Loading...
PPW081319PARKS & PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING August 13, 2019 Elected Officials Present Staff Present Councilmember Kristiana Johnson (Chair) Phil Williams, Public Works Director Councilmember Dave Teitzel Rob English, City Engineer Mayor Dave Earling Shannon Burley, Deputy Parks Director Jeannie Dines, Recorder The meeting was called to order at 7:04 p.m. in the Jury Meeting Room. The following items were added to the agenda: Additional Management Reserve for the 76th/212th Intersection Improvement Project, City Hall Elevator and Old Business. 1. Edmonds Rotary Oktoberfest Special Event Contract Ms. Burley introduced the contract for Oktoberfest, a new event that hopefully will become an annual event. She introduced Edmonds Rotary President David Kaufer and Jan Nicholas who were present to answer questions. The event will be held at the Frances Anderson Center the first two years and at Civic Park in the future. In addition to beer tasting, there will be family activities including a bouncy house, play zones and dog parade. Councilmember Johnson advised of other activities such as the running of the balls and chipping of pets in partnership with PAWS. Questions and answers included this event replacing the Rotary Waterfront Festival, this event raising funds to supplement City funds for an inclusive play area at Civic Park, operating hours on Friday and Saturday until 10 p.m., onsite monitoring of decibel levels, state of the art speakers that limit sound projection, precautions to address neighborhood concerns, location of the music, compostable product requirements and volunteers who will assist patrons with garbage, recycling and compostable bins. Action: Schedule on Consent Agenda 2. Report on Bids for the 84th Ave Overlay Mr. English explained this project includes grinding of existing pavement, a 2" pavement overlay and replacement of a failing storm main between 220th and 212th Streets. Bids were opened on Thursday; six bids were received and the low bidder was A&M Contractors in the amount of $810,227. The engineers estimate was $1,090,270. He reviewed the proposed construction budget and construction funding. A&M meets the requirements to award the project; but due to the federal funding, WSDOT is in the process of reviewing the bid submittal including the 11 % goal for disadvantaged businesses. If WSDOT's concurs with the bid award, he recommended scheduling award of the contact at the next Council meeting. Questions and discussion included challenges associated with doing the project while school is in session, additional reviews due to federal funds that impacted the schedule, construction of new ADA curb ramps, what each schedule represents (A: paving and curb ramps, B: storm water, C:1 year warranty, and D: add alternate for driveway replacements, and the difference between the bids on Schedule A and concern the contractor will require additional funding. Action: Schedule for full Council due to the amount once WSDOT completes their review 3. Alternatives Analysis for Willow Creek Daylight Project 08/13/19 PPW Committee Minutes, Page 2 Mr. Williams recalled funding was initially provided by the Recreation Conservation Office (RCO) to do a feasibility study. Additional funding was subsequently obtained to identify additional alternatives/alignments. The remaining grant funds were extended to do an analysis on sea level rise and the most recently work included water and sediment sampling to be used during design. Dave Cline, Shannon& Wilson, is scheduled to present their report to Council on August 27. The next step will be more detailed design which has been delayed pending resolution of a real estate issue on the Unocal property. Mr. Williams reviewed: • New project webpage www.edmondswa.gov/willow-creek-daylight.html on Public Works' webpage • Four initial alternative analyses 1. Next to railroad tracks 2. More elaborate, more natural meandering of stream and significantly wider buffers on channel 3. Less meandering with bigger buffers particularly on east side 4. Natural channel alignment, one side closer to railroad tracks and wider buffer on east side, least impact on property • Alternative 4 selected for further refinement o Alignments 5-7 = alignment #4 plus low flow channel added 5. No tide gate and no flood berms/walls 6. No tide gate with flood berms/walls 7. Tide gate with limited flood berms/walls • Sea Level Rise (SLR) Analysis o Year 2100 0 2' used in model; rounded up from 1.77' ■ "Low intermediate" projection from NOAA (3rd lowest of 4 categories) ■ "Intermediate" projection from Army Corp (middle of 3 categories) ■ Highest projection near 6-7' o Theoretical seawall assumed in mode; seawall needs to be evaluated in the future • Diagrams of existing and Alternative 6 with King tide with SLR-2100 and SAIC 1% (100-YR) AEP Inflow hydrographs maximum inundation depts (ft) (flooding not the result of over -topping berm; comes from Dayton system). • Analysis did not assume Dayton Street pump station • Next steps: o Accept final alternative analysis report o Continue to apply for grants ■ 2 grants submitted in 2019, so far ■ Already received rejection letter from one due to property issue o Continue to work with property owner /Ferries for MOU o Design funding beyond City funds is dependent on property owner agreement (MOU) o Decision package in 2020 budget to Initiate design phase utilizing Alt 6 if the property owners agreed to allow the City access for surveys, sampling and coring. Mr. Williams provided additional information regarding the tide gate that allows saltwater from Puget Sound to enter the marsh that is opened in spring/summer and closed in late fall and winter when tides are higher and there is more rain. He identified the location of the 180 gate and a culvert in an embankment. Questions and discussion included the impact of raising sea level rise on the seawall and whether that should be addressed in the Waterfront Rehab project, a preference to have the results of the Windward study before moving forward, whether the alignment could be moved further onto the Unocal property, relocation of the ferry terminal not in WSDOT's long range plan, whether dredging would be required with Alternative 6, lack of information in the report about temperature effects on fish, meeting the needs of juvenile chinook also meets the needs of other fish, WSDOT's maintenance of the culvert under SR104 and how to increase priority of that maintenance, no reference in Shannon & Wilson's report to Windward's analysis, premature to approve Shannon & Wilson's report until the Windward report is 08/13/19 PPW Committee Minutes, Page 3 complete, other alignment alternatives, and concern Shannon & Wilson did not include the Dayton Street Pump station in their report. Committee requests: • Include all visuals in the PPT in the record of tonight's meeting and in the City Council packet • Delay decision on Shannon & Wilson's report until Windward's report is completed (expected within a week) Action: Presentation to full Council August 27 with no action 4. Presentation of Supplemental Agreement with Shannon & Wilson for the Willow Creek Daylight Protect Mr. Williams explained the City has reached the end of its contract with Shannon & Wilson; he recommended an additional $20,000 to cover presentation of the report to Council, responding to questions, follow-up, potential modifications to the report and finalizing the report. Mr. English requested approval of the Supplement Agreement at next week's Council meeting to provide budget for Shannon & Wilson's additional work. Discussion followed regarding Council having an opportunity to ask questions of the consultant on August 27, scope of the existing contract, reasons the supplemental agreement is needed, total funding for Shannon & Wilson over five years ($500,000), what the additional funds will cover, concern $20,000 may not be enough particularly to correlate Windward's findings, scope of Windward's analysis, Shannon & Wilson's review of the Windward report, how the $20,000 estimate was determined, and refining the amount of the supplement agreement. Action: Schedule on Consent Agenda, add language to describe how the $20,000 will be used. 5. Presentation of Professional Services Aqreement with Framework for the 2019 Downtown Parking Study Mr. Williams distributed the scope of work. He reported about 41 people attended last Thursday's scoping meeting; the outreach via social meeting was successful in reaching new people. Comments were generalized, some expressed a high level dissatisfaction, some did not think there was a parking problem. A survey was available online before and after meeting; 731 responses have been received. Councilmember Teitzel agreed the meeting was well attended and included robust discussion and diverse opinions regarding whether there is a parking problem and the extent. The purpose was to reach out early before there is a contract with a consultant. Mr. Williams advised staff will reach out again once the data is available regarding demand, inventory, possible solutions that would manage demand and/or to increase capacity, etc. Some changes have been made to the draft scope as a result of meeting. The budget includes $40,000 for the parking study; the scope Framework submitted is approximately $93,000 and he estimated approximately $20,000 in City staff time to manage the project, work with the consultant and review and present deliverables, a total of approximately $113,000. He commented on staff's ability to use a drone to take pictures to augment the consultant's data collection and possibly reduce the cost. Questions and discussion included a request for the contract to analyze parking for Civic Field and Waterfront Center, concern with including a parking garage in the analysis, the study area, analyzing parking needs, managing existing parking and identifying opportunities for more parking, concern a $40,000 study would not provide the information the City needs, population growth in the area that will increase the need for parking, changes since the last parking study was done in 2003, staff's original $75,000 request in the budget, and the consultants' estimate of the cost based on the scope. 08/13/19 PPW Committee Minutes, Page 4 I Action: Present to full Council I 6. City Hall Elevator Mr. Williams said elevator parts recently came from South America. The elevator is original to the building, codes have changed and it needs to be upgraded. There is $295,000 in the budget; the project went out to bid, the low bid was rejected, the next low bid submitted by Ziegler for $256,000, $40,000 under the engineer's estimate. Action: Present to full Council as action item next week. 7. Additional Management Reserve for 76t"/212t" Intersection Improvement Project Mr. English relayed there is a list of items staff is working with Marshbank to resolve; resolution has been reached on five items. He requested an additional $20,000 in management reserve to pay for change order #12 in the amount of $43,000. Negotiations will continue on the remaining items. Action: Schedule on Consent Agenda 8. Old Business As follow-up to discussions at previous PPW meetings, Councilmember Johnson requested: 1. A hardcopy of the McKinstry building maintenance report 2. Pavement Condition Study (PCS) of all City streets 3. Status of Civic Field drainage issues Mr. Williams advised the consultant is analyzing options Councilmember Teitzel relayed the Port's inquiry about reducing the speed limit on Admiral Way from 20 to 25 mph. Mr. English said engineering would need to study that and make a recommendation. Councilmember Teitzel relayed the Port's appreciation to staff for resolving an issue with a pathway/sidewalk connection that was not ADA compliant in the area of the Port's beautification project at the corner of Dayton and Railroad. Councilmember Teitzel recalled staff's presentation to the Long Range Financial Planning Committee about a federal requirement to upgrade all the City's ADA curb ramps and asked the timeframe to comply with that requirement. Mr. Williams relayed the City is required to periodically prepare and publish an ADA transition plan that identifies the ramps that do not comply with ADA rules and show a budget that suggests they will all be addressed over 15 years. He recalled the cost for Edmonds was $20M/year or a total of $146M. No federal funding is provided. Councilmember Teitzel asked what happens if that is not accomplished in 15 years. Mr. Williams said it is an opportunity for an aggrieved party to inquire about plans. Discussion included the annual paving budget, plans to update the PCS, transitioning the Civic Park project to Engineering in the future, whether funds in the Pedestrian Safety Program could be used to address Admiral Way, and ADA ramp upgrades that occur with road projects and private development. Action: Discussion only The meeting was adjourned at 9:07 p.m.