CATEGORY: Transportation Improvement Fund 310 LEGAL REVIEW: City Attorney will review all contract documents prior to Bid Advertisement. DESCRIPTION: The City’s 2011 approved budget includes funding the resurfacing of Stillaguamish from Highland to First St. This agenda bill requests authorization to bid the project from the City’s Small Works Roster. HISTORY: As part of a Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Arlington and the Cascade Valley Hospital, a City partner, the City agreed to rehabilitate Stillaguamish Ave after the Hospital’s expansion project was completed. The hospital project is complete and the City is now ready to rehabilitate Stillaguamish Ave between Highland and maple (grind, compact, and pave). Since this road section is listed on the Indian Reservation Road (IRR) inventory, the City contacted the Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians and inquired if they wanted to partner on this project. Casey Steven of the Stillaguamish Tribe agreed and the City and the Tribe began planning for this road repaving project. The design is complete and we are now ready to bid the project. ALTERNATIVES: Defer to staff for additional design/planning. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion authorizing staff to advertise for construction of the Stillaguamish Avenue Paving Project. City of Arlington Council Agenda Bill AGENDA ITEM: New Business #6 ATTACHMENT I COUNCIL MEETING DATE: May 16, 2011 SUBJECT: Stillaguamish Ave Cape Seal – Authority to Contract with Snohomish County DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN: Public Works – Jim Kelly ATTACHMENTS: • Proposal from Snohomish County • Resolution XXX EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: $ 38,000 BUDGET CATEGORY: Transportation Improvement Fund 310 LEGAL REVIEW: City Attorney will provide a final review of the Snohomish County work order DESCRIPTION: Request authorization for the City to issue a Work Order to Snohomish County for installation of a micro-surfacing pavement preservation procedure known as a Cape Seal on Stillaguamish Ave between Maple and 1st. HISTORY: The City is responsible for maintaining all of the roads in Arlington; this is a big task to that has a small budget. As such, the City tries to utilize the most cost effective approach to pavement preservation on city streets. Micro-surfacing is one of the most cost effective pavement preservation procedures available, a cape seal is a micro-surfacing procedure. A cape seal is applied when the pavement deterioration is greater than what a slurry seal is designed to correct, yet has not deteriorated to the point of requiring an expensive asphalt overlay. A cape seal prevents water penetration reducing subsequent damage to the road bed, along with providing a new wearing surface. Cape seals are used on residential streets due to its ability to provide the strength of a chip seal with the smoothness of a slurry seal. Used with crack sealing and surface patching, a cape seal significantly extends the life of a neighborhood street. This project will first seal cracks and pre-level Stillaguamish Ave (cost $18,600 or $1.57 per sf) and then install the cape seal (cost $17,200 or $1.46 per sf). This will be the first cape seal ever used in Arlington and we will measure its effectiveness. ALTERNATIVES: Defer to staff for additional design/planning. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve Resolution XXX authorization for the City to issue a Work Order to Snohomish County for installation of a Cape Seal on Stillaguamish Ave between Maple and 1st Street. RESOLUTION NO. XXX A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARLINGTON, WASHINGTON , WHEREAS, the City of Arlington is obligated to follow competitive bidding statutes as defined by state law; and WHEREAS, RCW 35.77.020 authorizes a City to contract directly with Snohomish County for repair and maintenance of city streets, NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARLINGTON, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: 1. Findings. The City Council finds as follows: A. The City of Arlington needs to perform necessary maintenance and repair on Stillaguamish Avenue between the Maple Avenue and 1st Street, and that the maintenance and repair is known as a “cape seal”. B. The City of Arlington and Snohomish County entered into a Mutual Aid Agreement for Street Projects and Municipal Services in June 1998. C. Snohomish County Department of Public Works can perform the necessary cape seal per specifications, schedule, and cost acceptable to the City. 2. Declaration. Pursuant to the authorization provided by RCW 35.77.020 and RCW 47.24.050 and based upon the preceding findings of fact, the City Council of the City of Arlington hereby authorizes the contracting with Snohomish County for the performance of a “cape seal” maintenance and repair project on Stillaguamish Avenue between Maple Avenue and 1st Street. APPROVED by the Mayor and City Council of the City of Arlington this ____ day of _____________________, 2011. CITY OF ARLINGTON ____________________________________ Margaret Larson, Mayor RESOLUTION NO. XXX 2 ATTEST: _________________________________ Kristin Banfield, City Clerk PPROVED AS TO FORM: __________________________________ Steven J. Peiffle, City Attorney City of Arlington Council Agenda Bill AGENDA ITEM: New Business #7 ATTACHMENT J COUNCIL MEETING DATE: May 16, 2011 SUBJECT: Slurry Seal Pavement Preservation Project Bid Rejection DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN: Public Works – Engineering ATTACHMENTS: • Bid Tab • Resolution XXX EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: $80,000 BUDGET CATEGORY: Transportation Improvement Fund 310 LEGAL REVIEW: N/A DESCRIPTION: A resolution rejecting all bids received for the Slurry Seal Project. HISTORY: The Slurry Seal Pavement Project was advertised for bid in April with a bid opening date of April 28th. The Small Works Roster was utilized and project notification announcements were mailed to 22 contractors identified as asphalt paving contractors. Only one bid was received, this was from Intermountain Slurry Seal, Inc., and the submitted bid was 70% higher than the estimate. The City will reevaluate the scope of work, the project specifications, and rebid the project using a formal bid process. ALTERNATIVES: Defer to staff for additional design/planning. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve resolution XXX all bids received for the 2011 Slurry Seal project and authorizing staff to rebid the project. Page 1 ITEM NO. UNIT DESCRIPTION QTY UNIT COST TOTAL COST Unit Costs Total Costs PREPARATION 1 L.S.MOBILIZATION 1 6,000.00$ 6,000.00$ $13,042.00 $13,042.00 2 L.S.REMOVAL OF STRUCTURE AND OBSTRUCTION 1 500.00$ 500.00$ $300.00 $300.00 3 L.F.REMOVING PLASTIC LINE 96 2.00$ 192.00$ $5.00 $480.00 4 S.F.REMOVING PLASTIC CROSSWALK LINE 75 2.00$ 150.00$ $3.00 $225.00 HOT MIX ASPHALT 5 S.Y.PAVEMENT REPAIR 200 20.00$ 4,000.00$ $80.00 $16,000.00 6 S.Y.PRELEVELING 200 20.00$ 4,000.00$ $45.00 $9,000.00 7 L.F.CRACK SEALING 2,000 1.50$ 3,000.00$ $4.00 $8,000.00 8 S.Y.SLURRY SEAL 26,352 1.80$ 47,433.60$ $2.50 $65,880.00 TRAFFIC 9 S.F.PLASTIC CROSSWALK LINE 75 2.80$ 210.00$ $3.00 $225.00 10 L.F.PLASTIC STOP LINE 96 3.70$ 355.20$ $5.00 $480.00 11 L.S.PROJECT TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL 1 5,000.00$ 5,000.00$ $15,000.00 $15,000.00 OTHER 12 EST.FORCE ACCOUNT 1 2,000.00$ 2,000.00$ $2,000.00 $2,000.00 13 EST.REIMBURSEMENT FOR THIRD PARTY DAMAGES 1 500.00$ 500.00$ $500.00 $500.00 14 L.S.SPCC PLAN 1 750.00$ 750.00$ $500.00 $500.00 15 L.S.CONTRACT BOND EXTENSION 1 500.00$ 500.00$ $500.00 $500.00 TOTAL 74,590.80$ $132,132.00 16 5% CONTINGENCY 1 3,729.54$ 3,729.54$ 78,320.34$ ADDITIVE ALTERNATE #1 PREPARATION 2 L.S.REMOVAL OF STRUCTURE AND OBSTRUCTION 1 500.00$ 500.00$ $100.00 $100.00 3 L.F.REMOVING PLASTIC LINE 48 2.00$ 96.00$ $5.00 $240.00 4 S.F.REMOVING PLASTIC CROSSWALK LINE 25 2.00$ 50.00$ $3.00 $75.00 HOT MIX ASPHALT 5 S.Y.PAVEMENT REPAIR 50 20.00$ 1,000.00$ $80.00 $4,000.00 6 S.Y.PRELEVELING 75 20.00$ 1,500.00$ $45.00 $3,375.00 City of Arlington BID TAB - 2011 SLURRY SEAL 4/290/2011 Prepared by: LCP Intermountain Slurry Seal 585 West Beach Street Watsonville, CA 95076 Engineer's Estimate Page 2 ITEM NO. UNIT DESCRIPTION QTY UNIT COST TOTAL COST Unit Costs Total Costs City of Arlington BID TAB - 2011 SLURRY SEAL 4/290/2011 Prepared by: LCP Intermountain Slurry Seal 585 West Beach Street Watsonville, CA 95076 Engineer's Estimate 7 L.F.CRACK SEALING 500 1.50$ 750.00$ $3.50 $1,750.00 8 S.Y.SLURRY SEAL 8,864 1.80$ 15,955.20$ $2.50 $22,160.00 TRAFFIC 9 S.F.PLASTIC CROSSWALK LINE 25 2.80$ 70.00$ $3.00 $75.00 10 L.F.PLASTIC STOP LINE 48 3.70$ 177.60$ $5.00 $240.00 11 L.S.PROJECT TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL 1 1,000.00$ 1,000.00$ $1,225.50 $1,225.50 TOTAL 21,098.80$ $33,240.50 12 5% CONTINGENCY 1 1,054.94$ 1,054.94$ 22,153.74$ ADDITIVE ALTERNATE #2 PREPARATION 2 L.S.REMOVAL OF STRUCTURE AND OBSTRUCTION 1 500.00$ 500.00$ $100.00 $100.00 3 L.F.REMOVING PLASTIC LINE 84 2.00$ 168.00$ $5.00 $420.00 4 S.F.REMOVING PLASTIC CROSSWALK LINE 50 2.00$ 100.00$ $3.00 $150.00 HOT MIX ASPHALT 5 S.Y.PAVEMENT REPAIR 50 20.00$ 1,000.00$ $80.00 $4,000.00 6 S.Y.PRELEVELING 75 20.00$ 1,500.00$ $45.00 $3,375.00 7 L.F.CRACK SEALING 500 1.50$ 750.00$ $3.50 $1,750.00 8 S.Y.SLURRY SEAL 7,303 1.80$ 13,145.40$ $2.50 $18,257.50 TRAFFIC 9 S.F.PLASTIC CROSSWALK LINE 50 2.80$ 140.00$ $3.00 $150.00 10 L.F.PLASTIC STOP LINE 84 3.70$ 310.80$ $5.00 $420.00 11 L.S.PROJECT TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL 1 1,000.00$ 1,000.00$ $1,200.00 $1,200.00 TOTAL 18,614.20$ $29,822.50 12 5% CONTINGENCY 1 930.71$ 930.71$ 19,544.91$ 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2011-XXX A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ARLINGTON, WASHINGTON REJECTING ALL BIDS ON 2011 SLURRY SEAL PROJECT, AND AUTHORIZING THE PROJECT TO BE RE-BID WHEREAS, the City of Arlington solicited bids for a project known as the City of Arlington 2011 slurry seal project (hereinafter the “Project”); and WHEREAS, the City wishes to reject all bids and rebid the project; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Arlington, Washington do hereby resolve as follows: 1. The City Council hereby rejects all bids submitted for the Project; and 2. City staff is authorized and directed to prepare new bid specifications for the Project and to re-bid the Project once new specifications are prepared. APPROVED by the Mayor and City Council of the City of Arlington this ______ day of ____________, 2011. CITY OF ARLINGTON ____________________________________ Margaret Larson, Mayor ATTEST: _________________________________ Kristin Banfield, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: __________________________________ Steven J. Peiffle, City Attorney City of Arlington Council Agenda Bill AGENDA ITEM: New Business #8 ATTACHMENT K COUNCIL MEETING DATE: May 16, 2011 SUBJECT: Contractual Agreement to care, detain or destroy City of Arlington stray animals DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN: Police Nelson Beazley, 360-403-3400 ATTACHMENTS: Skagit Valley Animal Contract EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: N/A BUDGET CATEGORY: Police – Animal Contract LEGAL REVIEW: Pending DESCRIPTION: A contractual agreement between the City of Arlington and the Humane Society of Skagit Valley to receive all City of Arlington stray animals delivered to them by City of Arlington employees or citizens of Arlington. HISTORY: Since 2010 the City of Arlington has had a contractual relationship with the Humane Society of Skagit Valley to house all stray animals recovered within the City of Arlington. This agreement has worked well for both parties and resulted in a substantial budgetary cost savings from prior contracts with the Everett Animal Shelter. ALTERNATIVES: Take no action and allow existing contract to expire or return to Everett Animal Shelter at a substantial increase in costs. RECOMMENDED ACTION: “I move that the mayor be authorized to sign the Contractual Agreement with the Humane Society of Skagit Valley to provide for the care, detention and destruction of stray animals.” City of Arlington Council Agenda Bill AGENDA ITEM: New Business 9 ATTACHMENT L COUNCIL MEETING DATE: May 16, 2011 SUBJECT: Renewal of the Interlocal Agreement with Snohomish Regional Drug & Gang Task Force DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN: Police Contact: Nelson Beazley, 360-403-3400 ATTACHMENTS: Interlocal Agreement with Snohomish County EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: An additional $14 for the remainder of 2011 BUDGET CATEGORY: Police – Narcotics Investigations Expenditures LEGAL REVIEW: City Attorney Approved DESCRIPTION: This is an annual renewal of the interlocal agreement for the City of Arlington to participate in the Snohomish Regional Drug & Gang Task Force. This agreement sets out the terms, the fees, the organization and the operational conditions of this multi-agency task force and reflects an approximate .033% increase over the current agreement. HISTORY: The Task Force was formed in 1988 and the City of Arlington has been a steady participant. The Task Force was founded to work street narcotics and has evolved to investigating the highest level of drug dealers. The Task Force is staffed by detectives from the Sheriff’s Office and the City of Everett, and is assisted by a host of local and federal agencies. The Task Force continues to provide essential assistance to the Police Department especially in the area of training and undercover operations. The City’s financial contribution is only 2.43% of the total but receives far more in returned services. The Task Force receives a large amount of funding from the Federal government. ALTERNATIVES: Non-renewal and withdrawing from participation in the Task Force RECOMMENDED ACTION: I move that Council authorizes the Mayor to sign the Interlocal Agreement with the Snohomish Regional Drug and Gang Task Force. City of Arlington Council Agenda Bill AGENDA ITEM: New Business #10 ATTACHMENT M COUNCIL MEETING DATE: May 16, 2011 SUBJECT: Surplus of City Equipment DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN: Police – Nelson Beazley ATTACHMENTS: -Proposed Resolution EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: N/A BUDGET CATEGORY: N/A LEGAL REVIEW: Reviewed by City Attorney DESCRIPTION: The Police Department has two motor vehicles that are no longer viable for fleet use due to their mechanical condition and need to be sold as surplus. HISTORY: The first vehicle was used as a full-time patrol unit before retiring to part-time use for Support 46 and is now valued at less than repair costs. The second vehicle, acquired through lawful forfeiture, was used as a full-time detective vehicle before retiring for mechanical condition and is now valued at less than repair costs. ALTERNATIVES: -Bring back for additional discussion at a later date RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve the resolution to dispose of the two vehicles as surplus and deposit the proceeds into the equipment rental replacement fund for the future purchase of police department vehicles. RESOLUTION NO. _________ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ARLINGTON DECLARING CERTAIN PROPERTY AS SURPLUS AND AUTHORIZING ITS SALE WHEREAS, the City has purchased, or acquired through lawful forfeiture, 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 Exhibit “A” Surplus Items Year/Make/Model/VIN Motor Vehicle 2002 Ford Crown Victoria #2FAFP71W32X143696 Motor Vehicle 1998 Honda Passport #4S6CM58W3W4410688