Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2017, 01-10 Regular Meeting
AGENDA SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING FORMAL FORMAT MEETING Tuesday, January 10, 2017 6:00 p.m. Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers 11707 E Sprague Avenue Council Requests Please Silence Your Cell Phones During Council Meeting CALL TO ORDER INVOCATION: Pastor Brad Bruszer, Genesis Church PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF AGENDA INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS COMMITTEE, BOARD, LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS MAYOR'S REPORT PROCLAMATION: PUBLIC COMMENTS: This is an opportunity for the public to speak on any subject except those on this agenda as action items. (Action items include public hearings, and those items under NEW BUSINESS. Public Comments will be taken on those items at the time those items are discussed.) When you come to the podium, please state your name and city residence for the record and limit remarks to three minutes. 1. CONSENT AGENDA: Consists of items considered routine which are approved as a group. Any member of Council may ask that an item be removed from the Consent Agenda to be considered separately. Proposed Motion: I move to approve the Consent Agenda. a. Approval of claim vouchers on Jan 10, 2017 Request for Council Action Form, Total: $2,712,746.97 b. Approval of Payroll for Pay Period Ending December 15, 2016: $398,054.35 c. Approval of Payroll for Pay Period Ending December 31, 2016: $427,984.19 d. Approval of December 13, 2016 Council Meeting Minutes, Formal Meeting Format e. Approval of December 20, 2016 Council Meeting Minutes, Study Session Format NEW BUSINESS: 2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 17-001 Amending Alarm Systems — Morgan Koudelka [public comment] 3. Proposed Resolution 17-001 Repealing and Replacing 16-002, Bank Signing Authority — Chelsie Taylor [public comment] 4. Motion Consideration: GIS Enterprise License Interlocal Agreement — Morgan Koudelka [public comment] 5. Motion Consideration: Bid Award, Appleway Trail, Pines to Evergreen — Steve Worley [public comment] 6. Motion Consideration: Consultant Agreement Design Barker Rd/BNSF Separation Project- Steve Worley [public comment 7. Motion Consideration: Pines Road Underpass Right-of-way acquisition — Steve Worley[public comment] Council Agenda 01-10-17 Formal Format Meeting Page 1 of 2 PUBLIC COMMENTS: This is an opportunity for the public to speak on any subject except those on this agenda as action items. (Action items include public hearings, and those items under NEW BUSINESS. Public Comments will be taken on those items at the time those items are discussed.) When you come to the podium, please state your name and city residence for the record and limit remarks to three minutes. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS 8. Railroad Bridge Repair/Maintenance — Cary Driskell 9. Advance Agenda - Mayor Higgins INFORMATION ONLY (will not be reported or discussed): n/a CITY MANAGER COMMENTS ADJOURNMENT General Meetinj' Schedule (meeting schedule is always subject to change) Regular Council meetings are generally held every Tuesday beginning at 6:00 p.m. The Formal meeting formats are generally held the 211 and 41 Tuesdays. Formal meeting have time allocated for general public comments as well as comments after each action item. The Study Session formats (the less formal meeting) are generally held the 1st 311 and 5t'—' Tuesdays. Study Session formats DO NOT have time allocated for general public comments; but if action items are included, comments are permitted after those specific action items. NOTICE: Individuals planning to attend the meeting who require special assistance to accommodate physical, hearing, or other impairments, please contact the City Clerk at (509) 921-1000 as soon as possible so that arrangements may be made. Council Agenda 01-10-17 Formal Format Meeting Page 2 of 2 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: January 10, 2017 Department Director Approval: El Check all that apply: ® consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Approval of the Following Vouchers: VOUCHER LIST VOUCHER NUMBERS TOTAL AMOUNT 12/15/2016 40059-40110 $1,612,734.26 12/16/2016 40111-40140 $104,224.35 12/20/2016 6988-7000 $1,925.75 12/20/2016 5718; 5730; 5731; 5733; 5734 $79,543.02 12/22/2016 40141-40161 $573,694.42 12/23/2016 40162-40173 $35,923.00 12/28/2016 40174-40178 $3,586.59 12/28/2016 7001-7009 $1,872.00 12/28/2016 40179-40213; 1327816 $278,363.41 12/29/2016 40214-40222 $20,880.17 GRAND TOTAL: $2,712,746.97 Explanation of Fund Numbers found on Voucher Lists #001 - General Fund Other Funds 001.011.000.511. City Council 101 -- Street Fund 001.013.000.513. City Manager 103 — Paths & Trails 001.013.015.515. Legal 105 — Hotel/Motel Tax 001.016.000. Public Safety 106 — Solid Waste 001.018.013.513, Deputy City Manager 120 - CenterPlace Operating Reserve 001.018.014.514. Finance 121— Service Level Stabilization Reserve 001.018.016.518. Human Resources 122 — Winter Weather Reserve 001.032.000. Public Works 123 — Civil Facilities Replacement 001.058.050.558. CED - Administration 204 — Debt Service 001.058.051.558. CED -- Economic Development 301 -- REET 1 Capital Projects 001.058.055.558. CED — Development Services -Engineering 302 - REET 2 Capital Projects 001.058.056.558. CED -- Development Services -Planning 303 -- Street Capital Projects 001.058.057.558 CED — Building 309 — Parks Capital Grants 001.076.000.576. Parks & Rec—Administration 310 — Civic Bldg Capital Projects 001.076.300.576. Parks & Rec-Maintenance 311 — Pavement Preservation 001.076.301.571. Parks & Rec-Recreation 312 — Capital Reserve 001.076.302.576. Parks & Rec- Aquatics 314 — Railroad Grade Separation Projects 001.076.304.575. Parks & Rec- Senior Center 402 — Stormwater Management 001.076.305.571. Parks & Rec-CenterPlace 403 — Aquifer Protection Area 001.090.000.511. General Gov't- Council related 501 — Equipment Rental & Replacement 001.090.000.514. General Gov't -Finance related 502 -- Risk Management 001.090.000.517. General Gov't -Employee supply 001.090.000.518. General Gov't- Centralized Services 001.090.000.519. General Gov't -Other Services 001.090.000.540. General Gov't -Transportation 001.090.000.550. General Gov't -Natural & Economic 001.090.000.560. General Gov't -Social Services 001.090.000.594. General Gov't -Capital Outlay 001.090.000.595. General Gov't -Pavement Preservation RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to approve attached list of claim vouchers. [Approved as part of the Consent Agenda, or may be removed and discussed separately.] STAFF CONTACT: Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director ATTACHMENTS: Voucher Lists vchlist 12115/2016 3:05:51PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 1 Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 40059 12/15/2016 001873 ACME CONCRETE PAVING INC 40060 12/15/2016 001107 ADVANCEDTRAFFIC PRODUCTS 40061 12/15/2016 003078 ALLWESTTESTING & ENGINEERING 40062 12/15/2016 005433 AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF 40063 12/15/2016 004278 ARCHITECTS WEST INC 40064 12/15/2016 000506 ASCE 40065 12/15/2016 000796 BUDINGER & ASSOCIATES INC 40066 12/15/2016 000101 CDW-G 40067 12/15/2016 002572 CINTAS CORPORATION PAY APP 4 0000016760 0000016952 0000016954 82904 83235 83245 2507 8865 1043509104 M14310-20 GCB2095 606223185 606223355 606224477 606225799 606225984 606227116 606228379 606228559 Fund/Dept 303.223.40.00 303.000.221.595 303.000.221.595 101.042.000.542 313.000.215.594 303.000.221.595 313.000.215.594 001.143.70.00 313.000.215.594 001.143.70.00 303.303.155.595 001.090.000.518 101.000.000.542 101.042.000.543 101.000.000.542 101.000.000.542 101.042.000.543 101.000.000.542 101.000.000.542 101.042.000.543 Description/Account Amount CIP 0113 - RETAINAGE RELEASE Total : 0221 - MATRIX SENSOR - BROADVI 0221 - BROADWAY/MCDONALD REPLACEMENT : SPRAGUE/CONKI Total : 0215 - MATERIALS TESTING ON CALL MATERIALS TESTING 0215 - MATERIALS TESTING Total : MEMBERSHIP Total : 0215 -CITY HALL DESIGN & CN ADP Total : 2017 MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL: ER Total : 0155-SULLIVAN BRIDGE MATERIAL Total : IPAD REFRESH Total : SERVICES AT MAINT. SHOP CONTI SERVICES AT MA1NT. SHOP CONTI SERVICES AT MA1NT. SHOP CONTI SERVICES AT MAINT. SHOP CONTI SERVICES AT MAINT. SHOP CONTI SERVICES AT MAINT. SHOP CONTI SERVICES AT MAINT. SHOP CONTI SERVICES AT MAINT. SHOP CONTI 54,529.91 54,529.91 4,427.72 62.51 21,574.55 26,064.78 6,460.00 861.59 3,545.00 10,866.59 70.00 70.00 13,134.90 13,134.90 265.00 265.00 1,477.60 1,477.60 106.00 106.00 117.98 318.19 134.89 122.92 275.76 122.92 122.92 318.19 Page: 1 vchlist 12/15/2016 3:05:51 PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 2 Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 40067 12/15/2016 002572 002572 CINTAS CORPORATION 40068 12/15/2016 001888 COMCAST (Continued) DECEMBER 2016 40069 12/15/2016 002469 COMMUNITY MINDED ENTERPRISES 4578 4579 40070 12/15/2016 002604 DELL FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC 40071 12/15/2016 000734 DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION 40072 12/15/2016 000999 EASTERN WA ATTORNEY SVC INC 40073 12/15/2016 002157 ELJAY OIL COMPANY 40074 12/15/2016 003682 EPIC LAND SOLUTIONS INC 40075 12/15/2016 003392 EPICENTER SERVICES LLC 40076 12/15/2016 003274 EXCHANGE PUBLISHING LLC 78788176 RE 46 JG457 L003 104235 4257335 1116-0614 1116-0644 1116-0650 1116-0671 2016-23 433333 435062 435063 435065 435754 435755 435757 435759 Fund/Dept 001.090.000.518 107.000.000.518 107.000.000.518 001.090.000.548 303.000.238.595 001.013.015.515 101.000.000.542 303.303.123.595 303.303.166.595 303.000.247.595 303.000.247.595 106.000.000.537 309.000.227.595 001.058.056.558 001.058.056.558 001.013.000.513 001.058.056.558 001.013.000.513 001.013.000.513 001.058.056.558 Description/Account Amount INTERNET CITY HALL Total : Total : PEG REIMBURSEMENT - REPLACE PEG REIMBURSEMENT - PRODUC- Total COMPUTER LEASE:001-8922117-0( Total : 0238 - SR 27 & MIRABEAU PKWY Total : PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Total : FUEL FOR MAINT. SHOP & SNOWF Total : 0123 -RW SERVICES 0166 -RW SERVICES 0247: 15-073 D RW PROFESSIONA 15-073F:0247 REAL ESTATE ACQUI Total : PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLISHING LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION Total : 1,533.77 106.15 106.15 16,885.14 41,026.72 57,911.86 1,006.63 1,006.63 7,526.10 7,526.10 15.00 15.00 327.13 327.13 1,765.25 645.00 582.50 432.37 3,425.12 3,007.13 3,007.13 70.50 78.21 71.25 25.28 74.25 36.34 30.81 75.05 Page: 2 vchlist 12/15/2016 3:05:51 PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 3 Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 40076 12/15/2016 003274 EXCHANGE PUBLISHING LLC 40077 12/15/2016 001926 FARR, SARAH 40078 12/15/2016 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC 40079 12/15/2016 000609 GENDRONS CO 40080 12/15/2016 000179 GFOA 40081 12/15/2016 000007 GRAINGER 40082 12/15/2016 003177 GUTH, ERIC 40083 12/15/2016 002043 HDR ENGINEERING INC 40084 12/15/2016 000313 INLAND ASPHALT COMPANY INC. 40085 12/15/2016 005086 IRON MOUNTAIN INC 40086 12/15/2016 002259 MENKE JACKSON BEYER LLP (Continued) 435760 435761 435762 EXPENSES 46515 46605 46609 7783 0131582 9295749221 EXPENSES 1200022517 PAY APP 5 3901183036 485 499 Fund/Dept 001.013.000.513 001.013.000.513 001.013.000.513 001.018.014.514 309.000.227.595 001.058.056.558 001.058.056.558 001.032.000.543 001.143.70.00 001.032.000.543 001.032.000.543 303.000.239.595 311.000.221.595 001.058.057.558 001.013.015.515 001.013.015.515 Description/Account Amount LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION SUPPLIES: PW Total : Total : 2017 DUES: TAYLOR, DUFFEY, WIL Total : SUPPLIES: PW Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : 0239: 16 -086 -ROW SERVICES Total : 0221-MCDONALD RD DIET CONST/ Total : DOCUMENT DESTRUCTION Total : 54.21 31.60 32.39 579.89 87.48 87.48 160.00 166.40 84.15 410.55 21.69 21.69 640.00 640.00 4.94 4.94 45.93 45.93 3,496.21 3,496.21 26,166.10 26,166.10 67.78 67.78 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 5,148.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 207.20 Page: 3 vchf ist 12/15/2016 3:05:51 PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 4 Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 40086 12/15/2016 002259 002259 MENKE JACKSON BEYER LLP (Continued) 40087 12/15/2016 005037 MERIDIAN CONSTRUCTION INC PAY APP 6 40088 12/15/2016 005115 NB STORMWATER ENGINEERING LLC 0006 40089 12/15/2016 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. 40090 12/15/2016 005050 OGDEN MURPHY WALLACE PLLC 40091 12/15/2016 000881 OXARC INC 40092 12/15/2016 005049 PEDERSON, MICHAEL ROY 40093 12/15/2016 002424 PITNEY BOWES GLOBAL 40094 12/15/2016 001089 POE ASPHALT PAVING INC. 886469176001 886469318001 730929 R454541 NOVEMBER 2016 3302244732 45234 45235 45236 45237 45242 45248 45249 40095 12/15/2016 000675 RAMAX PRINTING & AWARDS INC 28893 28903 40096 12/15/2016 003407 RIGHT! SYSTEMS INC Fund/Dept 313.000.215.594 402.000.193.531 001.013.015.515 001.013.015.515 001.013.015.515 101.000.000.542 101.042.000.542 001.090.000.518 101.042.000.542 402.402.000.531 101.042.000.542 101.042.000.542 101.042.000.542 402.402.000.531 101.042.000.542 001.058.057.558 001.011.000.511 145034 001.090.000.518 Description/Account Amount Total : 0215 -CITY HALL CONSTRUCTION C Total : CONSULTING SERVICES Total : OFFICE SUPPLIES: LEGAL OFFICE SUPPLIES: LEGAL Total : PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CYLINDER RENTAL DEAD ANIMAL REMOVAL Total : Total : Total : LEASE CONTRACT 2969758001 Total : 2016 STREET & STORMWATER MA 2016 STREET & STORMWATER MA 2016 STREET & STORMWATER MA 2016 STREET & STORMWATER MA 2016 STREET & STORMWATER MA 2016 STREET & STORMWATER MA 2016 STREET & STORMWATER MA Total : NAME PLATE NAME TAG & NAME PLATE Total : JUNIPER SWITCH SUPPORT RENE 5,355.20 1,175,817.49 1,175,817.49 20,449.00 20,449.00 140.76 4.34 145.10 901.35 901.35 94.41 94.41 1,000.00 1,000.00 1,065.14 1,065.14 861.40 11,706.33 75,510.91 95.72 2,513.47 14,999.18 1,565.89 107,252.90 16.85 21.53 38.38 3,828.45 Page: 4 vchlist 12/15/2016 3:05:51 PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 5 Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 40096 12/15/2016 003407 003407 RIGHT! SYSTEMS INC 40097 12/15/2016 003133 SHAMROCK MANUFACTURING INC 40098 12/15/2016 005168 SOFTWAREONE INC 40099 12/15/2016 001903 SPOKANE TRAFFIC CONTROL INC 40100 12/15/2016 000093 SPOKESMAN -REVIEW, THE 40101 12/15/2016 002135 SPRAY CENTER ELECTRONICS INC 40102 12/15/2016 000065 STAPLES ADVANTAGE 40103 12/15/2016 004005 STONE CREEK LAND DESIGN & DEV 40104 12/15/2016 004740 THOMSON REUTERS -WEST 40105 12/15/2016 000335 TIRE-RAMA 40106 12/15/2016 002597 TWISTED PAIR ENTERPRISES LLC (Continued) 5121 US -PS 1-516685 2248 466726 239565 3322572908 3322572910 3322572912 3322572913 3322572914 3322572916 3322572918 3322572920 PAY APP 8 835184429 8080047355 8080047454 11302016 Fund/Dept 101.042.000.542 001.058.051.558 101.042.000.542 001.013.000.513 101.000.000.542 001.058.056.558 001.058.056.558 001.058.056.558 001.058.056.558 001.058.056.558 001.058.056.558 001.058.056.558 001.076.305.575 309.223.40.00 001.013.015.515 001.090.000.518 001.058.056.524 001.011.000.511 Description/Account Amount SUPPLIES: PW Total : Total : ADOBE CREATIVE CLOUD FOR CE Total : TRAFFIC CONTROL ADVERTISING ACCT 42365 Total : Total : SUPPLIES: MAINTENANCE SHOP Total : OFFICE SUPPLIES: COMM. DEV. OFFICE SUPPLIES: COMM. DEV. OFFICE SUPPLIES: COMM. DEV. OFFICE SUPPLIES: COMM. DEV. OFFICE SUPPLIES: COMM. DEV. OFFICE SUPPLIES: COMM. DEV. OFFICE SUPPLIES: COMM. DEV. OFFICE SUPPLIES: CENTERPLACE Total : CIP 0176 RETAINAGE - APPLEWAY Total : SUBSCRIPTION SERVICES Total : OIL CHANGE 2003 DODGE CARAVE WIPER BLADES 2008 COLORADO Total : 3,828.45 1,501.42 1,501.42 875.68 875.68 6,106.37 6,106.37 1,895.04 1,895.04 635.57 635.57 24.45 197.46 14.01 125.32 3.54 33.25 798.42 40.56 1,237.01 54,218.08 54,218.08 781.32 781.32 36.36 25.89 62.25 BROADCASTING COUNCIL MEETIN 1,770.00 Page: 5 vchlist 12/15/2016 3:05:51PM Voucher List Page: 6 Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 40106 12/15/2016 002597 002597 TWISTED PAIR ENTERPRISES LLC (Continued) Total : 1,770.00 40107 12/15/2016 000337 UPS 00000EX310496 001.058.056.558 SHIPPING 15.63 Total : 15.63 40108 12/15/2016 003206 VAN NESS FELDMAN LLP 131018 001.058.099.558 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4,908.00 Total : 4,908.00 40109 12/15/2016 000158 WELCH COMER & ASSOC. INC 2016804 309.000.237.595 16-058: CIP 0237 ENGINEERING S\ 9,072.49 Total : 9,072.49 40110 12/15/2016 001885 ZAYO GROUP LLC DECEMBER 2016 001.090.000.518 NETWORK INFRASTRUCTURE AC( 253.01 DECEMBER 2016 001.090.000.518 INTERNET SERVICE 560.73 Total : 813.74 52 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 1,612,734.26 52 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 1,612,734.26 Page: 6 vchlist 12/16/2016 12:04 :16 P M Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: s1— Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 40111 12/16/2016 001081 ALSCO 40112 12/16/2016 004046 AMERICAN ONSITE SERVICES 40113 12/16/2016 000334 ARGUS JANITORIAL LLC 40114 12/16/2016 000030 AVISTA LSPO1839068 LS P O 1844544 A-199700 A-201787 1NV014237 Nov 2016 Nov 2016 40115 12/16/2016 000918 BLUE RIBBON LINEN SUPPLY INC 9809818 S0152412 40116 12/16/2016 004854 CAMTEK INC 40117 12/16/2016 003300 CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 40118 12/16/2016 001169 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY 40119 12/16/2016 003795 CLEARWATER SUMMIT GROUP 40120 12/16/2016 000326 CONSOLIDATED IRRIGATION #19 40121 12/16/2016 000795 EARTHWORKS RECYCLING INC. 353223 353572 36567 Oct 2016 Dec 2016 0916-2165 Nov 2016 Fund/Dept 001.016.000.521 001.016.000.521 309.000.242.594 309.000.242.594 001.016.000.521 001.076.300.576 101.042.000.542 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.016.000.521 001.090.000.519 001.076.301.571 309.000.242.594 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 Description/Account Amount FLOOR MAT SERVICE AT PRECINC FLOOR MAT SERVICE AT PRECINC Total : RENT FENCE FOR BROWNS PAR RENT FENCE FOR BROWNS PAF Total : JANITORIAL SVC: NOV 2016 Total : UTILITIES: PARKS MASTER AVISTA UTILITIES: PW MASTER AVISTA Total : LINEN SERVICE AND SUPPLY AT C LINEN SERVICE AND SUPPLY AT C Total : GATE TESTING ANNUAL MAINTEN/ Total : SUPPLIES: KITCHEN/WELLNESS Total : PETTY CASH: 8998, 8999 Total : PAY APP 3: BROWNS PARKNOLLE Total : UTILITIES: PARKS AND CENTERPL Total : 20.39 20.39 40.78 5.04 38.86 43.90 2,501.87 2,501.87 7,856.33 28,116.00 35,972.33 47.10 49.38 96.48 2,168.57 2,168.57 484.43 484.43 25.24 25.24 23,462.13 23,462.13 168.62 168.62 RECYCLING COLLECTION AT CP 11 27.50 RECYCLING COLLECTION AT CP 9, 27.50 Page: vchlist 12/16/2016 12: 04:16PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 40121 12/16/2016 000795 000795 EARTHWORKS RECYCLING INC. (Continued) 40122 12/16/2016 002308 FINKE, MELISSA 40123 12/16/2016 002877 FISCHER, WALLY Nov 2016 Nov 2016 Expenses 40124 12/16/2016 003188 GENERAL FIRE EXTINGUISHER SERV 0060240 40125 12/16/2016 000011 GREATER SPOKANE VALLEY 40126 12/16/2016 000388 IRVIN WATER DIST. #6 40127 12/16/2016 000132 MODERN ELECTRIC WATER CO 40128 12/16/2016 000132 MODERN ELECTRIC WATER CO 40129 12/16/2016 002534 PEAK SOFTWARE SYSTEMS 40130 12/16/2016 001860 PLATT ELECTRICAL SUPPLY 40131 12/16/2016 005434 ROOF PRO STORM DIVISION 40132 12/16/2016 000323 SPOKANE CO UTILITIES 40133 12/16/2016 000898 SPOKANE PROCARE INC 4th QTR 2016 Nov 2016 Nov 2016 Nov 2016 017747 K866552 BLD -2016-2773 Dec 2016 552552 Fund/Dept 001.076.301.571 001.076.301.571 Description/Account Amount INSTRUCTOR PMT INSTRUCTOR PMT Total : Total : 001.076.301.571 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : 001.076.305.575 FIRE EXTINGUISHER SERVICE Total : 001.090.000.550 2016 ECO DEV GRANT REIMBURSI Total : 001.076.300.576 UTILITIES: PARKS 101.042.000.542 UTILITIES: NOV 2016 PW Total : 001,076.302.576 001.143.70.00 001.076.305.575 001.058.059.322 001.076.302.576 SPOKANE CO SEWER CHRGS: DE Total : 402.402.000.531 UTILITIES: NOV 2016 PARKS Total : Total : SPORTSMAN SQL SOFTWARE 201 Total : SUPPLIES FOR CENTERPLACE Total : PERMIT REFUND BLD -2016-2773 Total : 2016 ROADSIDE WEED SPRAYING Total : 55.00 1,113.75 93.75 1,207.50 255.50 255.50 1,104.28 1,104.28 6,676.00 6,676.00 166.00 166.00 8,760.54 8,760.54 1,725.54 1,725.54 2,813.00 2,813.00 55.65 55.65 255.75 255.75 1,637.69 1,637.69 2,771.43 2,771.43 Page: --2 vchlist 12/16/2016 12: 04:16PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 9 3 Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 40134 12/16/2016 000404 SPOKANE VALLEY HERITAGE MUSEUM Nov 2016 Nov 2016 40135 12/16/2016 002306 TERRELL LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, MIC 2716 2716-1 40136 12/16/2016 001472 TESTAMERICA LABORATORIES 59105070 40137 12/16/2016 002918 VALLEY ROTARY CHARITABLE ASSOC Dec 2016 40138 12/16/2016 000038 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF SPOKANE 0064805-1518-5 40139 12/16/2016 000066 WCP SOLUTIONS 40140 12/16/2016 000347 WORLEY, STEVE 30 Vouchers for bank code : apbank 9879570 Expenses Fund/Dept 105.000.000.557 105.000.000.557 309.000.242.594 309.000.243.594 001.076.300.576 001.076.301.571 402.402.000.531 001.076.305.575 001.032.000.543 DescriptionlAccount Amount 2016 LODGING TAX GRANT RE[MB 2016 LODGING TAX GRANT RE[MB Total : 0242 -LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE 0243 -LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Total : J5092-1 MONTHLY DRINKING WATT Total : BREAKFAST WITH SANTA Total : WASTE MGMT: PW NOV 2016 Total : SUPPLIES FOR CENTERPLACE Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : 2,381.75 1,335.00 3,716.75 435.00 30.80 465.80 28.50 28.50 2,485.00 2,485.00 4,518.31 4,518.31 572.04 572.04 9.73 9.73 Bank total : 104,244.36 30 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 104,244.36 Page: vchlist 12/20/2016 11:34:32AM Voucher List Spokane Valley 70 Page: 1 Bank code : pk-ref Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 6988 12/14/2016 005435 ALK SOURCE MATERIALS INC 6989 12/14/2016 004341 GRAND CANYON UNIVERSITY 6990 12/14/2016 005437 HATTEN, TERRI 6991 12/14/2016 005184 HEALTHCARE RESOURCE GROUP 6992 12/14/2016 003116 HORIZON CREDIT UNION 6993 12/14/2016 002190 HORIZON MIDDLE SCHOOL PTA 6994 12/14/2016 005439 INLAND NW APIC 6995 12/14/2016 005440 JOSIE FREIER SCHOLARSHIP FUND 6996 12/14/2016 005441 LARSON, BRANDON PARKS REFUND PARKS REFUND PARKS REFUND PARKS REFUND PARKS REFUND PARKS REFUND PARKS REFUND PARKS REFUND PARKS REFUND 6997 12/14/2016 004116 PROVIDENCE MEDICAL GROUP, ANESTI PARKS REFUND 6998 12/14/2016 005442 SQUISHY PEANUT MARKETING 6999 12/14/2016 005432 TAYLOR, LORNA 7000 12/14/2016 005443 TRUVISION HEALTH PARKS REFUND PARKS REFUND PARKS REFUND Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: GREAT ROOM/, 210.00 Total : 210.00 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: MEETING ROO 52.00 Total : 52.00 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: MEETING ROO 52.00 Total : 52.00 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: MEETING ROO 52.00 Total : 52.00 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: MEETING ROO 31.75 Total : 31.75 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: GREAT ROOM/: 210.00 Total : 210.00 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: MEETING ROO 52.00 Total : 52.00 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: GREAT ROOM': 210.00 Total : 210.00 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: MEETING ROO 52.00 Total : 52.00 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: FIRESIDE LOUI 873.00 Total : 873.00 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: MEETING ROO 52.00 Total : 52.00 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: SMALL DINING 27.00 Total : 27.00 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: MEETING ROO 52.00 Page: vchlist 12/20/2016 11:34:32AM Voucher List Page: -2- Spokane Valley Bank code : pk-ref Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept DescriptionlAccount Amount 7000 12/14/2016 005443 005443 TRUV1SION HEALTH (Continued) Total : 52.00 13 Vouchers for bank code : pk-ref Bank total : 1,925.75 13 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 1,925.75 I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been furnished, the services rendered, or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just, due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley, and that I am authorized to authenticate and certify said claim. Finance Director Date Council member reviewed: Mayor Date Council Member Date Page: vchlist Voucher List Page: / 12/20/2016 11:58:32AM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice FundlDept Description/Account Amount 5718 12/20/2016 002227 IDAHO TAX COMMISSION Ben70948 001.231.50.03 IDAHO STATE TAX BASE: PAYMENT 1,933.09 Total : 1,933.09 5730 12/20/2016 000048 VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS, 401A PLAN Ben70950 001.231.14.00 401A: PAYMENT 31,007.98 Total : 31,007.98 5731 12/20/2016 000682 EFTPS Ben70952 001.231.11.00 FEDERAL TAXES: PAYMENT 39,562.89 Total : 39,562.89 5733 12/20/2016 000145 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS, 457 PL} Ben70954 001.231.18.00 457 DEFERRED COMPENSATION: PAY] 6,401.56 Total : 6,401.56 5734 12/20/2016 000162 VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS, 401A EXEC PL Ben70956 001.231.14.00 401 EXEC PLAN: PAYMENT 637.50 Total : 637.50 5 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 79,543.02 5 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 79,543.02 Page: vchlist 12/22/2016 8:43:23AM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 40141 12/22/2016 004278 ARCHITECTS WEST INC 40142 12/22/2016 005268 ATLAS ADVERTISING LLC 40143 12/22/2016 004439 BIRCH COMMUNICATIONS INC 40144 12/22/2016 005419 BLACK BOX RESALE SERVICES 40145 12/22/2016 000101 CDW-G 40146 12/22/2016 004437 COMMUNITY ATTRIBUTES INC 40147 12/22/2016 000869 EVCO SOUND & ELECTRONICS 40148 12/22/2016 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC 40149 12/22/2016 000002 H & H BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC_ 8867 1116 22843261 4362371 GCV8703 GDZ4772 GGF0156 GGG2766 1899 27966 46635 46636 46640 329238 329239 329423 329424 329425 329426 329429 329430 Fund/Dept 001.058.056.558 001.058.051.558 001.076.305.575 001.090.000.518 001.090.000.518 001.090.000.518 001.090.000.518 001.090.000.518 105.000.000.557 107.000.246.594 001.013.000.513 001.013.000.513 001.058.056.558 001.058.057.558 001.058.057.558 001.013.000.513 001.013.000.513 001.013.015.515 001.013.015.515 001.058.050.558 001.058.050.558 Description/Account Amount PROFESSIONAL SERVICES - CITY Total : PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Total : PHONE SERVICE AT CENTERPLAC Total : IP PHONE UPGRADE Total : IPAD PRO 9.7 STYLFOLIO CREDIT RE PO 43589 HP DESIGNJET T930 LARGE FORN BROTHER PDS -6000 DOCUMENT c Total : SPOKANE VALLEY TOURISM ANAL' Total : CONTRACT 16-134 - NEW CITY HAI Total : LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGALPUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION COPIER COSTS COPIER COSTS COPIER COSTS COPIER COSTS COPIER COSTS COPIER COSTS COPIER COSTS COPIER COSTS Total : 1,140.30 1,140.30 1,746.96 1,746.96 215.80 215.80 17,500.00 17,500.00 113.83 -106.00 4,809.32 2,890.96 7,708.11 24,050.63 24,050.63 5,435.00 5,435.00 280.00 75.20 100.30 455.50 33.15 3.71 255.33 22.73 110.62 10.29 77.72 22.20 Page: 'lam vch l ist 12/22/2016 8:43:23AM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: Bank code : agbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 40149 12/22/2016 000002 H & H BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC. 40150 12/22/2016 003959 MAX J KUNEY CO 40151 12/22/2016 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. 40152 12/22/2016 003407 RIGHT! SYSTEMS INC 40153 12/22/2016 004535 SHRED -IT USA LLC 40154 12/22/2016 000090 SPOKANE CO INFO SYSTEMS 40155 12/22/2016 000093 SPOKESMAN -REVIEW, THE 40156 12/22/2016 000257 STATE AUDITOR'S OFFICE 40157 12/22/2016 000335 T1RE-RAMA (Continued) 329435 329436 329460 329461 329476 PAY AFP 26 885874911001 886311247001 886311247002 886311401001 SI -150086 8121338785 50315241 462782 L118001 8080046685 8080047483 40158 12/22/2016 003206 VAN NESS FELDMAN LLP 131507 131526 Fund/Dept 001.011.000.511 001.011.000.511 001.076.000.576 001.076.000.576 001.058.057.558 303.303.155.595 001.090.000.519 001.018.014.514 001.018.014.514 001.018.014.514 001.090.000.518 001.090.000.518 001.058.056.558 001.058.051.558 Description/Account Amount COPIER COSTS COPIER COSTS COPIER COSTS COPIER COSTS COPIER COSTS Total : 0155 - SULLIVAN RD WEST BRIDGE Total : OFFICE SUPPLIES: IT OFFICE SUPPLIES: FINANCE OFFICE SUPPLIES: FINANCE OFFICE SUPPLIES: FINANCE Total : JUNIPER EX3300 POE SWITCH Total : DOCUMENT DESTRUCTION Total : COUNTY IT SUPPORT NOVEMBER Total : ADVERTISING ACCT 9004210 Total : 001.090.000.514 SAO AUDIT OF 2015 001.058.055.558 001.090.000.518 001.058.099.558 001.058.056.558 Total : OIL CHANGE 2006 DAKOTA 40205 1 SERVICE FOR 2003 S-10 32810D Total : PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 943.17 27.77 453.62 23.59 4.87 1,988.77 486,194.60 486,194.60 34.22 18.89 28.34 24.56 106.01 3,547.97 3,547.97 156.30 156.30 10,082.39 10,082.39 1,031.74 1,031.74 92.53 92.53 36.36 119.31 155.67 3,014.60 4,464.55 Page: vchlist 12/22/2016 8:43:23AM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: -.3 Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 40158 12/22/2016 003206 003206 VAN NESS FELDMAN LLP (Continued) Total : 7,479.15 40159 12/22/2016 004989 WASH. STATE RECYCLING ASSN. 1038 001.143.70.00 WSRA 2017 MEMBERSHIP RENEW 240.00 Total : 240.00 40160 12/22/2016 000980 WESTERN SYSTEMS INC 0000031780 001.076.099.576 WIRELESS NETWORK FOR TWO S 4,251.63 Total : 4,251.63 40161 12/22/2016 002651 WOODARD, ARNE EXPENSES 001.011.000.511 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 115.36 Total : 115.36 21 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 573,694.42 21 Vouchers in this report I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been furnished, the services rendered, or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just, due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley, and that I am authorized to authenticate and certify said claim. Finance Director Date Council member reviewed: Mayor Date Council Member Date Total vouchers : 573,694.42 Page: vch list 12/2312016 1:48:29PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: , ti Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 40162 12/23/2016 001862 BISCHOFF, PATTY 40163 12/23/2016 000918 BLUE RIBBON LINEN SUPPLY INC 40164 12/23/2016 003317 COEUR D' ALENE PRESS 40165 12/23/2016 002308 FINKE, MELISSA 40166 12/23/2016 001732 GREATER SPOKANE SUBSTANCE 40167 12/23/2016 001635 ISS FACILITY EVENT SERVICES 40168 12/23/2016 004926 LE CATERING CO 40169 12/23/2016 000324 SPOKANE CO WATER DIST #3 Expenses 9811871 S0152547 S0152592 S0152904 S0152944 Nov 2016 Dec 2016 Dec 2016 December 2016 1127039 Contract # 26 Contract # 27 Contract #25 Dec 2016 40170 12/23/2016 000404 SPOKANE VALLEY HERITAGE MUSEUM December 2016 December 2016 40171 12/23/2016 001969 SUNSHINE DISPOSAL Fund/Dept 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.076.301.571 001.076.301.571 001.090.000.560 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 402.402.000.531 001.090.000.550 001.090.000.550 1114331 101.042.000.542 Description/Account Amount EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : LINEN SERVICE AND SUPPLY AT C LINEN SERVICE AND SUPPLY AT C LINEN SERVICE AND SUPPLY AT C LINEN SERVICE AND SUPPLY AT C LINEN SERVICE AND SUPPLY AT C Total : NORTH IDAHO BUSINESS JOURNP Total : INSTRUCTOR PMT INSTRUCTOR PMT Total : 2016 SOC SER GRANT REIMBURSI Total : EVENT SCVS FOR CENTERPLACE Total : CATERING INVOICE: DSHS CATERING INVOICE: DSHS CATERING INVOICE: 12/15/16 ACTI Total : WATER CHARGES FOR DEC 2016 Total : 2016 ECO DEV GRANT REIMBURSI 2016 ECO DEV GRANT REIMBURSI Total : 35.73 35.73 204.12 364.28 259.74 106.61 71.98 1,006.73 271.00 271.00 48.75 127.50 176.25 687.27 687.27 7,136.00 7,136.00 430.99 317.33 1,463.44 2,211.76 137.69 137.69 623.87 622.47 1,246.34 TRANSFER STATION 1,619.73 Page: vchlist 12/23/2016 1:48:29PM '7 ,j Voucher List Page: 2 Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 40171 12/23/2016 001969 001969 SUNSHINE DISPOSAL (Continued) Total : 1,619.73 40172 12/23/2016 003175 VISIT SPOKANE Nov 2016 105.000.000.557 2016 LODGING TAX GRANT REIMB 13,637.50 Total : 13, 637.50 40173 12/23/2016 000487 YMCA OF THE INLAND NW Dec 12 2016 001.076.302.576 OPERATING EXPENSES AND MANi 7,75T00 Total : 7,757.00 12 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 35,923.00 12 Vouchers in this report the undersigned. do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been furnished, the services rendered, or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just, due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley, and that I am authorized to authenticate and certify said claim. Finance Director Date Council member reviewed: Mayor Date Council Member Date Total vouchers : 35,923.00 Page: vchr t 12/28/2016 8:44:50AM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 40174 12/28/2016 001606 BANNER BANK 9713 Dec 2016 001.143.70.00 SPOKANE CO INFO SYSTEMS- 120.00 9713 Dec 2016 001.058.056.558 ULINE SUPPLIES 337.89 9713 Dec 2016 001.143.70.00 ASFPM 150.00 9713 Dec 2016 001.143.70.00 ASFPM 150.00 9713 Dec 2016 001.143.70.00 INT'L CODE COUNCIL 240.00 9713 Dec 2016 001.143.70,00 ASCE 265.00 9713 Dec 2016 001.058.056.558 MAP BOOKS 4 U 27.81 9713 Dec 2016 001.058.055.558 TITAN TRUCK EQUIP CO INC 739.16 9713 Dec 2016 001.143.70.00 WABO INC 185.00 9713 Dec 2016 001.058.056.558 NORTH 40 OUTFITTERS 35.76 Total : 2,250.62 40175 12/28/2016 001606 BANNER BANK 8573 Dec 2016 001.018.016.518 WALMART 33.01 8573 Dec 2016 001.018.014.514 GFOA 85.00 8573 Dec 2016 001.032.000.543 AMAZON 30.98 8573 Dec 2016 001.013.000.513 GFOA 85.00 8573 Dec 2016 001.018.013.513 AMAZON 34.98 8573 Dec 2016 001.018.016.518 DICKS SPORTING GOODS 500.01 Total : 768.98 40176 12/28/2016 001606 BANNER BANK 8599 Dec 2016 8599 Dec 2016 001.076.305.575 TOA ELECTRONICS 001.076.305.575 SMARTDRAW.COM Total : 25.18 118.95 144.13 40177 12/28/2016 001606 BANNER BANK 8557 Dec 2016 001.011.000.511 WALGREENS 27.35 8557 Dec 2016 001.011.000.511 GREATER SPOKANE INC 20.00 8557 Dec 2016 001.011.000.511 JIMMY JOHNS 86.98 8557 Dec 2016 001.011.000.511 JIMMY JOHNS 45.03 8557 Dec 2016 001.011.000.511 GREATER SPOKANE VALLEY CHAP 105.00 Total : 284.36 40178 12/28/2016 001606 BANNER BANK 8565 Dec 2016 8565 Dec 2016 001.018.016.518 AMAZON 001.018.016.518 AMAZON Total : 80.19 58.31 138.50 5 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 3,586.59 Page: vchlist 12/28/2016 7:50:32AM Voucher List Page: -- t Spokane Valley Bank code : pk-ref Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 7001 12/28/2016 005444 BREWER, JEANNE PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: FIRESIDE LOUI 210.00 Total : 210.00 7002 12/28/2016 005445 BUSBY, STEVEN PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: FIRESIDE LOUI 500.00 Total: 500.00 7003 12/28/2016 005446 CHESTER COMMUNITY CHURCH PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: GREAT ROOM 210.00 Total: 210.00 7004 12/28/2016 005447 CONTACTPOINTE INC PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: ROOM 110 52.00 Total : 52.00 7005 12/28/2016 005448 DEMARA, MICHELLE PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: ROOM 109 52.00 Total : 52.00 7006 12/28/2016 005449 LAVROVA, KATIE PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: GREAT ROOM 500.00 Total : 500.00 7007 12/28/2016 005450 MORRIS, NJERE PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: ROOM 213 52.00 Total : 52.00 7008 12/28/2016 003888 PERFORMANCE CONTRACTING INC PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: FIRESIDE LOUT 210.00 Total : 210.00 7009 12/28/2016 005451 VAUGHAN, GRACE PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 WINTER CAMP REFUND 86.00 Total : 86.00 9 Vouchers for bank code : pk-ref Bank total : 1,872.00 9 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 1,872.00 Page: vchlist 12/28/2016 4:21:29PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 1 Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 40179 12/28/2016 000958 AAA SWEEPING LLC 57290 57291-A 40180 12/28/2016 003337 ARROW CONSTRUCTION SUPPLY INC 185415 185506 185627 40181 12/28/2016 001194 DEPT OF ECOLOGY 40182 12/28/2016 002920 D[RECTV INC 40183 12/28/2016 004950 EIGHT31 CONSULTING 40184 12/28/2016 003274 EXCHANGE PUBLISHING LLC 40185 12/28/2016 001232 FASTENAL CO 40186 12/28/2016 002975 FREEDOM SALES AND SUPPLY LLC 7222 30124359495 1033 436479 436481 436482 436483 436485 436486 WASPK135928 WAS P K136065 WAS P K136502 WASPK136611 WAS PK 136791 WAS PK 136812 Fund/Dept 402.402.000.531 402.402.000.531 Description/Account Amount STREET SWEEPING SERVICES STORM DRAIN CLEANING Total : 001.058.055.558 SUPPLIES: COMM. DEV. 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 001.143.70.00 101.042.000.543 313.000.215.594 001.058.056.558 001.013.000.513 001.013.000.513 001.013.000.513 001.013.000.513 001.013.000.513 101.000.000.542 101.000.000.542 101.000.000.542 101.000.000.542 101.000.000.542 101.000.000.542 Total : 2017 WASTEWATER OPERATOR CI Total : CABLE SERVICE FOR MAINTENAN Total : PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION Total : Total : SUPPLIES: PW SNOWPLOWS SUPPLIES: PW SNOWPLOWS SUPPLIES: PW SNOWPLOWS SUPPLIES: PW SNOWPLOWS SUPPLIES: PW SNOWPLOWS SUPPLIES: PW SNOWPLOWS 2016861 101.042.000.543 FIRST AID SUPPLIES Total : 55,724.50 25,400.31 81,124.81 138.03 58.64 58.64 255.31 30.00 30.00 52.99 52.99 4,500.00 4,500.00 86.90 29.25 34.50 30.75 51.75 30.00 263.15 39.46 181.57 41.74 534.18 -13.44 -90.79 692.72 32.57 Total : 32.57 Page: vchlist 12/28/2016 4:21:29PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page/ Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 40187 12/28/2016 002992 FREEDOM TRUCK CENTERS 40188 12/28/2016 000179 GFOA 40189 12/28/2016 002568 GRAN1CUS INC 40190 12/28/2016 002043 HDR ENGINEERING INC 40191 12/28/2016 002538 HYDRAULICS PLUS INC 40192 12/28/2016 000313 INLAND ASPHALT COMPANY INC. 40193 12/28/2016 002518 INLAND PACIFIC HOSE & FITTINGS 556836 556958 PC001361612:01 PC001361612:02 PC001362240:01 PC001362240:02 0156860S 83227 1200025537 21099 PAY APP 3 40194 12/28/2016 000012 JOURNAL OF BUSINESS 40195 12/28/2016 001640 MAINTENANCE SOLUTIONS INC 40196 12/28/2016 000662 NAT'L BARRICADE & SIGN CO 40197 12/28/2016 001035 NDM TECHNOLOGIES INC 71117 121520104 93746 25401 25402 Fund/Dept 101.000.000.542 101.042.000.543 101.000.000.542 101.000.000.542 001.143.70.00 001.143.70.00 101.042.000.542 101.000.000.542 311.000.226.595 101.000.000.542 101.000.000.542 001.143.70.00 101.000.000.542 101.042.000.542 001.090.000.518 001.090.000.518 Description/Account Amount SAFETY EQUIPMENT: PW SUPPLIES FOR FORD F-550 SAFETY EQUIPMENT: PW SAFETY EQUIPMENT: PW Tota! : GAAFR REVIEW NEWSLETTER 20 - Total : MAINTENANCE FOR JANUARY 201 Total : PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SUPPLIES FOR #207 Total : Total : 16-128: 0226 CONSTRUCTION Total : SUPPLIES: SNOWPLOWS SUPPLIES: SNOWPLOWS 2017 R HIGGINS SUPPLIES: PW SUPPLIES: STREET Total : Total : Total : Total : QUARTERLY SENTINEL EPS QUARTERLY SENTINEL IPS Total : 2.71 60.10 100.66 93.05 256.52 50.00 50.00 777.16 777.16 1,649.55 1,649.55 47.28 47.28 36,248.80 36,248.80 131.21 23.95 155.16 39.95 39.95 385.77 385.77 97.03 97.03 1,197.00 1,197.00 2,394.00 Page: vchlist 12/28/2016 4:21:29PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: _3_ Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 40198 12/28/2016 004164 NETWORKS 2000 [NC 40199 12/28/2016 001546 NORCO [NC 40200 12/28/2016 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. 40201 12/28/2016 001578 PACIFICAD INC 40202 12/28/2016 001089 POE ASPHALT PAVING INC. 40203 12/28/2016 002578 REBUILDING & HARDFACING INC 40204 12/28/2016 002520 RWC GROUP 40205 12/28/2016 002531 SIX ROBBLEES INC 40206 12/28/2016 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 40207 12/28/2016 002540 SPOKANE HOUSE OF HOSE INC. 40208 12/28/2016 001903 SPOKANE TRAFFIC CONTROL INC 21930 24682275631 888822131001 888822203001 32220 45259 58187 41310N 41641 N 5-783609 5-784184 5-784290 51503584 51503605 Fund/Dept 001.090.000.518 101.000.000.542 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.032.000.543 101.000.000.542 101.000.000.542 101.000.000.542 101.000.000.542 Description/Account Amount HP SERVER SUPPORT RENEWAL Tota! : SUPPLIES: PW Total : OFFICE SUPPLIES: CENTERPLACE OFFICE SUPPLIES: CENTERPLACE Total : CUSTOM CIVIL 3D TRAINING Total : SPOKANE VALLEY WINTER RESPC Total : 3454' KENNAMETALTC BLADES PE Total : SUPPLIES: SNOWPLOW #203 SUPPLIES: SNOWPLOW #203 Total : 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: SNOWPLOWS 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: SNOWPLOWS 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: SNOWPLOWS 001.016.000.523 402.402.000.531 Total : DECEMBER 2016 HOUSING NOVEMBER 2016 WORK CREW IN' Total : 569168 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: STREET 2259 2260 2262 402.402.000.531 402.402.000.531 402.402.000.531 TRAFFIC CONTROL TRAFFIC CONTROL TRAFFIC CONTROL Total : 963.00 963.00 54.12 54.12 63.51 21.73 85.24 4,050.00 4,050.00 3,022.09 3,022.09 2,030.52 2,030.52 228.65 37.11 265.76 77.74 159.79 64.89 302.42 110,241.18 5,920.60 116,161.78 27.27 27.27 226.00 153.00 770.00 Page: rS� vchlist 12/28/2016 4:21:29PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: -1 Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor invoice Fund/Dept DescriptionlAccount Amount 40208 12/28/2016 001903 001903 SPOKANE TRAFFIC CONTROL INC (Continued) Total : 1,149.00 40209 12/28/2016 000335 TIRE-RAMA 8080046983 001.058.057.558 TIRE REPAIR 2015 ESCAPE 58405E 19.02 Total : 19.02 40210 12/28/2016 001134 WA STATE DEPT OF HEALTH 010460 402.402.000.531 2017 WATERWORKS OPERATOR C 42.00 Total : 42.00 40211 12/28/2016 000980 WESTERN SYSTEMS INC 0000031843 101.042.000.542 REPLACEMENT: SPRAGUE/CONKL 17,001.86 Total : 17,001.86 40212 12/28/2016 001189 WSDA 65644 402.402.000.531 2017 PESTICIDE LICENSE RENEW, 33.00 Total : 33.00 40213 12/28/2016 004741 ZUMAR INDUSTRIES INC 0186105 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES FOR PW 834.11 Total : 834.11 1327816 12/28/2016 002244 AOT PUBLIC SAFETY CORPORATION SPKVLY-84 001.016.000.521 NOVEMBER 2016 REVENUE SPLIT Total : 3,269.45 3,269.45 36 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 278,363.41 36 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 278,363.41 Page:`. vchlist 12/29/2016 1:05:54PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 40214 12/29/2016 005401 DOG -ON -IT -PARKS INC 40215 12/29/2016 000070 INLAND POWER & LIGHT CO 40216 12/29/2016 001635 ISS FACILITY EVENT SERVICES 40217 12/29/2016 001987 JENKINS, ART 40218 12/29/2016 000252 LOWE'S BUSINESS ACCOUNT 40219 12/29/2016 001860 PLATT ELECTRICAL SUPPLY 40220 12/29/2016 000415 ROSAUERS FOOD & DRUG CENTER D0111501 2301 1129705 Expenses Dec 2016 L004254 10-1694660 40221 12/29/2016 003532 STERICYCLE COMMUNICATION SOLUT 8010488382 40222 12/29/2016 000167 VERA WATER & POWER 9 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Dec 2016 Fund/Dept 001.076.300.576 101.042.000.542 001.076.305.575 001.032.000.543 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.076.301.571 001.076.305.575 101.042.000.542 Description/Account Amount VALLEY MISSION DOG PARK PLAY Total : UTILITIES: DEC 2016 Total : MONTHLY CLEANING AT CENTERP Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : OPERATING SUPPLIES: PARKS/CP Total : SUPPLIES FOR CENTERPLACE Total : SUPPLIES FOR COOL CAMP REC F Total : ANSWERING SERVICE FOR CENT1 Total : UTILITIES: DEC 2016 - MASTER BIL Total : Bank total : 9 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 8,978.62 8,978.62 450.09 450.09 7,136.00 7,136.00 260.65 260.65 504.52 504.52 109.28 109.28 14.25 14.25 39.44 39.44 3,387.32 3,387.32 20,880.17 20,880.17 Page: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: January 10, 2017 Department Director Approval : Item: Check all that apply: ® consent ❑ old business ['new business ['public hearing ['information ❑admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Payroll for Pay Period Ending December 15, 2016 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: Budget/Financial impacts: Employees Council Total Gross: $ 295,820.91 $ 295,820.91 Benefits: $ 102,233.44 $ 102,233.44 Total payroll $ 398,054.35 $ $ 398,054.35 RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to Approve above payroll. [Approved as part of the Consent Agenda, or may be removed and discussed separately.] STAFF CONTACT: Raba Nimri CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: January 10, 2017 Department Director Approval : Item: Check all that apply: ® consent ❑ old business ['new business ['public hearing ['information ❑admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Payroll for Pay Period Ending December 31, 2016 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: Budget/Financial impacts: Employees Council Total Gross: $ 288,788.98 $ 5,475.00 $ 294,263.98 Benefits: $ 120,424.43 $ 13,295.78 $ 133,720.21 Total payroll $ 409,213.41 $ 18,770.78 $ 427,984.19 RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to Approve above payroll. [Approved as part of the Consent Agenda, or may be removed and discussed separately.] STAFF CONTACT: Raba Nimri DRAFT MINUTES City of Spokane Valley City Council Regular Meeting Formal Meeting Format Tuesday, December 13, 2016 Mayor Higgins called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Attendance: Rod Higgins, Mayor Arne Woodard, Deputy Mayor Caleb Collier, Councilmember Pam Haley, Councilmember Mike Munch, Councilmember Ed Pace, Councilmember Sam Wood, Councilmember Staff Mark Calhoun, City Manager Cary Driskell, City Attorney Mike Stone, Parks & Rec Director Eric Guth, Public Works Director Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney John Hohman, Comm & Eco. Dev. Manager Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director Mike Basinger, Senior Planner Steve Worley, Capital Improve. Mgr Carolbelle Branch, Public Information Officer Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk INVOCATION: Pastor Matthew Larson of Advent Lutheran Church gave the invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Council, staff and the audience stood for the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL City Clerk Bainbridge called the roll; all Councilmembers were present. APPROVAL OF AGENDA It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the agenda. INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS n/a COMMITTEE, BOARD, LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS Councilmember Haley: said she attended the GSI (Greater Spokane, Inc.) meeting today where they talked about their legislative agenda regarding Fairchild; and attended a Board of Health meeting where they also discussed their legislative agenda. Councilmember Pace: reported that he attended an STA (Spokane Transit Authority) Board operations meeting, then had a monthly one-on-one meeting with STA's CEO, and said he introduced her to his personal STA Agenda, which is (1) in the short term get a bus to the CHAS Clinic on Indiana in Spokane Valley, and said she assured him it would happen soon; (2) doesn't understand the discrepancy in observing busses driving by with never more than three people on them, and often times there are no passengers, yet STA reports fairly high ridership, and said they tell him he doesn't understand what he's looking at, and (3) wants to see a gradual reduction in cost and a corresponding rise in bus fares until ten to twenty years from now, then STA will become a for-profit business. Councilmember Collier: said he attended a surprise birthday party for Liberty Lake Council Member Jessica McGuire. Deputy Mayor Woodard: said he attended several Chamber meetings including the one last week at Spokane Valley Tech, which he said was well attended; said he would like to continue to hold those kind of meetings next year, and said if members of the public would like to meet with one or two Councilmembers, to please let him know. Councilmembers Munch and Wood had no report. Minutes Regular Council Meeting: 12-13-2016 Page 1 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT MAYOR'S REPORT: Mayor Higgins stated that he attended a citizen's 100th birthday celebration. PROCLAMATION n/a PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Higgins invited public comments. Lynn Plaggemeier, Spokane Valley: said he keeps hearing from Council and staff that we are a complaint driven community, and he asked if we were; concerning last week's meeting at the Tech school addressing the street maintenance shortfall, he asked if Council knew of the shortfall prior to funding the new city hall; back to the idea of our city as a complaint driven community, he asked if that means that citizens have to file all the complaints; he asked how many complaints do we have in code violations that have come in from the community, and if none, then he asked why do we have such a large staff, said when driving down Sprague you can hardly see the businesses for the real estate signs which stay out there for weeks; said maybe it's about time Council did something; that if there is a free standing real estate sign on the street, it will cost $10 a day, with the first two weeks free. Jesse Granado, Waste Management District Manager: said they are prepared for winter weather and that safety is a core value for Waste Management; that if there are unsafe weather conditions, Waste Management will reach out to the City to inform them about affected areas, and will post schedule changes on their website; said their customer service is available to answer questions and their website is updated; and they also notify the local media about schedule changes. Don Meier, Spokane Valley: spoke concerning the proposed development of the Painted Hills Golf Course and said his major concerns are not being addressed; that we have a comp plan to protect homeowners from overly aggressive developers; said areas like the Ponderosa, Painted Hills, and other areas, there are contractors proposing 20 -foot lots; said that is more narrow than most driveways; said other homes in that area have lots 75 -feet wide and double garages and places for RVs, said he doesn't understand it; also mentioned a developer proposing row -houses; said there is nowhere in the valley with 20 -foot lots; also mentioned a 235 -apartment unit complex, and said that doesn't belong there; said it is the responsibility of the Planning Department to make sure this meets the criteria in the comp plan; said he sent letters and talked to representatives, that they are nice to work with but there has been no resolution, and people are concerned about this development and he wants to know who to contact about getting more information. Laura Renz, Spokane: spoke of her continuing concern with service dogs; said she met last week with Councilmembers Wood and Pace and she started a Facebook group called service dog community; that she visited a few grocery stores that have signs explaining what service dogs are and said they ask the questions of people with dogs which do not appear to be service dogs; but some other places do not; and said that allowing non -service dogs in businesses makes working with service animals very difficult, and she would like some regulations addressing that. Michael Luft: also spoke about service animals and what they are trained to do; that these animals are working dogs and not pets and are trained specific to the disability of the owner, all as under the ADA guidelines; said some of the non -service animals actually rush or attack the service animals thereby hindering the service they have been trained to perform, and he wants some kind of ordinance in place to help protect handlers and dogs. Robert Sampson: said he is with Checker Cab, and that he has e-mailed Councilmembers about Uber; said he feels this is a very important issue and important to the taxi industry; that Uber and Lyft do not have insurance, or do background checks, and they have been kicked out of San Francisco and the CEO was in prison in France for operating an illegal taxi service; said he has talked with the City's attorney and hopes to move this forward and go to the next step in regulating taxicabs. Minutes Regular Council Meeting: 12-13-2016 Page 2 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT Karen Gallion: asked how does the Spokane Valley Council communicate and organize with the Spokane County Commissioners; mentioned that Spokane City Council meetings are on channel 5 and she asked how does, or can one watch Spokane Valley meetings as well. Mr. Calhoun responded that the Spokane Valley meetings are recorded and broadcast once a week on TV; but that we are looking into broadcasting live perhaps in January or February. John Harding: regarding service dogs, suggested having a tab put on a dog's collar or getting a stamp at Public Works that this is a valid service dog. Steve O'Meara: spoke about the stop signs at 8th and McDonald; said now that the roads are slick, cars try to get more traction to cross that intersection, including buses, so there are even more close calls; said there is no cross -walk and it all puts kids in more danger; said we keep missing the point that it needs a four-way stop; and suggested the Fire Department be asked if they feel it would benefit them; said he sees police and fire trucks cross that intersection on many occasions, and said what happens if you take out a fire truck? 1. CONSENT AGENDA: Consists of items considered routine which are approved as a group. Any member of Council may ask that an item be removed from the Consent Agenda to be considered separately. Proposed Motion: I move to approve the Consent Agenda. a. Approval of claim vouchers on Dec 13, 2016 Request for Council Action Form Totaling: $6,004,020.05 b. Approval of Payroll for Pay Period Ending November 30, 2016: $409,664.89 c. Approval of November 8, 2016 Council Meeting Minutes, Regular 6:00 p.m. Meeting d. Approval of November 15, 2016 Council Meeting Minutes, Study Session Format e. Approval of November 17, 2016 Council Meeting Minutes, Special Meeting, Water Issues f Approval of November 22, 2016 Council Meeting Minutes, Special Legislative Meeting g. Approval of November 22, 2016 Council Meeting Minutes, Regular Formal Meeting Format h. Approval of November 30, 2016 Council Meeting Minutes, Special Meeting, Feasibility Study i. Confirmation of Mayoral Appointment of Citizen to the Spokane Housing Authority It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the Consent Agenda. NEW BUSINESS: 2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 16-018 Comprehensive Plan — Mike Basinger After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to approve Ordinance No. 16-018 repealing the existing Comprehensive Plan and certain development regulations and adopting the 2016 Comprehensive Plan and associated development regulations. Mr. Basinger explained the overview of the direction given by Council, and of the changes made to the document, and he explained the proposed changes as noted, and some of the accomplishments made through the update of this plan, including simplified land use designations. There was some discussion about where apartments are allowed throughout the City; and Councilmember Pace asked about the property on Flora and Mission which had requested a rezone to commercial to allow a storage unit. Mr. Basinger said that was changed and included as part of the CAR (Citizen Action Request) comp plan process. Councilmember Pace suggested staff contact the property owner so they are aware of that outcome. It was also noted that the effective date, based on when the ordinance summary gets published, will likely be December 28, 2016. Mayor Higgins invited public comments. Nina Fluegal, Spokane Valley: said she disagrees with the umbrella zoning for the multi -family, and said that is a big mistake as it allows any builder to put on as many units as they are allowed; said that the damage has already been done to her property value, but added that the people on the north side of 4th will be affected by that; said buffers don't make a difference and she was surprised that parcel wasn't an exemption; said there's plenty of other places for multi -family, even along Trent, as she doesn't need any apartments in her neighborhood; and she asked Council to please re -think that umbrella zoning for multi- family. Minutes Regular Council Meeting: 12-13-2016 Page 3 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT Bill Courier: thanked everyone for listening for so long, and said he appreciates that the land will be kept the way it is and not changed. Tony Lazanis, Spokane Valley: he mentioned Trent; and mentioned Sullivan Road, which he said is mostly residential; said the other side is railroad tracks and the trains make a lot of noise, that it was supposed to be made into a quiet zone but that never happened; and he cautioned Council to be careful what they do with Trent, and if they do something, to do the right thing. Karen Gallion: she thanked Council for the hard work and for listening to the factual complications concerning Sprague and Barker Road. Wayne Vincent, Spokane Valley: thanked Council, the Planning Commission and staff for the hard work; said most likely they will be seeing him in the future for that high density property on the east side of Barker since it can't get down to mufti -family; said it would be a great idea and would prevent him and others from coming back annually to try to prevent those apartments on Sprague. There were no other comments and Deputy Mayor Woodard extended thanks to Director Hohman for his work, to Director Stone for hosting meetings at CenterPlace, and for all of staff's work over the last two years; said it is a unique document with a lot of flexibility. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion carried. 3. Motion Consideration: Lodging Tax Funds — Chelsie Taylor First Motion: It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to deduct $250, 000 from the available Lodging Tax funds for distribution in 2017 and move those funds into the 1.3% Lodging Tax Fund account dedicated for a large sports venue or venues for tourism facilities that generate overnight guests. Finance Director Taylor explained the two issues, all as noted in her Request for Council Action form, after which Mayor Higgins invited public comment. Tony Lazanis: spoke about our City's sales tax and the 2% lodging tax, and that should be researched to see if we can use it. Councilmember Pace said that a few weeks ago he looked at Visit Spokane's brochure, and the content of the brochure is all about the City of Spokane with hardly anything in Spokane Valley, and maybe that's because we only have a few things people would come to our city for, and said he would like to see a move in the direction of investing in facilities not funded or maintained by Spokane Valley taxpayers. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion carried. Second Motion: It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to make the following allocation of Lodging Tax funds for calendar year 2017: (1) HUB Sports Center $40, 000; (2) Valleyfest $31, 600; (3) Valleyfest Cycle Celebration: $5, 000; (4) Spokane Valley Heritage Museum $9, 500; (5) Spokane Sports Commission $115,600; (6) Spokane County Fair & Expo Fair Advertising $47,000; (7) Spokane County Fair & Expo Winter Glow $2, 170; and (8) Visit Spokane $103,130. There was some Council discussion about a preference to see more funding for the Museum and less for some other entities, and mention by Director Taylor that all entities are required by law to give an estimate of what their event will generate in terms of overnight stays, how they came up with those numbers, and that staff does not follow up on those figures. Mr. Calhoun said that we are required to report to the state legislature by March 31 with that information so there is some follow up, but no audit on the part of the City. Councilmember Pace said that the hoteliers said that in some of those cases, there were no records of generated overnight stays. Mr. Calhoun replied that based on the applicant's presentation, the LTAC (Lodging Tax Advisory Committee) collectively makes a decision of what to forward to Council, and he understands that in some cases, figures differ from what the hoteliers say; but this comes down to the motion of accepting the whole thing, or doing a line item veto, or turn some or all back; and said we are regulated as set forth in the 2013 legislative changed rules. Councilmember Haley said that we can't make people stay in hotels in Spokane Valley, they could stay in a hotel in Coeur d'alene; and said our "heads in beds" numbers are not accurate anyway; that Minutes Regular Council Meeting: 12-13-2016 Page 4 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT the entities do bring heads to beds, but maybe not those five hotels in Spokane Valley. Mayor Higgins invited public comment. Tony Lazanis: said that money comes from the valley industry and valley money should stay in the valley; and he suggested care should be taken. Jayne Singleton: said she represents the Museum and she thanked Councilmembers for advocating for tourist attractions to be funded; said she sent each Councilmember a letter but didn't know if it covered everything; said she has participated in this process since 2004, and the Museum tracks every visitor and therefore has a proven record of bringing tourists to the Valley; she suggested looking at the hotels for what they offer to bring in more tourists; said the fund is not depleted and rather increases every year; and again thanked Council for their support. Council discussion included comments from Deputy Mayor Woodard and Councilmember Pace that too little was given to the Museum, while too much to the Sports Commission. Councilmember Pace said he also feels way too much was given to Visit Spokane. Councilmember Wood disagreed especially with the allocation for the Sports Commission, and said the hoteliers feel the Commission offers the "bang for the buck" as it's their money. There was further discussion about decreasing the allocation to Visit Spokane, or increasing the allocation to the Museum, doing a line item veto, sending it all back to the Lodging Tax Committee, or even have a second round. Mr. Calhoun reminded everyone that a second round would open the process for receiving numerous additional applications; and Councilmember Munch said if Council did some line -item vetoes, it would still have to go before the LTAC so there is no guarantee what they would recommend. Councilmember Pace moved to amend the motion to veto the Visit Spokane amount to zero and leave everything else the same. There was no second so the motion did not continue. Vote by Acclamation on the motion allocations as stated: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion carried. 4. Motion Consideration: Street Maintenance Contract Renewal — Eric Guth It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute the 2017 contract renewal with Poe Asphalt, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $1,366,663.00 for the Street and Stormwater Maintenance. Director Guth went over the information contained in his Request for Council Action form, said this would be the 2017 renewal option and does not change the equipment or material costs; that it does adjust the prevailing wage, but doesn't change the total amount as staff will adjust the work plan to keep it the same, even though the prevailing wage increased 2.7%. He noted that Councilmember Haley asked about the scope of the contract, and explained that no scope has been provided as this is based on a three-year work plan. Councilmember Munch asked about the miscellaneous fund of $83,000, said it appears in most years that hasn't been used much, that it seems high, and he asked if that is used as a type of "catch-all" in case of overrun in other categories. Mr. Guth replied that they also pay for fuel, there are some hard costs, some contingency, and miscellaneous costs of doing business; said we essentially pay for all and some of those costs don't fit in other categories. Further discussion included the idea of having a fuel or tools category in the future; a question about guard rail repairs; and a comment from Councilmember Collier about "using or loosing funds." Mr. Guth explained that we don't handle our budget that way, that we are in a fund base and we don't use it or lose it. Mr. Calhoun also noted that there is a budget, and there is a reality, and if we can underspend, we will; but the goal is always to put as much to asphalt repair as we can, and any money not spent would remain and be used for street related activities; that the funds don't go anywhere else as it is a special revenue fund and cannot be used for anything else. Councilmember Wood said he likes the idea of itemizing more in the miscellaneous fund so people understand where the money goes. Mr. Calhoun added that the reality is, if we spend significantly more on asphalt repair than was budgeted, we could reduce the miscellaneous and increase the asphalt repair. Mayor Higgins invited public comment. Tony Lazanis said if he were a contractor and going to bid on something, he would secure it for the year; and said if the amounts are not figured right, it's their fault. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Mayor Higgins, Deputy Mayor Woodard, and Councilmembers Munch, Haley, Pace and Wood. Opposed: Councilmember Collier. Motion carried. Minutes Regular Council Meeting: 12-13-2016 Page 5 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT 5. Motion Consideration: Street Sweeping Contract Renewal — Eric Guth It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute the 2017 contract renewal with AAA Sweeping in an amount not to exceed $490,200.00 for street sweeping services. Director Guth described the contract and the renewal as per the information contained in his Request for Council Action; he also noted the three-year hourly rate comparison. Based on previous questions from Council, Mr. Guth explained the purpose of sweeping, that it keeps the stormwater inlets and drywells clear so as not to create flooding; it is also for safety purposes to keep vehicles and bicycles safe from hitting debris; and that we use some of the best practices from Ecology and EPA related to air quality and stormwater maintenance, and that these services can be used for clean-up of accidents and spills that happen in the rights-of-way. Mr. Guth said that given our existing infrastructure, there are no other options. Councilmember Collier suggested we could get a better rate and suggested staff go back and re- negotiate and explore other options and give a cost analysis. Mayor Higgins invited public comment. Nina Fluegal asked if these funds are part of property taxes, and said she would like to see someone sweeping her street, as curbed streets are swept, but not her street. Mr. Calhoun said these funds are not part of the property taxes but are from a $21.00 annual fee per resident and business owner, and is calculated according to the impervious square foot. There were no other public comments. Councilmember Pace said he thinks this should be passed now but to examine some of these questions for next year; and again mentioned his preference for having at least two bidders for every contract, and said if the work was broken down, we might get other vendors; he also asked staff to look into whether all streets are swept or if there is no curb, we don't sweep. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Mayor Higgins, Deputy Mayor Woodard, and Councilmembers Munch, Pace and Wood. Opposed: Councilmembers Haley and Collier. Motion carried. Mayor Higgins called for a recess at 7:51 p.m.; he reconvened the meeting at 8:01 p.m. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Higgins invited public comment. Jayne Singleton: concerning the upcoming agenda item on the Arts Council sculpture, said she talked with Mr. Hohman about the proposed sculpture for City Hall, and from a historical perspective, asked about having something about the rest of our city's history once the white settlers arrived and how this became a mecca for travelers; said there is much that enriches this valley past when the Native Americans were relocated; and said there are various possibilities to consider. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS: 6. City Sponsorship of Potential 2017 Food Event — John Hohman Director Hohman explained that tonight we are at a little disadvantage as we had hoped to have had the tourism study item prior to this, and explained that the consultants are working on those figures now. Mr. Hohman went over the information as contained in his Request for Council Action form about this potential tourism event; said that Vision Marketing is helping us through this process, and that Adam Hegsted is a nationally renowned chef; said the idea is to have this event come together over the Father's Day weekend; with the potential layout of the event at CenterPlace; and that this could be quite a signature event for our City, and will grow over time and be a successful tourism driver. Discussion included positive comments from members of Council, and mention from Mr. Hohman that the plan would be for the City to apply for LTAC funds in the future. There was Council consensus to bring this forward for a motion consideration at next week's meeting. 7. Spokane Valley Arts Council Sculpture — John Hohman Director Hohman explained that here have been previous discussions concerning the Arts Council and the sculpture entitled the Rise of the Schitsu'Ush, whereby the Arts Council would donate the sculpture, and as part of their 2017 Outside Agency Funding request of $99,400, Council awarded them $48,601 toward that request. Mr. Hohman said that staff and Architects West worked to see where this sculpture might be placed within our City, but due to the scale and scope, along with the controversy about the piece, it was determined not compatible within the anticipated site plan of the new City Hall building. Other properties were considered, Mr. Hohman said, and some of those properties are for sale but are very expensive, which Minutes Regular Council Meeting: 12-13-2016 Page 6 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT would bring the total cost between $300,000 and $600,000. Mr. Hohman further explained that the Arts Council approached staff with a proposal to purchase and donate an alternative sculpture, entitled Coup Ponies, and Mr. Hohman mentioned that the artist Jerry McKellar, is the same artist who did the Walking the Line sculpture. Mr. Hohman said that staff feels this scope and scale can be integrated into some city properties, and perhaps be included on City Hall grounds; he said this was a two-part process, to site the sculpture and look at grounds to see where it could fit; said they identified perhaps nine different sculptures into the site, including relocating the historic monument now on the corner of Vista Road and Sprague Avenue. Mr. Hohman said staff understands the historical aspect of that marker but there is concern about future development; and the owner is considering a used car lot. Mr. Hohman explained that if changing to the Coup Ponies sculpture is something Council is interested in, he would look for a formal decision at an upcoming meeting since outside agency funds were formerly allocated for a specific sculpture. Councilmember Pace asked if this piece fits within the budget of $48,000 and Mr. Hohman said not entirely, but it is within their available money; the Arts Council would supply the sculpture, and we would have to make some minor modifications, a slab or rock to finish the installation, similar to what was done with existing sculptures; and said the estimated cost is about $80,000. After Council discussion, including comments about it being a better fit for City Hall, needed landscaping and installation costs, along with mention of some properties owned by Spokane County, including the Mullan/Argonne/Dishman Mica and Appleway and of the need for further research in that regard, it was agreed that staff will return with a motion consideration to reallocate the money to this piece, with destination unknown. Mr. Calhoun remarked that there would be no budget implication in 2017 as the funds have already been appropriated, other than siting or landscaping. Council concurred. 8. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins The following issues were agreed upon by several members of Council, to bring forward as future council agenda items for discussion: (1) term limits, (2) service dogs, (3) forming a 51st state east of the Cascades; with Councilmember Pace suggesting we also ask our lobbyist to work on this and for staff to get information on the current flow of tax dollars, including what we pay and get back in grants; (4) gathering information on what we charge and/or require for taxis or companies like Uber and Lyft, with Mr. Driskell explaining that although the City of Spokane regulates taxi cabs, we do not; but said that he put together some information last year and will bring that back again for Council. 9. Amended Legislative Agenda The Legislative Agenda was for information only and was not reported or discussed. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS Mr. Calhoun had no comments. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 8:54 p.m. ATTEST: L.R. Higgins, Mayor Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Minutes Regular Council Meeting: 12-13-2016 Page 7 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT Attendance: Councilmembers MINUTES SPOKANE VALLEY COUNCIL MEETING STUDY SESSION (with some action items) Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers Spokane Valley, Washington Tuesday, December 20, 2016 Staff Rod Higgins, Mayor Arne Woodard, Deputy Mayor Caleb Collier, Councilmember Pam Haley, Councilmember Mike Munch, Councilmember Ed Pace, Councilmember Sam Wood, Councilmember Mark Calhoun, City Manager Cary Driskell, City Attorney Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director Eric Guth, Public Works Director Steve Worley, Capital Improv. Program Mgr John Hohman, Comm & Eco. Dev. Director Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney Mike Stone, Parks & Recreation Director Carolbelle Branch, Public Information Officer Mark Werner, Police Chief Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Mayor Higgins called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called the roll; all Councilmembers were present. ACTION ITEMS: 1. CONSENT AGENDA: consists of items considered routine which are approved as a group. Any member of Council may ask that an item be removed from the Consent Agenda to be considered separately. Proposed Motion: I move to approve the Consent Agenda. a. Approval of claim vouchers on Dec 20, 2016 Request for Council Action Form, Total: $921,219.03 b. Approval of December 6, 2016 Council Meeting Minutes, Special Meeting c. Approval of December 6, 2016 Council Meeting Minutes, Study Session It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the Consent Agenda. 2. Motion Consideration: City Sponsorship of 2017 Food Event — John Hohman It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to authorize staff to negotiate contract terms for City sponsorship for up to five years, of an annual food and tasting event with NW Savor Spokane Valley, for future City Council consideration and approval. Director Hohman explained about the proposed food event to be held around Father's Day weekend, that staff seeks approval to move forward to negotiate the contract details; and said that we have not done an event like this before and that this local event would not only be a draw for those outside out area, but we will also likely hear from potential sponsors; that there would be no impact to the budget as economic development marketing funds would be used for this purpose; said we are not looking to become a financial partner, but rather to sponsor an organization that would benefit us all; and explained that we are getting into the contract negotiations, and once accomplished this will be brought back to Council. Mayor Higgins invited public comments. Mr. Tom Stebbins, Vision Marketing Co -Owner, said that on behalf of his business partner and wife Karen Stebbins, along with Adam Hegsted, that this would be a unique, high -event; said this type of event doesn't exist anywhere else; that this is meant to be a collaborative event and he has a PR firm to get the word out and drive economic value back into the valley along with overnight lodging stays; said the five years helps provide continuity as it Council Study Session: 12-20-2016 Page 1 of 6 Approved by Council: DRAFT takes a while for these events to become fully realized. Mr. Adam Hegsted said that the event would be held at CenterPlace; it would be a four-day event centered around food and wine and would encompass the region including Portland, Seattle, Boise, Montana, and other areas; would include a lot of chefs from this area; there would be classes, food demos, and large dinner events in the evening. Mr. Chris Nelson, Director of Sales at the Mirabeau Park Hotel, said he is always excited to see a signature event like this, he hopes to gain some tourism promotion area funding in the future, and it should be a great draw to maximum revenue potential for that weekend. There were no other public comments. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion carried. 3. Motion Consideration: Spokane Valley Arts Council Sculpture — John Hohman It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to reallocate the $48,601 awarded through the Outside Agency process to the Spokane Valley Arts Council from the Rise of the Schitsu'Umsh sculpture, to the Coup Ponies sculpture. Director Hohman explained that this is a follow-up item from last week's discussion, with tonight's focus on approval of the shift in funding from the original sculpture to this new Coup Ponies sculpture, which would result in, among other things, a dramatic cost savings. Mr. Hohman said that the second part of this item will occur later in January when Council and staff can discuss possible locations for this item, and said at that point, he would bring in a representative from Architects West to aid in the discussion of this and other sculptures, and to discuss the pros and cons of different places for these sculptures. Mayor Higgins invited public comment. No comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion carried. 4. Motion Consideration: Amended Legislative Agenda — Mark Calhoun, Mike Stone It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to approve the amended legislative action as drafted. [Prior to the vote on this motion, it was noted the Request for Council Action form's verbiage for the recommended motion contained a typo, and the word should have been agenda. The motion was subsequently corrected to move to approve the amended legislative agenda.] Mr. Calhoun stated that this is a follow-up of previous discussions concerning our legislative agenda; that the feeling is it will be a difficult session especially in terms of grants as the legislators wrestle with the McCleary case and having to fully fund education; so staff is proposing a change to the Appleway Trail agenda item that reflects fewer amenities and reduces the estimated cost from $1.1 million to $540,000. Parks and Recreation Director Stone stated that staff met with the legislators to help understand what park amenities they would like to see, or could do without; that staff heard interest in having a restroom, perhaps two small unisex restrooms or identified as Male and Female; said this site is already set up for sewer so that reduces the cost; and explained that a decision needs to be made eventually on the model of the restroom. There was some discussion about the best place to put restrooms, and how many. Mayor Higgins invited public comment. No comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion carried. NON -ACTION ITEMS: 5. Tourism Study — John Hohman; Mark Goodman, with CAI Director Hohman introduced Mr. Mark Goodman with CIA (Community Attributes, Inc.), who would be give an update to their ongoing tourism study, which is not yet complete; said this is a check-in opportunity with Council to talk about the process of specific items. Mr. Goodman went through the PowerPoint's major points of the study, including their approach and purpose, strategies and framework, existing conditions, local assets, their engagement with members of the tourism industry, and then on to the six proposed projects: (1) waterfront and whitewater park, (2) multimodal trail development and public art, (3) fairgrounds expansion, (4) Balfour Park redevelopment, (5) special events promotion, and (6) arts and entertainment venue; followed by the two proposed projects contained in the Feasibility Study, i.e. Plante's Ferry, and the HUB complex. Mr. Goodman went over several pros and cons of the projects, including costs, features, feasibility, estimated attendance, and the ability of these projects to draw people locally and from outside the area. Council Study Session: 12-20-2016 Page 2 of 6 Approved by Council: DRAFT At one point Councilmember Collier mentioned he feels the fairgrounds facility would be the best "bang for the buck" and Mr. Goodman added that we have a successful fairground facility now, and this project looks to have some of the better attributes. Councilmember Collier also said he would like a map of what is publicly owned by Spokane Valley. Councilmember Pace asked about how much private land there is around there and what kind of businesses could go in that area. Mr. Hohman noted the immediate area is industrial, but the thought would be maybe industrial/mixed use; said there are other mixed use changes along the Sprague corridor, and just to the south would help draw in more with all the multi -family; he said staff could follow up with a report on specific changes that occurred with the comp plan, work with the City of Spokane in terms of some potential uses, and bring more information forward to Council early next year. Councilmember Pace asked about the possibility of doing comparisons of Valleyfest to such festivals as Reardan's Mule Days, Odessa's Octoberfest, and Chataqua Chewelah. Mr. Goodwin said he would have to look into those numbers; and that they did look at several local events as well as events in other cities and their approach to funding special events. Councilmember Pace also asked if a library or art museum was ever used as an anchor of a facility such as this, and Mr. Goodwin replied that he has seen similar situations at a community college, with co -locations within a broader community center; said using a library is an interesting idea. There was also some discussion about the local theater group and whether there is a need for a facility, since several of the public schools have nice theaters, even though they are not dedicated community theaters. Discussion moved to the Plates Ferry and HUB Complex projects, along with a compare and contrast of all the facilities. Mr. Goodwin said these two facilities are very different projects and their approach in looking at overall spending is different from CAI's. Mr. Goodwin noted that the evaluation of the projects is based on how each fits within the City's vision and quality of life for local residents, the financial risk/burden to the City, the potential to impact local businesses and stimulate fiscal revenues, and opportunities for interim uses and short term implementation including project phasing. Mr. Goodwin noted that the next steps for CAI are to finalize the investment profiles, and for the City to have more in-depth feasibility assessment for one or more projects, including site evaluation, operational analysis, and design. Mr. Goodwin noted that his study included the design and construction but not how to pay for the facilities. Mr. Hohman said in speaking to whitewater groups, they have a lot of private and grant money, adding that any of these projects aren't necessarily fully funded. Mr. Calhoun said our goal tonight was to share this report with Council, and he anticipates at least a few more administrative reports to further analyze these projects in order to help Council make data -driven decisions; of the eight projects, he suggested we consider whether each has a true economic development impact, or is more of an additional community amenity; that we could "spend a nickel to earn a buck" when it comes to economic development, but for a community amenity, we do not want to "spend a buck to earn a nickel." Councilmember Pace asked why CAI didn't look at a sports field complex within our City limits, and Mr. Goodwin explained that the County was already studying that type of facility in depth, and CAI felt it didn't make a lot of sense to duplicate that effort. Mayor Higgins called for a recess at 7:46 p.m. He reconvened the meeting at 7:55 p.m. 6. Property Crimes — Mark Werner Through his PowerPoint presentation, Police Chief Werner explained about funding secured by the Washington legislators for Spokane Police, Spokane Valley Police, and the Spokane County Sheriff's Office to address auto theft and property crimes in the region; he spoke about the public awareness campaign„ the proactive property crime task force, the technology -automated license plate readers, which would passively read license plates of moving vehicles and compare them with a stolen vehicle registry, and said those plate readers can also be used to assist in Amber Alerts, missing persons, homicides, robberies, and other criminal investigations. Councilmember Collier said he would like to see all the funds go to the property crime task force as he isn't sure education is the best answer, and feels a better way would be a strong stance against criminals. Councilmember Haley disagreed and said she thinks public awareness Council Study Session: 12-20-2016 Page 3 of 6 Approved by Council: DRAFT makes a big difference. Councilmember Collier also voiced his opposition to cameras. Deputy Mayor Woodard said he feels the public campaign is a great idea, as is the task force; and likes the cooperation between jurisdictions. Councilmember Pace stated that he likes the ideas and appreciates the legislature for doing this; said he doesn't like the "camera thing" and would like to see most of the money toward the task force. With the exception of Councilmember Collier, there was consensus to move this proposal forward. 7. Appleway Trail Update — Mike Stone Parks and Recreation Director Stone introduced members from the design team, Mr. Dell Hatch and Ms. Julia Culp from Bernardo Wills, who he said, will be making tonight's presentation. Mr. Stone said that a conversation came up regarding theming of the trail as it pertains to culture and history, and staff liked that idea and therefore wanted to get feedback from Council after the PowerPoint. Mr. Hatch gave a brief update on the progress of the design of the Sullivan to Corbin section of the Trail, and said there will likely be another public meeting in the future. He and Ms. Culp went through the PowerPoint talking about ideas for interaction treatments at crossings, including plantings; and moved into the Appleway Trail Overall Theming showing the four sections of the trail with the four themes: (1) Spokane Valley: today and the future; (2) Early Spokane: agriculture, railroad, timber; (3) early America: Native Americans, fur trade, settlements, and (4) geologic era: Missoula Flood, Purcel Trench, Spokane River, Aquifer. It was also mentioned about Eastern Washington University doing some work on unique outcroppings in the Mirabeau Park area, and Ms. Culp said they have had the opportunity to work in conjunction with the Valley Museum and EWU, both of which are valuable resources for history of our area. Mr. Hatch mentioned that the trails would be a great opportunity for school field trips, and Ms. Culp commented about having interpretative signing and codes so people could look up additional information on their phone or social media. Mr. Hatch said that the top trail amenities given during the first public meeting was restrooms, followed by educational and wayfinding signs, then a natural play area. Discussion included positive remarks from members of Council, and Mr. Stone said that staff too got excited when they saw the potential for all the history as a great way to encourage people to use the trail. Mr. Stone said they have adequate funding for this section now to add some of these elements; and that they will move this forward and talk to citizens again next month, and that Council will see this again as well before it goes out to bid. Mayor Higgins said it appears we have unanimity. 8. Social Media — Carolbelle Branch Public Information Officer Branch explained some of the positives aspects of social media; said a work group of about twelve staff members researched and examined the issue of social media, with Twitter being selected as the platform; said its format is well suited for brief, concise, real-time messages; it is easy to use, is free and one doesn't need an account to use Twitter; said messages can be sent out about snow plowing crews and emergencies, and for now, it will be limited to outgoing messages as two-way messages can be very time consuming and we have a very limited number of staff; said the cost is estimated at $5,000 annually which will cover a backup program that allows us to archive the tweets we send; and that there will be a public portal to search for any tweets we have posted. At 8:51 p.m., it was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to extend the meeting for one hour. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Mayor Higgins, Deputy Mayor Woodard, and Councilmembers Munch, Haley, Pace and Collier. Opposed: Councilmember Wood. Motion carried. 9. Consultant Agreement: Design Barker Rd. BNSF Separation Project — Eric Guth, Steve Worley Due to several questions and concerns about this project, Public Works Director said that Council had asked staff to come back with more details. Mr. Guth said that we have the earmarked amount of $720,000, plus $300,000 from our funds, and we had talked about adding another $300,000. Mr. Calhoun further explained about the REET (real estate excise tax) funds and this project, and said we have earmarked $2.2 million and this would be $600,000 of that $2.2 million. Mr. Worley explained various aspects of this design Council Study Session: 12-20-2016 Page 4 of 6 Approved by Council: DRAFT project, and how the costs and percentages of design completion changed over time, all as noted in his PowerPoint presentation. Deputy Mayor Woodard said he wants this to continue to move forward, we have the earmarked money and suggested we get it done so we can qualify for the grant and hopefully make this a top priority for the state as well. Councilmember Collier said he thinks we should go with the $720,000 because using $600,000 elsewhere would mean a lot of street projects. Mayor Higgins also noted that there has been a study of rail crossings across the state and there is a published volume to help put us in a prime position to do something with the legislature. Mr. Calhoun noted he has copies of that study available and that he and Mayor Higgins met with Spokane County Commissioner French who shared the draft copy, which was prepared at the direction of the 2015 legislature to ask the Joint Transportation Committee to evaluate the impacts of road/rail conflicts; they developed a corridor based priority level and rank ordered the projects on a data driven approach; said there are just under 4,200 crossings in Washington with over 300 of them prominent; and of those 300, Spokane Valley has six ranged in the top 50 in the state, including Pines and Trent at #12, which is the highest ranking of our projects. Mr. Calhoun went over the options and asked if there was Council consensus to go with an agreement with the reduced scope valued at $720,000, and there was no consensus. Mr. Calhoun then asked for Council consensus to bring this agreement back with the scope valued at $1,274,000 and there was consensus, with the exception of Councilmembers Wood and Collier. 10. False Alarms — Morgan Koudelka Senior Administrative Analyst Koudelka explained that a couple months ago there was Council consensus to transition from Cry Wolf and move toward an internal program, that is less invasive, simpler, and less costly; and based on that, we need to amend the current false alarm ordinance, and he noted the draft revisions, and summarized that these changes will eliminate all references to registration, eliminate the false alarm awareness classes, consolidate the alarm administrator and appeals officer positions, simplify the appeals process, consolidate multiple terms with the same meaning, clarify the business registration requirements, reduce ongoing requirements of alarm companies, eliminate the late fees, and add exceptions for extreme weather events. Council indicated their agreement with these changes and to move this forward for an ordinance first reading. 11. Library Ad Hoc Committee — Mark Calhoun City Manager Calhoun went over the information contained in his Request for Council Action form, explaining that staff seeks consensus to have some Councilmembers join the Ad Hoc Committee, which would then continue discussions with the Library in January and beyond; and if Council concurs, to set this as a committee appointment for the January 3, 2017 Council meeting. Mr. Calhoun said the goal is to work together to develop a plan to construct a library structure at the location, and then bring that to Council for full Council support consideration. Council concurred. Mayor Higgins asked if members of Council would like to be involved, to please inform him or the City Clerk. 12. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins After some discussion on the issue suggested, as well as the procedure for adding items to the Advance Agenda, the following items were confirmed to be added to the Advance Agenda: (1) Councilmember Collier's suggestion of further discussion and possible resolution on the TPP; and (2) accidents at the intersection of 8th and McDonald and a citizen's request for a four-way stop sign, including a request for the police department to set up a speed trap there, mention that the idea was to wait for six -months in order to give the new larger stop signs ample time to see if there was a difference; mention that we can't follow up on unreported accidents; and that Mr. Calhoun said he and Police and Public Works staff will meet to discuss any new accidents that occurred after the installation of the signs. Councilmember Pace said there needs to be discussions about balancing this and hearing from the citizens again and again, that it is their street and at some point we should forget about liability and engineering and do what the citizens want. Councilmember Munch said he disagreed and does not want to put liability directly on the City, nor make Council Study Session: 12-20-2016 Page 5 of 6 Approved by Council: DRAFT it a bigger problem; and Councilmember Wood added that we can't be throwing up stop signs on main arterials as we will have problems. At 9:49 p.m., it was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to extend the meeting until 10:00 p.m. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Mayor Higgins, Deputy Mayor Woodard, and Councilmembers Munch, Haley, Pace, and Collier. Opposed: Councilmember Wood. Motion carried. 13. Department Reports These reports were for information only and were not reported or discussed. 14. Council Check in — Mayor Higgins There were no further Council comments. 15. City Manager Comments - Mark Calhoun Mr. Calhoun mentioned that the deadline was last week to file grant applications under the FASTLANE, which staff did for both the Barker and the Pines grade separations. 16. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Potential Litigation [RCW 42.30.110(1)(i)] It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn into executive session for approximately fifteen minutes to discuss potential litigation, and that no action will be taken upon return to open session. Council adjourned into executive session at 9:52 p.m. At approximately 9:58 p.m. Mayor Higgins declared Council out of executive session, at which time it was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. ATTEST: L.R. Higgins, Mayor Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Council Study Session: 12-20-2016 Page 6 of 6 Approved by Council: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: January 10, 2017 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ['admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 17-001: False Alarm Amendment GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Spokane Valley Municipal Code 7.20 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Council Approved False Alarm Program Contract C09-163 on October 13, 2009. Council extended the contract for one year on December 28, 2015. On October 16, 2016, Council provided consensus to move forward with internal false alarm program. On December 20, 2016, Council provided consensus to move forward with the amended ordinance; and on January 4, 2017, Council held a first reading and moved to advance the ordinance to a second reading. BACKGROUND: City started the current false alarm program in 2010 in order to reduce the number of false alarms, improve police response times, increase officer safety, and create more time for proactive policing. Spokane Valley Municipal Code 7.20.010.A states, "The City regulates security alarm businesses to assure that responses to false alarms do not diminish the availability of police services to the general public and to assure that citizens who cannot afford or do not choose to operate security alarm systems are not penalized for their condition or choice." Spokane Valley Municipal Code 7.20.160.A. states, "Causing police to engage in a false alarm response constitutes an appropriation of public police services for private purposes and is subject to a cost recovery fee." In 2015, staff conducted an evaluation of the program, costs and revenues, and dispatch records. Council approved the following changes to the program based upon that evaluation. ■ Extended the contract with Public Safety Corporation one year. ■ Reduced the false alarm rates to $75/residential and $125/commercial (Previously $85/$165). ■ Made the registration renewal rate the same regardless of previous false alarms, $15/residential and $25/commercial (Previously, if the customer had a false alarm in the past year the registration rate was $25/residential and $35/commercial). ■ Eliminated the appeal fee (Previously $25). ■ Suspend registered accounts for non-payment at 60 days past due (Previously 120 days). In October of 2016, Council provided consensus for staff to move forward with the development of an in-house false alarm reduction program that would reduce costs, simplify administration, and reduce government regulation and intrusion. This program does not require registration of an alarm system and makes police response to an alarm trip voluntary for the alarm system owner. The customer may opt -out of that service with the alarm monitoring company. Tonight is an opportunity for Council to consider a First Reading of the proposed amended ordinance. Ordinances generally require two readings before Council prior to adoption. Summary of changes to False Alarm Ordinance: ➢ Elimination of all references to registration. ➢ Elimination of false alarm awareness classes. ➢ Consolidation of alarm administrator and appeals officer positions. ➢ Simplification of appeals process. ➢ Consolidation of multiple terms with the same meaning. ➢ Clarification of business registration requirements. ➢ Reduction of ongoing requirements of alarm companies. ➢ Elimination of late fees. ➢ Addition of exceptions for extreme weather events. OPTIONS: Approve as presented, with or without further amendments. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to approve Ordinance 17-001 amending SVMC 7.20. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Any costs for processing payments will be offset by cost recovery fees. An amended fee resolution will be considered separately at a future meeting. STAFF CONTACT: Morgan Koudelka, Senior Administrative Analyst ATTACHMENTS: Draft Amended False Alarm Ordinance: clean and redlined versions. DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 17-001 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, AMENDING CHAPTER 7.20 OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO FALSE ALARMS, AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING THERETO. WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley previously adopted chapter 7.20 Spokane Valley Municipal Code in 2009, to be effective January 1, 2010; and WHEREAS, the purpose and intent of adopting the original chapter 7.20 SVMC was to ensure that responses to false alarms did not diminish the availability of police services to the general public; and WHEREAS, the City has operated the existing system and regulatory requirements for seven years, primarily through its former contract with Public Safety Corporation (Cry Wolf), which expired December 31, 2016; and WHEREAS, City staff have worked with Police Department staff to identify changes to the false alarm program that would allow the City and Police Department to operate the program in a manner that is anticipated to be more efficient and with a greater emphasis on customer service; and WHEREAS, Article 11, section 11 of the Washington State Constitution allows local governments to make and enforce within their jurisdictional limits, local laws and regulations not in conflict with the general laws of the State; and WHEREAS, the City Council, in enacting this Ordinance, seeks to promote the City's interest in protecting the public health, safety, and welfare of the residents of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Washington ordains as follows: Section 1. Amendment. Chapter 7.20 of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows: 7.20.010 Intent A. The City regulates security alarm businesses to ensure that responses to false alarms do not diminish the availability of police services to the general public and to ensure that citizens who cannot afford or do not choose to operate security alarm systems are not penalized for their condition or choice. B. The intent of chapter 7.20 SVMC is to encourage alarm businesses and alarm users to maintain the operational viability of security alarm systems and to significantly reduce or eliminate false alarm dispatch requests made to the Police Department. C. The purpose of chapter 7.20 SVMC is to provide for and promote the health, safety, and welfare of the general public, not to protect individuals or create or otherwise establish or designate any particular class or group of persons who will or should be especially benefited by the terms of chapter 7.20 SVMC. Chapter 7.20 SVMC does not impose or create duties on the part of the City or any of its departments, and the obligation of complying with the requirements of chapter 7.20 SVMC, and any liability for failing to do so, is placed solely upon the parties responsible for owning, operating, monitoring, installing, or maintaining security alarm systems. Ordinance 17-001 Amending Chapter 7.20 SVMC — False Alarms Page 1 of 10 DRAFT 7.20.020 Definitions. "Alarm administrator" means the person designated by the Chief of Police to administer the City's security alarm program, to issue citations, hear and decide appeals, and levy false alarm response cost recovery fees pursuant to chapter 7.20 SVMC. "Alarm business" means any business, by an individual, partnership, corporation, or other entity, engaged in the selling, leasing, maintaining, servicing, repairing, altering, replacing, moving, installing, or responding to security alarms. 1. Alarm businesses also include any person, business, or organization that monitors security alarm systems and initiates alarm dispatch requests, including units or divisions of larger businesses or organizations that provide proprietary security alarm monitoring services only to affiliates of the parent business or organization. 2. Alarm businesses do not include persons doing installation or repair work solely on premises they own, lease or rent where such work is performed without compensation of any kind (i.e., "do-it-yourselfers"). "Alarm dispatch request" means the initiating of a communication to the police, via police dispatch, by an alarm business indicating that a security alarm system has been activated at a particular alarm site and requesting Police Department response to that alarm site. "Alarm installation company" means a person in the business of selling, providing, maintaining, servicing, repairing, altering, replacing, moving or installing a security alarm system in an alarm site. "Alarm site" means a structure or portion thereof served by a single security alarm system (a "fixed" alarm site). In a multi -tenant building or complex, each portion of the structure or complex having its own security alarm system is considered a separate alarm site. "Alarm user" means any person, firm, partnership, corporation, or other entity who/which: 1. Controls a security alarm system at an alarm site; and 2. Is financially responsible for the operation of a security alarm system. "Alarm user" may mean more than one person, if more than one person has accepted financial responsibility for operation of a security alarm system. "Burglary alarm" means an alarm system that is used to detect and report an unauthorized entry or an attempted unauthorized entry upon real property. "Call-up dialer alarm" means a security device that is designed to evoke a police response by transmitting a pre-recorded, unverified signal or message to the police E911 system or to any other police telephone. "Chief' means the Chief of Police of the City or his designee. "City" means the City of Spokane Valley and/or the area within the incorporated municipal boundaries of the City of Spokane Valley. "Enhanced call verification" means an independent method whereby the alarm monitoring company attempts to determine that a signal from an automatic security alarm system reflects a need for immediate police assistance or investigation. This verification process shall be conducted by the security alarm system monitoring personnel and shall consist of making at least two phone calls to the responsible party or parties prior to requesting a police dispatch. "False alarm response" means Police Department response to an alarm dispatch request by a commissioned officer of the Police Department where, in the opinion of that officer, no evidence of the commission or attempted commission of a crime is present that can be reasonably attributed to having caused the alarm activation. A false alarm response is also deemed to have occurred when the responding officer is unable to determine if evidence of a criminal offense or attempted criminal offense is present because the alarm site is inaccessible: 1. Within a locked structure, such as an apartment building or business complex with a common entry; or 2. Behind a locked gate and no person is present to provide access to the officer; or 3. Contains a dog and no person is present to remove the dog so the officer can inspect the site; or Ordinance 17-001 Amending Chapter 7.20 SVMC — False Alarms Page 2 of 10 DRAFT 4. Contains any type of "protective/reactive" device or contrivance). "False Alarm Response Cost Recovery Fee" means the cost for police responding to an alarm call in which the alarm is determined to be a false alarm. The fee is revenue neutral and recovers only costs associated with responding to the call, invoicing, payment processing, and program administration. This fee is not punitive. "Government facility" means any alarmed location where the primary owner, operator, renter, or lessee is the City, county of Spokane, state of Washington, or agency of the United States government. A public school facility is not a government facility. "Monitoring" means the process an alarm business uses to: 1. Keep watch on security alarm systems; 2. Receive alarm activation signals from security alarm systems; 3. Verify alarm activations; 4. Relay alarm dispatch requests to the Police Department for the purpose of summoning police response to an alarm site; and 5. To cancel alarm dispatch requests when appropriate. "Multi -unit complex" means any building or group of buildings located/co-located on the same real property and comprised of two or more separately occupied units. "One -plus duress alarm" means a security alarm system which permits the manual activation of an alarm signal by entering on a keypad a code that either adds the value of "1" to the last digit of a normal arm/disarm code (e.g., the normal arm/disarm code "1234" if entered as "1235" automatically activates the duress alarm feature) or that involves entering any incorrect final digit to a normal arm/ disarm code (e.g., the normal arm/disarm code "1234" if entered as "123X" — where "X" is not "4" — automatically activates the duress alarm feature). "Person" means an individual, corporation, partnership, association, organization or similar entity. "Police Department" means the Spokane Valley Police Department. "Protective/reactive alarm system" means a security alarm system that is equipped and prepared to produce any temporary disability or sensory deprivation through use of chemical, electrical or sonic defense, or by any other means, including use of vision obscuring/disabling devices. "Robbery alarm" means an alarm signal generated by the manual or automatic activation of a device, or any system, device or mechanism, on or near the premises intended to signal that a robbery (refer to RCW 9A.56.190) or other crime is in progress, and that one or more persons are in need of immediate police assistance in order to avoid injury, serious bodily harm, or death at the hands of the perpetrator of the robbery or other crime. "Security alarm monitoring business" means any person, firm, or corporation which is engaged in the monitoring of security alarm systems and the summoning of police officer response to activations thereof. This includes all businesses that are engaged in alarm monitoring for profit, and businesses which have specialized units or subsidiaries that monitor only their own security alarm systems. "Security Alarm system" means a device or series of interconnected devices, including, but not limited to, systems interconnected with hard wiring or radio frequency signals, which are designed to emit and/or transmit a remote or local audible, visual, or electronic signal indicating that an intrusion may either be in progress or is being attempted at the alarm site. 1. It includes only the equipment located at the alarm site when a system is connected to an alarm system monitoring company. 2. It does not include those devices designed to alert only the inhabitants of specific premises and that have no sounding or signaling devices which can be generally heard or seen on the exterior of the alarm site. It does not include personal alert devices worn on a person's body that are primarily designed as an alert of a medical condition or other types of alarms such as car alarms. "Subscriber" means an alarm user who is a customer of an alarm monitoring company. "Suspend" ("suspension") means the temporary loss for an alarm user of police response to an alarm activation. Ordinance 17-001 Amending Chapter 7.20 SVMC — False Alarms Page 3 of 10 DRAFT "Unmonitored alarm system" means a security alarm system that is not actively monitored by an alarm business which has a function to evoke police response solely by means of a generally audible and/or visible signal. "Verified response" means a police response that is based on information received from a person physically present at an alarm site or from real-time audio or video surveillance positively verifying that there is evidence either of a crime or an attempted crime at the location. 7.20.030 Administration and funding. A. The Chief of Police shall be responsible for administration of chapter 7.20 SVMC. B. The Chief of Police shall designate an alarm administrator to carry out the duties and functions described in chapter 7.20 SVMC. C. Money generated by false alarm response cost recovery fees shall be paid into the City's general fund. D. The alarm administrator shall conduct an annual evaluation and analysis of the effectiveness of chapter 7.20 SVMC and identify and implement appropriate system improvements. 7.20.040 Responsibilities of alarm users. A. Each alarm user shall be responsible for ensuring that his security alarm system is used properly and pursuant to the manufacturer's directions and the law. Inherent in this responsibility is ensuring that all persons with access to the security alarm system shall be properly trained on correct use of the system and are authorized to cancel accidental activations, and ensuring that procedures and practices are followed that minimize the risk of false alarms. B. Each alarm user shall be responsible for keeping his security alatm system properly maintained and in good working order. C. Each alarm user shall be financially responsible for paying false alarm response cost recovery fees when police respond to false alarms from his alarm site. If the alarm user does not want a police response for alarm activations, it shall be the alarm user's responsibility to instruct the alarm monitoring company not to request police response without specific authorization by the alarm user. D. Failure to comply with SVMC 7.20.040(A) - (D) may lead to suspension of police response to alarm dispatch requests. E. If an alarm user has six false alarms within a calendar year, the person/business responsible for the alarm site may be required to meet with and provide a false alarm abatement plan to the alarm administrator. 7.20.050 Alarm installation companies required to have a valid City business registration. All alarm businesses shall have a current and valid City business registration. Companies that provide monitoring services, but which do not install systems and are not located within the City limits, are exempt from City business registration requirements. 7.20.060 Verified response required in certain circumstances. A. The Police Department may respond to the activation of unmonitored security alarm systems, and security alarm systems with a suspended status only if independent reporting indicates that a crime is in progress or has been attempted at the involved alarm site. B. No alarm user or alarm business shall presume, anticipate, or expect that a police response will result solely from the activation of: 1. Any unmonitored alarm system; or 2. A security alarm system in suspended status. Ordinance 17-001 Amending Chapter 7.20 SVMC —False Alarms Page 4 of 10 DRAFT 7.20.070 Differentiation and reporting of alarm activations. A. No person shall operate a security alarm system in the City that fails to differentiate burglary alarm activations from robbery activations, or that fails to accurately report such activations independently. B. No person shall operate a security alarm system in the City that fails to differentiate police incidents (i.e., burglary activations, robbery activations) from fire, medical, or other non -police incidents, or that fails to accurately report such incidents independently. 7.20.080 Alarm dispatch requests. A. Alarm dispatch requests shall be made in the manner prescribed by the alarm administrator and approved by 911 and police dispatch. B. Alarm dispatch requests shall include, but are not limited to, the following information: 1. Location of the alarm activation. 2. Type of alarm activation (burglary or robbery). 3. Alarm business's incident number (or other official incident identifier). 4 Name and Contact phone number of the alarm user. 5. Alarm zone information, including sensor type and location. C. Alarm dispatch requests made to the Police Department (or its designee) shall be for police incidents only, and shall accurately indicate the type of alarm activation (burglary or robbery) that is the proximate cause for the alarm dispatch request. D. No alarm business shall initiate an alarm dispatch request if it knows, or reasonably should know, that doing so would cause a law enforcement officer to respond to an alarm site containing a protective/reactive alarm system. E. No dispatch request and subsequent police response to a robbery alarm pursuant to SVMC 7.20.020 may be cancelled by the alarm user. In every case at least one officer shall respond to affirm that the alarm user is not under duress. 7.20.090 Duties of alarm installation company and/or monitoring company. A. All alarm installation and/or monitoring companies shall ensure that their customer information is updated at least monthly. This information shall include: 1. Customer name and contact information, including all phone numbers; 2. Alarm site address and billing address; 3. Monitoring company name and contact information; and 4. Installation date or date the alarm monitoring ended. B. The alarm installation company shall provide written and oral instructions to each of its alarm users in the proper use and operation of their security alarm systems. Such instructions shall specifically include all instructions necessary to turn the security alarm system on and off and to prevent false alarms. C. Installation or use of a robbery alarm which is a single action, non -recessed button is prohibited. D. Alarm installation companies shall, on new installations, use only alarm control panel(s) which meet SIA Control Panel Standard CP -01. E. Automatic voice dialers which call 911 or the Police Department are prohibited. F. After completion of the installation of a security alarm system, an alarm installation company employee shall review with the alarm user the customer false alarm prevention checklist established by Police Department policy. . G. A monitoring company shall: 1. Report alarm activations or signals by using the telephone numbers designated by the alarm administrator; 2. Attempt to verify every burglar alarm signal prior to requesting a police dispatch by making at least two phone calls to the responsible party or parties. This procedure shall not apply to robbery alarm signals; 3. Communicate alarm dispatch requests to the Police Department in a manner and form determined by the alarm administrator; Ordinance 17-001 Amending Chapter 7.20 SVMC — False Alarms Page 5 of 10 DRAFT 4. Communicate cancellations to the Police Department in a manner and form determined by the alarm administrator; 5. Ensure that all alarm users of security alarm systems equipped with robbery alarm(s) are given adequate training as to the proper use of the robbery alarm(s). 6. Communicate any available alarm zone information (north, south, front, back, floor, etc.) about the location on all alarm signals related to the alarm dispatch request; 7. Communicate type of alarm activation (silent or audible, interior or perimeter); 8. After an alarm dispatch request, promptly advise the Police Department if the monitoring company knows that the alarm user or the responder is on the way to the alarm site; 9. Attempt to contact the alarm user or responder within 24 hours via mail, fax, telephone or other electronic means when an alarm dispatch request is made; and 10. Shall maintain, for at least one year from the date of the alarm dispatch request, records relating to alarm dispatch requests. a. Records include the: i. Name, address, and telephone numbers of the alarm user; ii. Security alarm system zone(s) activated; iii. Time of alarm dispatch request; and iv. Evidence of an attempt to verify. b. The alarm administrator may request copies of such records for individually -named alarm users. c. If the request is made within 60 days of an alarm dispatch request, the monitoring company shall furnish requested records within three business days of receiving the request. d. If the records are requested between 60 days to one year after an alarm dispatch request, the monitoring company shall furnish the requested records within 30 days of receiving the request. 7.20. 100 Alarm dispatch request cancellations. A. An alarm dispatch request may be canceled only by the alarm business initiating the request prior to the time the responding police officer reports arrival at the alarm site. B. Alarm dispatch requests may be canceled pursuant to procedures established by the alarm administrator and approved by 911, police dispatch, and by the alarm business making the original request. C. Alarm dispatch requests canceled prior to the police officer's arrival on scene shall not be subject to false alarm service fees. 7.20.110 Prohibited devices. A. No person shall operate an alarm system in the City that has a siren, bell, or other signal audible from any property adjacent to the alarm site that sounds for longer than five consecutive minutes after the alarm is activated, or that repeats the five-minute alarm cycle more than three consecutive times without resetting. This limitation is subject to noise restrictions pursuant to SVMC 7.05.040(L). B. No person shall operate an alarm system in the City that is programmed for one -plus duress alarms. 7.20.120 Violations. A. The following actions constitute unlawful use of a security alarm system: 1. Any person who activates a security alarm system with the intent to report: a. Suspicious circumstances, or Ordinance 17-001 Amending Chapter 7.20 SVMC — False Alarms Page 6 of 10 DRAFT b. Any non -criminal incident, or c. A need for fire, medical or other non -police services. 2. Any person who violates SVMC 7.20.070(A) or (B), or SVMC 7.20.110(A) or (B), shall be subject to a cost recovery fee for the improper activation of the security alarm system. B. Chapter 7.20 SVMC shall not prevent the installation of a single reporting device for both types of security alarms, fire alarms, and medical alarms, provided, that such device complies with SVMC 7.20.070 and applicable fire code requirements. 7.20.130 Appropriating public police services for private purposes subject to false alarm response cost recovery fees. A. Causing the Police Department to engage in a false alarm response constitutes an appropriation of public police services for private purposes and is subject to a false alarm response cost recovery fee. B. The alarm user shall be responsible for payment of his false alarm response cost recovery fees. C. When, in the opinion of the responding officer(s), an alarm dispatch request may be reasonably associated with an actual or attempted criminal offense at the involved alarm site, the alarm is valid and the response is considered a basic police service not subject to false alarm response cost recovery fees. D. When, in the opinion of the responding officer(s), an alarm dispatch request can be reasonably attributed to an earthquake, tornado, wind storm, or other unusually violent act of nature, no false alarm response cost recovery fee shall be assessed. E. During the first 60 days following a security alarm system installation, a residential alarm user shall be provided one false alarm response without any charge. F. When, in the opinion of the responding officer(s), an alarm dispatch request cannot be reasonably attributed to the conditions pursuant to SVMC 7.20.130(C) or (D), the incident shall be deemed a false alarm and the police officer response shall be deemed an appropriation of public police services for private purposes that is subject to a false alarm response cost recovery. G. When the responding officer(s) is (are) unable to determine if an alarm is valid or false because of inaccessibility of the alarm site, the response is presumed to be a false alarm response, and is subject to a false alarm response cost recovery fee pursuant to the Master Fee Schedule. 7.20.140 Authorization to issue citations and assess service fees. A. The alarm administrator shall be granted a special commission by the Chief of Police to issue citations pursuant to this chapter, but citations shall not be issued for false alarms as an alternative to false alarm response cost recovery fees. B. The alarm administrator is authorized to assess costs pursuant to SVMC 7.20.260. 7.20.150 Fee processing. A. Alarm businesses contracting with customers to provide monitoring services, including their agents, shall ensure that customers residing in the City are provided information of the City's false alarm response cost recovery fees in the event of a false alarm. B. All fees are due and payable on receipt. Fees that are unpaid for 60 days or more after the date of initial invoice are considered past due and subject to suspension of police response to alarm activations. 7.20.160 Suspension. A. Any alarm user having more than three false alarm responses in any calendar year may, on the event of the fourth such incident, be suspended from receiving police response for alarm calls for service for 90 days. Ordinance 17-001 Amending Chapter 7.20 SVMC — False Alarms Page 7 of 10 DRAFT B. Any alarm user having false alarm response cost recovery fees 60 days past due in any year shall be suspended from receiving police response for alarm calls for service until all outstanding fees have been paid in full. 7.20.170 Appeals. False Alarm Response Cost Recovery Fees may be appealed to the alarm administrator, as follows: A. The appeal process shall be initiated by the alarm user sending a letter to the alarm administrator requesting that the false alarm response cost recovery fee be waived, and specifying the reasons for the appeal. This letter shall be received by the alarm administrator within 30 calendar days after mailing of the initial invoice to the alarm owner. Failure to comply with this 30 day requirement shall render any appeal untimely and therefore void. B. False Alarm Response Cost Recovery Fees may be appealed only on the grounds that the incident cited as the basis for the service fee was, in fact, not a false alarm response or that the alarm was activated due to an extreme weather event or a natural disaster. Human error or mechanical/electronic failure of the security alarm system are not valid reasons for appeal. The alarm user shall, in his letter requesting an appeal, describe detailed, credible evidence in his possession that supports the assertion that the incident was a valid alarm pursuant to SVMC 7.20.140(C) or (D) an alarm activation due to an extreme weather event or natural disaster. C. The alarm administrator may reject requests for appeals that are not supported by detailed, credible evidence of criminal activity or extreme weather events or natural disasters. Notice of rejection of a request for this initial appeal shall be sent to the appellant in writing within 10 working days following receipt of the appeal request by the alarm administrator. D. The alarm administrator may affirm, waive, cancel, or modify the false alarm response cost recovery fees or actions that are the subject of the appeal. A record of any modification of the false alarm cost recovery fee shall be recorded and forwarded to the Police Chief and the City Manager on a monthly basis. E. If the alarm administrator affirms or modifies the amount of a false alarm response recovery fee due, that amount becomes immediately due and payable. F The official decision of the alarm administrator shall be final. 7.20.180 Authority of alarm administrator. The following cases shall be within the jurisdiction of the alarm administrator: A. False alarm appeals. B. Alauu suspension of any system located within the City or under its jurisdiction. C. Administration of false alarm response cost recovery fees related to, or applicable to, any security alarm system. D. Any other administrative alarm appeals as they may pertain to security alarm systems located within the City. 7.20.190 Alarm administrator selection — Qualification and removal. A. The alarm administrator shall be appointed by the Chief of Police. B. The alarms administrator(s) shall be appointed solely with regard to their qualifications for the duties of the office and shall have such training and experience as will qualify them to conduct the duties or responsibilities pursuant to chapter 7.20 SVMC. C. The alarm administrator(s) may be removed from office by the Chief of Police. 7.20.200 Improper influence, conflict of interest, appearance of fairness. Ordinance 17-001 Amending Chapter 7.20 SVMC — False Alarms Page 8 of 10 DRAFT A. No City official, elective or appointive, shall attempt to influence the alarm administrator in any matter officially before him so as to constitute misconduct of a public office pursuant to chapter 42.20 RCW. B. The alarm administrator(s) shall conduct all proceedings in a manner to avoid conflicts of interest or other misconduct. If such conflicts or violations cannot be avoided in a particular case, the alarm administrator shall assign an alarm administrator as a pro tem to act in his absence. 7.20.210 Exceptions. A. Chapter 7.20 SVMC shall not apply to temporary security alarm systems used by the Police Department or other public law enforcement agencies for investigative or protective purposes. B. Government Facilities. 1. Pursuant to SVMC 7.20.020, government facilities are subject to the following special rules: a. Fee Structure: No cost recovery fees shall be charged for police response(s) to false alarms at government facilities. b. Government facilities shall be exempt from having police response suspended. 2. To qualify for the special rules and exemptions under this section, an alarm site shall meet the following criteria: a. The site be located within the municipal boundaries of the City; and b. Compliance with SVMC 7.20.020, "government facility." 3. Upon the fourth response to a false alarm in any calendar year, a responsible party for the government alarm site shall meet with the alarm administrator and present a false alarm abatement plan. 4. The alarm administrator may make any other special rules and exceptions as are deemed necessary to ensure that appropriate protection and accountability are maintained at government sites. 7.20.220 Special rules applicable to public schools. A. Public schools shall be subject to the following special rules: 1. Service fee structure: a. No fee shall be charged for the first false alarm in any calendar year. b. The second and all subsequent false alarms in any calendar year shall be charged at the standard false alarm response cost recovery fee rate. 2. Public school sites are exempt from suspension. B. To qualify for the special rules and exemptions pursuant to SVMC 7.20.220, a school alarm site shall meet the following criteria: 1. The site shall be located within the municipal boundaries of the City; and 2. The site shall be a public school site serving children in one or more of grades K-12, owned and operated by the East Valley School District, West Valley School District, Central Valley School District, or Spokane Public Schools C. The alarm administrator may make any other special rules and exceptions as are deemed necessary to ensure that appropriate protection and accountability are maintained at public schools regarding use of a security alarm system. 7.20.230 Confidentiality of alarm information. A. All information gathered through activations of false alarms, and/or through the appeals process shall be treated as confidential by all employees of the City and its third party administrator, if applicable. Such information shall be proprietary and is confidential except as otherwise required by chapter 42.56 RCW, the Public Records Act. Ordinance 17-001 Amending Chapter 7.20 SVMC — False Alarms Page 9 of 10 DRAFT B. Absent special circumstances or court order, no information gathered through activations of false alarms, and/or through the appeals process shall be released to the public or any other person except as otherwise required by chapter 42.56 RCW, the Public Records Act. C. This information may be released by the alarm administrator to another law enforcement agency, the applicable alarm user, and/or his installation or monitoring company upon written request of one of those three entities. 7.20.240 Scope of police duty — Immunities preserved. A. Chapter 7.20 SVMC does not create a contract between the City and any alarm user, alarm installation company, or monitoring company, nor does it create any duty or obligation, either expressed or implied, on the Police Department to respond to any alarm activation. B. Any and all liability and/or consequential damage or loss resulting from the failure of the Police Department to respond to an alarm dispatch request is hereby disclaimed and governmental immunity as provided by law is fully retained. C. Police Department response to an alarm activation may be impacted by the availability of officers, priority of current calls for service, traffic, weather conditions, and staffing levels. 7.20.250 False Alarm Response Cost Recovery Fees. The fees for false alarm response cost recovery shall be determined by separate resolution. Section 2. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance. Section 3. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five days after date of publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley this day of January, 2017. ATTEST: L.R. Higgins, Mayor Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Approved as to Form: Office of the City Attorney Date of Publication: Effective Date: Ordinance 17-001 Amending Chapter 7.20 SVMC — False Alarms Page 10 of 10 DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 17-001 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, , AMENDING CHAPTER 7.20 OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO FALSE ALARMS, AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING THERETO. WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley previously adopted chapter 7.20 Spokane Valley Municipal Code in 2009, to be effective January 1, 2010; and WHEREAS, the purpose and intent of adopting the original chapter 7.20 SVMC was to ensureassure that responses to false alarms did not diminish the availability of Ppolice services to the general public, . - .. . ... . - • . • . ' ; and WHEREAS, the City has operated the existing system and regulatory requirements for seven years, primarily through its former contract with Public Safety Corporation (Cry Wolf), which expired December 31, 2016; and WHEREAS, City staff have worked with Police Department staff to identify changes to the false alarm program that would allow the City and Police Department to operate the program in a manner that is anticipated to be more efficient and with a greater emphasis on customer service; and WHEREAS, Article 11, section 11 of the Washington State Constitution allows local governments to make and enforce within their jurisdictional limits, local laws and regulations not in conflict with the general laws of the State; and WHEREAS, the City Council, in enacting this Ordinance, seeks to promote the City's interest in protecting the public health, safety, and welfare of the residents of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Washington ordains as follows: Section 1. Amendment. Chapter 7.20 of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows: 7.20.010 Intent A. The City regulates security alarm businesses to ensureassure that responses to false alarms do not diminish the availability of police services to the general public and to ensureassure that citizens who cannot afford or do not choose to operate security alarm systems are not penalized for their condition or choice. B. The intent of this chapter 7.20 SVMC is to encourage alarm businesses and alarm users to maintain the operational viability of security alarm systems and to significantly reduce or eliminate false alarm dispatch requests made to the pPolice dDepartment. C. The purpose of the chapter 7.20 SVMC is to provide for and promote the health, safety, and welfare of the general public, not to protect individuals or create or otherwise establish or designate any particular class or group of persons who will or should be especially benefited by the terms of chapter Ordinance 17-001 Amending Chapter 7.20 SVMC — False Alarms Page 1 of 15 DRAFT 7.20 SVMCthis chapter. The cChapter 7.20 SVMC does not impose or create duties on the part of the City or any of its departments, and the obligation of complying with the requirements of this chapter 7.20 SVMC, and any liability for failing to do so, is placed solely upon the parties responsible for owning, operating, monitoring, installing, or maintaining security alarm systems. 7.20.020 Definitions. "Alarm administrator" means the person designated by the sChief of p Police to administer the City's security alarm program, to issue citations, hear and decide appeals, and levy false alarm response cost recovery fees pursuant to chapter 7.20 SVMC SVMCthis chapter. app 11s related to service fees and registration suspensions pursuant to chapter 7.20 SVMC this chapter. "Alarm business" means any business, by an individual, partnership, corporation, or other entity, engaged in the selling, leasing, maintaining, servicing, repairing, altering, replacing, moving, installing, or responding to security alarms. 1. Alarm businesses also include any person, business, or organization that monitors security alarm systems and initiates alarm dispatch requests, including units or divisions of larger businesses or organizations that provide proprietary security alarm monitoring services only to affiliates of the parent business or organization. 2. Alarm businesses do not include persons doing installation or repair work solely on premises they own, lease or rent where such work is performed without compensation of any kind (i.e., "do- it-yourselfers"). "Alarm dispatch request" means the initiating of a communication to the police, via police dispatch, by an alarm business indicating that a security alarm system has been activated at a particular alarm site and requesting police ciDepartment response to that alarm site. "Alarm installation company" means a person in the business of selling, providing, maintaining, servicing, repairing, altering, replacing, moving or installing an security alarm system in an alarm site. "Alarm site" (also "security alarm site") means a structure or portion thereof served by a single security alarm system (a "fixed" alarm site). In a multi -tenant building or complex, each portion of the structure or complex having its own security alarm system is considered a separate alarm site. "Alarm system" (also "security alarm system") mcians a device or series of interconnected devices, including, but not limited to, systems interconnected with hard wiring or radio frequency signals, which alarm system monitoring company. 2. It does not includeSecurity alarm systems do not include those devices designed to alert only thc generally beard or seen on thc exterior of thc alarm site. It doesSecurity devices do not include personal alert devices worn on a person's body that are primarily designed as an alert of a medical condition: "Alarm user" means any person, firm, partnership, corporation, or other entity who/ -(which: 1. Controls a security alarm system at an alarm site; and 2. Is named on the alarm registration; and R. Is financially responsible for the operation of an security alarm system. As used in the chapter, the term "aAlarm user" may mean more than one person, if more than one person is listed on the registration and has accepted financial responsibility for operation of an security alarm system. "Burglary alarm" (also "property/intrusion alarm") means an alarm system that is used to detect and report an unauthorized entry or an attempted unauthorized entry upon real property. Ordinance 17-001 Amending Chapter 7.20 SVMC — False Alarms Page 2 of 15 DRAFT "Call-up dialer alarm" means a security device that is designed to evoke a police response by transmitting a pre-recorded, unverified signal or message to the police E911 system or to any other police telephone. "Chief" means the eChief of pPolice of the City of Spokane Valley or his designee. "City" means the City of Spokane Valley and/or the area within the incorporated municipal boundaries of the City of Spokane Valley. alarm administrator that is used to validate alarm dispatch requests. GL Duress Alarm. (Sec "Robbery alarm.") "Enhanced call verification" means an independent method whereby the alarm monitoring company attempts to determine that a signal from an automatic security alarm system reflects a need for immediate police assistance or investigation._ This verification process shaltwill be conducted by the security alarm system monitoring personnel and shall consist of making at least two phone calls to the responsible party or parties - - has been accepted by the alarm system monitoring company.prior to requesting a police dispatch. "False alarm response" means pPolice elDepartment response to an alarm dispatch request by a commissioned officer of the Police Ddepartment where, in the opinion of that officer, no evidence of the commission or attempted commission of a crime is present that can be reasonably attributed to havinge caused the alarm activation._ A false alarm response is also deemed to have occurred when the responding officer is unable to determine if evidence of a criminal offense or attempted criminal offense is present because the alarm site is inaccessible (e.g., where the alarm site is located: 1. Within a locked structure, such as an apartment building or business complex with a common entry; or 2. Behind a locked gate and no person is present to provide access to the officer; or 3. Contains a dog and no person is present to remove the dog so the officer can inspect the site; or 4. Contains any type of "protective/reactive" device or contrivance). "False Alarm Response Cost Recovery Fee" means the cost for police responding to an alarm call in which the alarm is determined to be a false alarm. The fee is revenue neutral and recovers only costs associated with responding to the call, invoicing, payment processing, and program administration. This fee is not a -punitive, and is thus not. "Government facility" means any alarmed location where the primary owner, operator, renter, or lessee is the City of Spokane Valley, county of Spokane, state of Washington, or agency of the United States government. A public school facility is not a government facility. Hold up Alarm. (Sec "Robbery alarm.") Intrusion Alarm. (Scc `Burglary alarm."") "Monitoring" means the process an alarm business uses to: 1. Keep watch on security alarm systems; 2. Receive alarm activation signals from security alarm systems; 3. Verify alarm activations; 4. Relay alarm dispatch requests to the Police Ddepartment for the purpose of summoning police response to an alarm site; and 5. To cancel alarm dispatch requests (when appropriate). "Multi -unit complex" means any building or group of buildings located/co-located on the same real property and comprised of two or more separately occupied units. "One -plus duress alarm" means a security alarm system which permits the manual activation of an alarm signal by entering on a keypad a code that either adds the value of"1" to the last digit of a normal arm/disarm code (e.g., the normal arm/disarm code "1234" if entered as "1235" automatically activates the duress alarm feature) or that involves entering any incorrect final digit to a normal arm/ disarm code (e.g., the normal arm/disarm code "1234" if entered as "123X" — where "X" is not "4" — automatically activates the duress alarm feature). Ordinance 17-001 Amending Chapter 7.20 SVMC — False Alarms Page 3 of 15 • DRAFT Panic Alarm. (See "Robbery alarm.") "Person;" for purposes of this chapter, means an individual, corporation, partnership, association, organization or similar entity. "Police Department" means the Spokane Valley Police Department. Property Alarm. (Sce "Burglary alarm.") "Protective/reactive alarm system" means an security alarm system that is equipped and prepared to produce any temporary disability or sensory deprivation through use of chemical, electrical or sonic defense, or by any other means, including use of vision obscuring/disabling devices. "Robbery alarm" (also "duress alarm," "hold up alarm" or "panic alarm") means an alarm signal generated by the manual or automatic activation of a device, or any system, device or mechanism, on or near the premises intended to signal that a robbery (refer to RCW 9A.56.1909A.56.1909A.56.190) or other crime is in progress, and that one or more persons are in need of immediate police assistance in order to avoid injury, serious bodily harm, or death at the hands of the perpetrator of the robbery or other crime. "Security alarm monitoring business" means any person, firm, or corporation which is engaged in the monitoring of security alarm systems and the summoning of police officer response to activations thereof. This includes all businesses that are engaged in alarm monitoring for profit, and businesses whichthat have specialized units or subsidiaries that monitor only their own security alarm systems. "Security Alarm system" means a device or series of interconnected devices, including, but not limited to, systems interconnected with hard wiring or radio frequency signals, which are designed to emit and/or transmit a remote or local audible, visual, or electronic signal indicating that an intrusion may either be in progress or is being attempted at the alarm site. 1. It includes only the equipment located at the alarm site when a system is connected to an alarm system monitoring company. 2. It does not include those devices designed to alert only the inhabitants of specific premises and that have no sounding or signaling devices which can be generally heard or seen on the exterior of the alarm site. It does not include personal alert devices worn on a person's body that are primarily designed as an alert of a medical condition or other types of alarms such as car alarms. "Subscriber" means an alarm user who is a customer of an alarm monitoring company. "Suspend" ("suspension"), for purposes of this chapter, means the temporary loss for an alarm user of police response to an alarm activation. system in the City (specifically, police response). "Unmonitored alarm system" means an security alarm system (see "Alarm system") that is not actively monitored by an alarm business and -which has mese_ function it is to evoke police response solely by means of a generally audible and/or visible signal. "Verified response" means a police response that is based on information received from a person physically present at a location (e.g., an alarm site) or from real-time audio or video surveillance positively verifying that there is evidence either of a crime or an attempted crime at the location. e minutes from the time the alarm signal has been accepted. 7.20.030 Administration and funding. A. The Chief of Police shall be responsible for administration this-ehaptefof chapter 7.20 SVMC is vested with the cChief of Ppolice. B. The eChief of Ppolice shall designates an alarm administrator to carry out the duties and functions described in this -chapter 7.20 SVMC. PC. Moneys generated by false alarm response cost service feesrecovery fees and registration fees shall be paid into the City's general fund. Ordinance 17-001 Amending Chapter 7.20 SVMC — False Alarms Page 4 of 15 DRAFT D. The alarm administrator shall conducts an annual evaluation and analysis of the effectiveness of this chapter 7.20 SVMC and identifyies and implements appropriate system improvementsas warranted. not properly registered. • '4 CI • : " at 1 st once a month to the City in accordance with SVMC 7.20.110(A) is a class one civil infraction. ! ! ! • • •• ; " A. Alarm registration is valid for onc year. B. Alarm registration is issued to a person or persons ("alarm user") having bona fide ownership or change of ownership or control of thc alarm site occurs. alarm site. and shall be submitted to the alarm administrator or designee within 30 days. p-. limited to, the following: : - - C • of the alarm system being registcred) to the system. • the alarm user). • with false alarms. F. On receipt of the application and fees, the alarm administrator (or designee) shall issue a security alarm registration number to the alarm user. H. Registration may be renewed under the following conditions: 1. The alarm site has no past due fees. registration information is still corrcct. initial registration anniversary date each year. J. The rates for security alarm registration fees arc set forth in the City's master fee schedule, as set a Ordinance 17-001 Amending Chapter 7.20 SVMC — False Alarms Page 5 of 15 DRAFT registration fees. 7.20.0640 Responsibilities of alarm users. A. Each alarm user is responsible, annually, for: 1. Registering his alarm system; BA. Each alarm user shall beis responsible for ensuringassurin_ that his security alarm system is used properly and pursuant toin accordance with the manufacturer's directions and the law. _Inherent in this responsibility is ensuringassuring that all persons with access to the security alarm system shall beare properly trained on correct use of the system and are authorized to cancel accidental activations, and ensuringassuring that procedures and practices are followed that minimize the risk of false alarms. GB. Each alarm user shall beis responsible for keeping his security alarm system properly maintained and in good working order. DC. Each alarm user shall beis financially responsible for paying false alarm response cost recovery cervico fees when police respond to false alarms from his alarm site. if the alarm user does not want a police response for alarm activations, it shall be the alarm user's responsibility to instruct the alarm monitoring company not to request police response without specific authorization by the alarm user. ED. Failure to comply withmeet the responsibilities SVMC 7.20.0460(A) - (D) listed in subsection A, B, C or D C of this section may lead to suspensionprivileges associated with that rcgistration.of police response to alarm dispatch requests. FE. If an alarm user has six false alarms within a calendar year, the person/business responsible for the alarm site shall may be required to meet with and provide a false alarm abatement plan to the alarm administrator.appeals officeralarm administrator and provide a false alarm abatement plan to the 7.20.0570 e• . • : •• : • .Alarm installation companies required tomust have a valid City-of-Spelkane business registration. number. (Ord. 09 020 § 18, 2009).All alarm businesses - shall have a current and valid City of Spokane Val ey business registration. Companies that provide monitoring services, but which do not install systems and are not located within the City limits, are exempt from City business registration requirements. 7.20.0860 Verified response required in certain circumstances. A. Effective January 1, 2010, and thereafter, tThe Police dDepartment mayshall respond to the activation of unmonitored security alarm systems, alarm systems monitored by unlicensed security alarm businesses, unregistered alarm systems, and security alarm systems with a suspended registration status only if independent reporting indicates that a crime is in progress or has been attempted at the involved alarm site (i.e., verified response). B. No alarm user or alarm business shall presume, anticipate or expect that a police response will result solely from the activation of: 1. Any unmonitored security alarm systemalarm system; or 2. An alarm system monitored by an unlicensed security alarm business; 3. An unregistered alarm system; or 42. An security alarm system inwith a suspended fegistfatieRstatus. Ordinance 17-001 Amending Chapter 7.20 SVMC — False Alarms Page 6 of 15 DRAFT 7.20.0970 Differentiation and reporting of alarm activations. A. Effective January 1, 2010, and thereafter, nNo person shall operate a security alarm system in the City that fails to differentiate burglary prey _ alarm activations from robbery/hold .. • activations, or that fails to accurately report such activations independently. B. Effective January 1, 2010, and thereafter, nNo person shall operate a security alarm system in the City that fails to differentiate police incidents (i.e., burglary/property/intrusion alarm activations, robbery/hold up/panic/duress alarm activations) from fire, medical, or other non -police incidents, or that fails to accurately report such incidents independently. 7.20.084.00 Alarm dispatch requests. A. Alarm dispatch requests shall be made in the manner prescribed by the alarm administrator and approved by 911 and police dispatch. B. Alarm dispatch requests may shall include, but are not limited to, the following information: 21. Location of the alarm activation. 32. Type of alarm activation (burglary/property/intrusion, or robbery/pani ). 43. Alarm business's incident number (or other official incident identifier). 3--4 Alarm business's assigned control number.Name and Contact Pphone number of the alarm user. 5. Alarm zone information, including sensor type and location. C. Alarm dispatch requests made to the Police dDepartment (or its designee) shall be for police incidents only, and shall accurately indicate the type of alarm activation (burglary/prepefffsien or; robbery/hold up/panic/duress) that is the proximate cause for the alarm dispatch request. D. No alarm business shall initiate an alarm dispatch request if it knows, or reasonably should know, that doing so would cause a law enforcement officer to respond to an alarm site containing a protective/reactive alarm system. E. No dispatch request and subsequent police response to a robbery alarm pursuant to(a� ami SVMC 7.20.020) may be cancelled by the alarm user._ In every case at least one officer shall respond to affirm that the alarm user is not under duress_ of any kind. 7.20.090440 Duties of alarm installation company and/or monitoring company. A. All alarm installation and/or monitoring companies shall ensure that their customer information is updated - . - . - • . - - . b - at least monthly. This information shall include: 1. Customer name and contact information, including -{he.; all phone numbers); 2. Alarm site address and billing address; 3. Monitoring company name and contact information; and 4. Installation date or date the alarm monitoring ended. EB. The alarm installation company shall provide written and oral instructions to each of its alarm users in the proper use and operation of their security alarm systems. Such instructions shallwi-11 specifically include all instructions necessary to turn the security alarm system on and off and to prevent false alarms. 1 systems so that they arc capable of sending one plus duress alarms. systems programmed with one plus duress alarms prior to January 1, 2010. Ordinance 17-001 Amending Chapter 7.20 SVMC — False Alarms Page 7 of 15 DRAFT ECD. to activate a Installation or use of a held-uprobbery alarm which is a single action, non -recessed button is prohibited.: €DE. Effective April 1, 2010, the aAlarm installation companies shall, on new installations, use only alarm control panel(s) which meet SIA Control Panel Standard CP -01. QEE. An alarm company shall not use aAutomatic voice dialers which call 911 or the pPolice dDepartment are prohibited. 14FG. After completion of the installation of an security alarm system, an alarm installation company employee shall review with the alarm user the customer false alarm prevention checklist established by Police dDepartment policy. 21. Effective January 1, 2010, and thereafter, when a takeover or conversion occurs, or if an alarm user requests an alarm system inspection or modification, an alarm installation charge. 34G44. A monitoring company shall: 1. Report alarm activations or signals by using the telephone numbers designated by the alarm administrator; 2. Attempt to verify every burglar alarm signal prior to requesting a police dispatch by making at least two phone calls to the responsible party or parties. This procedure shall notdoes-net apply to duress or hold uprohbery alarm signals; 3. Communicate alarm dispatch requests to the Spokane \'alrey- pPolice Department in a manner and form determined by the alarm administrator; 4. Communicate cancellations to the Spokane Valley pPolice Department in a manner and form determined by the alarm administrator; 5. Ensure that all alarm users of security alarm systems equipped with duress, hold up, or panicrobbery alarm(s) are given adequate training as to the proper use of the dure;F, hold up, or panicrobbeiy alarm(s). _Alarm system training should be provided to every alarm user 6. Communicate any available alarm zone information (north, south, front, back, floor, etc.) about the location on all alarm signals related to the alarm dispatch request; 7. Communicate type of alarm activation (silent or audible, interior or perimeter); 98. After an alarm dispatch request, promptly advise the Spokane \'alley ~Police Department if the monitoring company knows that the alarm user or the responder is on the way to the alarm site; 409. Attempt to contact the alarm user or responder within 24 hours via mail, fax, telephone or other electronic means when an alarm dispatch request is made; and 4410. Effective January 1, 2010, mAlarm monitoring companies Sshallrt tst maintain, for a per-ied-ef-at least one year from the date of the alarm dispatch request, records relating to alarm dispatch requests. a. Records must include the: i. Name, address, and telephone numbers of the alarm user; ii. Security A4alarm system zone(s) activated; iii. Time of alarm dispatch request; and iv. Evidence of an attempt to verify. b. The alarm administrator may request copies of such records for individually -named alarm users. Ordinance 17-001 Amending Chapter 7.20 SVMC - False Alarms Page 8 of 15 DRAFT c. If the request is made within 60 days of an alarm dispatch request, the monitoring company shall furnish requested records within three business days of receiving the request. d. If the records are requested between 60 days to one year after an alarm dispatch request, the monitoring company shall furnish the requested records within 30 days of receiving the request. from another person shall notify the alarm administrator of such purchase and provide details as may standards sot forth in SVMC 7.20.110. 7.20.441030 Alarm dispatch request cancellations. A. An alarm dispatch request may be canceled only by the alarm business initiating the request prior to the timepeittt the responding police officer reports arrival at the alarm site. B. Alarm dispatch requests may be canceled pursuant toin accordance with the procedures established by the alarm administrator and approved by 911, police dispatch, and by the alarm business making the original request. C. Alarm dispatch requests canceled prior to the police officer's arrival on scene shall not beare not subject to false alarm service fees. 7.20.11040 Prohibited devices. A. Effective January 1, 2010, and thereafter, nNo person shall operate an alarm sv stem in the City that has a siren, bell, or other signal audible from any property adjacent to the alarm site that sounds for longer than five consecutive minutes after the alarm is activated, or that repeats the five-minute alarm cycle more than three consecutive times without resetting. This limitation is subject to noise restrictions pursuant to SVMC 7.05.040(L). B. Effective January 1, 2010, and thereafter, nNo person shall operate an alarm system in the City that is programmed for one -plus duress alarms. 7.20.12060 Violations. A. The following actions constitute unlawful use of a security alarm system: 1. Any person who activates a security alarm system with the intent to report: a. Suspicious circumstances, or b. Any non -criminal incident, or c. A need for fire, medical or other non -police services,;—er 2. Any person who violates the of SVMC 7.20.0907.20.0907.20.073-90(A) or (B), or SVMC 7.20.1107.20.1107.20.1410(A) or (B), shall beis subject to a cost recovery fee for the improper activation of the security alarm system. B. Chapter 7.20 SVMC shall not prevent the installation of a single reporting device for both types of security alarms, fire alarms, and medical alarms,; provided, that such device complies with SVMC -7,2-04)9{4740,0907.20.09760 and applicable fire code requirements. _7.20.1360 Appropriating public police services for private purposes subject to false alarm response cost recovery fees. Ordinance 17-001 Amending Chapter 7.20 SVMC — False Alarms Page 9 of 15 DRAFT A. Causing the Ppolice Department to engage in a false alarm response constitutes an appropriation of public police services for private purposes and is subject to a false alarm response cost recovery fee. B. The alarm user shall bes responsible for payment of his registr tion-andfalse alarm response cost recovery fees. C. When, in the opinion of the responding officer(s), an alarm dispatch request mayean be reasonably associated with an actual or attempted criminal offense at the involved alarm site, the alarm is valid and the response is considered a basic police service not subject to false alarm response cost recovery fees. D. When, in the opinion of the responding officer(s), an alarm dispatch request can be reasonably attributed to an earthquake, hurricane, tornado, wind storm, or other unusually violent act of nature, no false alarm response cost recovery fee shall be assessed. E. During the first 60 days following a security alarm system installation, aA residential alarm user shall be provided one false alarm .. .. response without any charge. F. When, in the opinion of the responding officer(s), an alarm dispatch request cannot be reasonably attributed to the conditions pursuant to SVMC 7.20.013460(C) or (D)described in subsection C or D of this section, the incident shall be deemeds a false alarm and the police officer response shall be deemedsidefeEl an appropriation of public police services for private purposes that is subject to a false alarm response : . - . . - cost recovery. FG. When the responding officer(s) is (are) unable to determine if an alarm is valid or false because of inaccessibility of the alarm site, the response is presumed to be a false alarm response, and is subject to a false alarm response cost recovery fees pursuant toas set forth in the mMaster F€ee sSchedule. 7.20.1480 Authorization to issue citations and assess service fees. A. The alarm administrator shall beis granted a special commission by the eChief of pPolice to issue citations pursuant to this chapters. but citations shallwill not be issued for false alarms as an alternativeirr lieu of to false alarn response cost recovery fees. B. The alarm administrator is authorized by the °City cCouncil to assess costs pursuant to SVMC 7.20.3107.20.260. 7.20.1950 Fee processing. A. Alarm businesses contracting with customers to provide monitoring services, including (or their agents,) shall ensureassuro that customers residing in the City cervice.are provided informationmadc aware of the City's false alarm response cost recovery fees in the event of a false alarm. B. All fees are due and payable on receipt. _Fees that are unpaid for 360 days or more after the date of initial invoice are considered past due fer purposes of this chapter and subject to suspension of police response to alarm activations,- ! ! ! ctivations.: ££! .. greater, may be imposed on past due accounts to cover the cost of processing and collection. 7.20.162A0 Suspension, A. Any alarm user having more than three false alarm responses in any calendar year may, on the event of the fourth such incident, - . • - be suspended from receiving police response for alarm calls for service for 90 days, valid, whichever is greater. Ordinance 17-001 Amending Chapter 7.20 SVMC — False Alarms Page 10 of 15 DRAFT B. Any alarm user having annual registration and/or false alarm response cost recovery fees 60 days past due in any year shall have his registration suspendedbe suspended from receiving police response for alarm calls for service until all outstanding fees have been paid in full. C. Furnishing false in ien-err 1. On the first offense of furnishing false information, the alarm administrator shall suspend the alarm user's registration for 30 days. alarm user's registration for the remainder of the registration period. alarm users having four or more false alarm activations in any calendar year. class. will show that the user has read and passed the class. B. Completion of the false alarm awareness class conducted by the alarm administrator by an alarm user (i.e., the person responsible for operation of a registered alari registration suspension one time per registered alarm site. This shall .:. for police response to a false alarm. 7.20.1720 Appeals. False Alarm Response Cost Rfecovery Flees may be appealed to the alarm appeals officeradministrator, as follows: A. The appeal process shall be4s initiated by the alarm user sending a letter to the alarm appeal:, officeradministrator requesting an appeal conference, that the false alarm response cost recovery fee be waived, and specifying the reasons for the appeal, and submitting the scheduled appeal fee. This letter and app al fee shallmust be received by the alarm appeals officeradministrator within 30 calendarworking days after mailing of the initial invoice to the alarm owner. Failure to comply with this 30 day requirement shall render any appeal untimely and therefore void. B. Service False Alarm Response Cost Recovery Ffees may be appealed only on the grounds that the incident cited as the basis for the service fee was, in fact, not a false alarm response or that the alarm was activated due to an uncontrollable event such as aextreme weather event or at natural disaster -et other act of god. Human error or mechanical/electronic failure of the security alarm system are not valid reasons for appeal. The alarm user shaI1m +st, in his letter requesting an appeal, describe detailed, credible evidence in his possession that supports the assertioncontention that the involved incident was a valid alarm pursuant to, as described in SVMC 7.20.1607.20.1640(C) or (D) an alarm activation due to an uncontrollable extreme weather event or natural disaster.other act of God. C. The alarm appeals officeradministrator may reject requests for appeals that are not supported by detailed, credible evidence of criminal activity or_ for one of the listed reasons in the City'sextreme weather events or; natural disasters., or acts of god of Spokane Valley false alarm app zl guideline form by the appellant. _Notice of rejection of a request for this initial appeal shall be sent to the appellant in writing within 10 working days following receipt of the appeal request by the alarm appeals officeradministrator. D. IfWhenever the first appeal is denied, the alarm user may then file a second written appeial requesting an in person hearing. • app 1. 2. All hearings shall be heard by an appeals officer appointed by the chief of police. Ordinance 17-001 Amending Chapter 7.20 SVMC — False Alarms Page 11 of 15 DRAFT The filing of a request for an app al conference with an alarin appeals officer, shall act to stayscts aside any pending scrvicc fee or related service suspension/revocation until the alarm appeals officer either rejects the app al request pursuant to SVMC 7.20.220(C), as described in subsection C of this section, or renders a final decision. E. The alarm appals officer, on receipt of a request for a h aring,The alarm appeals officer shall conduct an appeal conference within 30 working days after receiving the app al request. _The alarm administrator may also contact the appellant and offer a re fees prior to the scheduled hearing. person(s). 1. Because false alann responses are bascd on the professional judgment of the respending officer using appellant. involved was a valid alarm_pursuant to, as described in SVMC 7.20.160(C) or (D). 3. The alarm app als officer shall make his decision bas-- - - conclusions. GD. The alarm appeals officer shall render a decision and notify the appellant and the alarm administrator thereof in writing within 20 working days after the appeal conference is held. _The alarm appeals officeradministrator may affirm, waive, cancel, or modify the false alarm response cost recoverypenalty fees or actions that are the subject of the appeal. A record of any modification of the false alarm cost recovery fee shall be recorded and forwarded to the Police Chief and the City Manager or designee on a monthly basis. FIE. If the alarm appeals officeradministrator affirms or modifies the amount of a false alarm response recoveryserviee fee due, that amount becomes immediately due and payable. hF becoming official. The official decision of the alarm appeals officeradministrator shall be -is final, and no further appc'ds or remedies are available. 7.20.1802-30 Authority of alarm administrator. The following cases shall be within the jurisdiction of the alarm administrator and the alarm appeals officer(s) under the terms and procedures of this chapter: A. f=alse alarm appeals governed by this chapter. B. Alarm license suspension of any system located within the City or under its jurisdiction governed by this chapter. C. Administration of scrvicc fees and/or fines related tofalse alarm response cost recovery fees related to, or applicable to, any security alarm system authorized by this chapter. D. Any and all other administrative alarm appeals as they may pertain to security alarm systems located within the City. 7.20.190240 Alarm a-ppc eradministrator selection — Qualification and removal. A. The alarm appeals fficer(s) administrator shall be appointed by the eChief of Ppolice. B. The alarms appeals officeradministrator(s) shall be appointed solely with regard to their qualifications for the duties of the office and wi-llshall have such training and experience as will qualify them to conduct administrative or quasi judicial hearings, as well as any otherthe duties or responsibilities pursuant to chapter 7.20 SVMC. on regulatory enactments and to discharge any other conferred functions. C. The alarm appeals officeradministrator(s) may be removed from office by the eChief of Ppolice. Ordinance 17-001 Amending Chapter 7.20 SVMC — False Alarms Page 12 of 15 DRAFT 7.20.2002-50 Improper influence, conflict of interest, appearance of fairness. A. No City official, elective or appointive, shall attempt to influence the alarm appeals officcradministrator in any matter officially before him so as to constitute misconduct of a public office pursuant tounder Gehapter 42.20 RCW, or a violation of the appearance of fairness doctrine. B. The alarm appeals–effieefadministrator(s) shall conduct all proceedings in a manner to avoid conflicts of interest or other misconduct. If such conflicts or violations cannot be avoided in a particular case, the alarm appeals officeradministrator shall assign an alarm appeals-effieeFadministrator as a pro tem to act in his absence. 710.260-0Fganization—R-Hles: Z : " : " • • " . " • hearings and other procedural 'natters related to thc duties of his office. 1. Such rules may provide for cross examination of witnesses. public agencies. 7.20.210-70 Exceptions. A. The provisions of this cChapter 7.20 SVMC shall not apply to temporary security alarm systems used by the Police Ddepartment or other public law enforcement agencies for investigative or protective purposes. B. Government Facilities. 1. Pursuant to SVMC 7.20.020, Ggovernment facilities as clef -tiled in SVMC 7.20.020 are subject to the following special rules: a. Fee Structure: No cost recovery fees shalt be charged for police response(s) to false alarms at government facilities. i. Government facilities arc subject to annual rcgistra registration fccs established pursuant to SVMC 7.20.310. g vcinme b. Government facilities shall beare exempt from having police response suspended. 2. To qualify for the special rules and exemptions under this section, an alarm site shallmust meet the following criteria: a. The site beis located within the municipal boundaries of the City; and b. Compliance withThc site meets the criteria as defined in SVMC 7.20.0207.20.020, "Ggovernment facility." 3. Upon the fourth response to a false alarm in any calendar year, a responsible party for the government alarm site shall meet with the alarm administrator and present a false alarm abatement plan. 4. The alarm administrator may make any other special rules and exceptions as are deemed necessary to ensureassafe that appropriate protection and accountability are maintained at government sites. 7.20.2280 Special rules applicable to public schools. A. Public schools shall beare subject to the following special rules: 1. Public Schools are subjcct to the following :Service fee structure: Ordinance 17-001 Amending Chapter 7.20 SVMC – False Alarms Page 13 of 15 DRAFT the alarm system and contact information), but arc exempt from paying the annual registration fees applicable to government facilities, as described in SVMC 7.20.270(B). ba. No fee shallis be charged for the first false alarm in any calendar year,: class. db. The second and all subsequent false alarms in any calendar year shall bee charged at the standard false alarm response cost recovery service fee rate. 2. Public school sites are exempt from suspension. B. To qualify for the special rules and exemptions pursuant to SVMC 7.20.22-1-80 under this section, a schooln alarm site shallmust meet the following criteria: 1. The site shall beis located within the municipal boundaries of the City; and 2. The site shall beis a public school site serving children in one or more of grades K-12, owned and operated by the East Valley School District, West Valley School District, Central Valley School District, or Spokane Public SchoolsSchool District 81; or 3. The site is a public school site serving children in one or more of grades K 12, owned and operated by East Valley School District, Wcst V District, or School District 81. C. The alarm administrator may make any other special rules and exceptions as are deemed necessary to ensureassure that appropriate protection and accountability are maintained at public schools regarding use of au security alarm system. 7.20.2930 Confidentiality of alarm information. A. All information gathered through alarm registrations, activations of false alarms, submission of ' , and/or through the appeals process shall be treated as confidentialhe'a in confidence by all employees of the City and its third party administrator, if applicable._ Such information shall beis proprietary and is hereby declared confidential except as otherwise required by chapter 42.56 RCW, the Public Records Act. B. Absent special circumstances or court order, no information gathered through alarm registrations, activations of false alarms, submission of customer lists by alarm sales, installation or monitei4* g companies, and/or through the appeals process shall be released to the public or any other person except as otherwise required by chapter 42.56 RCW, the Public Records Act-. C. This information may be released by the alarm administrator to another law enforcement agency, the applicable alarm user, and/or his installation or monitoring company upon written request of one of those three entities. 7.20.24300 Scope of police duty — Immunities preserved. A. The issuance of an alarm registrationThis ordinancoChapter 7.20 SVMC does not create a contract between the City and any alarm user, alarm installation company, or monitoring company, nor does it create any duty or obligation, either expressed or implied, on the pPolice dDepartment to respond to any alarm activation. B. Any and all liability and/or consequential damage or loss resulting from the failure of the pPolice dDepartment to respond to an alarm dispatch request is hereby disclaimed and governmental immunity as provided by law is fully retained. C. By applying for an alarm registration, _ - _ :Police Department response to an alarm activation may be impacted by the availability of officers, priority of current calls for service, traffic, weather conditions, and staffing levels. Ordinance 17-001 Amending Chapter 7.20 SVMC — False Alarms Page 14 of 15 DRAFT 7.20.253-10 False Alarm Response Cost Recovery Fees4 The fees for registration and enforcementfalse alarm response cost recovery shall be determined by separate resolution. Section 2. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance. Section 3. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five days after date of publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley this day of January, 2017. ATTEST: L.R. Higgins, Mayor Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Approved as to Form: Office of the City Attorney Date of Publication: Effective Date: Ordinance 17-001 Amending Chapter 7.20 SVMC — False Alarms Page 15 of 15 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: January 10, 2017 Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ information ❑ admin. report Department Director Approval: ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Proposed Resolution #17-001: Authorization of qualified public depositories the City may conduct financial transactions with, and Councilmembers and City officers with signing authority. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 3.55.010. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: No action has been taken. BACKGROUND: SVMC 3.55.010 requires that the City Council authorize by resolution which qualified financial depositories (banks) the City may use to make payments on claims or obligations, and who has authority to sign checks for the City. OPTIONS: Adopt Resolution #17-001 by motion; request additional information. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: I move to approve Resolution #17-001 declaring which qualified public depositories the City is authorized to conduct financial transactions with, and declaring which Councilmembers and City officers have signing authority on behalf of the City. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: This action will result in no additional out-of-pocket costs to the City. STAFF CONTACT: Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director ATTACHMENTS: Resolution #17-001. P:IClerklAgendaPackets for Web120171agendapacket 2017, 01-1011tem 3 RCA 2017 01 10 motion on resolution 17-001.docx DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. 17-001 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DECLARING WHICH QUALIFIED PUBLIC DEPOSITORIES THE CITY IS AUTHORIZED TO CONDUCT FINANCIAL TRANSACTIONS WITH, DECLARING WHICH COUNCILMEMBERS AND CITY OFFICERS HAVE SIGNING AUTHORITY PURSUANT TO SPOKANE VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE 3.55.010; REPEALING RESOLUTION 16-002, AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING THERETO. WHEREAS, the City Council has authority, pursuant to Spokane Valley Municipal Code 3.55.010 to declare by resolution which qualified public depositories the City may use to pay its claims or obligations, and to declare three Councilmembers and those City officers who are authorized to make payments on claims or obligations of the City; and WHEREAS, it is necessary from time -to -time to update which qualified financial depositories the City does its banking with, as well as to update those Councilmembers and City officers who are authorized to sign checks on behalf of the City at those depositories or otherwise conduct the financial affairs of the City. NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County, Washington, as follows: Section 1. Authorized Qualified Public Depositories for Making Payments on Claims or Obligations of the City. The City of Spokane Valley is authorized to use Banner Bank, Mountain West Bank, Umpqua Bank and other public depositories as listed on the Washington Public Deposit Protection Commission listing of approved banks, for public deposits, checks, and making fund transfers to and from accounts. Section 2. Councilmembers Designated to Have Signature Authority at Qualified Financial Depositories for Making Payments on Claims or Obligations of the City. Pursuant to SVMC 3.55.010, the following Councilmembers are given signing authority on behalf of the City to make payments on claims or obligations of the City: L.R. Higgins Arne Woodard Edward Pace Section 3. City Officers Designated to Have Signature Authority at Qualified Financial Depositories for Making Payments on Claims or Obligations of the City and Investing Public Monies. Pursuant to SVMC 3.55.010, the following City Officers are given signing authority on behalf of the City to make payments on claims or obligations of the City, to invest its public monies with the Local Government Investment Pool, and make all appropriate transfers related thereto: Mark Calhoun, City Manager Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director Dan Duffey, Accounting Manager Section 4. Repeal. Resolution 16-002 is hereby repealed in its entirety. Section 5. Effective Date. This Resolution shall be effective upon adoption. Resolution 17-001 Declaring Banking Authority Page 1 of 2 DRAFT PASSED by the City Council of Spokane Valley, Washington this 10th day of January, 2017. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY L.R. Higgins, Mayor ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Approved as to Form: Office of the City Attorney Resolution 17-001 Declaring Banking Authority Page 2 of 2 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: January 10, 2017 Check all that apply: ['consent ❑ old business ['information ❑admin. report Department Director Approval: ❑ ® new business ['public hearing ['pending legislation ['executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Motion Consideration: Interlocal Agreement for ESRI GIS Enterprise License Agreement with Spokane County, City of Spokane, Regional Health District, and SRTC. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 39.34 Interlocal Agreements PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Council authorized execution of the previous Interlocal Agreement for GIS Licenses on February 5, 2013. Consensus to proceed to motion consideration on January 3, 2017. BACKGROUND: The City utilizes licenses for Geographic Information System (GIS) software to give us a better understanding of our physical infrastructure and to perform complex spatial analysis. The layers of information used vary depending on the department or purpose. It is also used to assist the Community and Economic Development department and other City departments in providing better service with shrinking resources. For instance, the City can use GIS to identify the best location for a new business as an economic development tool or view crimes and code violations to detect patterns, etc. In the last year, the City implemented an Enterprise GIS system allowing the City to apply business rules to the City's GIS data and provide multiuser access and historical archiving. The system also allows staff and the public to leverage GIS using mobile devices. Since incorporation, the City has participated in a regional Interlocal Agreement for GIS software. The City renews this agreement every four years. Spokane County negotiates the agreement with the GIS vendor Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI), and then all participating local jurisdictions enter into the regional Interlocal Agreement. This agreement includes the City's online GIS licenses which were previously included in a separate contract with ESRI. This saves the City money and simplifies the management of the contract. There is a new contract provision that limits reductions in licenses to 10%. This provision is primarily to prevent one participant from making a large reduction in licenses and shifting costs onto the other participants. If some jurisdictions felt the need to go beyond a 10% reduction it would need to be mutually agreed upon and negotiated with ESRI. OPTIONS: Authorize City Manager to execute agreement or request additional information. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to authorize the City Manager to Execute the Interlocal Agreement for Participation in the County of Spokane ESRI Enterprise License Agreement. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Estimated annual costs will be $17,369 compared to $21,210 currently. There will be no CPI adjustment for the next three years and we have already pre- paid for the first year. Costs do fluctuate depending on how many licenses each jurisdiction has. Costs include a County IT Admin fee of 2% and Indirect Costs. STAFF CONTACT: Morgan Koudelka, Staff ATTACHMENTS: Interlocal Agreement and Addendums, Enterprise License Agreement. INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BY AND AMONG THE CITY OF SPOKANE, CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE REGIONAL HEALTH DISTRICT, AND THE SPOKANE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COUNCIL FOR PARTICIPATION IN THE COUNTY OF SPOKANE/ESRI ENTERPRISE LICENSE AGREEMENT NO. 2004ESL6082, AS AMENDED PURSUANT TO AMENDMENT NO. 9 ("INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR SPOKANE REGIONAL GSI SYSTEM") THIS INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT (hereinafter referred to as "ILA"), is made and entered into the day of , 20 by and among the CITY OF SPOKANE, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, having offices for the transaction of business at 808 West Spokane Falls Boulevard, Spokane, Washington 99201; the CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, having offices for the transaction of business at 11707 E. Sprague Avenue, Suite 106, Spokane Valley, Washington 99206; the SPOKANE REGIONAL HEALTH DISTRICT, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, having offices for the transaction of business at 1101 W. College Avenue, Spokane, Washington 99201; the SPOKANE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COUNCIL, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, having offices for the transaction of business at 421 W Riverside Avenue, Suite 500, Spokane, Washington 99201; and SPOKANE COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Washington having offices for the transaction of business at 1116 West Broadway, Spokane, Washington 99260. The CITY OF SPOKANE, the CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, the SPOKANE REGIONAL HEALTH DISTRICT, and the SPOKANE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COUNCIL are hereinafter listed as "Eligible Agencies" in this ILA, as well as in the County of Spokane/ESRI Enterprise License Agreement No. 2004ESL6082, as amended and pursuant to Amendment No. 9 (see Addendum A for a listing of the Contract Documents for the County of Spokane/ESRI Enterprise License Agreement). Any entity subsequently added to this ILA as a user of the GIS Software, Systern or Services shall be included in the definition and list as "Eligible Agencies". Spokane County is hereinafter referred to as the "County." Collectively, the Eligible Agencies and the County are referred to as the "Parties." This ILA replaces and supersedes all previous interlocal agreements between the Parties for Participation in the County of Spokane/ESRI Enterprise License Agreement No. 2004ESL6082, as amended pursuant to Amendment No. 9, or any subsequent amendment. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of RCW 36.32.120(6), the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County, Washington has the care of County property and the management of County funds and business; and WHEREAS, chapter 39.34 RCW authorizes public agencies to contract with one another to perform any governmental service, activity, or undertaking which each public agency entering into the contract is authorized by law to perform; and WHEREAS, the Parties have cooperated for many years in the use of Geographic Information Systems Resources by standardizing on ESRI GIS software in order to jointly build DECEMBER 13, 2016 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR PAGE 1 OF 14 SPOKANE REGIONAL GSI SYSTEM common interagency GIS data layers that have enabled the Parties to provide geographic services that have best met the needs of the community while avoiding duplication of effort and cost; and WHEREAS, in 2004, the Eligible Agencies entered into interlocal agreements with the County to receive and use selected software, data and documentation subject to the terms and conditions set forth in Enterprise License Agreement No. 2004ESL6082 between Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc.(ESRI) 380 New York St., Redlands, CA 92373-8100, and the County; and WHEREAS, in 2016, ESRI and the County have entered into the County of Spokane/ESRI Enterprise License Agreement. No. 2004ESL6082, as amended pursuant to Amendment No. 9; and WHEREAS, the Parties desire to reduce GIS software acquisition costs and continue to improve the efficiency of geographic services provided to the community; and WHEREAS, the Eligible Agencies are desirous of continuing to receive and use selected software, data and documentation :subject to the terms and conditions set forth in the County of Spokane/ESRI Enterprise License Agreement No. 2004ESL6082, as amended pursuant to Amendment No. 9. WHEREAS, the Parties desire to continue further cooperation by agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the above recitals which are incorporated herein by reference and other good and sufficient consideration, receipt of which is acknowledged, and for the mutual terms and conditions contained herein the Parties hereto covenant and agree as follows: I. Purpose. The purpose of this ILA is for the County to provide an opportunity for the Eligible Agencies to acquire selected ESRI GIS software licenses, maintenance and other administrative services/benefits as delineated herein and under the terms and conditions of the County of Spokane/ESRI Enterprise License Agreement No. 2004ESL6082, as amended pursuant to Amendment No. 9 (hereinafter referred to as "ELA"). The ELA Contract Documents are attached hereto as enumerated in Addendum A, and incorporated herein by this reference. 2. Participation. The Eligible Agencies have been previously authorized to participate in the ELA, and agree to abide by the terms and conditions of the ELA applicable to a Licensee by signing this ILA. ESRI may pursue remedies directly against any user (i.e., either against the County or directly against any Eligible Agency) for noncompliance of the terms of the ELA. Rights specifically granted to the County by ESRI are not to be extended to the Eligible Agencies. 3. Additional Or Revised Terms. The Eligible Agencies agree that additional or revised licensing terms for: (1) upgrades or updates to the Site License Software and Limited Deployment Software or (2) upgrades or updates non -Site License Software terms may be incorporated from time to time. These license revisions/updates shall be provided by the County to the Eligible Agencies as they are incorporated into the ELA. Additional or revised terms and conditions for new software, data, documentation, shall be governed by the ELA, and any revised terms found in the then -current General License Terms and Conditions and Exhibit 1, the terms of which will be DECEMBER 13, 2016 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR PAGE 2 OF 14 SPOKANE REGIONAL GSI SYSTEM indicated on ESRI's Web site or enclosed in the deliverable's packaging, depending on the method of delivery. The pricelist(s) for non -Site License Software, Data, Documentation, maintenance for non -Site License Software items, training or services may be revised fro.m time to time, but in no event shall pricing contained therein exceed standard commercial pricing. Unless revised via mutual written amendment between SSRI and the County, the annual. ELA fee paid by the County to ESRI is fixed for the term of the agreement. The items provided by ESRI in exchange for the fee are identified in the ELA and include selected software (type and quantity defined), maintenance for the defined software, limited virtual campus training and a fixed amount of ESRI User Conference registration passes. 4. Agreement Is Non -Exclusive. The Eligible Agencies agree to officially name ESRI as their standard and further agree to act as a reference for other ESRI customers and potential customers as long as this ILA remains in effect. Notwithstanding, under no circumstances shall this 1LA be construed or interpreted as an exclusive dealings agreement and the Eligible Agencies reserve the right to purchase from third parties any of their requirements for GIS software. 5. Scope Of Services. Services provided by Spokane County Information Technology (County IT) are as follows: a. County IT shall administer and manage the ELA for the Eligible Agencies. The County will have the authority from ESRI to deploy ESRI Site License Software to the Eligible Agencies. Additionally, the Parties niay order training, services, custom software, and maintenance for standard licenses, or standard licenses for Software, Data, and Documentation separately under the applicable terms of this ILA as further described in Amendment No. 9. b. County IT shall administer and manage the optional ESRI Premium Support site license as further described in Amendment No. 9 (Appendix C). The decision to keep or suspend ESRI Premium Support shall be by mutual agreement between the City of Spokane and Spokane County. If either agency chooses to suspend Premium Support, the remaining agency may retain Premium Support but shall be responsible for all costs related to Premium Support and will receive all benefits of Premium Support. c. The County shall provide Tier 1 Teclrical Support to Eligible Agencies. County IT shall also maintain the official list of the eight (8) named individuals who niay contact ESRI's Technical Support Group directly for Tier 2 Technical Support in Addendum I3 and two (2) named individuals who may contact ESRI's Premium Support in Addendum B. Tier 1 and Tier 2 Technical Support is defined in the ELA, Amendment No. 9 (Article 7). Named individuals who may contact ESRI's Premium Support Group directly are allocated as follows: Spokane County, one (1) user; and City of Spokane, one (1) user; DECEMBER 13, 2016 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR PAGE 3 OF 14 SPOKANE REGIONAL GSI SYSTEM Named individuals who may contact ESRI's Standard Technical Support Group directly are allocated as follows: Spokane County, two (2) users; City of Spokane, three (3) users; City of Spokane Valley, one (1) user; Spokane Health District, one (1) user; and Spokane Regional Transportation Council, one (1) user. d. ESRI Conference Registrations (Amendment No. 9, Appendix C) shall be distributed to the Eligible Agencies, based on the following: ESRI Annual Conference Registrations are allocated as follows: Spokane County, three (3) registrations; City of Spokane, two (2) registrations; City of Spokane Valley, one (1) registration; Spokane Health District, one (1) registration; and Spokane Regional Transportation Council, one (1) registration. ii. ESRI Developer Conference Registrations are allocated as follows: Spokane County, one (1) registration; and City of Spokane, one (1) registration. iii. Eligible Agencies must confirm they will use their registration allocation by January 15th' each year. if an Eligible Agency does not wish to use a conference registration, the registration will be made available for another Eligible Agency to use. Spokane County will notify all Eligible Agencies if an additional conference registration becomes available. 6. Invoicing And Cost Sharing. The County shall handle alI invoicing associated with the ELA as follows. a. Make annual ELA payments to ESRI within 45 days of the anniversary date of the ELA of 1 January for the term of the ELA. Annual Fee (pre-tax): 2017 $251,000.00 2018 $305,000.00 2019 $305,000.00 2020 $305,000.00 b. Make annual ESRI Premium Support payments to ESRI within 45 days of the anniversary date of the ELA of 1 January so long as the optional service is in effect, for the terns of the ELA. DECEMBER 13, 2016 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR PAGE 4 OF 14 SPOKANE REGIONAL GSI SYSTEM Annual Fee (pre-tax): 2017 $38,500.00 2018 $38,500.00 2019 $38,500.00 2020 $38,500.00 c. Spokane County will collect two annual fees for contract administration: 1.) a County 1T administration fee of two (2) percent of the ELA amival fee (pre-tax) 2.) a County administration services fee to cover legal and financial expenses based on Spokane County Information Technology's annual countywide cost allocation rate (indirect Costs). d. Yearly proration of the ELA License Fee, associated taxes, County IT Administration Fee and County Indirect Costs shall occur in September of each year in the ELA term. Proration shall be based on two factors: 1.) the number of ArcGIS Online Subscription credits per agency, and 2.) the number of ESRI software licenses keyed. to a given agency/licensee. An ESRI software license table will be acquired by County IT on an annual basis (Table of Standard ESRI Maintenance Fees) and will be distributed to Eligible Agencies. e. Cost allocation methodology is as follows (see Addendum C for 2017 example): i. City of Spokane and Spokane County will each be allocated 50% of the cost of optional ESRI Premium Support (if applicable). ii. Each Eligible Agency will be allocated a cost for ArcGIS Online subscription credits of $0,60 per credit. Any additional AreG1S Online services (additional user packs, etc...) will be allocated a cost as detailed in the Table of Standard ESRI Maintenance Fees, and then added to the ArcGIS Online subscription credit cost. The total ELA cost will be reduced by the amount from this step for the remaining proration (iii). iii. Proration of remaining costs: a. Each individual ESRI software license will be associated with its standard ESRI maintenance fee based on the Table of Standard ESRI Maintenance Fees. b. The sum of the standard ESRI maintenance fees for all keyed ESRI software licenses for given agency will then be calculated. c. The sum of all agencies' standard maintenance fees will be calculated. DECEMBER 13,2016 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR PAGE 5 OF 14 SPOKANE REGIONAL GSI SYSTEM d. The sum of each agency's individual standard ESRI maintenance fees calculated in b. will be divided by the sum of all agencies' standard maintenance fees calculated in c. e, The sum of the remaining ELA costs (costs after Step 2), the annual County ELA Administration Fee, County Indirect Costs, and all associated taxes will then be multiplied by a given agency's annual percentage calculated in d. iv. Each agency will be invoiced on a monthly basis the sum of i. (if applicable), ii., and iii divided by twelve (12) to generate a monthly cost. The Eligible Agencies shall remit the funds due to the County within 30 days of invoicing. Invoicing for each year of the contract begins in January of the preceding year as ESRI requires payments in advance for software and maintenance. 7. Request, Deployment, & Account Procedures Of Newly -Keyed ESR! AGREEMENT Site License Software. Spokane County Information Technology shall maintain the official list of authorized individuals (one per licensee) in Addendum D who have the budget authority to request additional ESRI software covered by the ELA (as listed in ELA Amendment No. 9: Renewal Term Appendix B). Requests by a given Eligible Agency for additional ESRI Software Licenses must be sent to gis cr spokanecounty.org. Newly keyed licenses will be added for that licensee to the ESRI software license Table maintained by County IT. Newly keyed licenses will be incorporated on an annual basis into the Cost allocation procedures describe in Section 6 e iii under INVOICING AND COST SHARING. 8. Minimum License Counts. Spokane County Information Technology performed an ESRI keyed license review in September, 2016, for each Eligible Agency. The results of this license review shall be referred to as the "Initial License Count" and will be maintained by County IT for the duration of the Agreement. Parties may reduce the number of keyed licenses by up to ten (10) percent from the Initial License Count. Further reductions in the number of keyed licenses shall not occur except upon mutual agreement of the Parties. 9. Compliance with Laws. The Parties shall observe all federal, state, and local laws, ordinances and regulations to the extent that they may be applicable to the terms of this ILA. 10. Assignments, This ILA is binding on the Parties and their heirs, successors, and assigns. No party may assign, transfer or subcontract its interest, in whole or in part, without the other PARTIES prior written consent. 11. Amendments. This ILA may be amended at any time by mutual written agreement and the Parties. No modification or amendment of this ILA shall be valid until the same is reduced to writing and executed with the same formalities as this ILA. I2. Anti -kickback. No officer or employee of the Eligible Agencies, having the power or duty to perform an official act or action related to this ILA shall have or acquire any interest in the DECEMBER 13, 2016 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR PAGE 6 OF 14 SPOKANE REGIONAL GSI SYSTEM contract, or have solicited, accepted or granted a present or future gift, favor, service or other thing of value from or to any person involved in this contract. 13. Termination. This ILA shall commence on execution by Spokane County with ESRI and run for a term of four (4) years. This four (4) year time frame shall be referred to as the "Initial Term". This ILA may not be terminated during the Initial Term except upon mutual agreement of the Parties. Each Eligible Agency agrees to be bound by the provisions for termination, and cessation of using the ESRI GIS software, system and any related services, all as set forth in Article 7 of Amendment No. 9 to the ELA, or as may be subsequently amended. The agreement on the part of the Parties to be bound by the provisions for termination, and cessation of using the ESRI GIS software, system and any related services, all as set forth in Article 7 of Amendment No. 9 to the ELA shall survive any termination of this ILA and shall survive the termination of any Eligible Agency's participation in this ILA. 14. Severability. If any parts, terms or provisions of this ILA are held by the courts to be illegal, the validity of the remaining portions or provisions shall not be affected and the rights and obligations of the Parties shall not be affected in regard to the remainder of the Agreement. If it should appear that any part, term or provision of this ILA is in conflict with any statutory provision of the State of Washington, then the part, term or provision thereof that may be in conflict shall be deemed inoperative and null and void insofar as it may be in conflict therewith and this ILA shall be deemed to modify to conform to such statutory provision. 15. Nondiscrimination. No individual shall be excluded from participation in, denied benefit of, subject to discrimination under, or denied employment in the administration of or in connection with this ILA because of race, color, creed, marital status, familial status, religion, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, Vietnam era or disabled veteran status, age, or disability. The Parties shall comply with all applicable federal, state and local nondiscrimination laws, regulations and policies. 16. Venue. This ILA has and shall be construed as having been made and delivered in the State of Washington and the laws of the State of Washington shall be applicable to its construction and enforcement. Any action at law, suit in equity or judicial proceeding for the enforcement of this ILA, or any provision thereof, shall be instituted only in a court of competent jurisdiction within Spokane County, Washington. 17. All Writings Contained Herein. This ILA contains all the terms and conditions agreed upon by the Parties. The Parties agree that there are no other understandings, oral or otherwise, regarding the subject matter of this ILA shall be deemed to exist or to bind any of the Parties. 18. Administration. No new or separate legal or administrative entity is created to administer the provisions of this ILA. 19. Agreement To Be Tiled. The Eligible Agencies shall file this ILA as provided in RCW 39.34.040. DECEMBER 13, 2016 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR PAGE 7 OF 14 SPOKANE REGIONAL GSI SYSTEM 20. Non -Waiver. No waiver by any the Parties of any of the terms of this ILA shall be construed as a waiver of the same or other rights of that party in the future. 21. Headings, The section headings appearing in this ILA have been inserted solely for the purpose of convenience of reference. In no way to they purport to, and shall not be deemed to define, limit or extend the scope or intent of the sections to which they pertain. 22. Compliance With Laws. The Parties shall observe all federal, state and local laws, ordinances and regulations, to the extent that they niay be applicable to the terms of this ILA. 23. Relationship Of The Parties. The Parties intend that an independent contractor relationship will be created by this ILA: The Eligible Agencies are interested only in the results that could be achieved, and the conduct and control of all services will be solely with the County. No agent, employee, servant or otherwise of the County shall be deemed to be an employee, agent, servant, or otherwise of the Eligible Agencies for any purpose, and the employees of the County are not entitled to any of the benefits that the Eligible Agencies provides for the Eligible Agencies' employees. The County will be solely and entirely responsible for its acts and the acts of its agents, employees, servants, subcontractors or otherwise, during the performance of this ILA. The County does not have the power or authority to bind the Eligible Agencies in any promise, agreement, or representation other than. specifically provided for in this ILA. 24. Enforcement Costs. If any legal action or other proceeding is brought for the enforcement of this ILA, or because of an alleged dispute, breach, default or misrepresentation in connection with any provisions of this ILA, the successful or prevailing party or parties shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorney's fees, court costs, and all expenses even if not taxable as court costs (including, without limitation, all such fees, costs, and expenses incident to appeals), incurred in that action or proceeding, in addition to any other relief to which such party or parties may be entitled. 25. Maintenance Of Records. The Parties will maintain, for at least three (3) years after completion of this ILA, all relevant records pertaining to the Agreement. The Parties shall make available to other Parties, or the Washington State Auditor, or• their duly authorized representatives, at any time during their nonnal operating hours, all records, books or pertinent infonnation which the Parties shall have kept in conjunction with this ILA, and which the Parties may be required by law to include or make part of its auditing procedures, an audit trail, or which may be required for the purpose of funding the services contracted for herein. 26. Remedies. No remedy herein conferred upon the Parties is intended to be exclusive of any other remedy, and each and every such remedy shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to every other remedy given hereunder or now or hereafter existing at law or in equity or by statute or otherwise. No single or partial exercise by any Party of any right, power, or remedy hereunder shall preclude any other or further exercise thereof. 27. Counterparts. This ILA may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which, when so executed and delivered, shall be an original, but such counterparts shall together constitute but one and the same. DECEMBER 13, 2016 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR PAGE 8 OF 14 SPOKANE REGIONAL GSI SYSTEM 28. Notices. All notices or other conununications given under this ILA shall be considered given on the day such notices or other communications are received when sent by personal delivery; or the third day following the day on which the notice or communication has been mailed by certified mail delivery, receipt requested and postage prepaid addressed to the other Parties at the address set forth below, or at such other address as the Parties shall from time -to -time designate by notice in writing to the other Party: Spokane County Information Technology Department 815 N Jefferson Street Spokane WA 99260 City of Spokane Innovation Technology Services 808 W Spokane Falls Blvd Spokane WA 99201 City of Spokane Valley Spokane Valley City Hall 11707 E Sprague Avenue, Suite 106 Spokane Valley WA 99206 Spokane Regional Health District (SRHD) Spokane Regional Health District 1101 W College Avenue Spokane WA 99201 Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) Spokane Regional Transportation Council Paulson Center 421 W Riverside Avenue, Suite 500 Spokane WA 99201 29. RCW 39.34 Required Clauses. a. Purpose: See Section 1. b. Duration: See Section 5. c. Organization of Separate Entity and its Powers: No new or separate legal or administrative entity is created to administer the provisions of this ILA. d. Responsibilities of the Parties: See Agreement provisions. e. Agreement to be filed: See Section 19. f. Financing: Parties shall be responsible for the financing of its contractual obligations under its normal budgetary process. g. Termination: See Section 13. h. Property upon Termination: Title to all personal property acquired by any party in the performance of this ILA shall remain with the acquiring party upon termination of the Agreement. 30. Execution and Approval. The representatives of the Parties signing this ILA warrant that they have been duly authorized to act for and on behalf of the party for purposes of DECEMBER 13, 2016 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR PAGE 9 OF 14 SPOKANE REGIONAL GSI SYSTEM confirming this ILA and that the persons named in the Contract Administration Section are duly authorized to act for and on behalf of the party for purposes of in carrying -out the Contract Administration duties and responsibilities as set forth in this ILA. 31. ILA Administrator / ILA Administration. The Administration duties and responsibilities of this ILA shall be performed on behalf of each entity by and through the personnel (or their designees) appointed by each Party as identified in the table below with a brief description of the duties and responsibilities following the table. ASSIGNED ILA ADMINISTRATORS OF THE PARTIES COUNTY ILA. ADMINISTRATOR: Kevin Norris Programming Services Manager Phone: (509) 477-4231 Email: knonis@spokanecounty.org CITY OF SPOKANE ILA ADMINISTRATOR: Bill Myers GIS Supervisor Phone: (509) 625-6418 Email: bmyers@spokanecity.org spokanecity.org CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY ILA ADMINISTRATOR: Morgan Koudelka Senior Administrative Analyst Phone: (509) 720-5104 Email: mkoudelka@spokattevalley.org spokanevalley.org SPOKANE REGIONAL HEALTH DISTRICT ILA ADMINISTRATOR: Todd Miller IT Manager Phone: (509) 324-1689 Email: trmiller@srhd.org srhd.org SPOKANE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COUNCIL ILA ADMINISTRATOR: Ryan Stewart Executive Director (acting) Phone: (509) 343-6370 Email: rstewart@srtc.org DECEMBER 13, 2016 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR SPOKANE REGIONAL GSI SYSTEM PAGE 10 OF 14 ILA Administration Duties and Responsibilities: The duties and responsibilities will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: a. Serves as the primary point of contact of their governmental agency for• the purposes of coordinating any functions, work or activities in connection with this ILA. b. As necessary, reports to the various users and internal key stakeholders in their respective agency concerning the progress of work and services and deliverables as furnished and performed in connection with the purpose of this ILA and the ELA. c. Initiates and coordinates changes or modifications to this ILA and causes the same to be finally executed by amendments or modifications according to the procedures of their respective agency. 32. Interloeal Agreement (`ILA") Documents. The Interlocal Agreement ("ILA") Documents for this Interlocal Agreement For Spokane Regional GSI System are as enumerated below, all as may be amended, and which are attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference in order of precedence (i.e., 1 to 10, below) as follows (collectively the ILA Documents may otherwise be referred to as the "ILA"): 1. Any updated addenda as issued by Spokane County; and 2. This Interlocal Agreement including the following addenda: a. Addendum "A" — ELA Contract Documents b. Addendum "B" - Eligible Agency Staff Who May Contact ESRI's Technical Support Group Directly (as amended and updated) c. Addendum "C" — Exatnple - 2017 Total Costs by ELA Eligible Agency Derived using ELA Cost Allocation Methodology (as amended and updated) d. Addendum "D" — Eligible Agency -Authorized Individuals For Software Requests (as amended and updated) DECEMBER 13, 2016 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR PAGE 11 OF 14 SPOKANE REGIONAL GSI SYSTEM IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Interlocal Agreement to be executed on the date and year opposite their respective signatures. DATED: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASI-IINGTON ATTEST: Ginna Vasquez, Clerk of the Board DATED: Attest: City Clerk Approved as to form: City Attorney / Assistant SHELLY O'QUINN, Chair AL FRENCH, Vice -Chair JOSH KERNS, Commissioner CITY OF SPOKANE By: Title: DECEMBER 13, 2016 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR PAGE 12 OF 14 SPOKANE REGIONAL GSI SYSTEM DATED: Attest: City Clerk Approved as to forret: City Attorney / Assistant DATED: DATED: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY By: Title: SPOKANE REGIONAL HEALTH DISTRICT By: Title: SPOKANE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COUNCIL By: Title: DECEMBER 13, 2016 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR PAGE 13 OF 14 SPOKANE REGIONAL GSI SYSTEM Addendum A ELA Contract Documents The Contract Documents for the. Spokane of County ESRI Enterprise License Agreement No. 2004ESL6082 are as enumerated below, all as may be amended, and which are attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference in order of precedence (i.e., 1 to 10, below) as follows (collectively the Contract Documents may otherwise be referred to as the "ELA"): 1. Amendment No. 9 Contract No. 2004ESL6082 2. Amendment No. 8 Contract No. 2004ESL6082 3. Amendment No. 7 Contract No. 2004ESL6082 4. Amendment No. 6 Contract No. 2004ESL6082 5. Amendment No. 5 Contract No. 2004ESL6082 6. Amendment No. 4 Contract No. 2004ESL6082 7. Amendment No. 3 Contract No. 2004ESL6082 8. Amendment No. 2 Contract No. 2004ESL6082 9. Amendment No, 1 Contract No. 2004ESL6082 10. County of Spokane/ESR/ Enterprise License Agreement a. Agreement No. 2004ESL6082 b. License Agreement Signature Page(s), El 19 c. General License Terms and Conditions (E200 11/04) d. Exhibit 1, Scope of Use (E300 11/04) e. Enterprise License Agreement Addendum f. — APPENDIX A, Eligible Agencies g. — APPENDIX B, Enterprise License Agreement Software and Deployment Schedule h. APPENDIX C, Enterprise License Fee Schedule i. — APPENDIX D, County Deployment Report j. — APPENDIX E, ESRI Registration/Keycode Request Form k. MPA Price List (E405 10/04B) 1. ESRI Client Site Training Terms and Conditions (E207 11/04) in. Custom Software, Technical Data, and Assistance License Addendum (E600 5/04): i. Attachment A — Sample Task Order Form; and ii. Attachment B — Time and Materials Rate Schedule (J-8410/BD) DECEMBER 13, 2016 1NTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR PAGE 14 OF 14 SPOKANE REGIONAL GSI SYSTEM ADDENDUM B ELGIBLE AGENCY STAFF WHO MAY CONTACT ESRPS TECHNICAL SUPPORT GROUP DIRECTLY (As of November 4, 2016 —Subject to Change) SPOKANE COUNTY Eligible Agency Name Authorized Individual Phone Number Call Level Email Address SPOKANE COUNTY SPOKANE COUNTY SPOKANE MIKE STEWART (509) 477-7253 License Manager, Standard Support mstewartaspokanecounty.org semstryspokanecounty.org SHAWNA ERNST (509) 477-7531 Premium Support KIEN FROST ANDERSEN ANDERSEN (509) 477-7216 Standard Support kfrostnspokanecounty.org CITY OF SPOKANE Eligible Agency Nance Authorized Individual Phone Number Call Level Email Address CITY OF BILL MYERS (5 09) 625-6418 LicenseMana Manager, Premium Support bin ers�sPokanecit .or gSPOKANE binsmithAspokanecity.org mcline[?spokanccity.org CITY OF SPOKANE MIKE Slv91TH (509) 625-6457 Standard Support CITY OF SPOKANE CITY OF SPOKANE MIKE CLINE JOE SACCO309 (509) 625-6962 Standard Support ( ) 625-6417 Support Standard Su jsaccospakvrecity.arg CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Eligible Agency Name Authorized individual Phone Number CaII Level Email Address CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY DAN NEYMAN (509) 720-5302 Standard Support dncyman@spokanevalley.org SPOKANE REGIONAL HEALTH DISTRICT Eligible Agency Name Authorized Individual Phone Number Call Level Email Address SPOKANE REGIONAL HEALTH H DISTRICT JOHN DIXON( 324-1644StandardDIXON509 509) Support jdixon r srlid,org SPOKANE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COUNCIL Eligible Agency Name Authorized Individual Phone Number Call Level Email Address SPOKANE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATI ON DISTRICT KEVIN SHIPMAN (309) 343-6385 Standard Support kshipmanrOrsrlc.org INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT -ADDENDUM B ADDENDUM C Example - 2017 Total Costs by Eligible Agency Derived using ILA Cost Allocation Methodology Eligible Agency Step 1: Premium Support Costs Step 2: ArcGIS Online Cost (Subscription credits, taxes, additional user packs) Step 3: Remaining ELA Costs (ESRI Costs, County Admin Fee, County Indirect Casts, Taxes) Step 4: Grand Total Spokane County $19,250.00 $40,762.50 $98,784.66 S158,797.16 City of Spokane $19,250.00 $40,762.50 $81,319,68 $141,332.18 City of Spokane Valley $0.00 $4,348.00 $13,020.83 $17,368.83 Spokane County Health District $0.00 $0.00 $1,645.76 $1,645.76 Spokane Regional Transportation Council $0.00 $1,630.50 $5,034.08 $6,664.58 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT -ADDENDUM C ADDENDUM D ELIGIBLE AGENCY -AUTHORIZED INDIVIDUALS FOR SOFTWARE REQUESTS (Tire following individuals have budget authority within their agency to make requests to Spokane County IT for ESRI software covered by the ESRI ELA) (As of November 4, 2016 —Subject to Change) CITY OF SPOKANE Eligible Agency Name Authorized Individual Phone Number Email Address CITY OF SPOKANE BILL MYERS (509) 625-64418 bmyersrespokanccity.org CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Eligible Agency Name Authorized Individual. Phone Number Email Address CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY MORGAN KOUDELKA (509) 720-5104 nrkoudetkat spokanevalley.org SPOKANE REGIONAL HEALTH DISTRICT Eligible Agency Name Authorized individual Phone Number Email Address SPOKANE REGIONAL HEALTH DISTRICT TODD MILLER (509) 324-1689 trmillerrasrhd.org SPOKANE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COUNCIL Eligible Agency Name Authorized Individual Phone Number Email Address SPOKANE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT RYAN STEWART (509) 343-6370 rsteveart(,asrtc.org 1NTERLOCAL AGREEMENT- ADDENDUM D esti. Amendment No. 9 Contract No. 2004ESL6082 Esri, 380 New York St., Redlands, CA 92373.8100 USA • TEL 909-793-2853 • FAX 909-793-5953 This Amendment No. 9 is entered into by and between Spokane County, Washington (hereinafter referred to as "County") and Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as "Esri"). WHEREAS, Esri and County entered into an Enterprise License Agreement effective December 2211d, 2004 and Amendments 2, 4, 5, 7, and 8 extended the terns until January 1", 2017 ("Agreement"); and WHEREAS, the parties desire to amend the Enterprise License Terms and Conditions of the Agreement to (i) update applicable appendices and (ii) extend the term until January 1", 2021 ("Renewal Term") for an additional one million one hundred and sixty-six thousand dollars ($1,166,000); and WHEREAS, the County has the option to purchase Premium Support Services (PSS) for an additional thirty-eight thousand five hundred dollars ($38,500) per year for an additional total fee of one hundred fifty-four thousand dollars ($154,000) for the Premien Support Services (PSS). NOW THEREFORE, the parties agree to the following: 1. Extend the tern of this Agreement until January 15r, 2021 unless terminated earlier as provided in Article 7—Term, Termination, and Expiration. 2. Amend Appendix B Software and Deployment Schedule with the attached Renewal Terni Appendix 13 Software and Deployment Schedule, which shall supersede and apply during the Renewal Term. 3. Amend Appendix C ELA Fee Schedule with the attached Renewal Term Appendix C ELA Fee Schedule, which shall supersede and apply during the Renewal Term. 4. Delete and Replace Enterprise License Agreement Addendum Section 6.1 Purchase Orders, Delivery and Deployment with the attached Section 6.1 Purchase Orders, Invoicing, Delivery, and Deployment. 5. Delete and Replace Enterprise License Agreement Addendum Article 7—Term, Termination, and Expiration with the attached Article 7—Term, Termination, and Expiration. 6. Delete and Replace MPA Price List E413, dated 07/06/2011 with the attached County of Spokane Standard Products Price List of current commercial list prices E407 -4Q2016 for County's internal use only. The Standard Products Price List is subject to change and an updated version may be provided to County upon request. 7. Use the following definitions for the duration of the Renewal Term: L. Reserved M. "Technical Support" means a process to attempt to resolve reported Incidents through error correction, patches, hot fixes, workarounds, replacement deliveries, or any other type of corrections or modifications provided by ESRI Technical Support Staff. N. "Tier 1 Support" means the Technical Support provided by Centralized Help Desk as the primary contact to Authorized Users in attempted resolution of reported Incidents. O. "Tier 2 Support" means the Technical Support provided by Esri to the Centralized Help Desk when the Incident cannot be resolved through the Tier 1 Support. Except as may be specifically modified by this Amendment No. 9, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement and any Amendment(s) or Addendum(s) constitute the entire agreement between the parties and supersede all prior and contemporaneous agreements or representations, written or oral, concerning the subject matter of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment No. 9 as of the date of the last party to sign below. ACCEPTED AND AGREED: 2004ESL6082 Page 1 of 8 12/9/2016 LG 307540 SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON (County) ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS RESEARCH INSTITUTE, INC. (Esri) By: By: Printed Name: Printed Name: Title: Title: Date: Date: Page 2 of 8 RENEWAL TERM APPENDIX 13 SOFTWARE AND DEPLOYMENT SCHEDULE County may Deploy the Enterprise License Software up to the total quantity of licenses indicated below during the Renewal Term of this ELA. Table A-1 Enterprise License Software—Unlimited Quantities Item Total Qty./Seats to Be Deployed ArcGIS for Desktop Software (Single Use or Concurrent Use) Basic, Standard, and Advanced uncapped ArcGIS for Desktop Extension Software (Single Use or Concurrent Use) ArcGIS 3D Analyst, ArcGIS Data Reviewer, ArcGIS Geostatistical Analyst, ArcGIS Network Analyst, ArcGIS Publisher, ArcGIS Schematics, ArcGIS Spatial Analyst, and ArcGIS Workflow Manager uncapped ArcGIS for Server Software (Basic/Standard/Advanced) ArcGIS Server Workgroup, and AreGIS Server Enterprise uncapped AreGIS for Server Extensions AreGIS 3D Analyst, AreGIS Geostatistical Analyst, AreGIS Image Extension, ArcGIS Network Analyst, ArcGIS Schematics, ArcG1S Spatial Analyst, and ArcGIS Workflow Manager uncapped AreGIS Engine uncapped AreGIS Engine Extensions ArcGIS 3D Analyst, ArcGIS Geodatabase Update, ArcGIS Network Analyst, ArcGIS Schematics, and AreGIS Spatial Analyst uncapped AreGIS Runtime Standard uncapped AreGIS Runtime Extensions (Single Use) ArcGIS 3D Analyst, ArcG1S Network Analyst, and ArcGIS Spatial Analyst uncapped Mapping and Charting Solutions Esri Production Mapping for Desktop uncapped 2004ESL6082 Page 3 or8 12/9/2016 LG Table A-2 Enterprise License Software—Limited Quantities Item Rolled -In Qty. (if applicable) Qty./Seats to Be Deployed Total Esri Developer Network (EDN) Standard annual subscriptions - 2 2 ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Desktop Extension Concurrent- use 2 0 2 Esri CityEngine Advanced Concurrent Use 1 0 1 ArcGIS GeoEvent Extension for Server - 2 2 Product Number of Subscriptions Named Users per Subscription Annual Credits per Subscription ArcGIS Online Subscription (City of Spokane Valley) I 10 5,000 ArcGIS Online Level 1 :Subscription (Spokane Regional Transportation Council) / 5 2,500 ArcGIS Online Level 5 Subscription (City of Spokane) 1 500 62,500 ArcGIS Online Level 5 Subscription (County of Spokane) 1 500 62,500 Product Number of Subscriptions Number of Authorized Callers Number of Incidents Premium Support Services (Optional) I 2 Uncapped 2004ESL6082 Page 4 of 8 1219/2016 LG RENEWAL TERM APPENDIX C ELA FEE SCHEDULE The Total Required EA Fee for the Renewal Term is $1,166,000. The Total Fee for the Renewal Term, including the optional Premium Support Services, is S1,320,000. Renewal Terni: ** If County elects o do so, the PSS option must be exercised on the first day of an annual payment period. Premium Support Services will be automatically renewed on an annual basis during the term of the EA unless the City/County provides written notice to Esri in order to discontinue the Services. Number of Esri International User Conference Registrations per Year January 15', 2017 to December 315', 2017 January 151, 2018 to December 3151, 2018 January 15', 2019 to December 315', 2019 January 15', 2020 to December 315', 2020 Total Required Annual EA Fee $251,000 S305,000 5305,000 S305,000 51,166,000 Annual Premium Support Services (PSS) Fee (optional)** $38,500 $38,500 S38,500 $38,500 S154,000 Total Annual Fees (including optional) S289,500 5343,500 5343,500 5343,500 51,320,000 ** If County elects o do so, the PSS option must be exercised on the first day of an annual payment period. Premium Support Services will be automatically renewed on an annual basis during the term of the EA unless the City/County provides written notice to Esri in order to discontinue the Services. Number of Esri International User Conference Registrations per Year 8 Number of Esri Developer Conference per Year 2 Number of Tier 2 Support Callers 8 Sets of Back-up Media (upon request) 2 Renewal Term of ELA January 1", 2017 through December 3V, 2020 2004ESL6082 Page 5 of 8 120/2016 I,G 6.1 Purchase Orders, Invoicing, Delivery, and Deployment 6.1.1 a. Esri does not require County to issue purchase orders. County may submit a purchase order in accordance with its own process requirement, provided that County issues its initial purchase order on or before the Effective Date and subsequent purchase orders at least thirty (30) days before the annual anniversary date for each additional year. b. Any purchase orders that County issues will reference, incorporate, and be subject to the terms and conditions of this EA. No additional, conflicting, or different terms contained in a purchase order or ordering document will be binding. County will process all orders and deliveries pertaining to this EA through County's centralized point of contact. c. County will include the following information in each purchase order: (1) Esri customer number, the ship -to address, and bill -to address as identified in Article 4 — Points of Contact. (2) Purchase order number. (3) Applicable annual payment due and name of Licensee. For Unit -Priced Items, the name atilt product and quantity. (4) On the face of the purchase order, the following printed statement: "Governed by and subject to Enterprise Agreement No. 2004ESL6082." d. Esri will provide Authorization Codes to activate the nondestructive copy protection program that enables County to download, operate, or allow access to the EA Products listed in Appendix B. e, Delivery of updates/new versions of EA Products will be made in the same planner. If requested by Comity, Esri will deliver a limited number of sets of backup media as provided in Appendix C to the ship -to address identified in Article 4 — Points of Contact, FOB destination with shipping charges prepaid. County may purchase additional backup media sets at the prices in effect at the time of purchase. Delivery or receipt of tangible media could cause prior and future license fees to be subject to taxes. Esri may invoice for and County agrees to pay any such sales or use tax associated with receipt of tangible media, f. County shall track the Deployment status of EA Products. 6.1.2 Annual Report of Deployments. At each anniversary date and ninety (90) days prior to the expiration date (Willis EA, County shall provide a written report, as set forth in Appendix D, to Esri detailing all Deployments made, including preexisting and Rolled -In Software. The report will be subject to audit by an authorized representative of Esri. 6.1.3 Esri User Conference Registration. Esri shall provide Esri User Conference registrations to County annually during the term of this EA in the quantities set forth in Appendix D. County is responsible for distributing the registrations to Licensees. Third parties niay not represent or attend on behalf of County or Eligible Agencies at any Esri User Conference. 2004ESL6082 Page 6 orb 12/9/2016 W ARTICLE 7 -TERM, TERMINATION, AND EXPIRATION 7.0 Term- The term of the Agreement shall be through December 31, 2020. 7.1 Terminationn For Breach- Either party may earlier terminate this Agreement after written notice for material breach. Any such termination will terminate license rights as set forth herein. ESRI, or the County, may elect to terminate the license rights of a particular Eligible Agency for material breach without terminating this Agreement with the County or other Eligible Agencies. The breaching party, or entity, shall be given a period of thirty (30) days to cure any material breach. Upon completion of the 30 -day notice period of the termination of this Agreement for material breach, any terminated Eligible Agency shall uninstall, reprove, and destroy all Deployed Enterprise License Software, Data, or Documentation, and training materials, and any whole or partial copies, modifications, or merged portions in any form and execute and deliver evidence of such destruction to ESRI, which evidence shall be in a form acceptable to ESRI.. County shall reasonably cooperate with ESRI in termination of any Eligible Agency in a material breach of this Agreement, including the enforcement of this Agreement with respect to the termination of such Eligible Agency. Other deliverables to any terminated Eligible Agency that may be included in this ELA such as EAP, Virtual Campus training license, access, or VC dollar credits, and User Conference Registrations shall also terminate upon termination of this ELA. '7.2 License Terms and Use Upon Expiration of Term- Upon payment of fees due and the expiration of this Agreement (at the end of the full term defined in Article 7.0) the Enterprise License Software Deployed and the preexisting Rolled -In Software that has been updated (under ELA Maintenance) may continue to be used and licensed by the Licensee under the terms and conditions set forth in the License Agreement. At the end of the term (as defined in Article 7.0) of this Agreement, the parties may negotiate to extend this Agreement or negotiate and execute a follow-on Agreement. Licensee will notify ESRI as to which licenses it will continue to support under continuing maintenance and which licenses will not be supported under maintenance. 7.3 Termination For Non -Appropriation of Funds- The County, or ESRI, may terminate this Agreement for non -appropriation of funds by providing a 30 -day notice to the other party. Non -appropriation may include either: (a) a lack of funding approval by the County legislative body in any budget year; or (b) the termination of any Eligible Agency for .a non -appropriation of funds by that agency's legislative body in any budget year. Under no circumstances may the County, or any Eligible Agency, deploy additional copies of the Enterprise License Software, Data, or Documentation upon termination of this Agreement for non - appropriation of Funds. If termination is made for County non -appropriation of frnds, then Agreement shall terminate and both Sections 7.3.1, and 7.3.2, shall apply. If termination is made as a result of the non -appropriation of funds by any number of Eligible Agencies, then Sections 7.3.1 and 7,3.2 shall apply to the affected Eligible Agencies that did not appropriate the necessary finding; and Section 7.3.3 shall apply to the County, as well as to any remaining unaffected Eligible .Agencies that did appropriate the necessary funding. 7.3.1. Licensee must uninstall, remove, and destroy all Deployed Enterprise License Software and any whole or partial copies identified in Appendix B, Table B-2; 7.3.2. Licensee may continue to use Deployed Enterprise License Software identified in Appendix B, Table B -l; PROVIDED (i) The County shall report the quantity and types of Deployed. Enterprise License Software, and ESRI shall determine the quantity and type of Deployed Enterprise License Software, Data, or Documentation that Licensee may continue to use under the general license terms, based on the value of the software deployed at then -current commercial list prices deemed by Esri to be current and accurate against a portion of the amount paid (portion applicable to Enterprise License Software licenses identified in Table B -I). Licensee shall uninstall, remove, and destroy the Deployed Enterprise License Software in excess of the authorized quantities and types. The remaining author.izecl quantities and types of software ("Remaining Software") shall be Licensed in accordance with the License Agreement; and (ii) Rolled -In Software licenses of the type identified in Table B -I shall not terminate and may be used at the version level they have been upgraded to at the time of termination. Use and licensing of Rolled -In Software licenses shall be in accordance with the License Agreement. 7.3.3. Annual ELA Fee After Termination for Non -Appropriation of Funds. If an Eligible Agency is terminated for that Eligible Agency's non -appropriation of finds, then ESRI and County will act in good faith to renegotiate, as necessary, a mutually signed amendment to adjust the Enterprise License Fee Schedule that will apply for the remainder of the Agreement. if 2004ESL6082 Page 8 of 8 12/9/2016 LG after 30 -clays of renegotiation, the parties are not able to arrive at a mutually agreed upon Enterprise License Fee Schedule, then ESRI or the County may terminate this Agreement pursuant to this section 7.3, in which case the County and all remaining Eligible Agencies must comply with Sections 7.3.1 and 7.3.2. 7.4 Maintenance After Termination- Within thirty (30) days of termination of this Agreement, the County must document in writing to ESRI, the total quantity and type (e.g. Product) of Remaining Software for which Licensee desires to obtain maintenance, if any. Payment of maintenance fees for such Remaining Software for which Licensee wishes to have maintenance, if any, will be effective from the date of the termination., Other items that may be included in this ELA such as EAP, Virtual Campus training access/ VC dollar credits, User Conference Registrations shall also terminate Willis ELA is terminated. Rolled -In licenses that have been upgraded may continue to be used at the original Rolled -In quantities (and at the upgraded version), Use and licensing for Rolled -In licenses shall be in accordance with the License Agreement. 7.5 Record Retention and Public Disclosure- If the County terminates this Agreement for any reason, then notwithstanding any language to the contrary in the Agreement, any and all records or documents required to be maintained within the record retention and public disclosure requirements of Washington State may be subject to retention and disclosure by the County or by an Eligible Agency. 2004ESL6082 Page 8 of 8 12/9/2016 LG County of Spokane Standard Products Price List E407 -4Q2016 Section Description Price 1 ArcGIS for Desktop Software - 1 ArcGIS for Desktop Concurrent Use Licenses ArcGIS for Desktop Advanced Concurrent Use License $9,900.00 ArcGIS for Desktop Standard Concurrent Use License $7,000.00 ArcGIS for Desktop Basic Concurrent Use License $3,500.00 1 ArcGIS for Desktop Concurrent Use Licenses Maintenance Primary Maintenance for ArcG!S for Desktop Advanced Concurrent Use License $3,000.00 Secondary Maintenance for ArcGIS for Desktop Advanced Concurrent Use License $1,200.00 Primary Maintenance for ArcGIS for Desktop Standard Concurrent Use License $1,500.00 Secondary Maintenance for ArcGIS for Desktop Standard Concurrent Use License $1,200.00 Primary Maintenance for ArcGIS for Desktop Basic Concurrent Use License $700.00 Secondary Maintenance for ArcGIS for Desktop Basic Concurrent Use License $500.00 1 ArcGIS for Desktop Core Extensions Concurrent Use Licenses _ ArcGIS Spatial Analyst for Desktop Concurrent Use License $2,500.00 ArcG1S 3D Analyst for Desktop Concurrent Use License $2,500.00 ArcGIS Geostatistical Analyst for Desktop Concurrent Use License $2,500.00 ArcGIS Publisher for Desktop Concurrent Use License _ $2,500.00 ArcGIS Tracking Analyst for Desktop Concurrent Use License $2,500.00 ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Desktop Concurrent Use License $2,500.00 ArcGIS Network Analyst for Desktop Concurrent Use License $2,500.00 ArcGIS Schematics for Desktop Concurrent Use License $2,500.00 ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Desktop Concurrent Use License $2,500.00 ArcGIS Data Reviewer for Desktop Concurrent Use License $2,500.00 1 ArcGIS for Desktop Core Extensions Concurrent Use Licenses Maintenance Primary Maintenance for ArcGIS Spatial Analyst for Desktop Concurrent Use License $500.00 Secondary Maintenance for ArcGIS Spatial Analyst for Desktop Concurrent Use License $200.00 Primary Maintenance for ArcGIS 3D Analyst for Desktop Concurrent Use License $500.00 Secondary Maintenance for ArcGIS 3D Analyst for Desktop Concurrent Use License $200.00 Primary Maintenance for ArcGIS Geostatistical Analyst for Desktop Concurrent Use License $500.00 Secondary Maintenance for ArcGIS Geostatistical Analyst for Desktop Concurrent Use License $200.00 Primary Maintenance for ArcGIS Publisher for Desktop Concurrent Use License $500.00 Secondary Maintenance for ArcGIS Publisher for Desktop Concurrent Use License $200.00 Primary Maintenance for ArcGIS Tracking Analyst for Desktop Concurrent Use License $500.00 Secondary Maintenance for ArcGIS Tracking Analyst for Desktop Concurrent Use License $200.00 Primary Maintenance for ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Desktop Concurrent Use License $500.00 Secondary Maintenance for ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Desktop Concurrent Use License $200.00 Primary Maintenance for ArcGIS Network Analyst for Desktop Concurrent Use License $500.00 Secondary Maintenance for ArcGl5 Network Analyst for Desktop Concurrent Use License $200.00 Primary Maintenance for ArcGIS Schematics for Desktop Concurrent Use License $500.00 Secondary Maintenance for ArcGIS Schematics for Desktop Concurrent Use License $200,00 Primary Maintenance for ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Desktop Concurrent Use License $500.00 Secondary Maintenance for ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Desktop Concurrent Use License $200.00 Primary Maintenance for ArcGIS Data Reviewer for Desktop Concurrent Use License $500.00 Secondary Maintenance for ArcGIS Data Reviewer for Desktop Concurrent Use License $200.00 1 ArcGIS for Desktop Single Use Licenses Page 3 or 22 Esti Proprietary and Confidential information Page 4 of 22 Esri Proprietary and Confidential Information ArcGIS for Desktop Advanced Single Use License $9,900.00 ArcGIS for Desktop Standard Single Use License $7,000.00 ArcGIS for Desktop Basic Single Use License $1,500.00 1 ArcGIS for Desktop Single Use Licenses Maintenance Primary Maintenance for ArcGIS for Desktop Advanced Single Use License (core only) $3,000.00 Secondary Maintenance for ArcGIS for Desktop Advanced Single Use License (core only) $1,200.00 Primary Maintenance for ArcGIS for Desktop Standard Single Use License (without extensions) $1,500.00 Secondary Maintenance for ArcGIS for Desktop Standard Single Use License (without extensions) $1,200.00 Primary Maintenance for ArcGIS for Desktop Standard Single Use License (with extensions) $2,100.00 ' Secondary Maintenance for ArcGIS for Desktop Standard Single Use License (with extensions) $1,800.00 Primary Maintenance for ArcGIS for Desktop Basic Single Use License (core only) $400.00 Secondary Maintenance for ArcGIS for Desktop Basic Single Use License (core only) $300.00 Primary Maintenance for ArcGIS for Desktop Basic Single Use License (core plus extensions) $1,000.00 Secondary Maintenance for ArcGIS for Desktop Basic Single Use License (core plus extensions) $900.00 1 ArcGIS for Desktop Advanced Core Extensions Single Use Licenses ArcGIS 3D Analyst for Desktop Advanced Single Use License $2,500.00 ArcGIS Spatial Analyst for Desktop Advanced Single Use License $2,500.00 ArcGIS Geostatistical Analyst for Desktop Advanced Single Use License $2,500.00 ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Desktop Advanced Single Use License $2,500.00 ArcGIS Network Analyst for Desktop Advanced Single Use License $2,500.00 ArcGIS Schematics for Desktop Advanced Single Use License $2,500.00 ArcGIS Publisher for Desktop Advanced Single Use License $2,500.00 ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Desktop Advanced Single Use License $2,500.00 ArcGIS Tracking Analyst for Desktop Advanced Single Use License $2,500.00 ArcGIS Data Reviewer for Desktop Advanced Single Use License $2,500.00 1 ArcGIS for Desktop Core Extensions Single Use Licenses ArcGIS Spatial Analyst for Desktop Single Use License _ $2,500.00 ArcGIS 3D Analyst for Desktop Single Use License $2,500.00 ArcGIS Geostatistical Analyst for Desktop Single Use License $2,500.00 ArcGIS Publisher for Desktop Single Use License $2,500.00 ArcGIS Tracking Analyst for Desktop Single Use License $2,500.00 ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Desktop Single Use License _$2,500.00 ArcGIS Network Analyst for Desktop Single Use License $2,500.00 ArcGIS Schematics for Desktop Single Use License $2,500.00 ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Desktop Single Use License $2,500.00 ArcGIS Data Reviewer for Desktop Single Use License $2,500.00 1 ArcGIS for Desktop Advanced Core Extensions Single Use Licenses Maintenance Primary Maintenance for ArcGIS Spatial Analyst for Desktop Advanced Single Use License $500.00 Secondary Maintenance for ArcGIS Spatial Analyst for Desktop Advanced Single Use License $200.00 Primary Maintenance for ArcGIS Geostatistical Analyst for Desktop Advanced Single Use License $500.00 Secondary Maintenance for ArcGIS Geostatistical Analyst for Desktop Advanced Single Use License $200.00 Primary Maintenance for ArcGIS Network Analyst for Desktop Advanced Single Use License $500.00 Secondary Maintenance for ArcGIS Network Analyst for Desktop Advanced Single Use License $200.00 Primary Maintenance for ArcGIS 3D Analyst for Desktop Advanced Single Use License $500.00 Secondary Maintenance for ArcGIS 3D Analyst for Desktop Advanced Single Use License $200.00 i Primary Maintenance for ArcGIS Tracking Analyst for Desktop Advanced Single Use License $500.00 Secondary Maintenance for ArcGIS Tracking Analyst for Desktop Advanced Single Use License $200.00 Primary Maintenance for ArcGIS Publisher for Desktop Advanced Single Use License $500.00 Secondary Maintenance for ArcGIS Publisher for Desktop Advanced Single Use License $200.00 Page 4 of 22 Esri Proprietary and Confidential Information Page 5 of 22 Esri Proprietary and Confidential Information Primary Maintenance for ArcGIS Schematics for Desktop Advanced Single Use License $500.00 Secondary Maintenance for ArcGIS Schematics for Desktop Advanced Single Use License $200.00 Primary Maintenance for ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Desktop Advanced Single Use License $500.00 Secondary Maintenance for ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Desktop Advanced Single Use License $200.00 Primary Maintenance for ArcGIS Data Reviewer for Desktop Advanced Single Use License $500.00 Secondary Maintenance for ArcGIS Data Reviewer for Desktop Advanced Single Use License $200.00 Primary Maintenance for ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Desktop Advanced Single Use License $500.00 Secondary Maintenance for ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Desktop Advanced Single Use License $200.00 1 ArcGIS Upgrades ArcGIS for Desktop Basic Concurrent Use License Upgrade from ArcGIS for Desktop Basic Single Use License $2,000.00 1 Upgrade from One ArcGIS Product to Another ArcGIS for Desktop Standard Single Use License Upgrade from ArcGIS for Desktop Basic Single Use License $5,500.00 ArcGI5 for Desktop Standard Concurrent Use License Upgrade from ArcGIS for Desktop Basic Single Use License $5,500.00 ArcGIS for Desktop Advanced Single Use License Upgrade from ArcGIS for Desktop Basic Single Use License $8,400.00 ArcGIS for Desktop Advanced Concurrent Use License Upgrade from ArcGIS for Desktop Basic Single Use License $8,400.00 ArcGIS for Desktop Standard Concurrent Use License Upgrade from ArcGIS for Desktop Basic Concurrent Use License $3,500.00 ArcGIS for Desktop Advanced Single Use License Upgrade from ArcGIS for Desktop Basic Concurrent Use License $6,400.00 ArcGIS for Desktop Advanced Concurrent Use License Upgrade from ArcGIS for Desktop Basic Concurrent Use License $6,400.00 ArcGIS for Desktop Advanced Concurrent Use License Upgrade from ArcGIS for Desktop Standard Single Use or Concurrent Use License $2,900.00 ArcGIS for Desktop Advanced Single Use License Upgrade from ArcGIS for Desktop Standard Single Use or Concurrent Use License $2,900.00 2 ArcGIS for Desktop Advanced Specialized Extensions Single Use Licenses 2 Esri Roads and Highways Esri Roads and Highways for Desktop Concurrent Use License $10,000.00 Esri Roads and Highways for Desktop Single Use License $.10,000.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri Roads and Highways for Desktop Concurrent Use License $2,500.00 2 Mapping and Charting Solutions Esri Production Mapping Concurrent Use License $10,000.00 Esri Production Mapping Single Use License $10,000.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri Production Mapping Concurrent Use License $2,500.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri Production Mapping Single Use License $2,500.00 Esri Defense Mapping Concurrent Use License $10,000.00 Esri Defense Mapping Single Use License $10,000.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri Defense Mapping Concurrent Use License $2,500.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri Defense Mapping Single Use License $2,500.00 ArcGIS for Aviation: Airports Concurrent Use License $5,000.00 ArcGIS for Aviation: Airports Single Use License $5,000.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Aviation: Airports Concurrent Use License $1,250.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Aviation: Airports Single Use License $1,250.00 ArcGIS for Aviation: Charting Concurrent Use License $10,000.00 ArcGIS for Aviation: Charting Single Use License $10,000.00 Page 5 of 22 Esri Proprietary and Confidential Information Page 6 of 22 Esri Proprietary and Confidential Information Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Aviation: Charting Concurrent Use License $2,500.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Aviation: Charting Single Use License $2,500.00 ArcGIS for Maritime: Charting Concurrent Use License $10,000.00 ArcGIS for Maritime: Charting Single Use License $10,000.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Maritime: Charting Concurrent Use License $2,500.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Maritime: Charting Single Use License $2,500.00 ArcGIS for Maritime: Bathymetry Concurrent Use License $5,000.00 ArcGIS for Maritime: Bathymetry Single Use License $5,000.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Maritime: Bathymetry Concurrent Use License $1,250.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Maritime: Bathymetry Single Use License $1,250.00 2 Mapping and Charting Solutions Bundles ArcGIS for Aviation: Airports Bundle Single Use License $10,500.00 ArcGIS for Aviation: Airports Bundle Concurrent Use License $10,500.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Aviation: Airports Bundle Single Use License $2,750.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Aviation: Airports Bundle Concurrent Use License $2,750.00 ArcGIS for Aviation: Charting Bundle Single Use License $20,500.00 ArcGIS for Aviation: Charting Bundle Concurrent Use License $20,500.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Aviation: Charting Bundle Single Use License $6,500.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Aviation: Charting Bundle Concurrent Use License $6,500.00 ArcGIS for Maritime: Charting Bundle Single Use License $18,700.00 ArcGIS for Maritime: Charting Bundle Concurrent Use License $18,700.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Maritime: Charting Bundle Single Use License $6,000.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Maritime: Charting Bundle Concurrent Use License $6,000.00 ArcGIS for Maritime: Bathymetry Bundle Single Use License $12,500.00 ArcGIS for Maritime: Bathymetry Bundle Concurrent Use License $12,500.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Maritime: Bathymetry Bundle Single Use License $3,350.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Maritime: Bathymetry Bundle Concurrent Use License $3,250.00 2 Esri CityEngine Esri CityEngine Advanced Concurrent Use License $4,000.00 Esri CityEngine Advanced Single Use License $4,000.00 Esri CityEngine Basic Single Use License $500.00 Primary Maintenance for Esri CityEngine Advanced Concurrent Use License $800.00 Secondary Maintenance for Esri CityEngine Advanced Concurrent Use License $675.00 Primary Maintenance for Esri CityEngine Advanced Single Use License $800.00 Secondary Maintenance for Esri CityEngine Advanced Single Use License $675.00 Primary Maintenance for Esri CityEngine Basic Single Use License $100.00 Secondary Maintenance for Esri CityEngine Basic Single Use License $85.00 2 Esri CityEngine Product Upgrades Esri CityEngine Advanced Concurrent Use or Single Use License Upgrade from Basic Single Use License $3,500.00 3 ArcGIS for Desktop Single Use Term Licenses ArcGIS for Desktop Advanced Single Use Term License $4,200.00 ArcGIS for Desktop Standard Single Use Term License $3,000.00 ArcGIS for Desktop Basic Single Use Term License $800.00 3 ArcGIS for Desktop Extensions Single Use Term Licenses ArcGIS 3D Analyst for Desktop Single Use Term License $600.00 ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Desktop Single Use Term License $600.00 ArcGIS Geostatistical Analyst for Desktop Single Use Term License $600.00 ArcGIS Network Analyst for Desktop Single Use Term License $600.00 ArcGIS Publisher for Desktop Single Use Term License $600.00 Page 6 of 22 Esri Proprietary and Confidential Information Page 7 of 22 Esri Proprietary and Confidential Information ArcGIS Schematics for Desktop Single Use Term License $600.00 ArcGIS Spatial Analyst for Desktop Single Use Term License $600.00 ArcGIS Tracking Analyst for Desktop Single Use Term License $600.00 ArcGIS Data Reviewer for Desktop Single Use Term License $600.00 ArcG15 Workflow Manager for Desktop Single Use Term License $600.00 ArcGIS for Desktop All Extensions Single Use Term License $1,200.00 4 Esri Developer Technology 4 ArcGIS Engine Licenses ArcGIS Engine Single Use License $500.00 ArcGIS Engine Concurrent Use License $1,25100 ArcGIS Engine Concurrent Use License Upgrade from ArcGIS Engine Single Use License $750.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Engine Single Use License (without extensions) $100.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Engine Single Use License (with one or more extensions) $400.00 Primary Maintenance for ArcGIS Engine Concurrent Use License $250.00 Secondary Maintenance for ArcGIS Engine Concurrent Use License $185.00 4 ArcGIS Engine Extensions Single Use Licenses ArcGIS 3D Analyst for Engine Single Use License $1,000.00 ArcGIS Spatial Analyst for Engine Single Use License $1,000.00 ArcGIS Engine Geodatabase Update Single Use License $1,000.00 ArcGIS Network Analyst for Engine Single Use License $1,000.00 ArcGIS Schematics for Engine Single Use License $1,000.00 ArcGIS Tracking Analyst for Engine Single Use License $1,000.00 ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Engine Single Use License $1,000.00 4 ArcGIS Engine Extensions Concurrent Use Licenses ArcGIS 3D Analyst for Engine Concurrent Use License $1,000.00 ArcGIS Spatial Analyst for Engine Concurrent Use License $1,000.00 ArcGIS Engine Geodatabase Update Concurrent Use License $1,000.00 ArcGIS Network Analyst for Engine Concurrent Use License $1,000.00 ArcGIS Schematics for Engine Concurrent Use License $1,000.00 ArcGIS Tracking Analyst for Engine Concurrent Use License $1,000,00 ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Engine Concurrent Use License $1,000.00 4 ArcGIS Engine Extensions Maintenance Primary Maintenance for ArcGIS 3D Analyst for Engine Concurrent Use License $200.00 Secondary Maintenance for ArcGIS 3D Analyst for Engine Concurrent Use License $150.00 Primary Maintenance for ArcGIS Spatial Analyst for Engine Concurrent Use License $200.00 Secondary Maintenance for ArcGIS Spatial Analyst for Engine Concurrent Use License $150.00 Primary Maintenance for ArcGIS Engine Geodatabase Update Concurrent Use License $200.00 Secondary Maintenance for ArcGIS Engine Geodatabase Update Concurrent Use License $150.00 Primary Maintenance for ArcGIS Schematics for Engine Concurrent Use License $200,00 Secondary Maintenance for ArcGIS Schematics for Engine Concurrent Use License $150.00 Primary Maintenance for ArcGIS Network Analyst for Engine Concurrent Use License $200.00 Secondary Maintenance For ArcGIS Network Analyst for Engine Concurrent Use License $150.00 Primary Maintenance for ArcGIS Tracking Analyst For Engine Concurrent Use License $200.00 Secondary Maintenance for ArcGIS Tracking Analyst for Engine Concurrent Use License $150.00 Primary Maintenance for ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Engine Concurrent Use License $200.00 Secondary Maintenance for ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Engine Concurrent Use License $150.00 4 ArcGIS Runtime ArcGIS Runtime Standard 25 -Pack Single Use Deployment License (per 25 pack) $5,000.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Runtime Standard 25 -Pack Single Use Deployment license $1,000.00 Page 7 of 22 Esri Proprietary and Confidential Information 4 ArcGIS Extensions for ArcGIS Runtime ArcGIS 3D Analyst for Runtime Standard 2S -Pack Single Use Deployment License (per 2S pack) $10,000.00 ArcGIS Network Analyst for Runtime Standard 25 -Pack Single Use Deployment License (per 25 pack) $10,000.00 ArcGIS Spatial Analyst for Runtime Standard 25 -Pack Single Use Deployment License (per 2S pack) $10,000.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS 3D Analyst for Runtime Standard 25 -Pack Single Use Deployment License $2,000.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Network Analyst for Runtime Standard 25 -Pack Single Use Deployment License $2,000.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Spatial Analyst for Runtime Standard 2S -Pack Single Use Deployment License $2,000.00 4 Esri Developer Network (EDN) 4 EDN Standard Annual Subscriptions EDN Standard Single Use Term License $1,500.00 EDN Standard with ArcGIS for Desktop Basic Single Use Term License $2,000.00 EDN Standard with ArcGIS for Desktop Standard Single Use Term License $3,000.00 EDN Standard with ArcGIS for Desktop Advanced Single Use Term License $4,000.00 4 For Current EDN Subscribers EDN Standard Optional Add-on Software ArcGIS for Desktop Basic Single Use Term License $500.00 EDN Standard Optional Add-on Software ArcGIS for Desktop Standard Single Use Term License $1,500.00 EDN Standard Optional Add-on Software ArcGIS for Desktop Advanced Single Use Term License $2,500.00 4 EDN Software Upgrades EDN Standard with ArcGIS for Desktop Standard Single Use License Upgrade from ArcGIS for Desktop Basic License $1,000.00 EDN Standard with ArcGIS for Desktop Advanced Single Use License Upgrade from ArcGIS for Desktop Basic Single Use License $2,000.00 EDN Standard with ArcGIS for Desktop Advanced Single Use License Upgrade from ArcGIS for Desktop Standard License $1,000.00 5 ArcGIS for Server Enterprise 5 ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Advanced ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) $40,000.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) $10,000.00 ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) $10,000.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) $2,500.00 5 ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Standard ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) $20,000.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) $5,000.00 ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) $5,000.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) $1,250.00 5 ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Basic ArcG1S for Server Enterprise Basic (up to four cores) $10,000.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Basic (up to four cores) $3,000.00 ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Basic (additional cores) $2,500.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Basic (additional cores) $750.00 5 ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Advanced ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Advanced (up to two cores) $10,000.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Advanced (up to two cores) $2,500.00 ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Advanced (additional cores—maximum four cores per server) $5,000.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Advanced (additional cores—maximum four cores per server) $1,250.00 Page 8 of22 Esri Proprietary and Confidential Information 5 ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Standard ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Standard (up to two cores) $5,000.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Standard (up to two cores) $1,250.00 ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Standard (additional cores—maximum four cores per server) $2,500.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Standard (additional cores—maximum four cores per server) _ $625.00 5 ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Basic ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Basic (price per server [core pricing does not apply]—minimum two cores/maximum four cores) $5,000.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Basic—(price per server [core pricing does not apply]—minimum two cores/maximum four cores) $1,250.00 5 ArcGIS for Server Extensions Enterprise Advanced ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) $10,000.00 ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) $2,500.00 ArcGIS image Extension for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) $10,000.00 ArcGIS Image Extension for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) $2,500.00 ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) $7.0,000.00 ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) $2,500.00 ArcGIS Data Reviewer for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) $10,000.00 ArcGIS Data Reviewer for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) $2,500.00 ArcGIS GeoEvent Extension for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) $10,000.00 ArcGIS GeoEvent Extension for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) $2,500.00 Esri Defense Mapping for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) $10,000.00 Esri Defense Mapping for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) $2,500.00 Esri Production Mapping for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) $10,000.00 Esri Production Mapping for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) $2,500.00 ArcGIS for Maritime: Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) $10,000.00 ArcGIS for Maritime: Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) $2,500.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) $2,500.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) $625.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Image Extension for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) $2,500.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Image Extension for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) $625.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) $2,500.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) $625.00 Annual Maintenance for Data Reviewer for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) $2,500.00 Annual Maintenance for Data Reviewer for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) $625.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS GeoEvent Extension for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) $2,500.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS GeoEvent Extension for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) $625.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri Defense Mapping for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) $2,500.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri Defense Mapping for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) $625.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri Production Mapping for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) $2,500.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri Production Mapping for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) $625.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Maritime: Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) $2,500.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Maritime: Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) $625.00 5 ArcGIS for Server Extensions Enterprise Standard ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) $10,000.00 ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) $2,500.00 ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) $10,000.00 ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) $2,500.00 Page 9 of 22 Esri Proprietary and Confidential Information Page 10 of22 Esri Proprietary and Confidential Information ArcGIS Network Analyst for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) $10,000.00 ArcGIS Network Analyst for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) $2,500.00 ArcGIS Image Extension for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) $10,000.00 ArcGIS Image Extension for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) $2,500.00 ArcGIS Data Reviewer for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) $10,000.00 ArcGIS Data Reviewer for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) $2,500.00 ArcGIS GeoEvent Extension for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) $10,000.00 ArcGIS GeoEvent Extension for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) $2,500.00 Esri Production Mapping for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) $10,000.00 Esri Production Mapping for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) $2,500.00 ArcGIS for Maritime: Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) $10,000.00 ArcGIS for Maritime: Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) $2,500.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) $2,500.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) $625.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) $2,500.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) $625.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Network Analyst for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) $2,500.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Network Analyst for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) $625.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Image Extension for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) $2,500.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Image Extension for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) $625.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Data Reviewer for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) $2,500.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Data Reviewer for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) $625.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS GeoEvent Extension for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) $2,500.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS GeoEvent Extension for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) $625.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri Production Mapping for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) $2,500.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri Production Mapping for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) $625.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Maritime: Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) $2,S00.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Maritime: Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) $625.00 5 ArcGIS for Server Extensions Workgroup Advanced ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Server Workgroup Advanced (maximum four cores) License $5,000.00 ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Server Workgroup Advanced (maximum four cores) License $5,000.00 ArcGIS Image Extension for Server Workgroup Advanced (maximum four cores) License $5,000.00 ArcGIS Data Reviewer for Server Workgroup Advanced (maximum four cores) License $5,000.00 ArcGIS GeoEvent Extension for Server Workgroup Advanced (maximum four cores) License $5,000.00 Esri Defense Mapping for Server Workgroup Advanced (maximum four cores) License $5,000.00 Esri Production Mapping for Server Workgroup Advanced (maximum four cores) License $5,000.00 ArcGIS for Maritime: Server Workgroup Advanced (maximum four cores) License $5,000.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Server Workgroup Advanced (maximum four cores) License $1,250.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Server Workgroup Advanced (maximum four cores) License $1,250.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Image Extension for Server Workgroup Advanced (maximum four cores) License $1,250.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Data Reviewer for Server Workgroup Advanced (maximum four cores) License $1,250.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS GeoEvent Extension for Server Workgroup Advanced (maximum four cores) License $1,250.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri Defense Mapping for Server Workgroup Advanced (maximum four cores) License $1,250.00 Page 10 of22 Esri Proprietary and Confidential Information Page 11 of22 Esri Proprietary and Confidential Information Annual Maintenance for Esri Production Mapping for Server Workgroup Advanced (maximum four cores) License $1,250.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Maritime: Server Workgroup Advanced (maximum four cores) License $1,250.00 5 ArcGIS for Server Extensions Workgroup Standard ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Server Workgroup Standard (maximum four cores) License $5,000.00 ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Server Workgroup Standard (maximum four cores) License $5,000.00 ArcGIS Network Analyst for Server Workgroup Standard (maximum four cores) License $5,000.00 ArcGIS Image Extension for Server Workgroup Standard (maximum four cores) License $5,000.00 ArcGIS Data Reviewer for Server Workgroup Standard (maximum four cores) License $5,000.00 ArcG15 GeoEvent Extension for Server Workgroup Standard (maximum four cores) License $5,000.00 Esri Production Mapping for Server Workgroup Standard (maximum four cores) License $5,000.00 ArcGIS for Maritime: Server Workgroup Standard (maximum four cores) License $5,000.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Server Workgroup Standard (maximum four cores) License $1,250.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Server Workgroup Standard (maximum four cores) License $1,250.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Network Analyst for Server Workgroup Standard (maximum four cores) License $1,250.00 Annual Maintenance for Image Extension for Server Workgroup Standard (maximum four cores) License $1,250.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Data Reviewer for Server Workgroup Standard (maximum four cores) License $1,250.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS GeoEvent Extension for Server Workgroup Standard (maximum four cores) License $1,250.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri Production Mapping for Server Workgroup Standard (maximum four cores) License $1,250.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Maritime: Server Workgroup Standard (maximum four cores) License $1,250.00 5 ArcGIS for Server Upgrades 5 ArcGIS for Server Upgrades—Enterprise to Enterprise ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Basic Upgrade to ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) $10,000.00 ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Basic Upgrade to ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) $30,000.00 ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Standard Upgrade to ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) $20,000.00 ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Basic Upgrade to ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) $2,500.00 ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Basic Upgrade to ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) $7,500.00 ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Standard Upgrade to ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) $5,000.00 5 ArcGIS for Server Upgrades—Workgroup to Workgroup ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Basic Upgrade to ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Standard (up to four cores) $5,000.00 ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Basic Upgrade to ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Advanced (up to four cores) $15,000.00 ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Standard Upgrade to ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Advanced (up to two cores) $5,000.00 ArcG1S for Server Workgroup Standard Upgrade to ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Advanced (additional cores) $2,500.00 5 ArcGIS for Server Upgrades—Workgroup to Enterprise ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Basic Upgrade to ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Basic (up to four cores) $5,000.00 ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Basic Upgrade to ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) $15,000.00 ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Basic Upgrade to ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) $35,000.00 Page 11 of22 Esri Proprietary and Confidential Information Page 12 of 22 Esri Proprietary and Confidential Information ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Standard Upgrade to ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) $10,000.00 ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Standard Upgrade to ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) $30,000.00 ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Advanced Upgrade to ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) $20,000.00 ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Standard (up to two cores) Upgrade to ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) $15,000.00 ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Standard (up to two cores) Upgrade to ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) $35,000.00 ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Advanced (up to two cores) Upgrade to ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) $10,000.00 ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Advanced (up to two cores) Upgrade to ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) $30,000.00 5 ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Staging Server 5 ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Advanced Staging Server ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) Staging Server $20,000.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) Staging Server $5,000.00 ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) Staging Server $5,000.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 5 ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Standard Staging Server ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cares) Staging Server $10,000.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) Staging Server $2,500.00 ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) Staging Server $2,500.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) Staging Server $625.00 5 ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Basic Staging Server ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Basic (up to four cores) Staging Server $5,000.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Basic (up to four cores) Staging Server $1,500.00 ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Basic (additional cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Basic (additional cores) Staging Server $375.00 5 ArcGIS for Server Extensions Enterprise Staging Server 5 ArcGIS for Server Extensions Enterprise Advanced Staging Server ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) Staging Server $5,000.00 ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 ArcGIS Image Extension for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) Staging Server $5,000.00 ArcGIS Image Extension for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) Staging Server $5,000.00 ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 ArcGIS Data Reviewer for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) Staging Server $5,000.00 ArcGIS Data Reviewer for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 ArcGIS GeoEvent Extension for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) Staging Server $5,000.00 ArcGIS GeoEvent Extension for 5erver Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 Esri Production Mapping for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) Staging Server $5,000.00 Esri Production Mapping for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 Esri Defense Mapping for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) Staging Server $5,000.00 Esri Defense Mapping for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 ArcGIS for Maritime: Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) Staging Server $5,000.00 ArcGIS for Maritime: Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 Page 12 of 22 Esri Proprietary and Confidential Information Page 13 of 22 Esri Proprietary and Confidential Information Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) Staging Server $313.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Image Extension for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Image Extension for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) Staging Server $313.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) Staging Server $313.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Data Reviewer for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Data Reviewer for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) Staging Server $313.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS GeoEvent Extension for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS GeoEvent Extension for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) Staging Server $313.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri Production Mapping for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri Production Mapping for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) Staging Server $313.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri Defense Mapping for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri. Defense Mapping for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) Staging Server $313.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Maritime: Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Maritime: Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) Staging Server $313.00 5 ArcGIS for 5erver Extensions Enterprise Standard Staging Server ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) Staging Server $5,000.00 ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) Staging Server $5,000.00 ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 ArcGIS Network Analyst for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) Staging Server $5,000.00 ArcGIS Network Analyst for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 ArcGIS Image Extension for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) Staging Server $5,000.00 ArcGIS Image Extension for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 ArcGIS Data Reviewer for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) Staging Server $5,000.00 ArcGIS Data Reviewer for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) Staging Server $1,250,00 ArcGIS GeoEvent Extension for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) Staging Server $5,000.00 _ ArcGIS GeoEvent Extension for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 Esri Production Mapping for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) Staging Server $5,000.00 Esri Production Mapping for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 ArcGIS for Maritime: Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) Staging Server $5,000.00 ArcGIS for Maritime: Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 Page 13 of 22 Esri Proprietary and Confidential Information Page 14 or22 Esri Proprietary and Confidential Information Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) Staging Server $313.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) Staging Server $313.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Network Analyst for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Network Analyst for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) Staging Server $313.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Image Extension for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Image Extension for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) Staging Server $313.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Maritime: Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGFS for Maritime: Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) Staging Server $313.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Data Reviewer for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS Data Reviewer for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) Staging Server $313.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS GeoEvent Extension for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS GeoEvent Extension for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) Staging Server $313.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri Production Mapping for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri Production Mapping for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) Staging Server $313.00 5 ArcGIS for Server Staging Server Upgrades ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Basic Upgrade to ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) Staging Server $5,000.00 ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Basic Upgrade to ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) Staging Server $15,000.00 ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Standard Upgrade to ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) Staging Server $10,000.00 ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Basic Upgrade to ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Basic Upgrade to ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) Staging Server $3,750.00 ArcG!S for Server Enterprise Standard Upgrade to ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) Staging Server $2,500.00 5 Esri Roads and Highways for Server 5 Esri Roads and Highways for Server Enterprise Esri Roads and Highways for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) $10,000.00 Esri Roads and Highways for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) $2,500.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri Roads and Highways for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) $2,500.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri Roads and Highways for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) $625.00 Esri Roads and Highways for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) $10,000.00 Page 14 or22 Esri Proprietary and Confidential Information Page 15 of22 Esri Proprietary and Confidential Information Esri Roads and Highways for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) $2,500.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri Roads and Highways for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) $2,500.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri Roads and Highways for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) $625.00 Esri Roads and Highways for Server Workgroup Advanced (maximum four cores) License $5,000.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri Roads and Highways for Server Workgroup Advanced (maximum four cores) License $1,250.00 Esri Roads and Highways for Server Workgroup Standard (maximum four cores) License $5,000.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri Roads and Highways for Server Workgroup Standard (maximum four cores) License $1,250.00 5 Esri Roads and Highways Staging Server Esri Roads and Highways for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) Staging Server $5,000.00 Esri Roads and Highways for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri Roads and Highways for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri Roads and Highways for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) Staging Server $313.00 Esri Roads and Highways for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) Staging Server $5,000.00 Esri Roads and Highways for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri Roads and Highways for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) Staging Server $1,250.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri Roads and Highways for Server Enterprise Standard (additional cores) Staging Server $313.00 5 Esri Roads and Highways Term Licenses Esri Roads and Highways for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $1,200.00 Esri Roads and Highways for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $3,000.00 Esri Roads and Highways for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $6,000.00 Esri Roads and Highways for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $1,200.00 Esri Roads and Highways for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $3,000.00 Esri Roads and Highways for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $6,000.00 Esri Roads and Highways for Server Workgroup Advanced (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $600.00 Esri Roads and Highways for Server Workgroup Advanced (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $1,500.00 Esri Roads and Highways for Server Workgroup Advanced (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $3,000.00 Esri Roads and Highways for Server Workgroup Standard (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $600.00 Esri Roads and Highways for Server Workgroup Standard (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $1,500.00 Esri Roads and Highways for Server Workgroup Standard (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $3,000.00 5 Roadway Reporter for Esri Roads and Highways Roadway Reporter for Esri Roads and Highways for Server License (up to 50 Users) $20,000.00 Roadway Reporter for Esri Roads and Highways for Server License (up to 250 Users) $40,000.00 Roadway Reporter for Esri Roads and Highways for Server License (up to 500 Users) $60,000.00 Annual Maintenance for Roadway Reporter for Esri Roads and Highways for Server (up to 50 Users) $5,000.00 Annual Maintenance for Roadway Reporter for Esri Roads and Highways for Server (up to 250 Users) $10,000.00 Annual Maintenance for Roadway Reporter for Esri Roads and Highways for Server (up to 500 Users) $15,000.00 5 Roadway Reporter for Esri Roads and Highways—Term Licenses Roadway Reporter for Esri Roads and Highways for Server Term License (up to 50 Users) $12,000.00 Roadway Reporter for Esri Roads and Highways for Server Terni License (up to 250 Users) $24,000.00 Roadway Reporter for Esri Roads and Highways for Server Term License (up to 500 Users) $36,000.00 6 ArcGIS for Server Term Licenses 6 ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Term Licenses ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $4,700.00 Page 15 of22 Esri Proprietary and Confidential Information Page 16 01 22 Esri Proprietary and Confidential Information ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $12,000.00 ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $24,000.00 ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $2,300.00 ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $6,000.00 ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $12,000.00 ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Basic (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $1,200.00 ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Basic (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $3,000.00 ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Basic (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $6,000.00 6 ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Term Licenses ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Advanced (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $2,300.00 ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Advanced (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $6,000.00 ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Advanced (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $12,000.00 ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Standard (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $1,200.00 ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Standard (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $3,000.00 ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Standard (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $6,000.00 ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Basic (maximum four cores) 30 -Day Term License $600.00 ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Basic (maximum four cores) 90 -Day Term License $1,500.00 ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Basic (maximum four cores) 365 -Day Term License $3,000.00 6 ArcGIS for Server Extensions Enterprise Term Licenses ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $1,200.00 ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $3,000.00 ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $6,000.00 ArcGIS Image Extension for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $1,200.00 ArcGIS Image Extension for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $3,000.00 ArcGiS Image Extension for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $6,000.00 ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $1,200.00 ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $3,000.00 ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $6,000.00 ArcG:I.S Data Reviewer for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $1,200.00 ArcG1S Data Reviewer for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $3,000.00 ArcGIS Data Reviewer for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $6,000.00 ArcGIS GeoEvent Extension for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $1,200.00 ArcGIS GeoEvent Extension for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $3,000,00 ArcGIS GeoEvent Extension for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $6,000.00 Esri Defense Mapping for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $1,200.00 Esri Defense Mapping for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $3,000.00 Esri Defense Mapping for Server 'Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $6,000.40 Esri Production Mapping for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $1,200,00 Esri Production Mapping for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $3,000.00 Esri Production Mapping for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $6,000.00 ArcGIS for Maritime: Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $1,200.00 ArcGIS for Maritime: Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $3,000.00 ArcGIS for Maritime.: Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $6,000.00 ArcGIS Data interoperability for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $1,200.00 ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $3,000,00 ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $6,000.00 ArcGIS Image Extension for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $1,200.00 ArcGIS Image Extension for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $3,000.00 ArcGIS Image Extension for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $6,000.00 Page 16 01 22 Esri Proprietary and Confidential Information Page 17 of 22 Esri Proprietary and Confidential Information ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $1,200.00 ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $3,000.00 ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $6,000.00 ArcGIS Network Analyst for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $1,200.00 ArcGIS Network Analyst for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $3,000.00 ArcGIS Network Analyst for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $6,000.00 ArcGIS Data Reviewer for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $1,200.00 ArcGIS Data Reviewer for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $3,000.00 ArcGJ.S Data Reviewer for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $6,000,00 ArcGIS for GeoEvent Extension for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $1,200.00 ArcGIS for GeoEvent Extension for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $3,000.00 ArcGIS for GeoEvent Extension for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $6,000.00 Esri Production Mapping for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) 30 -Day Terrn License $1,200.00 Esri Production Mapping for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) 90 -Day Terrn License $3,000.00 Esri Production Mapping for Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $6,000,00 ArcGIS for Maritime: Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $1,200.00 ArcGIS for Maritime: Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $3,000.00 ArcGIS for Maritime: Server Enterprise Standard (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $6,000.00 6 ArcGIS for Server Extensions Workgroup Term Licenses ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Server Workgroup Advanced (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $600.00 ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Server Workgroup Advanced (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $1,500.00 ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Server Workgroup Advanced (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $3,000.00 ArcGIS Image Extension for Server Workgroup Advanced (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $600.00 ArcGIS Image Extension for Server Workgroup Advanced (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $1,500.00 ArcGIS Image Extension for Server Workgroup Advanced (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $3,000.00 ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Server Workgroup Advanced (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $600.00 ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Server Workgroup Advanced (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $1,500,00 ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Server Workgroup Advanced (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $3,000.00 ArcGIS Data Reviewer for Server Workgroup Advanced (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $600,00 ArcGIS Data Reviewer for Server Workgroup Advanced (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License I $1,500,00 ArcGIS Data Reviewer for Server Workgroup Advanced (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $3,000.00 ArcGIS GeoEvent Extension for Server Workgroup Advanced (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $600.00 ArcGIS GeoEvent Extension for Server Workgroup Advanced (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $1,500.00 ArcGIS GeoEvent Extension for Server Workgroup Advanced (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $3,000.00 Esri Defense Mapping for Server Workgroup Advanced (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $600.00 Esri Defense Mapping for Server Workgroup Advanced (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $1,500.00 Esri Defense Mapping for Server Workgroup Advanced (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $3,000.00 Esri Production Mapping for Server Workgroup Advanced (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $600.00 Esri Production Mapping for Server Workgroup Advanced (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License _ $1,500.00 Esri Production Mapping for Server Workgroup Advanced (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $3,000.00 ArcGIS for Maritime: Server Workgroup Advanced (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $600.00 ArcGIS for Maritime: Server Workgroup Advanced (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $1,500.00 ArcGIS for Maritime: Server Workgroup Advanced (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $3,000.00 ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Server Workgroup Standard (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $600.00 ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Server Workgroup Standard (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $1,500,00 ArcGIS Data Interoperability for Server Workgroup Standard (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $3,000.00 ArcGIS Image Extension for Server Workgroup Standard (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $600.00 ArcGIS image Extension for Server Workgroup Standard (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $1,500.00 ArcGIS Image Extension for Server Workgroup Standard (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $3,000,00 Page 17 of 22 Esri Proprietary and Confidential Information Page 18 of 22 Esri Proprietary and Confidential Information ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Server Workgroup Standard (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $600.00 ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Server Workgroup Standard (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $1,500.00 ArcGIS Workflow Manager for Server Workgroup Standard (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $3,000.00 ArcGIS Network Analyst for Server Workgroup Standard (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $600.00 ArcGIS Network Analyst for Server Workgroup Standard (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $1,500.00 ArcGIS Network Analyst for Server Workgroup Standard (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $3,000.00 ArcGIS Data Reviewer for Server Workgroup Standard (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $600.00 ArcGIS Data Reviewer for Server Workgroup Standard (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $1,500.00 ArcGIS Data Reviewer for Server Workgroup Standard (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $3,000.00 ArcGIS GeoEvent Extension for Server Workgroup Standard (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $600.00 ArcGIS GeoEvent Extension for Server Workgroup Standard (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $1,500.00 ArcGIS GeoEvent Extension for Server Workgroup Standard (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $3,000.00 Esri Production Mapping for Server Workgroup Standard (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $600.00 Esri Production Mapping for Server Workgroup Standard (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $1,500.00 Esri Production Mapping for Server Workgroup Standard (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $3,000.00 ArcGIS for Maritime: Server Workgroup Standard (up to four cores) 30 -Day Term License $600.00 ArcGIS for Maritime: Server Workgroup Standard (up to four cores) 90 -Day Term License $1,500.00 ArcGIS for Maritime: Server Workgroup Standard (up to four cores) 365 -Day Term License $3,000,00 7 Reserved 8 Location Analytics 8 Esri Business Analyst for Desktop Single Use Licenses Esri Business Analyst Basic for Desktop National Single Use License $18,495.00 Esri Business Analyst Basic for Desktop Regional Single Use License $13,495.00 Esri Business Analyst Basic for Desktop State Single Use License $8,495.00 8 Esri Business Analyst for Desktop Concurrent Use Licenses Esri Business Analyst Basic for Desktop National Concurrent Use License $18,495.00 Esri Business Analyst Basic for Desktop Regional Concurrent Use License $13,495.00 Esri Business Analyst Basic for Desktop State Concurrent Use License $8,495.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri Business Analyst Basic for Desktop National License $14,795.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri Business Analyst Basic for Desktop Regional License $10,795.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri Business Analyst Basic for Desktop State License $6,795.00 8 Esri Business Analyst Standard for Desktop Concurrent Use Licenses Esri Business Analyst Standard for Desktop National Concurrent Use License $40,995.00 Esri Business Analyst Standard for Desktop Regional Concurrent Use License $29,490.00 Esri Business Analyst Standard for Desktop State Concurrent Use License $18,405.00 8 Esri Business Analyst Standard for Desktop Single Use Licenses Esri Business Analyst Standard for Desktop National Single Use License $40,995.00 Esri Business Analyst Standard for Desktop Regional Single Use License $29,490.00 Esri Business Analyst Standard for Desktop State Single Use License $18,405.00 8 Annual Maintenance for Esri Business Analyst Standard for Desktop—Concurrent Use and Single Use Licenses Annual Maintenance for Esri Business Analyst Standard for Desktop National License $32,795.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri Business Analyst Standard for Desktop Regional License $23,590.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri Business Analyst Standard for Desktop State License $14,720.00 8 Esri Business Analyst for Server 8 Esri Business Analyst for Server Enterprise Advanced Esri Business Analyst for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) $150,000.00 Esri Business Analyst for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) $37,50100 Annual Maintenance for Esri Business Analyst for Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) $100,000.00 Page 18 of 22 Esri Proprietary and Confidential Information Page 19 of 22 Esri Proprietary and Confidential Information Annual Maintenance for Esri Business Analyst for Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) $25,000.00 8 Esri Business Analyst for Server Workgroup Advanced Esri Business Analyst for Server Workgroup Advanced (per server—minimum two cores, maximum four cores) $75,000.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri Business Analyst for Server Workgroup Advanced (per server—minimum two cores, maximum four cores) $50,000.00 8 Esri Business Analyst for Server Staging Server Esri Business Analyst for Server Staging Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) $37,500.00 Esri Business Analyst for Server Staging Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) $9,375.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri Business Analyst for Server Staging Server Enterprise Advanced (up to four cores) $25,000.00 Annual Maintenance for Esri Business Analyst for Server Staging Server Enterprise Advanced (additional cores) $6,250.00 9 -12 Reserved 13 Mobile GIS _ 13 AppStudio for ArcGIS AppStudio for ArcGIS Standard $1,500.00 AppStudio for ArcGIS Standard with ArcGIS Runtime Deployment Pack Bundle—Year 1 $6,000.00 AppStudio for ArcGIS Standard with ArcGIS Runtime Deployment Pack Bundle—Year 2 $2,000.00 EDN Optional Add -On for AppStudio Standard $500.00 13 ArcPad ArcPad Single Use License $700.00 ArcPad Single Use License with ArcPad StreetMap Premium TomToni Europe Street Data $700.00 ArcPad Single Use License with ArcPad StreetMap Premium TomTom North America (USA and Canada) and Europe Street Data $700.00 ArcPad Single Use License with ArcPad StreetMap Premium TomTom North America (U5A and Canada) _ Street Data $700.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcPad Single Use License $250.00 ArcPad Single Use License Upgrade $250.00 ArcPad Single Use License with ArcPad StreetMap Premium TomTom North America (USA and Canada) Street Data Upgrade $250.00 ArcPad Single Use License with ArcPad StreetMap Premium TornTom Europe Street Data Upgrade $2.50.00 ArcPad Single Use License with ArcPad StreetMap Premium TomTom North America (USA and Canada) and Europe Street Data Upgrade _ $250.00 13 ArcG1S for Windows Mobile 1 ArcGIS for Windows Mobile for Desktop Advanced, Standard, Basic, or ArcGIS Engine 5 -Deployment Pack License $1,500.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Windows Mobile for Desktop Advanced, Standard, Basic, or ArcGIS Engine5-Deployment Pack License $300.00 ArcGIS for Windows Mobile for ArcGIS Server Enterprise Standard or Workgroup Advanced 50 - Deployment Pack License $15,000.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Windows Mobile for ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Standard or Workgroup Advanced 50 -Deployment Pack License $3,000.00 ArcGIS for Windows Mobile for ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Advanced 5 -Deployment Pack License $1,500.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Windows Mobile for ArcGIS for Server Workgroup Advanced 5 - Deployment Pack License $300.00 ArcGIS for Windows Mobile for ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Standard 5 -Deployment Pack License $1,500.00 Annual Maintenance for ArcGIS for Windows Mobile for ArcGIS for Server Enterprise Standard 5 - Deployment Pack License $300.00 _ 13 StreetMap for ArcGIS for Windows Mobile Page 19 of 22 Esri Proprietary and Confidential Information 13 StreetMap for ArcGIS for Windows Mobile S -Pack Bundles StreetMap for ArcGIS for Windows Mobile for Desktop HERE North America Street Data 5 -Pack Single Use Term License $400.00 StreetMap for ArcGIS for Windows Mobile for Desktop HERE Europe Street Data 5 -Pack Single Use Terni License $600,00 StreetMap for ArcGIS for Windows Mobile for Server Workgroup Advanced HERE North America Street Data 5 -Pack Term License $400.00 StreetMap for ArcGIS for Windows Mobile for Server Workgroup Advanced HERE Europe Street Data 5 - Pack Term License $600.00 StreetMap for ArcGIS for Windows Mobile for Server Enterprise Standard HERE North America Street Data 5 -Pack Term License $400.00 StreetMap for ArcGIS for Windows Mobile for Server Enterprise Standard HERE Europe Street Data 5 - Pack Term License $600.00 StreetMap for ArcGIS for Windows Mobile for Server Enterprise Advanced HERE North America Street Data 5 -Pack Term License $400.00 StreetMap for ArcGIS for Windows Mobile for Server Enterprise Advanced HERE Europe Street Data 5 - Pack Term License $600.00 13 StreetMap for ArcGIS for Windows Mobile 50 -Pack Bundles StreetMap for ArcGIS for Windows Mobile for Server Workgroup Advanced HERE North America Street Data 50 -Pack Term License $3,800.00 StreetMap for ArcGIS for Windows Mobile for Server Workgroup Advanced HERE Europe Street Data 50 -Pack Term License $5,700.00 StreetMap for ArcGIS for Windows Mobile for Server Enterprise Standard HERE North America Street Data 50 -Pack Term License $3,800.00 StreetMap for ArcGIS for Windows Mobile for Server Enterprise Standard HERE Europe Street Data 50 - Pack Term License $5,700.00 StreetMap for ArcGIS for Windows Mobile for Server Enterprise Advanced HERE North America Street Data 50 -Pack Term License $3,800.00 StreetMap for ArcGIS for Windows Mobile for Server Enterprise Advanced HERE Europe Street Data 50 - Pack Term License $3,800.00 14 -15 Reserved 16 Instructor -Led Training [ILT) ILT—per Student, per Day at Esri Learning Centers in the United States $565.00 Instructor -Led Online (ILO) Classroom Training—per Student, per Day $565.00 Additional Student—Client Site Private Class per Student, per Day $380.00 Additional Student—Esri Site Private Class per Student, per Day $380.00 Half -Day ILO Training Workshop—per Student, per Seat $185.00 Half -Day ILO Private Training Workshop -20 Students $2,780.00 Full -Day ILO Training Workshop—per Student, per Seat $370.00 Full -Day ILO Private Training Workshop—up to 20 Students $5,560.00 Private Classes—Esri Site per Class, per Day (12 students) in Locations in the United States $5,095.00 Private Classes—Client Site per Class, per Day (12 students) in Locations in the United States $5,095.00 Client Coaching Services -Client Site $4,630.00 Client Coaching Services—Esri Site $4,630.00 Technical Certification Exam Voucher $225.00 EDN Instructor -Led Training (5 days) $2,565.00 16 Esri Training Pass Esri Training Pass—per Day, up to 49 Days $565.00 Esri Training Pass—per Day, 50 Days or More $540.00 Esri Training Pass—One-Year Extension, up to 49 Days $530.00 Page 20 of 22 Esri Proprietary i y and Confidential Information Page 21 of 22 Esri Proprietary and Confidential Information Esri Training Pass—One-Year Extension, 50 Days or More $1,590.00 17 Online GIS 17 ArcGIS Online for Organizations Plans - Term Licenses ArcGIS Online Level 1 Plan—Includes up to 5 Named Users and 2,500 Credits $2,500.00 ArcGIS Online Additional User 5 -Pack for Level 1 Plan $2,500.00 ArcGIS Online Level 2 Plan—Includes up to 50 Named Users and 10,000 Credits $10,000.00 ArcGIS Online Additional User 5 -Pack for Level 2 Pian $1,000.00 ArcGIS Online Level 3 Plan—Includes up to 100 Named Users and 17,500 Credits $17,500.00 ArcGIS Online Additional User 5 -Pack for Level 3 Plan $875.00 ArcGIS Online Level 4 Plan—includes up to 250 Named Users and 37,500 Credits $37,500.00 ArcG15 Online Additional User 5 -Pack for Level 4 Plan $750.00 ArcGiS Online Level 5 Plan—Includes up to 500 Named Users and 62,500 Credits $62,500.00 ArcGLS Online Additional User 5 -Pack for Level 5 Plan $625.00 ArcGIS Online Level 6 Plan—Includes up to 1,000 Named Users and 110,000 Credits $110,000.00 ArcGIS Online Additional User 5 -Pack for Level 6 Plan $550.00 ArcGIS Online Additional Service Credits—Block of 1,000 $100.00 17 Esri Business Analyst Online Organization Plans for Use with ArcGIS Online Esri Business Analyst Online (for use with ArcGIS Online) Level 1 Plan—Includes up to 5 Named Users $500.00 Esri Business Analyst Online (for use with ArcGIS Online) Additional User 5 -Pack for Level 1 Plan $500.00 Esri Business Analyst Online (for use with ArcGIS Online) Level 2 Plan—Includes up to 50 Named Users $2,000.00 Esri Business Analyst Online (for use with ArcG1S Online) Additional User 5 -Pack for Level 2 Plan $200.00 Esri Business Analyst Online (for use with ArcGIS Online) Level 3 Plan—Includes up to 100 Named Users $3,500.00 Esri Business Analyst Online (for use with ArcGIS Online) Additional User 5 -Pack for Level 3 Plan $175.00 Esri Business Analyst Online (for use with ArcGIS Online) Level 4 Plan—Includes up to 250 Named Users $7,500.00 Esri Business Analyst Online (for use with ArcGIS Online) Additional User 5 -Pack for Level 4 Plan $150.00 Esri Business Analyst Online (for use with ArcGIS Online) Level 5 Plan --Includes up to 500 Named Users $12,500.00 Esri Business Analyst Online (for use with ArcGIS Online) Additional User 5 -Pack for Level 5 Plan $125.00 Esri Business Analyst Online (for use with ArcGIS Online) Level 6 Plan—Includes up to 1,000 Named Users $22,000.00 Esri Business Analyst Online (for use with ArcG1S Online) Additional User 5 -Pack for Level 6 Plan $110.00 17 Esri Community Analyst Organization Plans for Use with ArcGIS Online Esri Community Analyst (for use with ArcGIS Online) Level 1 Plan—Includes up to 5 Named Users $500.00 Esri Community Analyst (for use with ArcGIS Online) Additional User 5 -Pack for Level 1 Plan $500.00 Esri Community Analyst (for use with ArcGIS Online) Level 2 Plan—Includes up to 50 Named Users $2,000.00 Esri Community Analyst (for use with ArcGIS Online) Additional User 5 -Pack for Level 2 Plan $200.00 Esri Community Analyst (for use with ArcGIS Online) Level 3 Plan—Includes up to 100 Named Users $3,500.00 Esri Community Analyst (for use with ArcGIS Online) Additional User 5 -Pack for Level 3 Plan $175.00 Esri Community Analyst (for use with ArcGIS Online) Level 4 Plan—Includes up to 250 Named Users $7,500.00 Esri Community Analyst (for use with ArcGI5 Online) Additional User 5 -Pack for Level 4 Plan $150.00 Esri Community Analyst (for use with ArcGIS Online) Level 5 Plan—Includes up to 500 Named Users $12,500.00 Esri Community Analyst (for use with ArcGIS Online) Additional User 5 -Pack for Level 5 Plan $125.00 Esri Community Analyst (for use with ArcGIS Online) Level 6 Plan—includes up to 1,000 Named Users $22,000.00 Esri Community Analyst (for use with ArcGI5 Online) Additional User 5 -Pack for Level 6 Plan $110.00 17 GeoPlanner for ArcGIS 17 GeoPlanner for ArcGIS for Use with ArcGIS Online—Annual Term Licenses GeoPlanner for ArcGIS (for use with ArcGIS Online) for 1 Named User Single Use $500.00 Page 21 of 22 Esri Proprietary and Confidential Information Page 22 of 22 Esri Proprictaly and Confidential information GeoPlanner for ArcGIS (for use with ArcGIS Online) Level 1 Plan—Includes up to 5 Named Users $2,500.00 GeoPlanner for ArcGIS (for use with ArcGIS Online) Additional User 5 -Pack for Level 1 Plan $2,500.00 GeoPlanner for ArcGIS (for use with ArcGIS Online) Level 2 Plan—Includes up to 50 Named Users $10,000.00 GeoPlanner for ArcGIS (for use with ArcGIS Online) Additional User 5 -Pack for Level 2 Plan $1,000.00 GeoPlanner for ArcGIS (for use with ArcGIS Online) Level 3 Plan—Includes up to 100 Named Users $17,500.00 GeoPlanner for ArcGIS (for use with ArcGIS Online) Additional User 5 -Pack for Level 3 Plan $875.00 GeoPlanner for ArcGIS (for use with ArcGIS Online) Level 4 Plan—Includes up to 250 Named Users $37,500.00 GeoPlanner for ArcGIS (for use with ArcGIS Online) Additional User 5 -Pack for Level 4 Plan $750.00 GeoPlanner for ArcGIS (for use with ArcGIS Online) Level 5 Plan—Includes up to 500 Named Users $62,500.00 GeoPlanner for ArcGIS (for use with ArcGIS Online) Additional User 5 -Pack for Level 5 Plan $625.00 GeoPlanner for ArcGIS (for use with ArcGIS Online) Level 6 Plan—Includes up to1,000 Named Users $110,000.00 GeoPlanner for ArcGIS (for use with ArcGIS Online) Additional User 5 -Pack for Level 6 Plan $550.00 17 GeoPlanner for ArcGIS for Use with Portal for ArcGIS Annual Term Licenses GeoPlanner for ArcGIS (for use with Portal for ArcGIS) for 1 Named User $500.00 GeoPlanner for ArcGIS Level 1 Plan (for use with Portal for ArcGIS) for up to 5 Named Users $2,500.00 GeoPlanner for ArcGIS (for use with Portal for ArcGIS) Additional User 5 -Pack for Level 1 Plan $2,500.00 GeoPlanner for ArcGIS Level 2 Plan (for use with Portal for ArcGIS) for up to 50 Named Users $10,000.00 GeoPlanner for ArcGIS (for use with Portal for ArcGIS) Additional User 5 -Pack for Level 2 Plan $1,000.00 GeoPlanner for ArcGIS Level 3 Plan (for use with Portal for ArcGIS) for up to 100 Named Users $17,500.00 GeoPlanner for ArcGIS (for use with Portal for ArcGIS) Additional User 5 -Pack for Level 3 Plan $875.00 GeoPlanner for ArcGIS Level 4 Plan (for use with Portal for ArcGIS) for up to 250 Named Users $37,500.00 GeoPlanner for ArcGIS (for use with Portal for ArcGIS) Additional User 5 -Pack for Level 4 Plan $750.00 GeoPlanner for ArcGIS Level 5 Plan (for use with Portal for ArcGIS) for up to 500 Named Users $62,500.00 GeoPlanner for ArcGIS (for use with Portal for ArcGIS) Additional User 5 -Pack for Level 5 Plan $625.00 GeoPlanner for ArcGIS Level 6 Plan (for use with Portal for ArcGIS) for up to 1,000 Named Users $110,000.00 GeoPlanner for ArcGIS (for use with Portal for ArcGIS) Additional User 5 -Pack for Level 6 Plan $550.00 17 Navigator for ArcGIS Navigator for ArcGIS—Named User 5 -Pack $250.00 17 Drone2Map for ArcGIS Drone2Map for ArcGIS Annual Individual Subscription $3,500.00 18 Portal for ArcGIS 18 Portal for ArcGIS Term Licenses Portal for ArcGIS--Includes up to 5 Named Users Annual Term License $2,500.00 Portal for ArcGIS—Includes up to 50 Named Users Annual Term License $10,000.00 Portal for ArcGIS—Includes up to 100 Named Users Annual Term License $17,500.00 Portal for ArcGIS—Includes up to 250 Named Users Annual Term License $37,500.00 Portal for ArcGIS—Includes up to 500 Named Users Annual Term License $62,500.00 Portal for ArcGIS—Includes up to 1,000 Named Users Annual Term License $110,000.00 18 Portal for ArcGIS Additional User 5 -Pack Term Licensing Portal for ArcGIS Additional User 5 -Pack for up to 5 Named Users Annual Term License $2,500.00 Portal for ArcGIS Additional User 5 -Pack for up to 50 Named Users Annual Term License $1,000.00 Portal for ArcGIS Additional User 5 -Pack for up to 100 Named Users Annual Term License $875.00 Portal for ArcGIS Additional User 5 -Pack for up to 250 Named Users Annual Term License $750.00 Portal for ArcGIS Additional User 5 -Pack for up to 500 Named Users Annual Term License $625.00 Portal for ArcGIS Additional User 5 -Pack for up to 1,000 Named Users Annual Term License $550.00 19 Premium Support Services Premium Support Annual Use—Unlimited Incidents $38,500.00 Premium Support Annual Use—Up to 10 Incidents $15,000.00 Premium Support Additional Authorized Contact—Unlimited Incidents $10,000.00 Page 22 of 22 Esri Proprictaly and Confidential information Page 23 of 22 Esri Proprietary and Confidential Information EDN Technical Support Services (10 calls) $2,000.00 20 StreetMap Premium for ArcGIS HERE Data —North America _ 20 StreetMap Premium for ArcGIS HERE Data—United States United States—Full Use (per single use ArcGIS for Desktop user/per year) $6,000.00 United States—Full Use (per concurrent use ArcGIS for Desktop user/per year) $15,000.00 United States—Full Use (per ArcGIS for Server Enterprise/per year) $75,000.00 United States—Full Use (per additional 2 cores ArcGIS for Server Enterprise/per year) $30,000.00 United States—Display and Geocode (per single use ArcGPS for Desktop user/per year) $3,000.00 United States—Display and Geocode (per concurrent use ArcGIS for Desktop user/per year) $7,500.00 United States—Display and Geocode (per ArcGIS for Server Enterprise/per year) $37,500.00 United States—Display and Geocode (per additional 2 cores ArcGIS for Server Enterprise/per year) $15,000.00 20 StreetMap Premium for ArcGIS HERE Data—North America (United States, Canada, and Mexico) North America—Full Use (per single use Ar GIS for Desktop user/per year) $12,000.00 North America—Full Use (per concurrent use ArcGIS for Desktop user/per year) $30,000.00 North America—Full Use (per ArcGIS for Server Enterprise/per year) $150,000.00 North America—Full Use (per additional 2 cores ArcGIS for Server Enterprise/per year) $60,000.00 North America—Display and Geocode (per single use ArcGIS for Desktop user/per year) $6,000.00 North America—Display and Geocode (per concurrent use ArcGIS for Desktop user/per year) $15,000.00 North America—Display and Geocode (per ArcGIS for Server Enterprise/per year) $75,000.00 North America—Display and Geocode (per additional 2 cores ArcGIS For Server Enterprise/per year) $30,000.00 20 StreetMap Premium for ArcGIS HERE Data—State State—Full Use (per single use ArcGIS for Desktop user/per year) $2,000.00 State—Full Use (per concurrent use ArcGIS for Desktop user/per year) $5,000.00 State—Full Use (per ArcGIS for Server Enterprise/per year) $25,000.00 State—Full Use (per additional 2 cores ArcGIS for Server Enterprise/per year) $10,000.00 State—Display and Geocode (per single use ArcGIS for Desktop user/per year) $1,000.00 State—Display and Geocode (per concurrent use ArcGIS for Desktop user/per year) $2,500.00 State—Display and Geocode (per ArcGIS for Server Enterprise/per year) $12,500.00 1 State—Display and Geocode (per additional 2 cores ArcGIS for Server Enterprise/per year) $5,000.00 20 StreetMap Premium for ArcGIS TomTom Data—North America 20 StreetMap Premium for ArcGIS TomTom Data—United States United States—Full Use (per single use ArcGIS for Desktop user/per year) $6,000.00 United States—Full Use (per concurrent use ArcGIS for Desktop user/per year) $15,000.00 United States—Full Use (per ArcGIS for Server Enterprise/per year) $75,000.00 United States—Full Use (per additional 2 cores ArcGIS for Server Enterprise/per year) $30,000.00 United States—Display and Geocode (per single use ArcG!S for Desktop user/per year) $3,000.00 United States—Display and Geocode (per concurrent use ArcGIS for Desktop user/per year) $7,500.00 United States—Display and Geocode (per ArcGIS for Server Enterprise/per year) $37,500.00 United States—Display and Geocode (per additional 2 cores ArcGIS for Server Enterprise/per year) $15,000.00 20 ' StreetMap Premium for ArcGIS TomTom Data—Small State in the United States Small State—Full Use (per single use ArcGIS for Desktop user/per year) $900.00 Small State—Full Use (per concurrent use ArcGIS for Desktop user/per year) i $2,250.00 Small State—Full Use (per ArcGIS for Server Enterprise/per year) $11,250.00 Small State—Full Use (per additional 2 cores ArcGIS for Server Enterprise/per year) $4,500.00 Small State—Display and Geocode (per single use ArcGIS for Desktop user/per year) $500.00 Small State—Display and Geocode (per concurrent use ArcGIS for Desktop user/per year) $1,125.00 Small State—Display and Geocode (per ArcGIS for Server Enterprise/per year) $5,625.00 Small State—Display and Geocode (per additional 2 cores ArcGIS for Server Enterprise/per year) $2,250.00 20 StreetMap Premium for ArcGIS TomTom Data—Medium State in the United States Page 23 of 22 Esri Proprietary and Confidential Information Page 24 of 22 Esri Proprietary and Confidential information Medium State—Full Use (per single use ArcGIS for Desktop user/per year) $1,200.00 Medium State—Full Use (per concurrent use ArcGIS for Desktop user/per year) $3,000.00 Medium State—Full Use (per ArcGIS for Server Enterprise/per year) $15,000.00 Medium State—Full Use (per additional 2 cores ArcGIS for Server Enterprise/per year) _ $6,000.00 Medium State—Display and Geocode (per single use ArcGIS for Desktop user/per year) $600.00 Medium State—Display and Geocode (per concurrent use ArcGIS for Desktop user/per year) $1,500.00 Medium State—Display and Geocode (per ArcGIS for Server Enterprise/per year) $7,500.00 Medium State—Display and Geocode (per additional 2 cores ArcG1S for Server Enterprise/per year) _ $3,000.00 20 StreetMap Premium for ArcGIS Tomiom Data—Large State in the United States Large State. --Full Use (per single use ArcGIS for Desktop user/per year) $1,800.00 Large State—Full Use (per concurrent use ArcGIS for Desktop user/per year) $4,500.00 Large State—Full Use (per ArcGIS for Server Enterprise/per year) $22,500.00 Large State—Full Use (per additional 2 cores ArcGIS for Server Enterprise/per year) $9,000.00 Large State—Display and Geocode (per single use ArcGIS for Desktop user/per year) $900.00 Large State—Display and Geocode (per concurrent use ArcGFS for Desktop user/per year) $2,250.00 Large State—Display and Geocode (per ArcGIS for Server Enterprise/per year) $11,250.00 Large State—Display and Geocode (per additional 2 cores ArcGIS for Server Enterprise/per year) $4,500.00 20 StreetMap Premium for ArcGIS `Fomiom Data—North America North America ---Full Use (per single use ArcGIS for Desktop user/per year) $12,000.00 North America --Full Use (per concurrent use ArcGIS for Desktop user/per year) $30,000.00 North America—Full Use (per ArcGIS for Server Enterprise/per year) $150,000.00 North America—Full Use (per additional 2 cores ArcGIS for Server Enterprise/per year) $60,000.00 North America—Display and Geocode (per single use ArcGIS for Desktop user/per year) $6,000.00 North America—Display and Geocode (per concurrent use ArcGIS for Desktop user/per year) $15,000.00 North America—Display and Geocode (per ArcGIS for Server Enterprise/per year) $75,000.00 North America—Display and Geocode (per additional 2 cores ArcGIS for Server Enterprise/per year) $30,000.00 Page 24 of 22 Esri Proprietary and Confidential information CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: January 10, 2017 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ['consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ['admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Motion Consideration: Bid Award Appleway Shared Use Path — Pines to Evergreen Project #0227 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: SVMC 3.35.10 — Contract Authority PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Council adopted the 2017-2022 Six Year Transportation Improvement Plan on June 28, 2016, Resolution #16-009; Info RCA on January 26, 2016 and Admin. Report on February 2, 2016 for the Amended 2016 Transportation Improvement Plan, which included this project; Appleway Trail Update Admin Report on November 1, 2016; Info RCA, December 6, 2016. BACKGROUND: The Appleway Shared Use Path Project will construct a one mile asphalt path within the existing Spokane County Milwaukee Railroad right-of-way to extend the Appleway Trail from the east side of Pines Rd. to the west side of Evergreen Rd. Project includes a pedestrian signal at Pines Rd. to support the public walking and biking across the state highway. Other improvements include landscaping, trees, lighting and pedestrian amenities (benches, trash receptacles, etc.) along the trail. This project is funded with federal grants and City funds. Consultant MIG/SvR designed the project and prepared the bid package. Bids were advertised on November 11 and 17 followed by the bid opening on December 9. Four bids were received. The first low bidder was deemed non-responsive since their bid did not meet the Condition of Award contract Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBE) goal of 10%. The second low bidder met the DBE goal, which was 6.2% under the engineer's estimate, and is recommended for award. A copy of the bid tabulation is attached. OPTIONS: Award the contract to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder or take other appropriate action. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute the contract for the Appleway Shared Use Path — Pines to Evergreen Project #0227 to T. LaRiviere Equipment & Excavation, Inc. in the amount of $1,680,981.00. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The total project budget is $2,134,057. City has been awarded $1,845,959 in federal grants for the project. There are sufficient funds to cover the construction bid for this project. STAFF CONTACT: Steve M. Worley— CIP Manager Eric Guth - Public Works Director ATTACHMENTS: Bid Tabulation BID TABULATION Appleway Share -Use Path Project Project CIP No. 0227 Valley REM# DESCRPTION UN (TS QUANTITY ENGINEERS ESTIMATE T. LA RIVIERE QUIPMENT & EXCAVATION MDM CONSTRUCTION DW EXCAVATING BIG SKV DEVELOPMENT UNIT PRICE TOTAL COST UNIT PRICE TOTAL COST UNIT PRICE TOTAL COST UNE PRICE TOTAL COST UNIT PRICE TOTAL COST 100 MOBILIZATION L.S. 1 $133,000.00 $133,000.00 $94,000.00 $94,000.00 $210,000.00 $210,000.00 $43,265.00 $43,265.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 101 CONSTRUCTION SURVEYING L.S. 1 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $13,000.00 $13,000.00 $17,890.00 $17,890.00 $25,270.00 $25,270.00 $40,174.46 $40,174.46 102 SPCC PLAN L.S. 1 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,200.00 $1,200.00 $960.00 $960.00 $612.00 $612.00 $3,467.50 $3,467.50 103 CLEARING AND GRUBBING L.S. 1 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $24,000.00 $24,000.00 $85,000.00 $85,000.00 $37,680.00 $37,680.00 $52,607.50 $52,607.50 104 REMOVAL OF STRUCTURE AND OBSTRUCTION L.S. 1 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,800.00 $1,800.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $5,385.00 $5,385.00 $36,227.50 $36,227.50 105 REMOVE CEMENT CONC. CURB L.F. 280 $15.00 $4,200.00 $8.00 $2,240.00 $1.60 $448.00 $20.00 $5,600.00 $5.33 $1,492.40 106 REMOVE CEMENT CONC. SIDEWALK/DRIVEWAY APPROACH S.V. 220 $20.00 $4,400.00 $9.00 $1,980.00 $3.60 $792.00 $10.00 $2,200.00 $5.49 $1,207.80 107 REMOVE ASPHALT PAVEMENT S.Y. 540 $30.00 $16,200.00 $5.00 $2,700.00 $32.50 $17550.00 $8.20 $4,428.00 $3.21 $1,733.40 108 ABANDON DRYWELL EACH 4 $750.00 $3,000.00 $460.00 $1,840.00 $829.00 $3,316.00 $800.00 $3,200.00 $3,386.53 $13,546.12 109 REMOVE STORM DRAIN PIPE L.F. 70 $3.00 $210.00 $9.00 $630.00 $497.00 $34,790.00 $12.00 $840.00 $32.24 $2,256.80 110 REMOVE CHAINLINK FENCE AND GATE L.F. 720 $6.00 $4,320.00 $3.00 $2,160.00 $1.50 $1,080.00 $4.00 $2,880.00 $4.06 $2,923.20 111 RELOCATE BOULDER EACH 40 $75.00 $3,000.00 $60.00 $2,400.00 $31.00 $1,240.00 $128.00 $5,120.00 $38.48 $1,539.20 112 TREE AND VEGETATION PROTECTION L.S. 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $600.00 $600.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $6,675.00 $6,675.00 $3,033.50 $3,033.50 113 ROADWAY EXCAVATION INCL. HAUL C.V. 6,065 $12.00 $72,780.00 $14.60 $88,549.00 $29.50 $178,917.50 $11.20 $67,928.00 $13.92 $84,424.80 114 UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION INCL. HAUL C.V. 1,740 $20.00 $34,800.00 $13.80 $24,012.00 $32.50 $56,550.00 $12.10 $21,054.00 $14.41 $25573.40 115 SOLID WALL PVC STORM SEWER PIPE 8 IN DIAM L.F. 73 $75.00 $5,475.00 $55.00 $4,015.00 $61.50 $4,489.50 $70.00 $5,110.00 $43.59 $3,182.07 116 CURB INLET, TYPE 1 EACH 2 $1,250.00 $2,500.00 $95.00 $190.00 $224.00 $448.00 $110.00 $220.00 $255.70 $511.40 117 CATCH BASIN TYPE 1 EACH 2 $2,000.00 $4,000.00 $1,400.00 $2,800.00 $2,205.00 $4,410.00 $1,500.00 $3,000.00 $1,349.45 $2,698.90 118 PRECAST CONCRETE DRVWELL TYPE A EACH 1 $4,500.00 $4,500.00 $3,200.00 $3,200.00 $2,850.00 $2,850.00 $2,200.00 $2,200.00 $4,074.01 $4,074.01 119 SERVICE CONNECTION 2 IN. DIAM EACH 1 $4,000.00 $4,000.00 $2,200.00 $2,200.00 $2,635.00 $2,635.00 $595.00 $595.00 $892.73 $892.73 120 CRUSHED SURFACING TOP COURSE, 2 IN. DEPTH S.V. 7,000 $4.00 $28,000.00 $5.10 $35,700.00 $7.20 $50,400.00 $2.75 $19,250.00 $3.35 $23,450.00 121 CRUSHED SURFACING TOP COURSE, 5 IN. DEPTH S.V. 2,320 $10.00 $23,200.00 $7.00 $16,240.00 $11.00 $25,520.00 $7.00 $16,240.00 $8.06 $18,699.20 122 CRUSHED SURFACING TOP COURSE, 8 IN. DEPTH S.V. 450 $16.00 $7,200.00 $11.00 $4,950.00 $29.50 $13,275.00 $10.88 $4,896.00 $13.50 $6,075.00 123 CRUSHED SURFACING BASE COURSE, 4 IN. DEPTH S.V. 7,000 $8.00 $56,000.00 $6.50 $45,500.00 $6.10 $42,700.00 $5.45 $38,150.00 $6.13 $42,910.00 124 PLANING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT S.V. 1560 $16.00 $16,960.00 $4.50 $4,770.00 $12.00 $12,720.00 $8.00 $8,480.00 $9.78 $10,366.80 125 HMA CL. 1/2 IN. PG 70-28, 2 IN. DEPTH S.V. 1,060 $10.00 $10,600.00 $13.30 $14,098.00 $14.00 $14,840.00 $15.00 $15,900.00 $21.71 $23,012.60 126 HMA CL. 1/2 IN. PG 64-28, 3 IN. DEPTH S.V. 7,000 $12.00 $84,000.00 $13.20 $92,400.00 $14.00 $98,000.00 $15.00 $105,000.00 $20.68 $144,760.00 127 HMA CL. 1/2 IN. PG 70-28, 6 IN. DEPTH S.V. 450 $20.00 $9,000.00 $43.00 $19,350.00 $46.00 $20,700.00 $48.00 $21,600.00 $63.80 $28,710.00 128 JOINT ADHESIVE L.F. 340 $5.00 $1,700.00 $3.50 $1,190.00 $14.00 $4,760.00 $3.60 $1,224.00 $3.77 $1,281.80 129 SOIL RESIDUAL HERBICIDE S.V. 7,000 $0.50 $3,500.00 $0.15 $1,050.00 $0.20 $1,400.00 $0.18 $1,260.00 $0.49 $3,430.00 130 JOB MIX COMPLIANCE PRICE ADJUSTMENT CALC 1 -$1.00 -$1.00 -$1.00 -$1.00 -$1.00 -$1.00 -$1.00 -$1.00 -$1.00 -$1.00 131 ASPHALT COST PRICE ADJUSTMENT CALC 1 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 132 COMPACTION PRICE ADJUSTMENT CALC 1 -$1.00 -$1.00 -$1.00 -$1.00 -$1.00 -$1.00 -$1.00 -$1.00 -$1.00 -$1.00 133 EROSION CONTROL L.S. 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $5,750.00 $5,750.00 $6,720.00 $6,720.00 $3,670.00 $3,670.00 $2,87040 $2,870.40 134 WATTLE L.F. 1,160 $4.00 $4,640.00 $9.20 $10,672.00 $9.00 $10,440.00 $2.55 $2,958.00 $3.90 $4,524.00 135 HIGH VISIBILITY SILT FENCE L.F. 6,800 $4.00 $27,200.00 $9.80 $66,640.00 $9.50 $64,600.00 $2.56 $17,408.00 $2.80 $19,040.00 136 HIGH VISIBILITY FENCE L.F. 1,230 $2.50 $3,075.00 $7.00 $8,610.00 $6.70 $8,241.00 $1.40 $1,722.00 $1.95 $2,398.50 137 INLET PROTECTION EACH 8 $100.00 $800.00 $175.00 $1,400.00 $168.00 $1,344.00 $100.00 $800.00 $229.68 $1,83744 138 STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE S.V. 670 $15.00 $10,050.00 $3.50 $2,345.00 $24.00 $16,080.00 $13.50 $9,045.00 $11.30 $7,571.00 139 HYDROSEEDING ACRE 7.00 $4,500.00 $31,500.00 $4,425.00 $30,975.00 $4,695.00 $32,865.00 $3,930.00 $27,510.00 $6,085.76 $42,600.32 140 SOD INSTALLATION S.V. 1,610 $7.00 $11,270.00 $6.30 $10,143.00 $9.00 $14,490.00 $7.00 $11,270.00 $10.72 $17,259.20 141 TOPSOIL TYPE A, 4'' DEPTH S.V. 34,600 $3.50 $121,100.00 $3.70 $128,020.00 $5.00 $173,000.00 $2.64 $91,344.00 $4.02 $139,092.00 142 TOPSOIL TYPE A, PLANTING BACKFILL C.V. 150 $32.00 $4,800.00 $2.10 $315.00 $72.50 $10,875.00 $2.50 $375.00 $102.38 $15,357.00 143 STREAMBED BOULDER THREE MAN EACH 40 $200.00 $8,000.00 $95.00 $3,800.00 $67.00 $2,680.00 $101.00 $4,040.00 $103.67 $4,146.80 144 PSIPE- HELICTOTRICHON SEMPERVIRENS - 1 GALLON SHRUB OR PERENNIAL EACH 10 $15.00 $150.00 $21.00 $210.00 $18.00 $180.00 $23.00 $230.00 $36.25 $362.50 145 PSIPE- HEMEROCALLIS X 'RED RUM'- 1 GALLON SHRUB OR PERENNIAL EACH 31 $15.00 $465.00 $26.00 $806.00 $18.00 $558.00 $28.00 $868.00 $36.98 $1,146.38 146 PSIPE- HEMEROCALLIS X'STELLA DE ORO 1 GALLON SHRUB OR PERENNIAL EACH 22 $15.00 $330.00 $23.00 $506.00 $18.00 $396.00 $25.00 $550.00 $59.45 $1,307.90 147 PSIPE- CALAMAGROSTIS XACUTIF LORA AVALANCHE - 3 GALLON SHRUB EACH 59 $25.00 $1,475.00 $37.00 $2,183.00 $44.50 $2,625.50 $40.00 $2,360.00 $60.17 $3,550.03 148 PSIPE- GERANIUM X ROZANNE TM - 3 GALLON SHRUB EACH 20 $25.00 $500.00 $37.00 $740.00 $44.50 $890.00 $40.00 $800.00 $74.04 $1,480.80 149 PSIPE- KALM IA LATIFOLIA'CAROL'- 3 GALLON SHRUB EACH 3 $25.00 $75.00 $37.00 $111.00 $44.50 $133.50 $40.00 $120.00 $63.09 $189.27 1 of 3 BID TABULATION Appleway Share -Use Path Project Project CIP No. 0227 "Valley REM# DESCRPTION UN (TS QUANTITY ENGINEERS ESTIMATE T. LA RIVIERE QUIPMENT & EXCAVATION MDM CONSTRUCTION DW EXCAVATING BIG SKV DEVELOPMENT UNIT PRICE TOTAL COST UNIT PRICE TOTAL COST UNIT PRICE TOTAL COST UNIT PRICE TOTAL COST UNIT PRICE TOTAL COST 150 PSIPE- MAHONIA REPENS - 3 GALLON SHRUB EACH 23 $25.00 $575.00 $37.00 $851.00 $44.50 $1,023.50 $40.00 $920.00 $59.44 $5367.12 151 PSIPE- PENSTEMON DIGITALIS HUSKER RED - 3 GALLON SHRUB EACH 66 $25.00 $1,650.00 $37.00 $2,442.00 $44.50 $2,937.00 $40.00 $2,640.00 $39.90 $2,633.40 152 PSIPE- PEROVSKIAATRIPLICIFOLIA' LITTLE SPIRE TM - 3 GALLON SHRUB EACH 30 $25.00 $750.00 $37.00 $1,110.00 $44.50 $1,335.00 $40.00 $1,200.00 $59.44 $1,783.20 153 PSIPE- PHVSOCARPUS OPULIFOLIUS 'CENTER GLOW- 3 GALLON SHRUB EACH 40 $25.00 $1,000.00 $37.00 $1,480.00 $44.50 $1,780.00 $40.00 $1,600.00 $58.71 $2,348.40 154 PSIPE- ROSA WOODSII - 3 GALLON SHRUB EACH 30 $25.00 $750.00 $37.00 $1,110.00 $44.50 $1,335.00 $40.00 $1,200.00 $55.79 $1,673.70 155 PSIPE- VIBURNUM OPULUS 'NANUM' - 3 GALLON SHRUB EACH 15 $25.00 $375.00 $37.00 $555.00 $44.50 $667.50 $40.00 $600.00 $57.25 $858.75 156 PSIPE- MALUS IOENSIS 'KLEHM'S IMPROVED BECHTEL' (2 IN. CAL.) EACH 5 $350.00 $1,750.00 $205.00 $1,025.00 $391.00 $1,955.00 $220.00 $1,100.00 $405.88 $2,029.40 157 PSIPE-CORNUS FLORIDA RU BRA (2 IN. CAL.) EACH 4 $350.00 $1,400.00 $205.00 $820.00 $391.00 $5564.00 $220.00 $880.00 $449.68 $1,798.72 158 PSIPE -ACER RUBRUM'AUTUMN BLAZE' (2 IN. CAL.) EACH 11 $350.00 $3,850.00 $205.00 $2,255.00 $391.00 $4501.00 $220.00 $2,420.00 $376.68 $4,14348 159 PSIPE- FRAXINUS AMERICANA'AUTUMN PURPLE' (2 IN. CAL.) EACH 4 $350.00 $1,400.00 $205.00 $820.00 $391.00 $1564.00 $220.00 $880.00 $391.28 $1,565.12 160 PSIPE-FRAXINUS EXCELSIOR'AUREAFOLIA' (2 IN. CAL.) EACH 15 $350.00 $5,250.00 $205.00 $3,075.00 $391.00 $5,865.00 $220.00 $3,300.00 $405.88 $6,088.20 161 PSIPE- PLATANUS XACERIFOLIA "AVELANCHE' (2 IN. CAL.) EACH 2 $350.00 $700.00 $205.00 $410.00 $391.00 $782.00 $220.00 $220.00 $440.00 $391.28 $782.56 162 PSIPE- TILIA CORDATA'GREENSPIRE' (2 IN. CAL.) EACH 9 $350.00 $3,150.00 $205.00 $1,845.00 $391.00 $5519.00 $1,980.00 $391.28 $3521.52 163 PSIPE- PRUNUS X HILLIER! 'SPIRE' (2 IN. CAL.) EACH 13 $350.00 $4550.00 $205.00 $2,665.00 $391.00 $5,083.00 $220.00 $2,860.00 $405.88 $5,276.44 164 PSIPE- PINUS PONDEROSA (7-8' TALL) EACH 6 $350.00 $2,100.00 $226.00 $5356.00 $391.00 $2,346.00 $240.00 $1,440.00 $407.89 $2,447.34 165 PSIPE- PINUS NIG RA (7-8' TALL) EACH 8 $350.00 $2,800.00 $226.00 $5808.00 $391.00 $5128.00 $240.00 $5920.00 $34949 $2,795.92 166 FINE COMPOST C.V. 150 $40.00 $6,000.00 $58.00 $8,700.00 $56.00 $8,400.00 $62.00 $9500.00 $101.31 $15,196.50 167 DECOMPOSED GRANITE MULCH C.V. 50 $60.00 $5000.00 $74.00 $3,700.00 $112.00 $5,600.00 $80.00 $4,000.00 $253.66 $12,683.00 168 IRRIGATION SYSTEM L.S. 1 $53,000.00 $55000.00 $57,000.00 $57,000.00 $106,250.00 $106,250.00 $60,650.00 $60,650.00 $210,141.11 $210,141.11 169 BENCH EACH 5 $2,000.00 $10,000.00 $2,100.00 $10500.00 $1,955.00 $5775.00 $1,985.00 $9,925.00 $3,708.47 $18,542.35 170 TRASH RECEPTACLE EACH 6 $1500.00 $9,000.00 $2,400.00 $14,400.00 $2,330.00 $13,980.00 $2,400.00 $14,400.00 $3,923.52 $25541.12 171 DOGGIE BAG DISPENSER EACH 6 $300.00 $1500.00 $500.00 $5000.00 $519.00 $3,114.00 $420.00 $2,520.00 $722.20 $4533.20 172 DRINKING FOUNTAIN EACH 1 $4,000.00 $4,000.00 $5,700.00 $5,700.00 $5,665.00 $5,665.00 $8,200.00 $8,200.00 $7,589.90 $7589.90 173 CEMENT CONC. TRAFFIC CURB L.F. 140 $35.00 $4,900.00 $23.00 $5220.00 $25.00 $3,500.00 $45.00 $6500.00 $57.35 $8,029.00 174 CEMENT CONC. TRAFFIC CURB AND GUTTER L.F. 200 $40.00 $8,000.00 $30.00 $6,000.00 $31.00 $6,200.00 $50.00 $10,000.00 $60.93 $12,186.00 175 PLASTIC STOP LINE L.F. 50 $12.00 $600.00 $13.60 $680.00 $14.00 $700.00 $14.54 $727.00 $18.03 $901.50 176 PLASTIC LINE (TYPE B) L.F. 270 $16.00 $4,320.00 $4.00 $1,080.00 $4.00 $1,080.00 $4.10 $1,107.00 $5.01 $1552.70 177 PLASTIC (TYPE C-1) L.F. 760 $8.00 $6,080.00 $4.00 $3,040.00 $4.30 $5268.00 $4.50 $3,420.00 $5.37 $4,081.20 178 PLASTIC WIDE LANE LINE L.F. 120 $12.00 $1,440.00 $7.00 $840.00 $740 $888.00 $7.50 $900.00 $9.13 $1,095.60 179 PLASTIC CROSSWALK LINE S.F. 480 $15.00 $7,200.00 $9.00 $4520.00 $9.60 $4,608.00 $10.00 $4,800.00 $11.91 $5,716.80 180 RAISED PAVEMENT MARKER TYPE 2 EACH 8 $25.00 $200.00 $22.00 $176.00 $23.50 $188.00 $24.00 $192.00 $29.47 $235.76 181 REMOVING PAINT LINE L.F. 150 $2.00 $300.00 $5.60 $840.00 $6.00 $900.00 $6.00 $900.00 $7.40 $1,110.00 182 RAISED MEDIAN ISLAND S.V. 80 $85.00 $6500.00 $115.00 $9,200.00 $76.00 $6,080.00 $160.00 $12,800.00 $211.56 $16,924.80 183 BOLLARD TYPE 1 EACH 6 $750.00 $4500.00 $950.00 $5,700.00 $1,015.00 $6,090.00 $1,020.00 $6,120.00 $2,454.18 $14,725.08 184 BULLNOSE MARKER EACH 2 $100.00 $200.00 $600.00 $1,200.00 $639.00 $1,278.00 $640.00 $1,280.00 $794.06 $1588.12 185 DELINEATOR AAND CORE HOLE EACH 11 $20.00 $220.00 $100.00 $1,100.00 $110.00 $1,210.00 $110.00 $1,210.00 $136.81 $1504.91 186 TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYSTEM- PINES RD/SPRAGUE AVE MODIFICATION L.S. 1 $4,000.00 $4,000.00 $3,200.00 $5200.00 $4,000.00 $4,000.00 $5500.00 $3500.00 $5,908.62 $5,908.62 187 TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYSTEM - PINES RD/APPLEWAV TRAIL L.S. 1 $95,000.00 $95,000.00 $91,000.00 $91,000.00 $90,000.00 $90,000.00 $97,265.00 $97,265.00 $119536.80 $119,836.80 188 ILLUMINATION SYSTEM - McDONALD RD SERVICE CONNECTION L.S. 1 $240,000.00 $240,000.00 $193,000.00 $195000.00 $192,000.00 $192,000.00 $214,650.00 $214,650.00 $254,653.20 $254,653.20 189 ILLUMINATION SYSTEM - BLAKE RD SERVICE CONNECTION L.S. 1 $270,000.00 $270,000.00 $221,000.00 $221,000.00 $220,000.00 $220,000.00 $244500.00 $244,500.00 $295686.10 $291,686.10 190 CONDUIT PIPE 4 IN. DIAM L.F. 400 $25.00 $10,000.00 $16.00 $6,400.00 $15.50 $6,200.00 $17.00 $6,800.00 $20.81 $8,324.00 191 CONDUIT PIPE 3 IN. DIAM L.F. 130 $25.00 $3,250.00 $18.00 $2,340.00 $19.00 $2,470.00 $20.00 $2,600.00 $24.27 $5155.10 192 RRFB ASSEMBLY L.S. 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $18,000.00 $18,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $23,925.75 $25925.75 193 DIRECTIONAL BORING L.F. 90 $150.00 $13,500.00 $28.00 $2520.00 $75.00 $6,750.00 $80.00 $7,200.00 $95.70 $8,613.00 194 PERMANENT SIGNING L.S. 1 $14,000.00 $14,000.00 $9500.00 $9,300.00 $5860.00 $5860.00 $9,900.00 $9,900.00 $12,344.30 $12,344.30 195 PROJECT TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL L.S. 1 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $68,000.00 $68,000.00 $10,060.00 $10,060.00 $10,700.00 $10,700.00 $7,628.50 $7,628.50 196 TRAFFIC CONTROL SUPERVISOR L.S. 1 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $15000.00 $15000.00 $15739.00 $15739.00 $13,500.00 $13500.00 $9,431.60 $9,431.60 197 FLAGGERS HR. 70 $50.00 $3,500.00 $35.00 $2,450.00 $49.00 $3,430.00 $50.00 $3500.00 $126.81 $8,876.70 198 PORTABLE CHANGEABLE MESSAGE SIGN HR. 4,800 $2.00 $9,600.00 $3.00 $14,400.00 $2.20 $10560.00 $2.25 $10,800.00 $26.01 $124,848.00 199 TRENCH EXCAVATION SAFETY SYSTEM L.S. 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $1,200.00 $1,200.00 $1,675.00 $1,675.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $3,467.50 $3,467.50 2 of 3 BID TABULATION Appleway Share -Use Path Project Project CIP No. 0227 Valley REM4 DESCRPTION UN RS QUANTITY ENGINEERS ESTIMATE T. LA RIVIERE QUIPMENT & EXCAVATION MDM CONSTRUCTION DW EXCAVATING BIG SKV DEVELOPMENT UNIT PRICE TOTAL COST UNIT PRICE TOTAL COST UNIT PRICE TOTAL COST UNIT PRICE TOTAL COST UNIT PRICE TOTAL COST 200 DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE S.F. 50 $35.00 $1,750.00 $21.00 $1,050.00 $50.50 $2,525.00 $25.00 $1,250.00 $63.80 $3,190.00 201 CEMENT CONC. SIDEWALK, 4" THICK S.V. 130 $50.00 $6,500.00 $75.00 $9,750.00 $79.00 $10,270.00 $78.00 $10,140.00 $79.65 $10,354.50 202 CEMENT CONC. SIDEWALK, 6'' THICK S.V. 120 $65.00 $7,800.00 $93.00 $11,160.00 $84.00 $10,080.00 $85.00 $10,200.00 $87.44 $10,492.80 203 CEMENT CONC. CURB RAMP TYPE PERPENDICULAR A EACH 4 $2,000.00 $8,000.00 $1,900.00 $7,600.00 $2,175.00 $8,700.00 $1,670.00 $6,680.00 $3,081.50 $12,326.00 204 CEMENT CONC. CURB RAMP TYPE PERPENDICULAR B EACH 2 $2,000.00 $4,000.00 $1,900.00 $3,800.00 $2,120.00 $4,240.00 $1,670.00 $3,340.00 $3,012.15 $6,024.30 205 CONCRETE PAD, 4 -INCH THICK S.F. 600 $7.00 $4,200.00 $9.70 $5,820.00 $49.00 $29,400.00 $39.00 $23,400.00 $12.08 $7,248.00 206 CONCRETE PAD, 6 -INCH THICK S.F. 280 $10.00 $2,800.00 $12.00 $3,360.00 $54.00 $15,120.00 $41.00 $11,480.00 $13.19 $3,693.20 207 CEMENT CONCRETE MOW CURB L.F. 1,330 $22.00 $29,260.00 $14.00 $18,620.00 $6.30 $8,379.00 $12.50 $16,625.00 $7.81 $10,387.30 208 MINOR CHANGE CALC. 1 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 TOTAL $1,791,743.00 $1,680,981.00 $2,206,214.00 $1,594,991.00 $2,327,500.82 Highlighted amounts have been corrected 3 of 3 CHECKLIST Non -Re ponsive Non -Re ponsive Addenda Acknowledged VES VES VES VES l' ° No.1 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Competitive bids were opened on et.ii,„ " ^ .., ,fes Contractor's Administrative Information ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ December 9, 2016. I hereby o - -I- -,..s Bidder Qualification Statement ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ certify to the best of my ability t -` Local Agency Subcontractors List ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ that this is a true and correct bid-- tabulaton for the Appleway Share ' �, � Bid Deposit Form Bid Deposit Surety Form ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ -Use Path Project, CIP # 0227 / 42308 p SV Surety Power of Attorney ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ F, 6'01%0'..-''' Representations and Certifications ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ S'S/(1\'}j,t- Proposal for Incoporating Recycled material into the Project ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 12/27/16 Non -Collusion Declaration ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Local Agency Certification for Federal -Aid Contract ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Local Agency DBE Utilization Certification V (10.0%) V (10.9%) x (2.1%) x (4.6%) Local Agency Written DBE Confirmation ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Highlighted amounts have been corrected 3 of 3 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: January 10, 2017 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ['admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Motion Consideration: Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation Project #0143 — Final Design Contract with David Evans & Associates GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Adopted the 2016-2021 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), which included this project. Admin Report on April 5, 2016 on use of Federal Earmark funds for final design; Info RCA on project status, November 8, 2016; Administrative Report on project status, November 15, 2016; Info RCA, November 22, 2016; Admin Report, December 6, 2016; Admin Report, December 20, 2016. BACKGROUND: Based on approval from Council, staff issued a Request for Qualifications for Engineering Design Services for the Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation Project #0143. The selection committee unanimously selected the DEA/HDR team as the most highly qualified firm for this project. The DEA/HDR team and City staff developed the attached Agreement for the design phase of the Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation project. The initial scope of work will provide for much of the preliminary design work and coordination with the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) and the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad (BNSF). This Agreement will need to be supplemented in the future with additional scope of work tasks to complete the design phase and prepare bid ready documents for construction. To date, $1,020,000 has been allocated to the project ($720,000 federal earmark funds plus $300,000 of REET funds). Council indicated willingness to increase the REET funding by another $300,000 (to $600,000 total) at its November 15, 2016 meeting. The fee associated with the current scope of work is $1,274,031 OPTIONS: Authorize the City Manage to execute a Contract with DEA or take other appropriate action. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute a Contract with David Evans and Associates in the amount of $1,274,031 for the Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation project design services. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: An additional $300,000 in REET funds ($600,000 total) will need to be allocated to fully fund the scope of work associated with this consultant agreement. STAFF CONTACT: Steve M. Worley, P.E. — Capital Improvement Program Manager Eric Guth, P.E. — Public Works Director ATTACHMENTS: Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation Project #0143, Design Services Consultant Agreement Local Agency A&E Professional Services Cost Plus Fixed Fee Consultant Agreement Agreement Number: 16-175 Firm/Organization Legal Name (do not use dba's): David Evans and Associates, Inc. Address 908 N. Howard St., Suite 300, Spokane, WA 99201 Federal Aid Number UBI Number 600 227 608 Federal TIN or SSN Number 93-0661195 Execution Date Completion Date 12/31/17 1099 Form Required Federal Participation ❑Yes J No i Yes ❑No Project Title Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation - Design Services Description of Work See Exhibit A for the Scope of Services. Total Amount Authorized: $1,274,031 Management Reserve Fund: $0.00 Maximum Amount Payable: ❑ Yes 1 No DBE Participation ❑ Yes 1 No MBE Participation ❑ Yes 1 No WBE Participation If Yes HRA ❑ No SBE Participation Index of Exhibits Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit F Exhibit G Exhibit 1-1 Exhibit 1 Exhibit J Scope of Work DBE Participation Preparation and Delivery of Electronic Engineering and Other Data Prime Consultant Cost Computations Sub -consultant Cost Computations Title VI Assurances Certification Documents Liability Insurance Increase (Not Applicable) Alleged Consultant Design Error Procedures Consultant Claim Procedures Agreement Number: 16-175 Local Agency A&E Professional Services Cost Plus Fixed Fee Consultant Agreement Page 1 of 14 Revised 4/10/2015 THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as shown in the "Execution Date" box on page one (1) of this AGREEMENT, between the City of Spokane Valley hereinafter called the "AGENCY," and the "Firm / Organization Name" referenced on page one (1) of this AGREEMENT, hereinafter called the "CONSULTANT." WHEREAS, the AGENCY desires to accomplish the work referenced in "Description of Work" on page one (1) of this AGREEMENT and hereafter called the "SERVICES;" and does not have sufficient staff to meet the required commitment and therefore deems it advisable and desirable to engage the assistance of a CONSULTANT to provide the necessary SERVICES; and WHEREAS, the CONSULTANT represents that they comply with the Washington State Statutes relating to professional registration, if applicable, and has signified a willingness to furnish consulting services to the AGENCY. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms, conditions, covenants, and performance contained herein, or attached and incorporated and made a part hereof, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. General Description of Work The work under this AGREEMENT shall consist of the above-described SERVICES as herein defined, and necessary to accomplish the completed work for this project. The CONSULTANT shall furnish all services, labor, and related equipment and, if applicable, sub -consultants and subcontractors necessary to conduct and complete the SERVICES as designated elsewhere in this AGREEMENT. 11. General Scope of Work The Scope of Work and projected level of effort required for these SERVICES is described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and by this reference made a part of this AGREEMENT. The General Scope of Work was developed utilizing performance based contracting methodologies. 111. General Requirements All aspects of coordination of the work of this AGREEMENT with outside agencies, groups, or individuals shall receive advance approval by the AGENCY. Necessary contacts and meetings with agencies, groups, and/or individuals shall be coordinated through the AGENCY. The CONSULTANT shall attend coordination, progress, and presentation meetings with the AGENCY and/or such State, Federal, Community, City, or County officials, groups or individuals as may be requested by the AGENCY. The AGENCY will provide the CONSULTANT sufficient notice prior to meetings requiring CONSULTANT participation. The minimum required hours or days' notice shall be agreed to between the AGENCY and the CONSULTANT and shown in Exhibit "A." The CONSULTANT shall prepare a monthly progress report, in a form approved by the AGENCY, which will outline in written and graphical form the various phases and the order of performance of the SERVICES in sufficient detail so that the progress of the SERVICES can easily be evaluated. The CONSULTANT, any sub -consultants, and the AGENCY shall comply with all Federal, State, and local laws, rules, codes, regulations, and all AGENCY policies and directives, applicable to the work to be performed under this AGREEMENT. This AGREEMENT shall be interpreted and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. Agreement Number: 16-175 Local Agency A&E Professional Services Cost Plus Fixed Fee Consultant Agreement Page 2 of 14 Revised 4/10/2015 Participation for Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBE) or Small Business Enterprises (SBE), if required, per 49 CFR Part 26, shall be shown on the heading of this AGREEMENT, If DBE firms are utilized at the commencement of this AGREEMENT, the amounts authorized to each firm and their certification number will be shown on Exhibit `B" attached hereto and by this reference made part of this AGREEMENT. If the Prime CONSULTANT is a DBE certified firm they must comply with the Commercial Useful Function (CUF) regulation outlined in the AGENCY's "DBE Program Participation Plan" and perform a minimum of 30% of the total amount of this AGREEMENT. It is recommended, but not required, that non -DBE Prime CONSULTANTS perform a minimum of 30% of the total amount of this AGREEMENT. The CONSULTANT, on a monthly basis, is required to submit DBE Participation of the amounts paid to all DBE firms invoiced for this AGREEMENT. All Reports, PS&E materials, and other data furnished to the CONSULTANT by the AGENCY shall be returned. All electronic files, prepared by the CONSULTANT, must meet the requirements as outlined in Exhibit "C — Preparation and Delivery of Electronic Engineering and other Data." All designs, drawings, specifications, documents, and other work products, including all electronic files, prepared by the CONSULTANT prior to completion or termination of this AGREEMENT are instruments of service for these SERVICES, and arc the property of the AGENCY. Reuse by the AGENCY or by others, acting through or on behalf of the AGENCY of any such instruments of service, not occurring as a part of this SERVICE, shall be without liability or legal exposure to the CONSULTANT. Any and all notices or requests required under this AGREEMENT shall be made in writing and sent to the other party by (i) certified snail, return receipt requested, or (ii) by email or facsimile, to the address set forth below: If to AGENCY: Name: Chris Bainbridge, Agency: City of Spokane Valley Address: 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106 City: Spokane Valley State: WA Zip: 99206 Email: cbainbridge@spokanevalley.org Phone: (509) 720-5102 Facsimile: (509) 921-1008 If to CONSULTANT: Name: Greg Holder, P.E. Agency: David Evans and Associates, Inc. Address: 908 N. Howard St., Suite 300 City: Spokane State: WA Zip: 99201 Email: hgh@deainc.com deainc.com Phone: (509) 232-8718 Facsimile: (509) 327-7345 IV. Time for Beginning and Completion The CONSULTANT shall not begin any work under the terms of this AGREEMENT until authorized in writing by the AGENCY. All work under this AGREEMENT shall be completed by the date shown in the heading of this AGREEMENT titled "Completion Date." The established completion time shall not be extended because of any delays attributable to the CONSULTANT, but may be extended by the AGENCY in the event of a delay attributable to the AGENCY, or because of unavoidable delays caused by an act of GOD, governmental actions, or other conditions beyond the control of the CONSULTANT. A prior supplemental AGREEMENT issued by the AGENCY is required to extend the established completion time. Agreement Number: 16-175 Local Agency A&E Professional Services Cost Plus Fixed Fee Consultant Agreement Page 3 of 14 Revised 4/10/2015 V. Payment Provisions The CONSULTANT shall be paid by the AGENCY for completed SERVICES rendered under this AGREEMENT as provided hereinafter. Such payment shall be full compensation for SERVICES performed or SERVICES rendered and for all labor, materials, supplies, equipment, and incidentals necessary to complete SERVICES, specified in Section I1, "Scope of Work". The CONSULTANT shall conform to all applicable portions of 48 CFR Part 31 (www.ecfr.gov). The estimate in support of the Cost Plus Fixed Fee amount is attached hereto as Exhibits "D" and "E" and by this reference made part of this AGREEMENT. A. Actual Costs: Payment for all consulting services for this PROJECT shall be on the basis of the CONSULTANT'S actual cost plus a fixed fee. The actual cost shall include direct salary cost, indirect cost rate, and direct non -salary costs. 1. Direct (RAW) Labor Costs: The Direct (RAW) Labor Cost is the direct salary paid to principals, professional, technical, and clerical personnel for the time they are productively engaged in work necessary to fulfill the terms of this AGREEMENT. The CONSULTANT shall maintain support data to verify the direct salary costs billed to the AGENCY. 2. Indirect Cost Rate (ICR) Costs: ICR Costs are those costs, other than direct costs, which are included as such on the books of the CONSULTANT in the normal everyday keeping of its books. Progress payments shall be made at the ICR rates shown in attached Exhibits "D" and "E" of this AGREEMENT. Total ICR payment shall be based on Actual Costs. The AGENCY agrees to reimburse the CONSULTANT the actual 1CR costs verified by audit, up to the Maximum Total Amount Payable, authorized under this AGREEMENT, when accumulated with all other Actual Costs. A summary of the CONSULTANT'S cost estimate and the ICR percentage is shown in Exhibits "D" and "E", attached hereto and by this reference made part of this AGREEMENT. The CONSULTANT (prime and all sub -consultants) will submit to the AGENCY within six (6) months after the end of each firm's fiscal year, an ICR schedule in the format required by the AGENCY (cost category, dollar expenditures, etc.) for the purpose of adjusting the ICR rate for billings received and paid during the fiscal year represented by the ICR schedule. It shall also be used for the computation of progress payments during the following year and for retroactively adjusting the previous year's ICR cost to reflect the actual rate. The ICR schedule will be sent to Email: ConsultantRates@wsdot.wa.gov. Failure to supply this information by either the prime CONSULTANT or any of their sub -consultants shall cause the AGENCY to withhold payment of the billed ICR costs until such time as the required information is received and an overhead rate for billing purposes is approved. The AGENCY's Project Manager and/or the Federal Government may perform an audit of the CONSULTANT'S books and records at any time during regular business hours to determine the actual ICR rate, if they so desire. 3. Direct Non -Salary Costs: Direct Non -Salary Costs will be reimbursed at the Actual Cost to the CONSULTANT. These charges may include, but are not limited to, the following items: travel, printing, long distance telephone, supplies, computer charges and fees of sub -consultants. Air or train travel will be reimbursed only to economy class levels unless otherwise approved by the AGENCY. The CONSULTANT shall comply with the miles and regulations regarding travel costs (excluding air, train, and rental car costs) in accordance with WSDOT's Accounting Manual M 13-82, Chapter 10 —Travel Rules and Procedures, and revisions thereto. Air, train, and rental car costs shall be reimbursed in accordance with 48 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 31.205-46 "Travel Costs." The billing for Direct Non -Salary Costs shall include an itemized listing of the charges directly identifiable with the PROJECT. The CONSULTANT shall maintain the original supporting documents in their office. Copies of the original supporting documents shall be supplied to the AGENCY upon request. All above charges must be necessary for the services provided under this AGREEMENT. Agreement Number: 16-175 Local Agency A&E Professional Services Cost Plus Fixed Fee Consultant Agreement Page 4 of 14 Revised 4/10/2015 4. Fixed Fee: The Fixed Fee, which represents the CONSULTANT'S profit, is shown in attached Exhibits "D" and "E" of this AGREEMENT. This fcc is based on the Scope of Work defined in this AGREEMENT and the estimated person -hours required to perforin the stated Scope of Work. In thc event the CONSULTANT enters into a supplemental AGREEMENT for additional work, the supplemental AGREEMENT may include provisions for the added costs and an appropriate additional fee. The Fixed Fee will be prorated and paid monthly in proportion to the percentage of work completed by the CONSULTANT and reported in the Monthly Progress Reports accompanying the billings. Any portion of the Fixed Fee earned but not previously paid in the progress payments will be covered in the final payment, subject to the provisions of Section IX entitled "Termination of Agreement." 5. Management Reserve Fund (MRF): The AGENCY may desire to establish MRF to provide the Agreement Administrator with the flexibility to authorize additional funds to the AGREEMENT for allowable unforeseen costs, or reimbursing the CONSULTANT for additional work beyond that already defined in this AGREEMENT. Such authorization(s) shall be in writing and shall not exceed the lesser of $ I00,000 or 10% of the Total Amount Authorized as shown in the heading of this AGREEMENT. The amount included for the MRF is shown in the heading of this AGREEMENT. This fund may not be replenished. Any changes requiring additional costs in excess of the MRF shall be made in accordance with Section XIII, "Changes of Work." 6. Maximum Total Amount Payable: The Maximum Total Amount Payable by the AGENCY to the CONSULTANT under this AGREEM ENT shall not exceed the amount shown in the heading of this AGREEMENT. The Maximum Total Amount Payable is comprised of the Total Amount Authorized, and the MRF. The Maximum Total Amount Payable does not include payment for Extra Work as stipulated in Section XIII, "Changes of Work." No minimum amount payable is guaranteed under this AGREEMENT. B. Monthly Progress Payments: The CONSULTANT may submit billings to the AGENCY for reimbursement of Actual Costs plus the ICR and calculated fee on a monthly basis during the progress of the work. Such billings shall be in a format approved by the AGENCY and accompanied by the monthly progress reports required under Section III, "General Requirements" of this AGREEMENT. The billings will be supported by an itemized listing for each item including Direct (RAW) Labor, Direct Non -Salary, and allowable ICR Costs to which will be added the prorated Fixed Fee. To provide a means of verifying the billed Direct (RAW) Labor costs for CONSULTANT employees, the AGENCY may conduct employee interviews. These interviews may consist of recording the names, titles, Direct (RAW) Labor rates, and present duties of those employees performing work on the PROJECT at the time of the interview. C. Final Payment: Final Payment of any balance due the CONSULTANT of the gross amount earned will be made promptly upon its verification by the AGENCY after the completion of the work under this AGREEMENT, contingent, if applicable, upon receipt of all PS&E, plans, maps, notes, reports, electronic data and other related documents which are required to be furnished under this AGREEMENT. Acceptance of such Final Payment by the CONSULTANT shall constitute a release of all claims for payment, which the CONSULTANT may have against the AGENCY unless such claims are specifically reserved in writing and transmitted to the AGENCY by the CONSULTANT prior to its acceptance. Said Final Payment shall not, however, be a bar to any claims that the AGENCY may have against the CONSULTANT or to any remedies the AGENCY may pursue with respect to such claims. The payment of any billing will not constitute agreement as to thc appropriateness of any item and at the time of final audit; all required adjustments will be made and reflected in a final payment. In the event that such final audit reveals an overpayment to the CONSULTANT, the CONSULTANT will refund such overpayment to the AGENCY within thirty (30) calendar days of notice of the overpayment. Such refund shall not constitute a waiver by the CONSULTANT for any claims relating to the validity of a finding by the AGENCY of overpayment. The CONSULTANT has twenty (20) working days after receipt of the final POST AUDIT to begin the appeal process to the AGENCY for audit findings. Agreement Number: 16-175 Local Agency A&E Professional Services Cost Plus Fixed Fee Consultant Agreement Page 5 of 14 Revised 4/10/2015 D. Inspection of Cost Records: The CONSULTANT and their sub -consultants shall keep available for inspection by representatives of the AGENCY and the United States, for a period of six (6) years after receipt of final payment, the cost records and accounts pertaining to this AGREEMENT and all items related to or bearing upon these records with the following exception: if any litigation, claim or audit arising out of, in connection with, or related to this AGREEMENT is initiated before the expiration of the six (6) year period, the cost records and accounts shall be retained until such litigation, claim, or audit involving the records is completed. An interim or post audit may be performed on this AGREEMENT, The audit, if any, will be performed by the State Auditor, WSDOT's internal Audit Office and/or at the request of the AGENCY's Project Manager. VI. Sub -Contracting The AGENCY permits subcontracts for those items of SERVICES as shown in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and by this reference made part of this AGREEMENT. The CONSULTANT shall not subcontract for the performance of any SERVICE under this AGREEMENT without prior written permission of the AGENCY. No permission for subcontracting shall create, between the AGENCY and sub -consultant, any contract or any other relationship. Compensation for this sub -consultant SERVICES shall be based on the cost factors shown on Exhibit "E" attached hereto and by this reference made part of this AGREEMENT. The SERVICES of the sub -consultant shall not exceed its maximum amount payable identified in each sub - consultant cost estimate unless a prior written approval has been issued by the AGENCY. All reimbursable direct labor, indirect cost rate, direct non -salary costs and fixed fee costs for the sub -consultant shall be negotiated and substantiated in accordance with section V "Payment Provisions" herein and shall be memorialized in a final written acknowledgement between the parties, All subcontracts shall contain all applicable provisions of this AGREEMENT, and the CONSULTANT shall require each sub -consultant or subcontractor, of any tier, to abide by the terms and conditions of this AGREEMENT. With respect to sub -consultant payment, the CONSULTANT shall comply with all applicable sections of the STATE's Prompt Payment laws as set forth in RCW 39.04.250 and RCW 39.76.011. The CONSULTANT, sub -recipient, or sub -consultant shall not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, or sex in the performance of this AGREEMENT. The CONSULTANT shall carry out applicable requirements of 49 CFR Part 26 in the award and administration of DOT -assisted contracts. Failure by the CONSULTANT to carry out these requirements is a material breach of this AGREEMENT, which may result in the termination of this AGREEMENT or such other remedy as the recipient deems appropriate. VII. Employment and Organizational Conflict of Interest The CONSULTANT warrants that they have not employed or retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for the CONSULTANT, to solicit or secure this contract, and that it has not paid or agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for the CONSULTANT, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift, or any other consideration, contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this contract. For breach or violation of this warrant, the AGENCY shall have the right to annul this AGREEMENT without liability or, in its discretion, to deduct from this AGREEMENT price or consideration or otherwise recover the full amount of such fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift, or contingent fee. Any and all employees of the CONSULTANT or other persons while engaged in the performance of any work or services required of the CONSULTANT under this AGREEMENT, shall be considered employees of the CONSULTANT only and not of the AGENCY, and any and all claims that may arise under any Workmen's Agreement Number: 16-175 Local Agency A&E Professional Services Cost Plus Fixed Fee Consultant Agreement Page 6 of 14 Revised 4/10/2015 Compensation Act on behalf of said employees or other persons while so engaged, and any and all claims made by a third party as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of the CONSULTANT's employees or other persons while so engaged on any of the work or services provided to be rendered herein, shall be the sole obligation and responsibility of the CONSULTANT. The CONSULTANT shall not engage, on a full- or part-time bask, or other basis, during the period of this AGREEMENT, any professional or technical personnel who arc, or have been, at any time during the period of this AGREEMENT, in the employ of the United States Department of Transportation or the AGENCY, except regularly retired employees, without written consent of the public employer of such person if he/she will be working on this AGREEMENT for the CONSULTANT. VIII. Nondiscrimination During the performance of this AGREEMENT, the CONSULTANT, for itself, its assignees, sub -consultants, subcontractors and successors in interest, agrees to comply with the following laws and regulations: • Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 • Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987 (42 U.S.C. Chapter 21 Subchapter V § 2000d (Public Law 100-259) through 2000c1 -4a) • American with Disabilities Act of 1990 • Federal -aid Highway Act of 1973 (42 U.S.C. Chapter 126 § 12101 et. seq.) (23 U.S.C. Chapter 3 § 324) • 23 CFR Part 200 • Rehabilitation Act of 1973 • 49 CFR Part 21 (29 U.S.C. Chapter 16 Subchapter V § 794)• 49 CFR Part 26 • Age Discrimination Act of 1975• RCW 49.60.180 (42 U.S.C. Chapter 76 § 6101 et. seq.) In relation to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the CONSULTANT is bound by the provisions of Exhibit "F" attached hereto and by this reference made part of this AGREEMENT, and shall include the attached Exhibit "F" in every sub -contract, including procurement of materials and leases of equipment, unless exempt by the Regulations or directives issued pursuant thereto. IX. Termination of Agreement The right is reserved by the AGENCY to terminate this AGREEMENT at any time with or without cause upon ten (10) days written notice to the CONSULTANT. In the event this AGREEMENT is terminated by the AGENCY, other than for default on the part of the CONSULTANT, a final payment shall be made to the CONSULTANT for actual hours charged and any appropriate fixed fee percentage at the time of termination of this AGREEMENT, plus any direct non -salary costs incurred up to the time of termination of this AGREEMENT. No payment shall be made for any SERVICES completed after ten (10) days following receipt by the CONSULTANT of the notice to terminate. If the accumulated payment made to the CONSULTANT prior to Notice of Termination exceeds the total amount that would be due when computed as set forth in paragraph two (2) of this section, then no final payment shall be due and the CONSULTANT shall immediately reimburse the AGENCY for any excess paid. If the services of the CONSULTANT are terminated by the AGENCY for default on the part of the CONSULTANT, the above formula for payment shall not apply. In the event of a termination for default, the amount to be paid to the CONSULTANT shall be determined by the AGENCY with consideration given to the actual costs incurred by the CONSULTANT in performing SERVICES to the date of termination, the amount of SERVICES originally required which was satisfactorily completed to Agreement Number: 16-175 Local Agency A&E Professional Services Cost Plus Fixed Fee Consultant Agreement Page 7 of 14 Revised 4/10/2015 date of termination, whether that SERVICE is in a form or a type which is usable to the AGENCY at the time of termination, the cost to the AGENCY of employing another firm to complete the SERVICES required and the time which may be required to do so, and other factors which affect the value to the AGENCY of the SERVICES performed at the time of termination. Under no circumstances shall payment made under this subsection exceed the amount, which would have been made using the formula set forth in paragraph two (2) of this section. If it is determined for any reason that the CONSULTANT was not in default or that the CONSULTANT's failure to perform is without the CONSULTANT's or its employee's fault or negligence, the termination shall be deemed to be a termination for thc convenience of the AGENCY. In such an event, the CONSULTANT would be reimbursed for actual costs and appropriate fixed fee percentage in accordance with the termination for other than default clauses listed previously. The CONSULTANT shall, within 15 days, notify the AGENCY in writing, in the event of the death of any member, partner, or officer- of the CONSULTANT or the death or change of any of the CONSULTANT's supervisory and/or other key personnel assigned to thc project or disaffiliation of any principally involved CONSULTANT employee. The CONSULTANT shall also notify the AGENCY, in writing, in the event of the sale or transfer of 50% or more of the beneficial ownership of the CONSULTANT within 15 days of such sale or transfer occurring. The CONSULTANT shall continue to be obligated to complete the SERVICES under the terms of this AGREEMENT unless thc AGENCY chooses to terminate this AGREEMENT for convenience or chooses to renegotiate any term(s) of this AGREEMENT. If termination for convenience occurs, final payment will be made to the CONSULTANT as set forth in the second and third paragraphs of this section. Payment for any part of the SERVICES by the AGENCY shall not constitute a waiver by the AGENCY of any remedies of any type it may have against the CONSULTANT for any breach of this AGREEMENT by the CONSULTANT, or for failure of the CONSULTANT to perform SERVICES required of it by the AGENCY. Forbearance of any rights under the AGREEMENT will not constitute waiver of entitlement to exercise those rights with respect to any future act or omission by the CONSULTANT. X. Changes of Work The CONSULTANT shall make such changes and revisions in the completed work of this AGREEMENT as necessary to correct errors appearing therein, without additional compensation thereof. Should the AGENCY find it desirable for its own purposes to have previously satisfactorily completed SERVICES or parts thereof changed or revised, the CONSULTANT shall make such revisions as directed by the AGENCY. This work shall be considered as Extra Work and will be paid for as herein provided under section XIII "Extra Work." XI. Disputes Any disputed issue not resolved pursuant to the terms of this AGREEMENT shall be submitted in writing within 10 days to the Director of Public Works or AGENCY Engineer, whose decision in the matter shall be final and binding on the parties of this AGREEMENT; provided however, that if an action is brought challenging the Director of Public Works or AGENCY Engineer's decision, that decision shall be subject to judicial review. If the parties to this AGREEMENT mutually agree, disputes concerning alleged design errors will be conducted under the procedures found in Exhibit "J". In the event that either party deem it necessary to institute legal action or proceeding to enforce any right or obligation under this AGREEMENT, this action shall be initiated in the Superior Court of the State of Washington, situated in the county in which the AGENCY is located. The parties hereto agree that all questions shall be resolved by application of Washington law and that the parties have the right of appeal from such decisions of the Superior Court in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. The CONSULTANT hereby consents to the personal jurisdiction of the Superior Court of the State of Washington, situated in the county in which the AGENCY is located. Agreement Number: 16-175 Local Agency A&E Professional Services Cost Plus Fixed Fee Consultant Agreement Page 8 of 14 Revised 411012015 XII. Legal Relations The CONSULTANT, any sub -consultants, and the AGENCY shall comply with all Federal, State, and local laws, rules, codes, regulations and all AGENCY policies and directives, applicable to the work to be performed under this AGREEMENT. This AGREEMENT shall be interpreted and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. The CONSULTANT shall defend, indemnify, and hold The State of Washington (STATE) and the AGENCY and their officers and employees harmless from all claims, demands, or suits at law or equity arising in whole or in part from the negligence of, or the breach of any obligation under this AGREEMENT by, the CONSULTANT or the CONSULTANT's agents, employees, sub consultants, subcontractors or vendors, of any tier, or any other persons for whom the CONSULTANT may be legally liable; provided that nothing herein shall require a CONSULTANT to defend or indemnify the STATE and the AGENCY and their officers and employees against and hold harmless the STATE and the AGENCY and their officers and employees from claims, demands or suits based solely upon the negligence of, or breach of any obligation under this AGREEMENT by the STATE and the AGENCY, their agents, officers, employees, sub -consultants, subcontractors or vendors, of any tier, or any other persons for whom the STATE and/or the AGENCY may be legally liable; and provided further that if the claims or suits arc caused by or result from the concurrent negligence of (a) the CONSULTANT or the CONSULTANT's agents, employees, sub -consultants, subcontractors or vendors, of any tier, or any other persons for whom the CONSULTANT is legally liable, and (b) the STATE and/or AGENCY, their agents, officers, employees, sub -consultants, subcontractors and or vendors, of any tier, or any other persons for whom the STATE and or AGENCY may be legally liable, the defense and indemnity obligation shall be valid and enforceable only to the extent of the CONSULTANT's negligence or the negligence of the CONSULTANT's agents, employees, sub -consultants, subcontractors or vendors, of any tier, or any other persons for whom the CONSULTANT may be legally liable. This provision shall be included in any AGREEMENT between CONSULTANT and any sub -consultant, subcontractor and vendor, of any tier. The CONSULTANT shall also defend, indemnify, and hold the STATE and the AGENCY and their officers and employees harmless from all claims, demands, or suits at law or equity arising in whole or in part from the alleged patent or copyright infringement or other allegedly improper appropriation or use of trade secrets, patents, proprietary information, know-how, copyright rights or inventions by the CONSULTANT or the CONSULTANT's agents, employees, sub -consultants, subcontractors or vendors, of any tier, or any other persons for whom the CONSULTANT may be legally liable, in performance of the Work under this AGREEMENT or arising out of any use in connection with the AGREEMENT of methods, processes, designs, information or other items furnished or communicated to STATE and/or the AGENCY, their agents, officers and employees pursuant to the AGREEMENT; provided that this indemnity shall not apply to any alleged patent or copyright infringement or other allegedly improper appropriation or use of trade secrets, patents, proprietary information, know-how, copyright rights or inventions resulting from STATE and/orAGENCY's, their agents', officers' and employees' failure to comply with specific written instructions regarding use provided to STATE and/or AGENCY, their agents, officers and employees by the CONSULTANT, its agents, employees, sub -consultants, subcontractors or vendors, of any tier, or any other persons for whom the CONSULTANT may be legally liable. The CONSULTANT's relation to the AGENCY shall be at all tines as an independent contractor. Notwithstanding any determination by the Executive Ethics Board or other tribunal, the AGENCY may, in its sole discretion, by written notice to the CONSULTANT terminate this AGREEMENT if it is found after due notice and examination by the AGENCY that there is a violation of the Ethics in Public Service Act, Chapter 42.52 RCW; or any similar statute involving the CONSULTANT in the procurement of, or performance under, this AGREEMENT. The CONSULTANT specifically assures potential liability for actions brought by the CONSULTANT's own employees or its agents against the STATE and /or the AGENCY and, solely for the purpose of this indemnification and defense, the CONSULTANT specifically waives any immunity under the state industrial insurance law, Title 51 RCW. This waiver has been mutually negotiated between the Parties. Agreement Number: 16-175 Local Agency A&E Professional Services Cost Plus Fixed Fee Consultant Agreement Page 9 of 14 Revised 4/10/2015 Unless otherwise specified in this AGREEMENT, the AGENCY shall be responsible for administration of construction contracts, if any, on the project. Subject to thc processing of a new sole source, or an acceptable supplemental AGREEMENT, the CONSULTANT shall provide On -Call assistance to the AGENCY during contract administration. By providing such assistance, the CONSULTANT shall assume no responsibility for: proper construction techniques, job site safety, or any construction contractor's failure to perform its work in accordance with the contract documents. The CONSULTANT shall obtain and keep in force during the terms of this AGREEMENT, or as otherwise required, the following insurance with companies or through sources approved by the State Insurance Commissioner pursuant to Title 48 RCW. Insurance Coverage A. Worker's compensation and employer's liability insurance as required by the STATE. 13. Commercial general liability insurance written under 1SO Form CG 00 01 12 04 or its equivalent with minimum limits of one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per occurrence and two million dollars ($2,000,000.00) in the aggregate for each policy period. C. Business auto liability insurance written under ISO Form CG 00 01 10 01 or equivalent providing coverage for any "Auto" (Symbol 1) used in an amount not less than a one million dollar ($1,000,000.00) combined single limit for each occurrence. Excepting the Worker's Compensation Insurance and any Professional Liability Insurance, the STATE and AGENCY, their officers, employees, and agents will be named on all policies of CONSULTANT and any sub - consultant and/or subcontractor as an additional insured (thc "Als"), with no restrictions or limitations concerning products and completed operations coverage. This coverage shall be primary coverage and non-contributory and any coverage maintained by the Als shall be excess over, and shall not contribute with, the additional insured coverage required hereunder. The CONSULTANT's and the sub -consultant's and/or subcontractor's insurer shall waive any and all rights of subrogation against theAls. The CONSULTANT shall furnish the AGENCY with verification of insurance and endorsements required by this AGREEMENT. The AGENCY reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies at any time. All insurance shall be obtained from an insurance company authorized to do business in the State of Washington. The CONSULTANT shall submit a verification of insurance as outlined above within fourteen (14) days of the execution of this AGREEMENT to: Name: Chris Bainbridge Agency: City of Spokane Valley Address: 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106 City: Spokane Valley State: WA Zip: 99206 Email: cbainbridge@spokanevalley.org Phone: (509) 720-5102 Facsimile: (509) 921-1008 No cancellation of the foregoing policies shall be effective without thirty (30) days prior notice to the AGENCY. The CONSULTANT's professional liability to the AGENCY, including that which may arise in reference to section IX "Termination of Agreement" of this AGREEMENT, shall be limited to the accumulative amount of the authorized AGREEMENT amount or one million dollars ($1,000,000.00), whichever is greater, unless the limit of liability is increased by the AGENCY pursuant to Exhibit H. In no case shall the CONSULTANT's professional liability to third parties be limited in any way. Agreement Number: 16-175 Local Agency A&E Professional Services Cost Plus Fixed Fee Consultant Agreement Page 10 of 14 Revised 4/10/2015 The parties enter into this AGREEMENT for the sole benefit of the parties, and to the exclusion of any third party, and no third party beneficiary is intended or created by the execution of this AGREEMENT. The AGENCY will pay no progress payments under section V "Payment Provisions" until the CONSULTANT has fully complied with this section. This remedy is not exclusive; and the AGENCY may take such other action as is available to it under other provisions of this AGREEMENT, or otherwise in law. XIII. Extra Work A. The AGENCY may at any time, by written order, make changes within the general scope of this AGREEMENT in the SERVICES to be performed. B. If any such change causes an increase or decrease in the estimated cost of, or the time required for, performance of any part of the SERVICES under this AGREEMENT, whether or not changed by the order, or otherwise affects any other terms and conditions of this AGREEMENT, the AGENCY shall make an equitable adjustment in the: (1) maximum amount payable; (2) delivery or completion schedule, or both; and (3) other affected terms and shall modify this AGREEMENT accordingly. C. The CONSULTANT must submit any "request for equitable adjustment," hereafter referred to as "CLAIM," under this clause within thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of the written order. However, if the AGENCY decides that the facts justify it, the AGENCY may receive and act upon a CLAIM submitted before final payment of this AGREEMENT. D. Failure to agree to any adjustment shall be a dispute under the section XI "Disputes" clause. However, nothing in this clause shall excuse the CONSULTANT from proceeding with the AGREEMENT as changed. E. Notwithstanding the terms and conditions of paragraphs (A,) and (B.) above, the maximum amount payable for this AGREEMENT, shall not be increased or considered to be increased except by specific written supplement to this AGREEMENT. XIV. Endorsement of Plans If applicable, the CONSULTANT shall place their endorsement on all plans, estimates, or any other engineering data furnished by them. XV. Federal Review The Federal Highway Administration shall have the right to participate in the review or examination of the SERVICES in progress. XVI. Certification of the Consultant and the Agency Attached hereto as Exhibit "G -1(a and b)" are the Certifications of the CONSULTANT and the AGENCY, Exhibit "G-2" Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension and Other Responsibility Matters - Primary Covered Transactions, Exhibit "G-3" Certification Regarding the Restrictions of the Use of Federal Funds for Lobbying and Exhibit "G-4" Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data. Exhibit "G-3" is required only in AGREEM ENT's over one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000.00) and Exhibit "G-4" is required only in AGREEMENT's over five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000.00.) These Exhibits must be executed by the CONSULTANT, and submitted with the master AGREEMENT, and returned to the AGENCY at the address listed in section III "General Requirements" prior to its performance of any SERVICES under this AGREEMENT. Agreement Number: 16-175 Local Agency A&E Professional Services Cost Plus Fixed Fee Consultant Agreement Page 11 of 14 Revised 4110/2015 XVII. Complete Agreement This document and referenced attachments contain ail covenants, stipulations, and provisions agreed upon by the parties. No agent, or representative of either party has authority to make, and the parties shall not be bound by or be liable for, any statement, representation, promise or agreement not set forth herein. No changes, amendments, or modifications of the terms hereof shall be valid unless reduced to writing and signed by the parties as a supplement to this AGREEMENT. XVIII. Execution and Acceptance This AGREEMENT niay be simultaneously executed in several counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original having identical legal effect. The CONSULTANT does hereby ratify and adopt all statements, representations, warranties, covenants, and AGREEMENT's contained in the proposal, and the supporting material submitted by the CONSULTANT, and does hereby accept this AGREEMENT and agrees to all of the terms and conditions thereof. XIX. Protection of Confidential information The CONSULTANT acknowledges that some of the material and information that may come into its possession or knowledge in connection with this AGREEMENT or its performance may consist of information that is exempt from disclosure to the public or other unauthorized persons under either chapter 42.56 RCW or other Local, state or federal statutes ("State's Confidential Information"). The "State's Confidential Information" includes, but is not limited to, names, addresses, Social Security numbers, e-mail addresses, telephone numbers, financial profiles, credit card information, driver's license numbers, medical data, law enforcement records (or any other information identifiable to an individual), STATE and AGENCY source code or object code, STATE and AGENCY security data, non-public Specifications, STATE and AGENCY non -publicly available data, proprietary software, State security data, or information which niay jeopardize any part of the project that relates to any of these types of information. The CONSULTANT agrees to hold the State's Confidential Information in strictest confidence and not to make use of the State's Confidential Information for any purpose other than the performance of this AGREEMENT, to release it only to authorized employees, sub -consultants or subcontractors requiring such information for the purposes of carrying out this AGREEMENT, and not to release, divulge, publish, transfer, sell, disclose, or otherwise make it known to any other party without the AGENCY'S express written consent or as provided by law. The CONSULTANT agrees to release such information or material only to employees, sub -consultants or subcontractors who have signed a nondisclosure AGREEMENT, the terns of which have been previously approved by the AGENCY. The CONSULTANT agrees to implement physical, electronic, and managerial safeguards to prevent unauthorized access to the State's Confidential Information. Immediately upon expiration or termination of this AGREEMENT, the CONSULTANT shall, at the AGENCY's option: (i) certify to the AGENCY that the CONSULTANT has destroyed all of the State's Confidential Information; or (ii) returned all of the State's Confidential Information to the AGENCY; or (iii) take whatever other steps the AGENCY requires of the CONSULTANT to protect the State's Confidential Information. As required under Executive Order 00-03, the CONSULTANT shall maintain a log documenting the following: the Statc's Confidential Information received in the performance of this AGREEMENT; the purpose(s) for which the State's Confidential Information was received; who received, maintained and used the State's Confidential Information; and the final disposition of the State's Confidential Information, The CONSULTANT's records shall be subject to inspection, review, or audit upon reasonable notice from the AGENCY. The AGENCY reserves the right to monitor, audit, or investigate the use of the Statc's Confidential Information collected, used, or acquired by the CONSULTANT through this AGREEMENT. The monitoring, auditing, or investigating may include, but is not limited to, salting databases. Agreement Number: 16-175 Local Agency A&E Professional Services Cost Plus Fixed Fee Consultant Agreement Page 12 of 14 Revised 4/10/2015 Violation of this section by the CONSULTANT or its sub -consultants or subcontractors may result in termination of this AGREEMENT and demand for return of all State's Confidential Information, monetary damages, or penalties. It is understood and acknowledged that the CONSULTANT may provide the AGENCY with information which is proprietary and/or confidential during the terns of this AGREEMENT. The parties agree to maintain the confidentiality of such information during the term of this AGREEMENT and afterwards. All materials containing such proprietary and/or confidential information shall be clearly identified and marked as "Confidential" and shall be returned to the disclosing party at the conclusion of the SERVICES tinder this AGREEMENT. The CONSULTANT shall provide the AGENCY with a list of all information and materials it considers confidential and/or proprietary in nature: (a) at the commencement of the term of this AGREEMENT; or (b) as soon as such confidential or proprietary material is developed. "Proprietary and/or confidential information" is not meant to include any information which, at the time of its disclosure: (i) is already known to the other party; (ii) is rightfully disclosed to one of the parties by a third party that is not acting as an agent or representative for the other party; (iii) is independently developed by or for the other party; (iv) is publicly known; or (v) is generally utilized by unaffiliated third parties engaged in the same business or businesses as the CONSULTANT. The parties also acknowledge that the AGENCY is subject to Washington State and federal public disclosure laws. As such, the AGENCY shall maintain the confidentiality of all such information marked proprietary and/ or confidential or otherwise exempt, unless such disclosure is required under applicable state or federal law. If a public disclosure request is made to view materials identified as "Proprietary and/or confidential information" or otherwise exempt information, the AGENCY will notify the CONSULTANT of the request and of the date that such records will be released to the requester unless the CONSULTANT obtains a court order from a court of competent jurisdiction enjoining that disclosure. If the CONSULTANT fails to obtain the court order enjoining disclosure, the AGENCY will release the requested information on the date specified. The CONSULTANT agrees to notify the sub -consultant of any AGENCY communication regarding disclosure that may include a sub -consultant's proprietary and/or confidential information. The CONSULTANT notification to the sub -consultant will include the date that such records will be released by the AGENCY to the requester and state that unless the sub -consultant obtains a court order from a court of competent jurisdiction enjoining that disclosure the AGENCY will release the requested information. If the CONSULTANT and/or sub -consultant fail to obtain a court order or other judicial relief enjoining the AGENCY by the release date, the CONSULTANT shall waive and release and shall hold harmless and indemnify the AGENCY from all claims of actual or alleged damages, liabilities, or costs associated with the AGENCY's said disclosure of sub -consultants' information. XX. Records Maintenance During the progress of the Work and SERVICES provided hereunder and for a period of not less than six (6) years from the date of final payment to the CONSULTANT, the CONSULTANT shall keep, retain and maintain all "documents" pertaining to the SERVICES provided pursuant to this AGREEMENT. Copies of all "documents" pertaining to the SERVICES provided hereunder shall be made available for review at the CONSULTANT's place of business during normal working hours. If any litigation, claim or audit is commenced, the CONSULTANT shall cooperate with AGENCY and assist in the production of all such documents. "Documents" shall be retained until all litigation, claims or audit findings have been resolved even though such litigation, claim or audit continues past the six (6) year retention period. For purposes of this AGREEMENT, "documents" means every writing or record of every type and description, including electronically stored information ("ESI"), that is in the possession, control, or custody of the CONSULTANT, including, without limitation, any and all correspondences, contracts, AGREEMENT `s, appraisals, plans, designs, data, surveys, maps, spreadsheets, memoranda, stenographic or handwritten notes, reports, records, telegrams, schedules, diaries, notebooks, logbooks, invoices, accounting records, work sheets, charts, notes, drafts, scribblings, recordings, visual displays, photographs, minutes of meetings, Agreement Number: 16-175 Local Agency A&E Professional Services Cost Plus Fixed Fee Consultant Agreement Page 13 of 14 Revised 4/10/2015 tabulations, computations, summaries, inventories, and writings regarding conferences, conversations or telephone conversations, and any and all other taped, recorded, written, printed or typed matters of any kind or description; every copy of the foregoing whether or not the original is in the possession, custody, or control of the CONSULTANT, and every copy of any of the foregoing, whether or not such copy is a copy identical to an original, or whether or not such copy contains any commentary or notation whatsoever that does not appear on the original. For purposes of this AGREEMENT, "ESI" means any and all computer data or electronic recorded media of any kind, including "Native Files", that are stored in any medium from which it can be retrieved and examined, either directly or after translation into a reasonably useable form. ESI may include information and/or documentation stored in various software programs such as: Email, Outlook, Word, Excel, Access, Publisher, PowerPoint, Adobe Acrobat, SQL databases, or any other software or electronic communication programs or databases that the CONSULTANT may use in the performance of its operations. ESI may be located on network servers, backup tapes, smart phones, thumb drives, CDs, DVDs, floppy disks, work computers, cell phones, laptops or any other electronic device that CONSULTANT uses in the performance of its Work or SERVICES hereunder, including any personal devices used by the CONSULTANT or any sub -consultant at home. "Native files" are a subset of ESI and refer to the electronic format of the application in which such ESI is normally created, viewed, and /or modified. The CONSULTANT shall include this section XX "Records Maintenance" in every subcontract it enters into in relation to this AGREEMENT and bind the sub -consultant to its terms, unless expressly agreed to otherwise in writing by the AGENCY prior to the execution of such subcontract. In witness whereof, the parties hereto have executed this AGREEMENT as of the day and year shown in the "Execution Date" box on page one (1) of this AGREEMENT. Signature Date Signature Date Any modification, change, or re fornuition of this AGREEMENT shall require approval as to, form by the Office of the Attorney General. Agreement Number: 16-175 Local Agency A&E Professional Services Cost Phis Fixed Fee Consultant Agreement Page 14 of 14 Revised 4/10/2015 Exhibit A �pokanc�" Valley City of Spokane Valley, WA Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation Project No. 0143 Phase I — Design Services Scope of Services Prepared by: David Evans and Associates, Inc. 908 North Howard Street, Suite 300 Spokane, WA 99201 6,71 1.11 In association with HDR Engineering, Inc. F�2 December 1, 2016 Table of Contents PROJECT DESCRIPTION, DESIGN CRITERIA, AND DELIVERABLES 1 A. Project Description I 13. Project Coordination 1 C. Design Criteria 1 D. Project Deliverables and Schedule 2 E. Information, Responsibilities, and Services Provided by the CLIENT 2 F. General Project Assumptions 3 0, Change Management 4 TASK 1.0 PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND QUALITY CONTROL 4 1.1 Project Management 4 1.2 ProjectWise and Project Setup 4 1.3 Suhconsultanl Agreements and Coordination 4 1.4 Prepare Project Notebooks 4 1.5 Project Quality Management Plan 4 1.6 Develop 'Project CPD Schedule and Updates 5 1.7 Monthly Progress Reports and Invoices 5 1.8 Project Team Meetings and Council Meeting Presentations 5 1.9 Quality Control/Quality Assurance Review 6 TASK 2.0 CAPACITY JUSTIFICATION REPORT 7 2.1 Capacity Justification Report. 7 TASK 3.0 CORRIDOR INVENTORY! DATA COLLECTION 7 3.1 Obtain As-Huilts and C'ontract Plan Documents 7 3.2 Assertible Applicable Design Standards and Policies 7 3.3 Update/Verify Environmental and Land Use Constraints 7 3.4 Verify Existing Corridor Utilities and Develop Utility Conflict Matrix (by CLIENT) 7 3.5 Site Visits to Obtain Additional Information as Needed 10 TASK 4.0 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING 10 TASK 5.0 CONFIRM PLANNING FRAMEWORK FOR THE PROJECT (CLIENT AND WSDOT) 13 TASK 6.0 TRAFFIC MODELING AND ANALYSIS 14 6.1 Traffic Volumes Data Collection 14 6.2 Develop Project Methods and Assumptions Document 14 6.3 Travel Demand Forecasting in AM and PM Peak Hours 15 6.4 Operational Assessment of Study Intersections and Study Corridors in AM and PM Peak Hours (including weaving, LOS, and queuing) 15 6.5 Collision Ilislory Evaluation - Evaluate Safety History ofthc Intersections and Roadways 15 6.6 Intersection Control Analysis for Project Intersections 16 6.7 Draft Traffic Operational Analysis Report 16 6.8 Final Traffic Operational Analysis Report 16 TASK 7.0 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM 17 7.1 Public Open House 17 7,2 Property Owner Contact Meetings 18 TASK8.0 NEPA DOCUMENTATION 18 8.1 Environmental Studies 18 8.2 Environmental Technical Memoranda 21 8.3 NEPA Categorical Exclusion Documentation (CED) Forst 22 TASK 9.0 SURVEYING 22 9.1 Develop Control Network 22 City of Spokane Valley Page i Scope of Services Barker koad/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 9.2 Aerial LiDAR Processing 23 9.3 Perform Boundary/Right-of-Way Surveying 25 9.4 Prepare Final Base Mapping Products 25 TASK 10.0 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS - INTERCHANGE AND BRIDGE CONFIG URATION 26 10.1 Develop Alternative Alignments - Interchange and Bridge Alternatives 26 10.2 Evaluate Alternatives Traffic Impacts 26 10,3 Develop Alternative Costs 26 10.4 Develop an Alternatives Evaluation Matrix 27 10.5 Develop Alternatives Evaluation Report 27 TASK 11.0 BNSF COORDINATION AND SUBMITTALS 27 11.1 Prepare Temporary Occupancy Application & Safety Plan 27 11.2 BNSF Design Phase A Package (Concept Railroad Submittal) 28 11.3 IUNSF Design Phase H Package (30% Railroad Submittal) 28 TASK 12.0 PRELIMINARY STRUCTURES AND DESIGN APPROVAL 28 12,1 Refine BTV 30% Design Typical Sections (Deleted) 28 12.2 Refine BTV 30% Design SR 290 and Interchange Ramp Plans (Deleted) 28 12.3 Refine HTV 30% Design Local Roadway Plans (Deleted) 28 12.4 Refine BTV 30% Design Utility Plans (Deleted) 29 125 Refine BTV 30% Design Pavement Channelization Plans (Deleted) 29 12.6 Prepare Bridge and Wall Stntctures Type Alternatives Analysis 29 12.7 Prepare Bridge Preliminary Plan (6 bridge sheets) 29 12.8 Prepare Cost Estimates for Refined BTV 30% Design (Deleted) 30 12,9 Submit Refined BTV 30% Design Package (Deleted) 30 12,10 Refined BTV 30% Design Review Meeting (Deleted) 30 12.11 Prepare Basis of Design Memorandum 30 12.12 Design Approval Memorandum 31 TASK 13.0 INTERMEDIATE DESIGN DOCUMENTS 31 13.1 Develop IndexNicinity Map (2 sheets) 31 13.2 Develop Roadway'fypical Sections (8 sheets for 15 Typical Sections) 31 13.3 Develop Pavement and Facility Rernoval(Demolition Plans (Future Supplemental Agreement) 32 13.4 Interchange Plans for Approval (3 sheets) 32 13.5 Develop Roadway Paving Plan and Profile Sheets (62 sheets) 32 13.6 Develop Drainage Plans for SR 290 and Local Roadways (6 sheds) 32 13.7 Hydraulic Report 33 13.8 Develop Channeliz lion, Pavement Marking, Signing, and Sign Stnrcturc Plans (22 sheets) 33 13.9 Intersection Control Plans (9 sheets) 34 13.10 Develop Maintenance of Traffic (MOT) Plans (15 sheets) 34 13.11 Develop Illumination Design and Plans (Future Supplemental Agreement) 35 13.12 Develop Preliminary Utility Plans (Future Supplemental Agreement) 35 13,13 Develop Bridge Shccts (51 sheets) 35 13.14 Develop Detail Sheets (Future Supplemental Agreement) 36 13.15 Prepare Itemized Quantity Takeoff and Cost Estimate 36 13.16 Compile and Submit Intermediate Design Package 36 13.17 Intermediate Design Review Meeting 37 TASK 14.0 RIGHT-OF-WAYAND LIMITED ACCESS ACQUISITION DOCUMENTS (FUTURE SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT) 37 TASK 15.0 APPRAISE AND ACQUIRE RIGHT•OF•WAY AND LIMITED ACCESS (FUTURE SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT) 37 TASK 16.0 TEMPORARY PROJECT CLOSEOUT 37 TASK 17.0 FiNAL DESIGN (FUTURE SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT) 37 TASK 16.0 PS&E PREPARATION AND SUBMITTAL (FUTURE SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT) 37 City of Spokane Valley Page ii Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December I, 2016 PROJECT DESCRIPTION, DESIGN CRITERIA, AND DELIVERABLES A. Project Description The objective of this project is to develop a grade separated facility at the intersection of Barker Road and the BNSF Railway railroad tracks, and an interchange at the intersection of Barker Road and SR 290 (E Trent Avenue). Other major works associated with this project include, realignment of East Wellesley Avenue, removal of the two existing Wellesley Avenue bridges over BNSF Railway tracks and SR 290, and closing the Flora/BNSF Railway at -grade intersection in the City of Spokane Valley, Washington. The design development will expand on the Concept Design and 30% BTV Plans prepared as part of the Bridging the Valley project completed in 2004. The project goals include: • Position the project to obtain future grant funding for right-of-way acquisition and construction. • Remove the existing at -grade railroad crossings at Barker Road and Flora Road • Provide a grade separated interchange at the Barker Road/SR 290 intersection • Provide improved access to the industrial/commercial properties to the south and the residential properties to the north of SR 290 and the BNSF Railway corridor. • Improve safety within the project limits • Limit right-of-way acquisition • Improve mobility on SR 290 • Identify and implement Practical Design Solutions on the already proposed 30% BTV Design Plans • Achieve public support and endorsement B. Project Coordination This scope of work uses the following references for project team members: • CLIENT or the City = City of Spokane Valley - Project Sponsor and owner of facilities within City of Spokane Valley rights-of-way. • BNSF — Burlington Northern Sante Fe Railway (Major Project Stakeholder) • WSDOT = Washington State Department of Transportation - Project coordination with review authority, and owner of facilities within State rights-of-way (Major Project Stakeholder). • CONSULTANT or DEA = David Evans and Associates, Inc. (Prime Consultant on the project) • HDR = I -IDR Engineering, Inc, Engineering (Major Transportation subconsultant to DEA) • CONSULTANT Team = DEA and HDR • GE = GeoEngineers inc. (Geotechnical Engineering subconsultant to DEA) • HRA = Historical Research Associates, Inc. (Cultural Resources subconsultant to DEA) C. Design Criteria As pail of the design effort on this project, design criteria will be developed and approved by the CLIENT, WSDO"I', and BNSF Railway. When developing design criteria, the City's standards will govern within City's rights-of-way, WSDOT standards will govern within State rights-of-way, and BNSF's requirements will additionally he met for portions of the project within its rights-of-way. Additionally, the following publications, standards and guidelines will be used: • WSDOT's Local Agency Guidelines (LAG) Manual, April 2016 • AASHTO's "A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets" 2011 City of Spokane Valley Page 1 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 • AASHTO Roadside Design Guide 2011 • AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 7th Edition 2014 with current Interims • AASHTO Guide Specifications for LRFD Seismic Bridge Design, 2nd Edition, 2011. • Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), 2009, with Revisions 1 and 2, May 2012 • WSDOT Design Manual, July 2016. • WSDOT Highway Runoff Manual, 2014 • WSDOT Hydraulic Manual, January 2015 • WSDOT Bridge Design Manual LRFD, June 2016. • WSDOT Geotechnical Design Manual, May, 2015. • WSDOT Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control Manual, April 2014 • Spokane Regional Stormwater Manual, April 2008 • Hydraulic Engineering Circular No. 22, Third Edition, September 2009 • WSDOT Standard Plans. • WSDOT Standard Specifications. • Union Pacific Railroad — BNSF Railway Guidelines for Railroad Grade Separation Projects, May, 2016 D. Project Deliverables and Schedule 'Task 2016 - 2017 Project management and Quality Control December, 2016 — December, 2017 CLIENT and WSDOT Coordination December, 2016 - December, 2017 Corridor Inventory and Data Collection December 2016 — January, 2017 Design Surveying December 2016 - January, 2017 Geotechnical Borings December 2016 - January, 2017 BNSF ROE, Design Exception Meeting December 2016 - January, 2017 Confirm Planning Framework. December 2016 - January, 2017 Traffic Modeling and Analysis December, 2016 to March, 2017 Public involvement Tasks January, 2017 to October, 2017 NEPA Documentation December, 2016 to September, 2017 Interchange and Bridge Alternatives Analysis December, 2016 to March, 2017 BNSF Design Phase A Review March, 2017 Basis of Design Memorandum March, 2017 WSDOT Preliminary Bridge Plans Approval May, 2017 Design Approval Memorandum June, 2017 Channelization Plans for WSDOT Approval September, 2017 BNSF Design Phase B Review October, 2017 Intermediate Plans and Estimate Complete October, 2017 Final BNSF Design Phase B Review November, 2017 E. Information, Responsibilities, and Services Provided by the CLIENT The following existing information will be provided by the CLIENT and WSDOT. This is not intended to be an exhaustive list and additional data to be provided by the CLIENT and WSDOT are included throughout the scope of work: City of Spokane Valley Page 2 Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation Scope of Services December 1, 2016 • Roadway and utility as -built drawings for adjacent or related projects as are currently available. • Utility meeting minutes from utility coordination meetings • Geotechnical data, boring logs, and as -built drawings showing geotechnical information as are eurrently available. • Conceptual pavement structural section recommendations based on other area projects (for cost estimating purposes). • Conceptual storm water infiltration rate recommendations based on other area projects (for conceptual storm water management design) • Any available recent ADT data at the locations as identified in the scope will be provided by the CLIENT and appropriately supplemented by counts to meet the requirements set forth in this scope. • Crash data as identified in the scope • Existing right-of-way or plat maps for the project area • Existing right-of-way plans for the project area • Existing aerial photographs F. General Project Assumptions This Scope of Services is based upon certain assumptions and exclusions, identified below and under specific tasks. The following assumptions were used in the development of this scope of services: • LAG Manual Guidelines will be consulted to determine whether WSDOT specifications will govern different aspects of the design or if the City's supplemental specifications and/or special provisions are appropriate. Where possible, the City's requirements will govern. • WSDOT bid items will be used for all items on the project. • WSDOT will review and approve project elements that could impact SR -290. • MicroStation© Version 8i, SELECTSeries 3 will be utilized on the project. • WSDOT workspace will be utilized but plan sheets will bear the CLIENT's Title Block • InRoads© Version 8i, SELECTSeries 2 will be utilized as the project's design platform. • Bentley StorinCAD, FlowMaster, CivilStorrn, and/or other hydrologic and hydraulic software will be utilized for drainage design • AG132 software will be used for illumination design • MS Excel will be utilized for spreadsheets. • MS Word will be utilized for word processing. • MS Project will be utilized for scheduling. • MS Power Point will be utilized for presentations. • Synchro version 9 will be used for stop -controlled and signalized intersection operational analysis as well as signal timing optimization. Sidra version 5.x will be used for alterative intersection control operational analysis (if needed). Highway Capacity Software version HCS20I0 will be used for the operational analysis of merge and diverge locations. VISSIM software will be used for micro- simulation analysis. VISUM will be used for travel demand forecasting as provided by SRTC. AutoTurn for MicroStation© Version 8i will be utilized to evaluate vehicle turning movements. • ES RI ArcGIS products will be used for the processing and presentation of geospatial information. • Construction bid estimates and other opinions of cost and schedule are estimates. Therefore, CONSULTANT Team makes no warranty that actual project costs, financial aspects, economic feasibility, or schedules will not vary from CONSULTANT Team's opinions, analyses, projections City of Spokane Valley Page 3 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December I, 2016 or estimates. G. Change Management This is a cost plus fixed fee contract with a not to exceed maximum. lithe scope of work increases or decreases as it relates to the following scope of work, then an adjustment to the associated fees and delivery schedule will be implemented once the CLIENT and the CONSULTANT mutually agree on the terms of the change and an agreement to formalize the terms is executed. Task 1.0 PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND QUALITY CONTROL 1,1 Project Management Project management will be on-going during the course of the project. The project manager will maintain communication with the CLIENT, WSDOT, and BNSF and will monitor the project's scope, schedule, and budget, will coordinate and communicate with the project's subconsultants, and other similar project management tasks. ASSUMPTION • For purposes of This scope it is assumed that project management will require 20 hours per month. 1.2 ProjectWise and Project Setup DEA and HDR will set up project files. This will include setting up budget tracking spreadsheets, plan storage areas, preparing the project's financial files, and the project's electronic and hard copy technical filing system. This will also include setting up ProjectWisc for the ease of data storage and transfer between all team members: CONSULTANT, CLIENT, WSDOT, BNSF, etc, and preparing file storage and access instructions/protocols. ASSUMPTION • DEA will house the project files on its ProjectWise Server and provide access to the other consultants, CLIENT, WSDO'I', and others, as appropriate. 1,3 Subconsultant Agreements and Coordination DEA will prepare subconsultant agreements for HDR, GE, and HRA. This will include developing the draft of the subconsultant agreement, having management from each firm review the agreement, then issuing and executing the final agreements. 1.4 Prepare Project Notebooks DEA will prepare project notebooks for team members (CLIENT, WSDOT, subconsultants, DEA) that include project contact information, the project's work breakdown structure (WBS) codes for invoicing, the electronic filing structure on DEA's ProjectWise server, the negotiated scope of work and labor spreadsheet, the project's Critical Path Diagram (CPD) schedule, the project's Quality Management Plan, and other pertinent data. The notebooks will be updated periodically as approvals are granted and pertinent data becomes available. 1.5 Project Quality Management Plan DEA will prepare a Project Specific Quality Management Plan. The Plan will identify the Quality Management Team, procedures that will be used for quality assurance and quality control, the schedule of quality management tasks, and quality control protocol that will be followed. The plan will be submitted to the CLIENT and WSDOT for review and approval. City of Spokane Valley Page 4 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 1.6 Develop Project CPD Schedule and Updates DEA will prepare a schedule in Microsoft Project. The project team will use the schedule, which will be updated monthly with actual milestone achievements, to check the budget, staffing levels, and where the deliverable schedule might be affected. These tools will be used to adjust staff assignments so that schedule and fee commitments are met. Project team meetings will enforce the schedule and hold team members accountable for progress on their components of the project. Schedule updates will be submitted monthly to the CLIENT as part of the invoice package. DELIVERABLES • Project Schedule • Monthly Project Schedule updates • Quality Management Plan • Project Notebooks • Access to ProjectWise 1.7 Monthly Progress Reports and Invoices The CONSULTANT Team will provide monthly progress reports and invoices in accordance with the CLIENT'S standard procedures. DEA will coordinate the first invoice so that the format is acceptable to the CLIENT. Each progress report and invoice package will include the CONSULTANT Team's invoice showing all labor and direct expenses included for the period, the monthly progress report, and fill documentation of labor hours and direct expenses charged for the period for DEA and each subconsultant. A total of 11 progress report and invoice packages (December 2016 to November 2017) will be submitted as part of this initial contract. ASSUMPTIONS • The invoice format for this project will be one that is acceptable to the CLIENT. • Progress Report and Invoice packages will be prepared monthly for 11 months. DELIVERABLES • Monthly Progress Report and hlvoice Packages • Monthly Project Schedule update 1,8 Project Team Meetings and Council Meeting Presentations Regular meetings will be scheduled to monitor the progress of the project, to coordinate with team members, and to maintain accountability between all members of the team including the CONSULTANT, subconsultants, the CLIENT, and WSDOT. 1.8.1 City Council Meetings The DEA project manager will attend up to three (3) City Council Meetings as part of this project al appropriate milestones to report progress to the Council and to support CLIENT staff representatives. These milestones will likely be after the project team completes the Bridge and Interchange Alternatives Analysis and when the Design Approval Memorandum is approved by the CLIENT and WSDOT. One other meeting with the City Council will be attended by DEA at the discretion of CLIENT staff. Preparation for the City Council Meeting will include developing graphics and/or a Power Point presentation — using the presentation mechanism that best fits the Council's needs. ASSUMPTIONS • For budgetary purposes, up to three (3) graphics will be prepared. • For budgetary purposes, up to two (2) PowerPoint presentations will prepared. DELIVERABLES • Graphics • PowerPoint Presentation City of Spokane Valley Page 5 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 1.81 Project Design Team Meetings The Project Design Team is made up of representatives from the CLIENT, WSDOT, BNSF (when available to participate) and the CONSULTANT Team. The meetings will be face to face and will occur once a month in DEA's offices. Key team members that need to participate but that cannot travel to the meetings will be included by conference call. It is anticipated that there will be 11 Project Design Team meetings lasting about two (2) hours each not including travel. Four (4) DEA staff members (Project Manager, Interchange/Roadway Lead, Bridge Lead, and Traffic Engineer) on average will be in attendance. Three (3) staff members from I -IDR (Transportation Lead, Bridge or BNSF Lead, and Roadway Lead) will also participate in the meetings. Only staff needed at each team meeting will be invited and the list of invitees will be modified each month. Items covered at the meetings will include: • Environmental Documentation discussion and review • Planning Framework (Methods and Assumptions Document) • Basis of Design review and confirmation • BNSF Coordination and Processing • Bridge and Interchange Alternatives Development and review • Practical Design opportunities and discussion • Technical Reports and Memoranda discussion and review • Quality Control/Quality Assurance Review • Intermediate Design progress and schedule • Change Management DELIVERABLES • Meeting Agenda and Meeting Minutes 1.9 Quality Control!Quallty Assurance Review Quality Control reviews will be conducted by the Quality Control Team prior to submittal of major - deliverables. Unique task specific QA/QC tasks are additionally included under specific tasks to which they apply. QA/QC tasks include the following: • Draft and Final survey mapping products • Draft and Final Technical Reports • Draft and Final Traffic Operalional Analysis • Bridge and Interchange Alternatives Analysis and Recommendations • Draft and Final Environmental Documents • Drag and Final Alternatives Evaluation Report • Draft and Final Public Involvement Materials • Draft and Final Basis of Design Memorandum • Draft and Final Design Approval Memorandum • Draft and Final Hydraulic Design Report • Intermediate Design documents City of Spokane Valley Page 6 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 Task 2.0 CAPACITY JUSTIFICATION REPORT 2,1 Capacity Justification Report The CONSULTANT will provide data and supporting information to the CLIENT for the preparation of the Capacity Justification Report as required by SRTC's Congestion Management Process. It is assumed that the CLIENT will prepare and submit this report. Task 3.0 CORRIDOR INVENTORY / DATA COLLECTION The CONSULTANT will collect existing project information and obtain new information needed to proceed with the design documents. Sources of information may include contract plans, as-builts, surveys, field visits to collect information, State and City files and databases, design and policy manuals, transportation plans, previous corridor studies, discussions with City, State and local technical experts, and other sources of information as needed. 3,1 Obtain As-Builts and Contract Plan Documents DEA will request from the CLIENT, WSDOT, and BNSF any as -built construction documents and contract plans for improvements located in the project vicinity. This would include as -built drawings and right-of-way plans for SR 290, Barker Road, N. Flora Road, E Wellesley Avenue, and N. Vista Grande Dr. This would also include as-builts for the Wellesley Avenue bridges at the BNSF and SR 290 crossings. Any existing area boring logs, roadway structural sections or area infiltration rates that were developed for other arca projects will also be provided to the CONSULTANT Team for use as reference. ASSUMPTION The CLIENT will provide the Design/CAD files of the realignment of Wellesley Avenue that has already been agreed to for a land exchange between Raymond Villanueva and Avista Corporation (approximately 2.1 to 2.2 acres). 3.2 Assemble Applicable Design Standards and Policies DEA will prepare a WSDOT Basis of Design Form which wil] include General Project Information, Project Needs, Context, Design Controls, and Interchange and Bridge Alternatives Analysis Summary. This Basis of Design will form the foundation from which the Intermediate Design Plans will be developed. An initial draft of the Basis of Design will be prepared early in the process and circulated to WSDOT and the CLIENT for review. Comments from the review will be updated in the document and changes to the document throughout the development process will be tracked and also communicated to the design team. This form will be finalized and included in the Design Report. 3,3 Update/Verify Environmental and Land Use Constraints Utilizing files and information received under prior tasks and from the original 30% BTV Design effort, environmental and land use constraints will be evaluated and verified for applicability to the project. Land use constraints will be identified and will be placed in a base map for referencing into the design documents, plans, and exhibits. 3,4 Verify Existing Corridor Utilities and Develop Utility Conflict Matrix (by CLIENT) The purpose of this task is to build on the utility contacts that occurred with the 30% BTV Design effort, to notify the utility companies of the proposed project, to identify existing or planned major utility lines that may affect design elements, and to develop a protocol of how to best coordinate with the utility companies. Utility transmission, distribution, and service lines information gathered will be provided to DEA for depiction on project mapping. THE CLIENT will contact utility companies early in the project so that existing and proposed utility facilities are considered throughout the design process. Utility companies will be identified and a search City of Spokane Valley Page 7 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 will be made by contacting WSDOT and known wet and dry utility providers to identify lesser known utilities (small private water, sewer, irrigation or electric utilities for instance). Each company will be contacted and copies of their existing corridor facilities will be requested. THE CLIENT will also develop a utility conflict matrix that will be used in identifying utility constraints for the alternatives considered. The matrix will include the utility company, contact information, type of utility and location, likelihood of a conflict, any compensable property rights an existing Utility may possess, and a preliminary determination of relocation reimbursement with associated costs. Meetings with each utility purveyor will be held to discuss the project and potential relocations, as outlined in the sub -tasks below: 3.4.1 Highland .Estates / Spokane County Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) THE CLIENT will coordinate with Spokane County and Highland Estates regarding demolition of the wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) that has been taken out of operation. ASSUMPTIONS • The WWTP is not in operation • The WWTP has been abandoned. in-place • Demolition of the WWTP will be the responsibility of Highland Estates or Spokane County DELIVERABLES • Copies of information and documents received from County or Highland Estates. 3.4.2 Pioneer Water Company THE CLIENT will meet with Pioneer Water Company to determine the current status of the wells and as - built information. ASSUMPTIONS • The wells are still in operation and will not be impacted due to the project, • THE CLIENT will meet with Pioneer Water Company to determine the current status of the well and main line(s) leaving the wells. DELIVERABLES • Meeting Minutes from the meeting • Copies of information and documents received from Pioneer. 3.4.3 Consolidated Irrigation District Based on the 30% BTV design report from December 31, 2004, there are water lines that will require relocation. THE CLIENT will meet with Consolidated Irrigation District to determine the current status of their water lines within the project area. ASSUMPTIONS • The water line on the east side of Barker will be relocated outside of the proposed construction limits • The relocated line will require a plan and profile sheet(s) that will be developed under a future Supplemental Agreement. • Water pressure calculations will not be required. • Consolidated Irrigation District will provide required specifications for any proposed improvements. • The water line near relocated Wellesley Avenue will be protected in place. • THE CLIENT will meet with Consolidated Irrigation District representative to determine the current status of their facilities. One meeting will include research into the current system and another meeting to discuss a proposed relocation or change to the system functionality. DELIVERABLES • Meeting Minutes from each meeting • Copies of information ancl documents received from Consolidated Irrigation District. City of Spokane Valley Page 8 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December I, 2016 3.4.4 Telecommunications Based on the 30% BTV design report from December 31, 2004, there are significant telecommunication lines that will require relocation. On the north side of SR 290, fiber optic lines extend east -west from a vault at the NE comer of the SR 290/Barker intersection. There is also an existing fiber optic line south of the BNSF tracks that may require relocation (depending on the final bridge configuration). The report did not mention the number of companies present. ASSUMPTIONS • Two telecommunication utility companies are present in the area • There arc fiber optic lines that will require relocation • THE CLIENT will meet with the utility companies' representative to determine the current status of their facilities. One meeting will include research into the current system and another two (2) meetings to discuss a proposed relocation or change to the system's functionality (relocation and conduit needs on the bridges). DELIVERABLES • Meeting Minutes from each meeting • Copies of information and documents received from utility companies. 3.4.5 Avista Utilities (Power and Natural Gas) Based on the 30% BTV design report from December 31, 2004, there are power and natural gas transmission and distribution lines within the project area. Power transmission lines cross over Trent about 500 feet west of Barker Road, Since 2004, the poles appear to have been replaced. There is a single pole on the north side of SR 290 above a rock cut that is presently near the proposed westbound on-ramp for the 30% BTV design interchange. According to information from Avista, the existing clearance over Trent is 36 feet and the minimum is 34 feet. The proposed ramp and profile may reduce this clearance. Also, the structural stability of the pole and its foundation may be impaeted by the proposed ramp. Power distribution lines are overhead on the east side of Barker Road. Based on the 30% BTV design, several poles were anticipated to require relocation outside the road construction limits. Also vertical clearances will need to be verified for the eastbound on-ramp and westbound off -ramp. Natural gas transmission plain (12-ineh) is on an east -west alignment and may need to be relocated. Natural gas distribution main lines are adjacent to Consolidated's water mains. The mains are on the cast side of Barker Road and on the south side of the BNSF tracks, east of Barker Road. On the Barker Road main, it is anticipated to be relocated to the east, outside the toe of the new fill slopes. The east -west main is anticipated to be protected in place. THE CLIENT will meet with Avista utilities to determine the current status of its services within the project area. ASSUMPTIONS • THE CLIENT will meet with the Avista representative to determine the eurrent status of its facilities. One meeting will include research into the current system and another two (2) meetings to discuss a proposed relocation or change to the system's Functionality (Transmission line clearance, distribution clearances (two ramps), and gas line relocation). DELIVERABLES • Meeting Minutes from each meeting • Copies of information and documents received from Avista. 3.4.6 Yellowstone Pipeline Company Based on the 30% BTV design report from December 31, 2004, there is a 10 -inch petroleum pipe line along the south side of the tracks. Depending on the final bridge configuration, the pipeline may be City of Spokane Valley Page 9 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 impacted. THE CLIENT will meet with Yellowstone Pipeline Company to determine the current status of its services within the project area. ASSUMPTIONS • THE CLIENT will meet with the Yellowstone Pipeline representative to determine the current status of their facilities. One meeting will include research into the current system and another one (1) meeting to discuss a proposed relocation or change to the system's functionality. DELIVERABLES • Meeting Minutes from each meeting • Copies of information and documents received from Yellowstone Pipeline Company. 3.5 Site Visits to Obtain Additional Information as Needed Technical staff from the CONSULTANT team will perform site visits to obtain additional project information. This may include confirming or reviewing existing surface features, topographical, utility, boundary, environmental and other constraints. It is estimated that a total of two (2) site visits will be required by DEA and two (2) site visits will be required by HDR. It is assumed that two (2) staff will participate in each site visit. DELIVERABLES • None Task 4.0 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING GeoEngineers (GE) is DEA's Geotechnical Subconsultant for this project. The scope of work for DEA and HDR as related to the geotechnical work is as follows: • Coordination with GeoEngineers in developing the work plan - DEA • Coordinating environmental and cultural clearances to initiate the work - DEA • Coordinating with WSDOT to obtain a General Permit to work within the SR 290 right-of-way - DEA • Coordinating witlt the CLIENT to obtain street obstruction permits - DEA • Quality Control Review of both the Draft and Final Geotechnical Report prior to submittal to the CLIENT— DEA and HDR. ASSUMPTIONS • SR 290 Bridge Work plan coordination will be accomplished by HDR • DEA and HDR will review the Draft and Final Geotechnical Reports • Coordinating with BNSF to obtain a Temporary Occupancy Permit is covered under other tasks (HDR) • Traffic signal and illumination pole foundation evaluation is not included in the current geotechnical scope of work and will be included in a subsequent agreement if necessary. • Sign structure foundation evaluation is not included in the current geotechnical scope of work and will be included in a subsequent agreement if necessary. GE's Scope of Work is as Follows: GEOENGINEER'S WORK TASKS: The City plans to improve traffic flow and safety at the Barker Road/SR 290 intersection by constructing an overpass for Barker Road over the BNSF Railway (BNSF) railroad corridor and SR 290. Access to SR 290 will be via a diamond interchange layout. The Wellesley Avenue "flyover" located east of the interchange will be removed, and Wellesley Avenue will be re -aligned to connect to Barker Road about 500 feet south of the interchange and north to Vista Grande Drive. City of Spokane Valley Page 10 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 The proposed BNSF overpass bridge will consist of an approximately 27I -foot -long, 3 -span bridge. The proposed SR 290 overpass bridge will consist of an approximately 141 -foot -long, single span bridge. Retaining walls will help support proposed SR 290 access ramps at the following locations: between the BNSF tracks and the SR 290 eastbound (EB) ramps; between SR 290 and the SR 290 EB access ramps; and between SR 290 and the westbound (WB) access ramps. The retaining walls likely will consist of a combination of concrete cast -in-place and mechanically stabilized earth walls. The north side of the SR 290 WB access ramps are planned to consist of a combination of fill slopes within the eastern approximate two-thirds of the ramp footprint and a rock cut slope within the western approximate one third of the ramp footprint. Additional improvements will include stormwater management facilities along Barker Road and the proposed Wellesley Avenue alignment. We anticipate proposed Barker Road and SR 290 access ramp embankments will be less than about 30 feet in height. METHODOLOGY Previous explorations, including borings and subcontracted geophysical testing were completed by Budinger & Associates, Inc. in 2003 for preliminary feasibility and conceptual design purposes. In order to meet WSDOT and American Railway Engineering and Maintenance -of -Way Association (AREMA) guidelines for subsurface exploration programs for projects of this scope, GE proposes to supplement the existing subsurface data with additional explorations. GE's research of the existing data and experience in the project vicinity indicates natural soil conditions underlying most of the site could include outburst flood gravel deposits. The outburst flood gravels deposited in the site vicinity also typically contain varying amounts of cobbles and boulders. However, the previous geophysical data also indicates a possible softer zone located about 40 feet below site grade in the project vicinity. For this reason, we propose completing deeper borings to support bridge foundation design by air -rotary drilling methods to reduce the chance of drilling refusal caused by cobbles or boulders and to evaluate the softer soil zone possibly located beneath the bridge foundations. GE proposes completing the remaining shallower soil borings at the currently proposed retaining wall and stornlwater pond locations using hollow -stem auger drilling methods. A portion of the site near the proposed WB on-ramp is underlain by gneiss rock, Grade lowering (cutting) for the proposed WB SR 290 on-ramp likely will require excavation of the gneiss. We propose to evaluate the surface condition of the rock through geologic mapping. GE will supplement the geologic mapping and evaluate rock strength by completing a series of wireline rock cores. The results of the geologic mapping and rock cores will be used to evaluate the level of effort required by the contractor to excavate rock in this vicinity. Additional shallow explorations along proposed roadways will be completed by backhoe test pits. To the extent possible, GE will restore the site around each exploration to its pre -exploration condition. GEOENGINEER'S SCOPE OF SERVICES The purpose of the geotechnical engineering services is to provide recommendations for site preparation and earthwork, and foundation design and construction based on site exploration, laboratory testing and engineering analyses. Specific scope of services will include: • Contacting the one -call utility notification system and assisting in coordinating with BNSF, WSDOT and private land owners during siting of the explorations relative to underground utilities. • Supporting DEA in obtaining street obstruction permits for explorations within public right-of-way. • Completing a geologic reconnaissance of the site, including evaluating and mapping the existing rock cut along the north side of SR 290, west of the proposed interchange. • Exploring soil, rock and groundwater conditions underlying the proposed Barker Overpass site by drilling 13 borings, and excavating 10 test pits using a backhoe. Specifically, explorations will be distributed across the site as follows: o Four air -rotary borings at proposed bridge bent and abutment locations, drilled to depths in the range of about 50 to 70 feet below existing site grade. if rock is encountered a depth of City of Spokane Valley Page 11 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December I, 2016 less than about 50 feet below existing site grade, GE will obtain up to 10 feet of rock core. If rock is encountered below about 50 feet, GE will advance the air -rotary borings about 5 feet into apparent rock. o Six hollow -stem borings at proposed retaining wall and stormwater management facility locations drilled to depths in the range of about 25 to 30 feet, or practical auger refusal, whichever occurs first. o Three rock core borings in the vicinity of the WB SR 290 on-ramp, cored to depths in the range of about 20 to 40 feet below existing site grade (depending on grading plans relative to existing site grades). For estimating purposes, a total of 90 lineal feet of coring are assumed. o Ten test pits excavated to depths in the range of about 8 to 12 feet below existing site grade at the locations along proposed alignments and fill slopes associated with the overpass, SR 290 and Wellesley Avenue realignment. Each boring and test pit will be monitored by an experienced engineer or geologist from GE. Soil samples will be collected from the borings at approximate 21/2- to 5 -foot -depth intervals. Continuous rock core will be collected from the rock core borings. Grab and bulk samples of site soil will be obtained from the test pits. Relatively undisturbed (Shelby tube) samples might be collected if fine-grained (silt or clay) soil is encountered during drilling. Soil and rock samples will be returned to GE's laboratory for subsequent evaluation. Each boring, following its completion, will be backfilled in accordance with state regulations. Borings completed in public roadways will be patched with like material. Each test pit, upon completion, will be backfilled with excavation spoils, tamped into place, and the ground surface smoothed with the excavator bucket. • Laboratory testing to assess pertinent physical and engineering properties of soil encountered relative to the proposed construction. For budget estimating purposes, the assumed testing program includes: 2 R-Value/CBR tests; 2 modified Proctor tests; 15 gradation analyses; 15 percent fines passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve tests; 10 moisture content determinations; 8 rock point load index tests; and 3 rock unconfined compression tests. Laboratory testing will be completed in general accordance with applicable A STM International (ASTM) standards. • Recommendations for site preparation and fill placement including: criteria for clearing, stripping and grubbing; an evaluation of the suitability of on-site soil for use as structural fill; gradation criteria for imported fill; guidance for preparation of subgrade soil, which will support pavements; and criteria for structural fill placement and compaction. Recommendations for allowable cut and fill slope inclinations will be provided. • Recommendations for design and construction of conventional shallow foundations for retaining walls including: soil bearing pressures; minimum width and depth criteria; coefficient of friction and equivalent fluid densities for the passive earth pressure state of stress to estimate resistance to lateral loads; and estimates of foundation settlement. Design criteria will be presented in Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) format. Where shallow foundations are not feasible, recommendations will be provided for design of drilled shafts at select bridge bent locations including: capacity versus shaft depth (penetration) for downward and uplift load conditions; estimates of single shaft settlement; and group reduction factors, if appropriate. • Recommendations for lateral earth pressure criteria for design of retaining walls including equivalent fluid densities for the active, at -rest and passive earth pressure states of stress. Soil strength parameters for mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) wall design will be provided including: unit weight; friction angle; and cohesion. Internal stability design of MSE walls will be completed by the wall designer. City of Spokane Valley Page 12 Scope of Services Barker Road/IBNSF Grade Separation December I, 2016 • Geotechnical seismic design criteria based on the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) procedures. • Pavement layer thickness design based on vehicle type and traffic volumes provided by DEA, and recommendations for hot mix asphalt (HMA) pavement construction including: criteria for base course thickness, gradation and required degree of compaction; and thickness and compaction criteria for HMA surfacing. • Recommendations for surface and subsurface drainage, as appropriate, including an evaluation of the feasibility of subsurface disposal of storntwater, and design parameters; if appropriate. Analyses will be based on correlations of soil grain -size analyses to permeability found in the Spokane Regional Stornnvater Manual (SRSIvI) and the WSDOT Highway Runoff Manual. • A draft and final written report containing findings, conclusions and recommendations. One round of comments to the draft report from DEA, the City, WSDOT and BNSF is assumed. The final report will address the comments. ASSUMPTIONS • The exploration locations are accessible to truck -mounted drilling equipment. • Fieldwork will be performed during normal daytime hours (Monday through Friday). Street obstruction permits for explorations in public streets and private land access agreements will allow for 8 am to 6 pm work. • Written permission to access explorations on private property (including BNSR and WSDOT right- of-way [ROW]) will be obtained by the CONSULTANT team with assistance from the CLIENT. • BNSF will provide permission to access and drill and/or excavate test pits at proposed boring and test pit locations on BNSF ROW in a timely manner that allow for all drilling services to be completed under a single mobilization of equipment, • A BNSF-approved lookout or flogger, if required to support our field activities, will be scheduled and provided by others. • Underground utilities located on private property will be located by the current property owner. If this is not possible or acceptable, a private utility locator may need to be subcontracted at additional cost. • Temporary road building is not anticipated for truck -equipment access. Hydro -seeding, re -vegetation or other improvements are rtot included in this scope of work. • Cultural resources and environmental permitting required for exploration work will be coordinated under other tasks. GE will assist with preparing exploration plans, upon request. • It is assumed that contaminated soil will not be encountered during drilling of geotechnical borings or excavation of test pits. As such, GeoEngineers will not provide field screening, which is used to assess possible presence of volatile and septi -volatile compounds in soil. If obvious contaminated materials (based on coloration or odor) are encountered, drilling will be stopped, the drill crew will be put on stand-by and GeoEngineers will notify DEA. • Drill cuttings (non -contaminated) that cannot be returned to completed exploratory borings will be evenly distributed near the borings in undeveloped areas. if on-site disposal is not acceptable to BNSF, GeoEngineers will collect the soil in drums on site and transport them to a facility approved by BNSF within 5 utiles of the boring locations. Task 5.0 CONFIRM PLANNING FRAMEWORK FOR THE PROJECT (CLIENT AND WSDOT) Based on the data gathered as part of Task 3, the CONSULTANT, CLIENT, and WSDOT will collaborate to confirm the planning framework items. This effort will be driven by the Methods and City of Spokane Valley Page 13 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 Assumptions document development process prepared under other tasks. The planning framework includes but is not limited to the following items: • Traffic Operations Parameters -- DEA will work with the CLIENT and WSDOT to determine the design year, the peak hour volume hour forecast, and the operational criteria (including LOS). See Traffic Modeling and Analysis Task for scope definition. • Future Vision and Forward Compatibility within the Corridor - DEA will work with the CLIENT to confirm the City's vision for the area. DEA will work with the CLIENT and WSDOT to confirm the State's forward compatibility plan for the corridor. This information will form a basis for the future project compatibility. • Right-of-way, local area development — DEA will work with the CLIENT to determine future land use and upcoming developments for the corridor. • Pedestrian/bicycle use— DEA will work with the CLIENT and WSDOT to determine pedestrian and bicycle routes and use and appropriate applications for the project. DEA will include the findings from this task in the Methods and Assumptions document confirming these items. The planning framework and related questions will be circulated for review and discussed/confirmed at a Project Progress Meeting. Task 6.0 TRAFFIC MODELING AND ANALYSIS 6.1 Traffic Volumes Data Collection DEA will coordinate the collection of intersection AM and PM peak hour turning movement counts through a traffic count vendor. AM Counts will be conducted between 7AM and 9AM. PM Counts will be conducted between 4PM and 6PM. The counts will be collected at up to 12 intersections which will further be confirmed through the Methods and Assumptions document. Intersections immediately adjacent to the project and identified for counting are listed below: • Barker Road @ Trent Avenue/SR-290 • Barker Road @ Proposed Wellesley Approach (existing commercial approach) • Del Rey Drive @ Trent Avenue/SR-290 • Flora Road @ Trent Avenue/SR-290 DEA will also coordinate the collection of ADT (tube) counts at the 5 locations identified below: • Barker Road south of BNSF • Trent Avenue west of Del Rey Drive • Westbound Trent Avenue north of Wellesley Avenue flyover • Wellesley Avenue west of flyover • Eastbound Trent Avenue east of Barker Road The CLIENT will provide available data to DEA for review. Expected data includes but is not limited to: • Relevant GIS data and files • Copies of recent studies or reports that may impact the study area • Signal timing plans for any traffic signals within the study area • Any recent traffic counts available within the study area 6.2 Develop Project Methods and Assumptions Document The CONSULTANT will develop the project Methods and Assumptions document in accordance with WSDOT Design Manual Section 550.02(1)(b). This will include the project's purpose and need, analysis City of Spokane Valley Page 14 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 methodologies, criteria, traffic analysis tools and approach, etc. The Methods and Assumptions document is a living document and will be updated as new decisions and conclusions are reached. ASSUMPTIONS • A speed study will not be necessary for the project • An Interchange Justification Report (IJR) or partial IJR will not be needed for the project DELIVERABLES • Draft and Final Methods and Assumptions document 6.3 Travel Demand Forecasting in AM and PM Peak Hours Given this determination of travel through the area, DEA will coordinate with the CLIENT for their traffic volume and land use projections in the study area, which incorporates the latest updates to the land uses in the study area through the Comprehensive Plan Update, The CLIENT will provide the land use assumptions and trip growth for the geographic areas included in the study, This growth will be used to project the increase in trips and redistribution of traffic through the project area. ASSUMPTIONS • It is assumed that the CLIENT will provide the travel demand modeling AM and PM projections for the traffic patterns through the study area. Manual adjustments will be made to accommodate the alternative configurations. • Traffic volume forecasts will be completed for the 2040 design year. 6.4 Operational Assessment of Study Intersections and Study Corridors in AM and PM Peak Hours (including weaving, LOS, and queuing) DEA will develop one (1) traffic model to complete the operational analyses of the study area. 6.4.1 Create Synchro Operational Model DEA will create a model using Synchro operational software to calculate the level of service based on Highway Capacity Manual 2010 (HCM2010) methodologies. This model will be used to evaluate the delay and level of service (LOS) of the study area intersections to meet WSDOT design manual requirements and City LOS standards: LOS D or better at signalized intersections. • LOS E or better at unsignalized intersections or driveways. • Up to three (3) isolated intersection analyses will be completed for alternative intersection control alternatives using Sidra evaluation software. 6.4.2 Ramp Merge/Diverge Analysis DEA will utilize the I-Iighway Capacity Software and the Highway Capacity Manual 2010 (HCM20I0) methodologies to evaluate the merge and diverge operations at the ramp gores. The WSDOT standard for regionally significant highways in an urban setting is LOS D. 6.4.3 Trent Avenue (SR -290) Operations DEA will utilize the Highway Capacity Software and tate HCM2010 methodologies to evaluate the operations of SR -290 including the reduction in lanes from two to one. The WSDOT standard for regionally significant highways in an urban setting is LOS D. 6.5 Collision History Evaluation — Evaluate Safety History of the Intersections and Roadways DEA will obtain crash data from the CLIENT and WSDOT for 2011-2015. Using methodologies and procedures prescribed in AASHTO's 2010 Highway Safety Manual (HSM), DEA will conduct an analysis of any high accident locations within the study area. This analysis will be used to develop calibration factors for use in the evaluation of design alternatives. City of Spokane Valley Page 15 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 DELIVERABLES • Collision Analysis Memorandum • Summary of Synchro model (in Traffic Operations Report) • Summary of Merge/Diverge Analysis (in Traffic Operations Report) • Summary of SR 290 Operations (in Traffic Operations Report) 6.6 Intersection Control Analysis for Project Intersections Given the alternatives developed in the Alternatives Analysis task and the subsequent volumes derived for the alternatives, the intersection volumes wilt be evaluated to determine the appropriate intersection control type. This task will include signal warrant analyses based on peak hour volumes at the project intersections, as listed below: • Barker Road at Vista Grande Drive • Barker Road at Eastbound Ramps • Barker Road at Westbound Ramps • Barker Road at Wellesley Avenue For the alternatives based on the 30% BTV design configuration, DEA will evaluate each of the following types of intersection control: • Two-way stop control • Signalization • All -way stop control • One Other Findings will be included in the Traffic Operational Analysis Report. 6.7 Draft Traffic Operational Analysis Report DEA will prepare a draft traffic operation analysis report for the project. The report will include the following items: • Summary of data collection • Traffic forecasting assumptions and results as discussed above • Operational analysis methodology and results as discussed above • Safety analysis methodology and results as discussed above • Findings and Recommendations ASSUMPTIONS • The CLIENT will provide recent ADT data and any recent turning movement counts within the study area as identified in the scope. • The CLIENT will provide crash data as identified in the scope. DELIVERABLES • Draft Traffic Operational Analysis Report 6.8 Final Traffic Operational Analysis Report Addressing the comments received on the draft report, the CONSULTANT will review and respond to each comment and if appropriate, incorporate them into the Final Traffic Operational Analysis Report. DELIVERABLES • Final Traffic Operational Analysis Report City of Spokane Valley Page 16 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 Task 7.0 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM The public involvement process will be performed as described below and will be reviewed by CLIENT and WSDOT representatives prior to implementation. ASSUMPTIONS • A formal Public Participation Pian will not be prepared • The CLIENT will conduct meetings with stakeholders and citizen action committees like the Chamber of Commerce, bicycle and pedestrian groups, and other applicable stakeholders. • The CLIENT will send invitations to public meetings and project related events. • The CLIENT will be responsible for any press releases that are issued related to the project. • The CLIENT will be responsible for developing and updating a project website if one is created for the project. The CONSULTANT team will provide necessary information to the CLIENT and the CLIENT will maintain the website. The CLIENT will provide the CONSULTANT team with any feedback from stakeholders/community member use of the website. • The CLIENT will be responsible for developing and distributing Fact Sheets and "Frequently Asked Questions" sheets if they will be prepared for the project. The CONSULTANT team will provide necessary information to the CLIENT so the CLIENT can publish and distribute this information. • This scope of work does not include launching social media tools as a component of communication between the consultant team and the stakeholders. 7.1 Public Open House DEA will arrange, prepare, and attend one (1) Public Open House meeting. The CLIENT will notify the public of this meeting by sending a direct mail postcard to identified stakeholders. The Public Open House Meeting will be held after the Bridge and Interchange Alternatives Analysis has been completed and the preferred alternative has been selected. This scope of work does not include any virtual open houses. DEA AND HDR RESPONSIBILITIES AND DELIVERABLES • Coordinate logistics for the meetings - DEA • Provide sign in sheet - DEA • Provide project displays (a total of ten (10) displays are anticipated five (5) by each DEA and HDR • Facilitate Public Open House - DEA • Provide a summary of the Public Open House— DEA CITY RESPONSIBILITIES • Prepare, print, and mail postcards to the public and identified stakeholders. DEA will provide the mailing list developed to the CLIENT as part of the Notification of Field Activities. • Provide facility for Public Open House • Advertise the Public Open House in the newspaper • Send open house notifications to local civic organizations • Provide refreshments • Attend Public Open House • Include Public Open House dates in City newsletter and on City website (if one is developed for the project) ASSUMPTIONS • Public Open House will last for five (5) hours including set up and take down. • Three (3) local staff members from DEA and one (1) local staff member from l -IDR will attend the meeting City of Spokane Valley Page 17 Scope of Services Barker RoadIBNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 7.2 Property Owner Contact Meetings HDR staff will support the CLIENT in conducting owner contact meetings with property owners that will be impacted by the project. 7.2.1 Initial Owner Contact Meetings The CLIENT will set up and conduct the Owner Contact Meetings. DEA and HDR will provide plans prepared under other tasks to support this effort. One staff member from HDR will participate in two (2) owner contact meetings (as requested by the CLIENT) accompanying CLIENT staff to discuss the project with impacted property owners. The purpose of the meetings is to explain design elements that affect the property owners (driveway approaches, fences, right-of-way acquisition, etc.) and to gather information that enables the design team to develop a more context sensitive design. The meetings will be set up by the CLIENT and will occur once the Bridge and Interchange Alternatives Analysis is complete. 7.2.2 Final Owner Contact Meetings The CLIENT will set up and conduct Final Owner Contact Meetings. DEA and HDR will provide plans prepared under other tasks to support this effort. One staff member from HDR will participate in two (2) owner contact meetings (as requested by the CLIENT) accompanying CLIENT staff to discuss the project with impacted property owners. The purpose of the Final Owner Contact meetings is to explain how design elements that affect the property owners that were discussed at the initial meeting were incorporated into the design. The meetings will be set up by the CLIENT and will occur once the Intermediate Design Plans are prepared. DELIVERABLES • Notes from initial owner contact meetings (up to two (2) in-person meetings with direct property owners) • Notes from final owner contact meetings (up to two (2) in-person meetings with direct property owners) CITY RESPONSIBILITIES • Leading and setting up all owner contact meetings -- the CONSULTANT Team will only participate in meetings that the CLIENT requests. Task 8.0 NEPA DOCUMENTATION 8,1 Environmental Studies DEA will coordinate with WSDOT Local Programs to determine the type and scope of environmental studies needed. At a minimum DEA will conduct the following studies and prepare the associated documentation for appending to the NEPA Categorical Exclusion Documentation (CED) form prepared in Task 8.3: • Section 106 compliance and APE letter (by third party vender Historical Research Associates) • Section 44(f)/6(f) de tniniiu es determination letter • Environmental Justice letter to file • ESA No Effect letter • Critical Areas Report ASSUMPTIONS • DEA will use Historical Research Associates for Section 106 Compliance/APE Letter. If a cultural resource survey is required it will be included in a supplemental agreement. HRA's WORK TASKS Historical Research Associates, Inc. (HRA), will conduct a cultural resources inventory addressing recent design changes on the Project. The Project is part of the Spokane Regional Transportation Council's (SRTC) Bridging the Valley Project (BTV), implemented to improve traffic safety through the elimination of 75 at -grade rail/roadway crossings with mainline train operations between Spokane, Washington, and City of Spokane Valley Page 18 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 Athol, Idaho. The SRTC, in coordination with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), contracted ENTRIX, Inc. (ENTRIX), to conduct a cultural resources study in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NI -IPA) and its implementing regulations 36CFR800. ENTRIX (2005) identified a total of 45 resources in Idaho and 77 resources in Washington, four of which are situated within the current project area: 45SP450 (Old Trent Road), 45SP452 (North Branch of Spokane River Canal), 45SP499 (Northern Pacific Railroad), and 45SP502 (unnamed foundation and associated features). All four sites were determined not eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). A National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) Categorical Exclusion (CE) was approved for the entire suite of BTV projects in 2006 by FHWA and WSDOT. Based on WSDOT Local Programs CE guidance (March 2016), NEPA documentation limited to the Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation improvements is needed. The area of potential effects (APE) for BTV projects was separated for the 2005 study: one to address archaeological resources and one to address historical resources. The archaeological APE was defined as all areas of ground disturbance, including all areas of new right-of-way (ROW) and associated construction areas. The APE for historical (i.e., aboveground) resources included a 100 -foot -wide buffer on each side of the BNSF track (measured from the centerline of the outside track); all areas of new ROW; and a 100 -foot - wide buffer around areas of new road ROW at separated crossings, excluding the existing rail within the 100 feet. This general APE description for BTV projects has not changed since the 2005 study; however, the construction footprint for the current Project includes additional areas (e.g., Barker Road Extension and Wellesley Road), encompassing approximately 34 acres in Sections 5 and 6 of Township 25 North, Range 45 East, and Sections 31 and 32 of Township 26 North, Range 45 East, Willamette Meridian.. HRA's PROJECT APPROACH The project approach described below addresses potential archaeological and ethnographic cultural resources and historic -period (over 50 years of age) buildings, structures, and objects (BSOs) that the proposed Project may impact. HRA proposes to survey the construction footprint and conduct subsurface excavation for archaeological resources, and survey for aboveground resources within the 100 -foot buffer described above. Based on a preliminary review of the Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation's (DAHP) online cultural resources database (WISAARD), no archaeological sites have been recorded within, or in close proximity to, the APE since the 2005 study. DAHP's predictive model classifies the area's probability for precontact cultural resources as low to very high. A review of Historic Property Inventory Form (HPI) data on WISAARD shows no BSOs dating from the historic period in the project vicinity. HRA TASK 1: PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND AGENCY/TRIBAL COORDINATION Project Management and Coordination includes coordination with the CLIENT regarding the project schedule and deliverables, communications with DEA and the appropriate agency and tribal representatives, and internal management of tasks and products. HRA expects that WSDOT will initiate consultation with DAT -IP, as well as the interested Tribes, to notify them of the proposed Project and request their comment. HRA staff will be available for telephone consultations with DEA, DAHP, WSDOT, and/or the Tribes as necessary, regarding the project and our findings. HRA TASK 2: HEALTH AND SAFETY COORDINATION HRA's Project Manager and Health and Safety Coordinator will coordinate with the CLIENT and, as needed, BNSF, to determine which safety trainings and clearances are required, as well as appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) and procedures to follow during fieldwork. At this time, it is assumed that BNSF contractor orientation and safety training will be required for each field team member, and that eRailsafe security training and clearance will also be required. HRA will prepare a project -specific health and safety plan (HASP), but it is assumed that HDR will prepare the BNSF-required Safety Action Plan (SAP). A BNSF flagger may also be required, depending on the specifications outlined in the Temporary City of Spokane Valley Page 19 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 Occupancy Permit from BNSF. HRA will work with DEA to determine these needs closer to the date of proposed fieldwork. HRA TASK 3: BACKGROUND AND ARCHIVAL RESEARCH Background and archival research includes appropriate research to determine whether cultural resources are located in the APE, whether they are likely to be located in the APE, and to identify the appropriate historical contexts for evaluating the significance of any such resources. Based on maps and descriptions of the proposed Project, to be provided by DEA, HRA staff will conduct an online records search of the DAHP cultural resources database to determine what previous studies have been conducted within and in the vicinity of the project area, as well as to identify previously recorded archaeological sites, NRNP properties, and aboveground resources in the project vicinity. HRA personnel will also review county soil books and aerial photography, as well as historic -period maps including, but not limited to, General Land Office (G LO) plats, historic U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 15 -minute topographic maps, Metsker maps, Sanborn Fire Insurance Company maps, and other pertinent cartographic resources to develop a preliminary impression of the type and number of cultural resources that may be located within the APE and surrounding area. Additional background research will be conducted in HRA's cultural resource reference library, the Spokane Public Library, and the Joel E. Ferris Research Library and Archives, as needed. HRA TASK 4: FIELDWORK HRA will arrange for utility locates to meet the requirements of Washington's Underground Utilities regulations (RCW 19.122). This requires obtaining a locate survey for any kind of excavation on public and private property that will exceed 12 inches in depth. A locate service must be notified by the excavator (HRA) at least 2 business days before digging and the area of proposed excavation must be marked with paint as described in RCW 19.122.030. DEA will mark the location of the area (or provide locations on a map) that will receive subsurface impacts or excavations for the utility locate survey and will notify HRA when the area has been marked, so we can order the locate survey. HRA will not be responsible for marking the area or maintaining the markings. If desired by WSDOT, HRA staff will notify the Tribes about the schedule for the field survey. HRA will conduct a 100 -percent archaeological pedestrian survey of the revised APE area and a visual assessment for any potentially significant aboveground historic -period resources that may be impacted by the proposed development. Survey transects shall be 25 meters apart or less on average for the survey; narrower transects may be used according to the judgment of the Field Director. The surveyor will seek out and examine all ground exposures (e.g., exposed trails, ditches) for evidence of subsurface features and/or cultural materials. All survey areas will be drawn on a USGS quadrangle map at a scale appropriate to the size of the survey area or recorded using a Global Positioning System (GPS) instrument, utilizing HRA's standard Data Dictionary. The character of the landscape and its potential for containing intact archaeological deposits will determine subsurface testing methods. Shovel test probes will be placed in areas where the Field Director determines that a location is of high probability for the presence of subsurface cultural materials (e.g., where there is evidence of archaeological materials on the ground surface wtassociated with any of the four existing archaeological sites). Up to 20 probes will be excavated within the APE to examine the subsurface and to identify any areas that might contain buried, intact cultural strata and/or features. Probes will be at least 40 centimeters (cm) in diameter and will be excavated to a depth of at least 50 cm below the surface and terminated after 20 cm of sterile sediments or upon discovery of sediments that clearly pre -date human use of the region. Probes may be terminated at shallower depths if the sediments reveal that substantial ground disturbance has previously occurred at a location. All excavated sediments will be screened through 0.25 - inch mesh to identify any small cultural items that may be present. The identification of any subsurface cultural materials in a single shovel test will result in the excavation of up to four additional shovel tests in a cruciform pattern at a distance of 5 meters, a.k.a. "radial" probes, to determine resource boundaries. All probes will be completely backfilled and their locations will be plotted onto a project map. City of Spokane Valley Page 20 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December I, 2016 If archaeological materials are found, they will be analyzed in the field but not collected. To the extent possible, they will be identified as to type, material, function and cultural and temporal association. All encountered archaeological materials will be documented on DAHP site or isolate foams, as appropriate. Draft archaeological site and isolate forms will be submitted to DAHP for review and assignment of Smithsonian Trinomials for inclusion with the Final Report deliverable. Site boundary polygons, the locations of all features, and all shovel probe locations shall be recorded using GPS technology and on a site sketch map. Photographs will be taken to accompany the form and a sketch map will be prepared showing any intrasite resource patterns and the site in relation to the surrounding topography and proposed developments. In the event that human remains are discovered during the field survey, the Sheriff, City of Spokane Valley (City), WSDOT, DAHP, and Tribes will be immediately notified. Treatment of the human remains would be coordinated through consultation among these parties. HRA TASK 5: ANALYSIS AND REPORT PREPARATION HRA will conduct data analysis and prepare a Cultural Resource Inventory Report summarizing the results of the investigations which will adhere to the professional standards for format and content as expressed in DAHP reporting guidelines. The draft report and all associated deliverables will be submitted to DEA and WSDOT far comment in electronic format (MS Word). The report will include: • A description of the Project and applicable laws and regulations; • A summary of the results of the background literature and records research; • The methods used during the fieldwork and the results; • A description and evaluation of any cultural resources found within the APE according to national, state, and local registers, as appropriate; • A summary assessment of potential effects to any identified resources based on our knowledge of the resource type, soil conditions, and extent to which the proposed project may affect the resource; • Recommendations for completion of any additional cultural resources compliance obligations stemming from the results of our study; • A sumittaty of project procedures that should be followed in the event of an unanticipated discovery of buried cultural materials or human remains during construction; and • References cited. The report will include such tables, maps, photographs, and other graphics as are needed to depict the scope of the study and results. Archaeological site records for any recorded resources will be included in an appendix to the report. HRA will make any necessary revisions to the Draft report in response to comments by DEA and WSDOT, and will submit an electronic copy that includes the DAHP submittal form inserted (DAHP now only accepts submittals in electronic [Adobe PDF] fonnat). DELIVERABLES • Draft and Final Cultural Resource Inventory Report 8.2 Environmental Technical Memoranda DEA will prepare the following brief (l to 3 pages) documents that typically are appended to the CED form prepared in Task 8.3: • Air Quality • Noise • Right-of-way • Hazardous waste ASSUMPTIONS • Quantitative air and noise modeling is not required City of Spokane Valley Page 21 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 • Scope includes two NEPA meetings: I. Site Visit / SEPA Meeting with CLIENT (two (2) DEA staff), and 2. WSDOT Local Agency Program NEPA Kick-off Meeting (one (1) DEA staff) 8.3 NEPA Categorical Exclusion Documentation (CED) Form DEA will prepare the CED form following the WSDOT guidance in NEPA Categorical Exclusions, A Guidebook for Local Agencies (October 19, 2015). • Draft CED form • Final CED form ASSUMPTIONS • The CLIENT will adopt the approved NEPA document to meet SEPA requirements thus fulfilling a truncated SEPA approval process. • The scope includes the Critical Areas Report, which also addresses listed species and habitat. • This scope does not include the preparation of a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment. • Federal agency consultation related to ESA species will not be required. • The scope includes Area of Potential Effect Letter and research for cultural resources. If a cultural resource survey is required it will be included in a supplemental agreement. • Draft environmental documents will be revised once in response to review comments by the CLIENT and a second time in response to review comments by WSDOT/FH WA. DELIVERABLES • Draft Environmental Studies • Final Environmental Studies • Draft Environmental Technical Memoranda • Final Environmental Technical Memoranda • Draft CED form • Final CED form Task 9.0 SURVEYING 9.1 Develop Control Network 9.1.1 Notifications DEA will create notifications letters that will be approved by the CLIENT and mailed out in advance of any field work to adjacent land owners within the project limits. 9.1.2 Control Network Planning, Research, and Office Preparation DEA will develop a control network plan before performing any field work per WSDOT Highway Surveying Manual M22-97 (Section 13-03). Meetings will be held with the survey team and project manager. Following these meetings, a control plan will be developed. The project surveyor will research CLIENT, previous project control, FEMA Benchmarks, NGS datasheets and WSDOT records to determine the availability of existing control in the project area. The project surveyor will then conduct a meeting with the party chief to develop a plan to recover necessary existing control. 9.1.3 Development of GPS Control Network DEA will utilize Static GPS surveying and continuously operating Washington High -Precision Geodetic Network (HPGN) stations in post processing methods to establish a primary control network throughout the project corridor. DEA will carefully develop a localized projection so that ground distances are maintained throughout the project. WSDOT standard vertical and horizontal datum, NAD83 2011 and NAVD88 Geoid I 2B will be utilized. Control coordinates will be reported in Washington State Plane North Zone and a conversion factor will be provided for future translations, Distances will be reported in City of Spokane Valley Page 22 Scope of Services Barker RoadIBNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 ground distances. Primary control points will be used to develop the overall static control network placed within the project limits, previously defined, 11- 1000 foot intervals and at interchanges through the entire project site. These points will be monumented with aluminum caps and set in concrete and stamped with corresponding control point number. Up to ten (10) points are anticipated and will be set in locations beyond the anticipated disturbance area to the extent feasible. 9.1.4 Vertical Project Control Network DEA will establish vertical benchmarks on a horizontal control monument during the GPS Control Network effort (previous task) and project this elevation across the previously established control network. 9.1.5 Control Diagram DEA will develop a control diagram per WSDOT Highway Surveying Manual M22-97 (Chapter 13- 06.1). Included, but not limited to, in this control diagram as specified in Chapter 13-06.01, are established horizontal and vertical monument locations, HPGN stations used to establish horizontal project control, a coordinate list in state plane and local datum, and descriptions of each established control point. The project Control Diagram will also be used in the Project Control Report. ASSUMPTIONS • DEA will create a local datum plane for this project which will keep the entire project measurements nearest ground distances using one combined scale factor and will be referenced to Washington State Plane Coordinate System, North Zone, NAD 83 horizontal datum and NAVD 88 vertical datum. • DEA will search for and make ties on at least two nearest, and any other NGS published monuments within the project limits to verify vertical and horizontal accuracies are attained. • DEA will set or utilize existing monumentation on up to ten (10) points throughout the site for establishing primary control. DELIVERABLES • A control diagram and a project control report per WSDOT standards. 9,2 Aerial LiDAR Processing City of Spokane Valley Page 23 Harker Road/HNSF Grade Separation Scope of Services December 1, 2016 Supplemental topographical field and utility confirmation survey necessary due to potential gaps in the aerial survey will be collected under a supplemental agreement. However, as listed below, obtaining aerial survey data and processing it into the topographical component of the base mapping is included in this task. 9.2.1 Aerial Photocjrammetry (Provided by tire CLIENT) DEA will obtain high resolution aerial imagery and Lidar topographical point data that can be processed into a topographical map to use on the project. This task will include obtaining the data from the CLIENT. Assumptions • Aerial Lidar topographical data and high resolution imagery will be provided by the CLIENT. • CLIENT provided aerial topographical meta data and digital information will be sufficient to create a topographical map with a 1 -foot minimum contour interval. • Aerial imagery will be used to depict the proposed project for public meeting displays and displays included in the alternatives analysis. 9.2.2 Perform Ground Checks DEA will collect and process ground truthing RTK GPS from primary control network. Perform quality control and assurance checks on ground truthing aerial photography mapping. Process mapping data and prepare data to be imported into MicroStation. Shots will also be taken on the existing railroad tracks 1000 feet each side of the proposed bridge crossing to confirm track plans. This will also include collecting top of rail profile shots for each rail for 1000 feet from the bridge in each direction. 9.2.3 Prepare Aerial Mapping DEA will convert LiDAR point data to a don to WSDOT mapping standards using MicroStation. Quality checks will be performed on the line work to ensure accuracy and validity to WSDOT standards. This product will be prepared for proper use through the Intermediate Design phase. ASSUMPTIONS • Aerial topographical mapping will be used for intermediate Design and will be supplemented by in- fill ground shots that will be included in a supplemental agreement. • Existing utility facility information will not be collected DELIVERABLES • Electronic base map in MicroStation© format. City of Spokane Valley Page 24 Scope of Services Barker RoadBNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 93 Perform Boundary/Right-of-Way Surveying 9.3.1 Research DEA will research and analyze the following to determine the locations of the existing City, Spokane County, WSDOT and BNSF rail road rights of way boundaries within the project limits: • Transfer Deeds • Right -of -Way Plans • Records of Survey • Subdivision plats • Unrecorded maps • Land Corner Records • Railroad Right -of -Way • Deeds of Record Research will be sufficient enough to place record right-of-ways of BNSF, Barker Road, S. Wellesley Ave., Flora Road, along the project corridor. ASSUMPTIONS • WSDOT, city and county right of way plans will be provided by others. 9.3.2 Field Survey DEA will travel to the site and search for and make field ties on a minimal number of right-of-way monuments (up to 20 monuments) within the project corridor along the BNSF right-of-way, SR 290, and the other roadways listed above sufficient to develop right-of-way lines per record documents recovered during the research task. DEA will also make field ties on adjacent monumentation used to define the Public Land Survey System (PLSS) and minimal right of way monuments (up to 20 monuments). The intent of this field survey will be to identify field evidence sufficient to make a preliminary recreation of the BNSF, Barker Road, S. Wellesley Ave., and Flora Road rights-of-way along the project corridor. These will be used for design purposes with the intent of developing a full retracement record of survey under a subsequent agreement. 9.3.3 Preliminary Right -of -Way Resolution by record documents ONLY DEA will develop a preliminary reconstruction of rights-of-way within the project limits from the researched documents to calculate and prepare an approximate location of existing right-of-way to display on the base map. ASSUMPTIONS • No boundary resolution will be performed and no boundary issues will be resolved. • It is assumed that the preliminary boundary survey in tasks above per state statute (RCW 58.09.090 1 b) will be preliminary in nature with the intent of performing a complete retracement record of survey under supplemental agreement prior to further development of the project. 9.4 Prepare Final Base Mapping Products DEA will import the right-of-way lines, parcel sidelines, centerline alignments, and tied monuments into the project's existing base mapping. AsSUMPTfONS • DEA will incorporate the above stated features and elements into the base map. DELIVERABLES • DEA will create a MicroStation DGN file with the completed base neap with 1 -foot contour mapping, a DTM (Digital Terrain Model), tied monumentation, and boundary linework for design purposes. City of Spokane Valley Page 25 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 Task 10.0 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS - INTERCHANGE AND BRIDGE CONFIGURATION Based on our meeting with the CLIENT on September 13, 2016, and further internal discussions among the CONSULTANT Team , the following three (3) interchange and bridge alternatives will be evaluated to determine a preferred alternative to advance to design: Alternative 1: The interchange and bridge horizontal alignment as included in the 30% BTV Plans. The vertical profile of Barker Road will be updated based on modern girder types (the interchange ramp profiles will not be updated and roadway modeling will not be performed for this alternative). Alternative 2: The interchange and bridge with Barker Road shifted to the east so that the new bridge over BNSF is not on a horizontal curve. New ramp alignments and profiles will be developed (4 interchange ramps, Barker Road, and SR 290) and the roadways modeled. Alternative 3: The interchange and bridge with Barker Road shifted to the east so that the new bridge over BNSF is not on a horizontal curve with alternative intersection control. New ramp alignments and profiles will be developed (4 interchange ramps, Barker Road, and SR 290) and the roadways modeled, 10.1 Develop Alternative Alignments — Interchange and Bridge Alternatives HDR will prepare alternative alignment layouts for Alternatives 1-3. Roll plots (horizontal and vertical alignment including InRoads modeling (Alternatives 2 & 3 only) will be developed for the project for each of the alternatives including bridge geometries so that appropriate costs can be developed. ASSUMPTIONS • The alternatives will be evaluated with the typical sections from the 30% BTV design. • The BNSF bridge will accommodate the same number of tracks as in the 30% BTV design • Alternatives 1&2 intersection configurations will utilize signals (Alternative 3 will use alternative intersection control) • 'Truck turning movements wilI be performed to verify an adequate design • Detailed intersection control alternatives will not be developed for the geometric layout of the alternatives — instead, general approximate geometry will be used. DELIVERABLES • Roll plots of Alternatives 1-3 10,2 Evaluate Alternatives Traffic Impacts DEA will evaluate the traffic impacts of each of the three (3) alternatives. Since each of the three alternatives will have intersections in different locations, queue lengths, turning movements, and other traffic related elements of the alternatives will be evaluated so that the true impact of the alternatives is understood. Alternative intersection configurations will be evaluated as an alternative to signalized intersections for the diamond interchange alternatives. DELIVERABLES • Traffic Impact Analysis of Alternatives 1-3 10.3 Develop Alternative Costs HDR will develop conceptual costs for the components included in Alternatives 1-3 (with the exception of the BNSF bridge and all the retaining walls, which will be estimated by DEA). This would not be a detailed cost estimate for the entire project, but a comparative cost estimate that only evaluates and compares those components related to the two bridges and associated retaining walls, and related impacts to the highway and roadways. Cost estimates will be developed with present worth prices. ASSUMPTIONS • Alternative costs for bridges will be based on structure costs per square foot from WSDOT's Bridge Design Manual. City of Spokane Valley Page 26 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 DELIVERABLES • Conceptual construction cost estimates ofAlternatives 1-3 in MS Excel 10.4 Develop an Alternatives Evaluation Matrix HDR will develop an Alternatives Evaluation Matrix that evaluates and compares each of the three (3) Alternatives to each other. The consultant team, DEA and I -IDR, will collaboratively evaluate the four alternatives and recommend a preferred alternative. The team's recommendations will be vetted with the CLIENT and WSDOT before developing the recommendation in a report. ASSUMPTIONS • DEA, HDR and the CLIENT will have a meeting to discuss the evaluation components to study (i.e. cost, utilities, drainage, roadway, earthwork, right-of-way, safety, constructability and other pertinent project elements, etc.). Three (3) DEA staff (PM, Bridge Lead, and Traffic Lead) and three (3) HDR staff (Transportation Lead, Roadway Lead, and Bridge Lead) will attend. DELIVERABLES • Evaluation Matrix with weighted scoring evaluating Alternatives 1-3 prepared in MS Excel. 10.5 Develop Alternatives Evaluation Report HDR will summarize the findings from the Alternatives Evaluation effort in a written report. Other potential project impacts will also be evaluated: utilities, drainage, roadway, earthwork, right-of-way, safety, constructability and other pertinent project elements. A draft and final version of the report will be developed and submitted to the CLIENT and WSDOT for review and acceptance. ASSUMPTIONS • HDR will conduct quality control reviews of the Draft and Final Reports prior to submittal to DEA. • HDR will review and incorporate one (I) set of CLIENT comments on the Draft and Final Report DELIVERABLES • One Draft Alternatives Evaluation Report as a PDF • One Final Alternatives Evaluation Report as a PDF Task 11.0 BNSF COORDINATION AND SUBMITTALS DEA and HDR will prepare submittals for BNSF Railway review in accordance with Section 5 Overhead Structures of the Union Pacific Railroad - BNSF Railway Guidelines for Railroad Grade Separation Projects as listed above. These submittals will utilize the bridge plans developed under the preliminary and final design tasks and modify them as needed to meet the BNSF submittal requirements. 11.1 Prepare Temporary Occupancy Application & Safety Plan HDR will prepare a BNSF Temporary Occupancy Application & Safety Plan for permission to survey, perform environmental fieldwork, and geotechnical fieldwork within the BNSF right-of-way. The agreement will specify Railroad requirements that must be met to conduct fieldwork within the BNSF right-of-way. ASSUMPTIONS • HDR will prepare the BNSF Temporary Occupancy Application & Safety Plan and provide it to the CLIENT for submittal to BNSF. • The CLIENT will be responsible for the $775 non-refundable processing fee. DELIVERABLES • One Application for Temporary Occupancy as a PDF City of Spokane Valley Page 27 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 11,2 BNSF Design Phase A Package (Concept Railroad Submittal) The CONSULTANT team will prepare the Concept Plans and Site Pictures in accordance with Table 3-1 of the Guidelines for Railroad Grade Separation Projects. HDR will put the plan package together and will coordinate and process the package through BNSF. DEA will provide the bridge plans as that will be included in the package. As part of this task, DEA and HDR will conduct a one -day meeting and site visit with BNSF, CLIENT, WSDOT, and WUTC representatives. The concept will be submitted to BNSF for review. This meeting will also include displays and a discussion about any proposed design exceptions that the CONSULTANT team is proposing as part of the design package. This task includes HDR communication with BNSF to encourage them to provide a meaningful and timely review and acceptance of the Design Phase A Package. The meeting wil] last for four (4) hours. Ass UMPTIONS • Two (2) DEA staff (PM and Bridge Lead) and two (2) HDR staff (Transportation Lead and BNSF Coordination Lead) will attend the meeting. • The office portion of the meeting will be held at the CLIENT's office • The CLIENT PM will attend the meeting DELIVERABLES • Draft and Final BNSF Railway Design Phase A Package (Concept Railroad Submittal) 11.3 BNSF Design Phase B Package (30% Railroad Submittal) The following items will be developed for the 30% submittal: 11.3.1 Bridge Plans (30% Railroad Submittal Package) (by DEA) The 30% submittal wil] include responses to BNSF review comments on the concept submittal. The 30% Bridge Plans will show Plan View, Elevation View, and Typical Sections and the CONSULTANT's response to BNSF's comments on the Concept Railroad Submittal. Construction Phasing Plans and anticipated construction methods will also be included. Plans will depict top of rail profile for 1000 feet from the bridge each direction. The plans will include General Bridge Notes, a summary of bridge design criteria, and Crossing Exhibit for crossings that will be closed, This submittal package will also include related Specifications and railroad coordination requirements in draft form. 11.3.2 Hydraulics Summary (30% Railroad Submittal Package) (by HDR) The 30% Railroad Submittal will include a Hydraulics Summary Report for culverts and drainage as it relates to the railroad and a statement that the project will not direct additional drainage along the tracks. 11.3.3 Railroad Profile Grade Diagrams (30% Railroad Submittal Package) (by HDR) Railroad Profile Grade Track Diagrams will be prepared for submittal with the 30% Design Package. 11.3.4 Quality Control (30% Railroad Submittal Package) (by HDR/DEA) HDR will develop most of the 30% Railroad Submittal Package as discussed above but DEA will provide a quality control review along with comments on the package that will be addressed by HDR prior to submittal to BNSF. HDR will review those portions as detailed above developed by DEA. DELIVERABLES FOR 11.3 • Draft and Final BNSF Railway Design Phase B Package (30% Submittal Package) Task 12.0 PRELIMINARY STRUCTURES AND DESIGN APPROVAL 12.1 Refine BTV 30% Design Typical Sections (Deleted) 12.2 Refine BTV 30% Design SR 290 and Interchange Ramp Plans (Deleted) 12.3 Refine BTV 30% Design Local Roadway Plans (Deleted) City of Spokane Valley Page 28 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 12.4 Refine BTV 30% Design Utility Plans (Deleted) 12.5 Refine BTV 30% Design Pavement Channelization Plans (Deleted) 12.6 Prepare Bridge and Wall Structures Type Alternatives Analysis This task includes a determination of general structure type and size (investigating options that have become feasible since BTV approval in 2004), bridge railing type recommendation, aesthetic considerations, preliminary cost estimates, construction staging concepts, estimated construction durations and required lane closures, and assisting the design staff and project team in evaluating the alternatives included. 12.6.1 Bridge Type Alternatives Analysis Report The CONSULTANT team will develop up to three (3) bridge type alternatives for both bridges, and summarize the findings in the Bridge Type Alternatives Analysis Report. This effort includes a determination of general structure type and size, preliminary cost estimates, construction staging, SR 290 lane closures and assisting the design staff and project team in evaluating the bridge alternatives included. 12,6.1.1 Barker over BNSF (by DEA) 12.6.1.2 Barker over SR 290 (by HDR) ASSUMPTIONS • The Bridge Type Alternative Analysis Report will be approximately five (5) pages in length for each bridge. • Bridge costs will be evaluated on a unit price basis. DELIVERABLES • Draft and Final Bridge Type Alternatives Analysis Report 12.6.1.3 Wall Type Alternatives Analysis Report (by DEA) DEA will evaluate up to three (3) wall options for the walls proposed for the project. The Wall 'type Alternatives Analysis Report will summarize the findings of the wall type selection and include a narrative discussing the estimated probable cost, railroad crash wall considerations, constraints (sueh as available ROW), geotechnical and soil conditions, constructability, and maintenance of traffic. HDR will provide input during the development of the report and will review the draft report prior to submitting to the CLIENT. ASSUMPTIONS • Wall costs will be evaluated on a cost per square foot basis. • Wall types to be evaluated include: o Reinforced Concrete Retaining Wall (WSDOT Std. Plan) o Precast Panel Faced Structural Earth Wall (Supplier Designed) o Permanent Geosynthetic Wall with Concrete Fascia (WSDOT Std. Plan) DELIVERABLES • The Wall Type Alternative Analysis Report will be approximately three (3) pages in length. • Draft and Final Wall Type Alternatives Analysis Report 12,7 Prepare Bridge Preliminary Plan (6 bridge sheets) DEA will advance the preferred bridge type for the BNSF bridge to the bridge preliminary plan stage (which will also be used to develop the BNSF Design Phase A Submittal) and HDR will advance the preferred bridge type for the SR 290 bridge to the bridge preliminary plan stage. Bridge design will be reviewed by the WSDOT Bridge and Structures office and will therefore meet WSDOT's Bridge Design Deliverable Expectation Matrix. City of Spokane Valley Page 29 Scope of Services Barker Road!BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 12.7.1 Bridge Preliminary Plan - Barker Rd over BNSF (by DEA) 12.7.2 Bridge Preliminary Plan - Barker Rd over SR 290 (by l -IDR) ASSUMPTIONS • Bridges included in this project: o One three -span bridge over BNSF (by DEA) o One single -span bridge aver SR 290 (by HDR) • Retaining Wall location and plans limits only will be developed. Wall profiles will not be developed. • 11"x17" plan sheets for the preliminary bridge design for CLIENT, BNSF and WSDOT approval. • This submittal will meet the requirements outlined in WSDOT's Bridge Delivery Expectation Matrix, Column "Permitting Submittal" for any structures reviewed by WSDOT. DELIVERABLES • Bridge Preliminary Plan - Barker Rd over BNSF (by DEA) • Bridge Preliminary Plan - Barker Rd over SR 290 (by HDR) 12.8 Prepare Cost Estimates for Refined BTV 30% Design (Deleted) 12.9 Submit Refined BTV 30% Design Package (Deleted) 12.10 Refined BTV 30% Design Review Meeting (Deleted) 12.11 Prepare Basis of Design Memorandum DEA will prepare the Basis of Design (130D) for the project. The ROD will follow the outline shown in WSDOT's Design Manual Section 1100,10(1) (July 2016). DEA will prepare supporting documentation to be included in the BOD Memorandum. This documentation includes the following items: Basis of Estimate (BOE) Design Parameter Sheets • Interchange and Bridge Alternatives Comparison Tables • Performance Target Refinement Form • Basis of Design (BOD) Memorandum The outline for the BOD Memorandum is as follows: • Planning Document Summary • General Project Information • Section 1 — Project Need • Section 2 — Context • Section 3 — Design Controls • Section 4 — Interchange and Bridge Alternatives Analysis • Section 5 — Design Element Selection ASSUMPTIONS • WSDOT will provide templates for the following items: BOD Memorandum, BOE, Performance Target Refinement Form DELIVERABLES • Basis of Design Memorandum (Draft and Final) City of Spokane Valley Page 30 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 12,12 Design Approval Memorandum DEA will prepare the Design Approval Memorandum following the outline shown in WSDOT's Design Manual Section 300.04(1) (July 2016). The following items will be included in the Memorandum: • Stamped Cover Sheet (project description) • A reader -friendly memo that describes the project • Project summary documents • Basis of Design • interchange and Bridge Alternatives Comparison Table • Design Parameters worksheets • Crash Analysis Report • Design Analysis (If Needed) • Design Variance Inventory (If Required) • Channelization Plans, intersection plans, and interchange plans • Alignment plans and profile • Current cost estimate with a Basis of Estimate ASSUMPTIONS • The Design Approval Memorandum will follow the outline shown in WSDOT's Design Manual Section 300.04(1) (July 2016). DELIVERABLES • Draft Design Approval Memorandum • Final Design Approval Memorandum Task 13.0 INTERMEDIATE DESIGN DOCUMENTS The following tasks will be accomplished in preparing the Intermediate Design Documents. The sheet count for this task in included in the table at the end of this scope of work. It should be noted that this Intermediate Design package is NOT inclusive of a complete plan package. It only includes elements of the design that discussed and agreed to between the CONSULTANT TEAM and the CLIENT. 13.1 Develop lndexlVicinity Map (2 sheets) DEA will develop an Index/Vicinity Map showing the project location and a list of sheets included in the Intermediate Design plans. 13,2 Develop Roadway Typical Sections (8 sheets for 15 Typical Sections) DEA and HDR will prepare typical sections for the project with two typical sections on each sheet. The Refined BTV 30% Design Typical Sections will be adjusted as necessary for this task. Roadway typical sections are estimated as follows: • Four for SR 290 - One for existing SR 290 at the westerly tie in, one for SR 290 bridge, one for SR 290 at the existing E. Wellesley Avenue bridge, and one at the existing SR 290 easterly tie in. (by DEA). • Two for SR 290/Barker Road 1.C. ramps — one single lane and one for a widened section near the intersection with Barker (by DEA) • Four for Barker Road— one at the southerly end, one at the northerly end, and one at each of the ramp terminals (by HDR) • Two for proposed E. Wellesley Avenue (by HDR) City of Spokane Valley Page 31 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 • One for the N Flora Road cul-de-sac (by HDR) • Two more for other miscellaneous roads as necessary ASSUMPTIONS • Typical Sections for alternative intersection control (if it becomes a part of the project) are not included. 13.3 Develop Pavement and Facility RemovallDernolition Plans (Future Supplemental Agreement) 13.4 Interchange Pians for Approval (3 sheets) DEA will prepare Interchange Plans for Approval including the interchange main line, crossroad, and ramp layouts. Design speeds for main line and crossroads; bearings, grades, curve data for main line, ramps, and crossroads; number and widths of lanes; superelevation diagrams for roads and ramps; existing/proposed right-of-way; finish contours, etc. as detailed in section 1360.07 "Interchange Plans for Approval" of WSDOT's Design Manual will be included in these plan sheets. 13.5 Develop Roadway Paving Plan and Profile Sheets (62 sheets) The CONSULTANT team will prepare roadway paving plan and profile sheets that will also depict drainage elements designed for the project, proposed right-of-way and easements limits, and existing utilities. Separate sheets will be generated for the paving plan and profile views rather than having plan and profile shown on the same sheet. The CONSULTANT team will develop the proposed vertical alignment within the proposed grade separation and interchange project limits. This task also includes developing the preliminary roadway section templates required for the project in InRoads and establishing roadway cross sections. Super - elevation data (shown as super -elevation diagrams on the profile sheets) will be included to meet current WSDOT and AASHTO Standards. This task also includes modeling the project in an attempt to get earthwork to balance as close as possible or to reduce import or export of material, providing roadside design services, and providing the level of effort to determine right-of-way need lines. DELIVERABLES • Roadway paving plan sheets and profile sheets estimated as follows: Street Name Plan Profile SR 290 - DEA 8 8 WB On Ramp - DEA 0 4 WB Off Ramp - DEA 0 5 EB On Ramp - DEA 0 4 EB Off Ramp - DEA 0 5 Barker Road North - DEA 3 3 Barker Road south - HDR 3 3 E. Wellesley Ave - HDR 7 7 N. Flora Road - HDR 1 1 TOTAL 22 40 ASSUMPTIONS • SR -290 and Ramps will be at 1"=40' scale • Barker Road, Wellesley Avenue, and Flora Road and other local roads or approaches will be at 1"=110' scale 13.6 Develop Drainage Plans for SR 290 and Local Roadways (6 sheets) HDR will develop drainage design depicting existing and proposed drainage courses, storm sewer systems, stormwater treatment facilities, ponds, catch basins, etc. Drainage facilities will be designed so City of Spokane Valley Page 32 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 their conceptual limits are established and required right-of-way needs can be factored in to project cost estimates. The final design elements and specifics of the drainage facilities will be detailed under Final Design and PS&E. ASSUMPTION • Drainage facilities (other than grass swales and drywells) will be shown on stand-alone drainage sheets. Swales and drywells layouts will be shown on Paving Plans and detail sheets. • Since most of the drainage facilities are going to be grass swales and drywells, only six (6) Drainage Plan Sheets are anticipated. • Station and offsets, pipe slopes, lengths, invert elevations, and labels will NOT be completed at this stage. 13,7 Hydraulic Report HDR will prepare a drainage report in conformance with the WSDOT Hydraulic & Highway Runoff Manuals and the Spokane Regional Stormwater Manual. HDR will document the existing conditions and delineate the existing drainage basins. HDR will delineate the proposed drainage conditions and document the proposed conveyance, treatment, and flow control of stormwater within the drainage report. DEA will perform a quality control review of the draft and final report prior to submittal. ASSUMPTIONS • Swales with drywells will be the typical treatment and flow control method of stormwater • Detention facilities are not needed for the project • Storm drains may be needed to intercept runoff on the bridges to limit spread width • Storm drain system will not be needed on Wellesley Avenue. Runoff will enter the roadside swales via curb cuts or inlets under the sidewalk. No closed pipe system will be required. • A limited storm drain system may be needed for the ramps to limit spread width and convey drainage to the interchange gore areas. • Existing runoff from the north appears to be conveyed to the south to the existing BNSF right-of- way. This existing condition can be perpetuated by extending culverts under the interchange ramps or new pipes installed to maintain existing drainage pathways. • New treatment and flow control areas for the interchange ramps and bridges will be within the gore areas between SR 290 and the interchange ramps. DELIVERABLES • Draft Hydraulic Report documenting the existing and proposed drainage conditions including hydrologic and hydraulic calculations, basin maps, photos, and details (PDF) • Final Hydraulic Report documenting the final configuration and drainage facilities (PDF) 13.8 Develop Channelization, Pavement Marking, Signing, and Sign Structure Plans (22 sheets) DEA will prepare channelization pavement marking plans indicating locations for channelization and pavement markings. These plans will be created from the paving plan sheets and at the same scale so that the same match lines are carried through the plan set for clarity and efficiency. DEA will include on the plans signing and sign structure design indicating locations for proposed signs, instructions for existing signs (remove, relocate or protect), and locations for sign structures. The signing and sign structure plans will be developed in enough detail to depict sign and sign structure locations along with their legends. ASSUMPTIONS • Signing and Sign Structure Details will not be included in this set of plans but will be developed for Final Design through a future Supplemental Agreement. City of Spokane Valley Page 33 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 13.9 Intersection Control Plans (9 sheets) DEA and HDR will finalize the Intersection Control Plans and Details. Intersection Control Plans will be prepared for the: 1) Barker Road/Wellesley Avenue (HDR), 2) Barker Road/SR 290 EB Ramps (DEA), and 3) Barker Road/SR 290 WB Ramps (DEA) intersections. The Barker Road/N Vista Grande intersection will likely be stop -controlled and additional detailed plans will not be necessary for it. Traffic Signal Plans are proposed at the three (3) intersections and will include: 1) signal equipment layout, 2) conduit and conductors, and 3) illumination, power source(s) as coordinated with electric utility. For the Intermediate Design submittal, the traffic signal plans will include limited wiring or conductor information and detail and will instead focus on the signal equipment layout including signal standards, signal head location, signal controllers and service cabinets, conduit runs, pull boxes, and signal mounted signage. Supporting documentation will be provided including peak hour turning movement volumes, loop placement calculations, left turn phasing analysis, and signal mounting Height calculations. Preliminary traffic signal design will be developed on separate Traffic Signal Plan Sheets. ASSUMPTIONS • Limited wiring/conductor design will be completed at the Intermediate Design stage; • Inductive Loop Detection is assumed for signal actuation. • Emergency Vehicle Preemption Detectors will be provided by the City and utilized for this project. • Accessible Pedestrian Signals (APS) will be utilized for this project. • Traffic Signal locations will be identified and laid out sufficiently so that adequate costs of the facilities can be estimated. • The scope and estimate will be revisited if alternative intersection control becomes the preferred alternative. • This task includes coordinating the power source with the utility provider. 13.10 Develop Maintenance of Traffic (MOT) Plans (15 sheets) HDR will prepare preliminary Maintenance of Traffic (MOT) Plans and staging overview plans in accordance with MUTCD and WSDOT standards, as appropriate. The plans will depict construction stages, construction signing and other traffic control devices required during construction. Construction drawings will be developed for each stage so that sequential construction of the project can be understood. It is assumed that there will be three major stages as detailed below. • Stage I: Relocate utilities and build new Wellesley Avenue and open it to traffic. • Stage II: WB Wellesley traffic will continue using the existing Wellesley Avenue bridge to access SR 290 but would use new Wellesley Avenue to access Barker Road. Barker Road/SR 290 and Barker Road/BNSF bridges would be built and the existing Barker Road/SR 290 intersection and the Barker/BNSF at -grade intersection would be closed. This stage would build the new Barker Road/SR 290 interchange ramps, ramp walls, remaining utility adjustments, pertinent SR 290 lane revisions and connections, and Barker Road from Wellesley Avenue to its northerly terminus. The MOT plans will include detour signing. SR -290 will remain open and operational during this stage. • Stage III: Complete the new Wellesley tie in to existing Wellesley. This Stage would remove the two (2) existing Wellesley Avenue bridges over BNSF and SR 290; remove Wellesley Avenue's existing connection to SR 290, and SR 290 W13 lanes that curve to the north. This stage would also include widening SR 290 for westbound traffic after the existing Wellesley Avenue bridges are removed. This stage would complete Barker Road from Wellesley to its southerly terminus in two phases. Close the BNSF/Flora Road at -grade crossing and completely open the new facility to traffic. Based on the phasing detailed above, the following sheets are anticipated: City of Spokane Valley Page 34 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 Sheet Name No. MOT Index 1 MOT Summary 1 MOT Stage I — Overview sheet 1 MOT - Generic Signing for shoulder work operation (Stage 1) 1 MOT Stage II -- Overview sheet 1 MOT — Typical SR 290 Lane Closure for Constructing the Bridge 1 MOT - Typical Advanced Warning and Detour Sheets 4 MOT Stage III — Wellesley tie in and Flora Closure Detail 2 MOT -- Typical Barker Lane Closure for single lane operation (Stage 3) 1 MOT —Detail Sheets 2 MOT/Staging Sheet Total 15 13.11 Develop Illumination Design and Plans (Future Supplemental Agreement) 13.12 Develop Preliminary Utility Plans (Future Supplemental Agreement) 13.13 Develop Bridge Sheets (51 sheets) CONSULTANT will develop structural design to the Intermediate Design completion level. This will include incorporating Interchange and Bridge Alternatives Analysis review continents and developing the gross sizes of the main structural elements. In general, concrete reinforcing and other details will not be complete and will be completed under subsequent tasks. 13.13.1 Barker Road over SR 290 Bridge (by HDR) (24 sheets) • Layout (1 sheet) • General Notes and Geometric Data (1 sheet) • Construction Sequence (1 sheets) • Foundation Layout (1 sheet) • Pier 1 Abutment Plan and Elevation (1 sheet) • Pier 2 Abutment Plan and Elevation (1 sheet) • Bearing Details (1 sheet) • Framing Plan (I sheet) • Typical Section (1 sheet) • Prestressed Girder Details (5 sheets) • Intermediate Diaphragm Details (1 sheet) • End Diaphragm Details (1 sheet) • Pedestrian Barrier Details (3 sheets) • Bridge Railing Type BP Details (2 sheets) • Approach Slab Details (3 sheets) 13.13.2 Barker Road over BNSF Bridge (by DEA) (27 sheets) • Layout (1 sheet) • General Notes and Geometric Data (1 sheet) • Construction Sequence (I sheets) • Foundation Layout (1 sheet) • Pier 1 Abutment Plan and Elevation (1 sheet) City of Spokane Valley Page 35 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 • Pier 2 Plan and Elevation (1 sheet) • Pier 3 Plan and Elevation (1 sheet) • Pier 4 Abutment Plan and Elevation (I sheet) • Bearing Details (1 sheet) • Framing Plan (2 sheets) • Typical Section (1 sheet) • Prestressed Girder Details (5 sheets) • Intermediate Diaphragm Details (1 sheet) • End Diaphragm Details (1 sheet) • Traffic Barrier Details (3 sheets) • Bridge Railing Type BP Details (2 sheets) • Approach Slab Details (3 sheets) ASSUMPTIONS • Deck drains will not be necessary and both bridges will drain to catch basins located outside of the bridge structure in the approaches to the bridges. • Both Barker Rd Over BNSF and SR 290 Bridges: o The bridge design and plan sheet count are based on the 30% BTV configuration. o A single design will be used for the abutments based on the most conservative design loading and geometry from both abutments. • WSDOT BDM Type A End Connections will be used for both Bridges. • Pedestrian barrier with a raised sidewalk is assumed with no barrier separation required between sidewalk and travel lanes. • Architectural treatment will be limited to WSDOT Standard formliner finishes and pigmented sealers only. No public art or other architectural features will be required on the bridges. 13.13.3 Retaining Walls (Future Supplemental Agreement) 13.14 Develop Detail Sheets (Future Supplemental Agreement) 13.15 Prepare Itemized Quantity Takeoff and Cost Estimate Quantity takeoffs for the multiple design tasks will be reported by each task lead and a preliminary cost estimate for the project will be developed. The cost estimate will take into account recent construction project bid prices in the project vicinity. The cost estimate will also include right-of-way costs, construction contingencies, construction engineering, and contractor mobilization. 13.16 Compile and Submit Intermediate Design Package The CONSULTANT team will prepare the Intermediate Design Submittal package based on the City's requirements and WSDOT's Design Manual and submit the package for review and comment. The submittal package for Intermediate Design Review will be compiled by DEA and will include for CLIENT and WSDOT review: • Intermediate Design Construction Cost Estimate • The Intermediate Design Plans as described above and as summarized in the table at the end of this document DELIVERABLES: • Intermediate design plans in accordance with the table at the end of this doeument City of Spokane Valley Page 36 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation Deeember 1, 2016 • Intermediate design cost estimate 13.17 Intermediate Design Review Meeting DEA and HDR will attend the Intermediate Design Review meeting with the CLIENT and WSDOT staff. DEA will also prepare meeting minutes and distribute to the appropriate recipients by email. Prior to the meeting, DEA will assemble the comments received from the CLIENT and WSDOT in a comment response form. The team will address the comments and identify comments that require further discussion at the Intermediate Design Review meeting. The compiled comment form will be provided to attendees at the Intermediate Design Review meeting and the continent form will be included in the Final Design Review submittal. ASSUMPTIONS • There will be one Intermediate Design Review Meeting lasting eight (8) hours • Four (4) DEA staff will attend (Project Manager, Bridge Lead, Transportation Lead, and Traffic Lead) • Three (3) HDR staff will attend (Transportation Lead, Bridge Lead, Local Roadway Lead) DELIVERABLES • Intermediate Design Review Package Task 14.0 RIGHT-OF-WAY AND LIMITED ACCESS ACQUISITION DOCUMENTS (FUTURE SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT) Task 15.0 APPRAISE AND ACQUIRE RIGHT-OF-WAY AND LIMITED ACCESS (FUTURE SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT) Task 16.0 TEMPORARY PROJECT CLOSEOUT The task includes saving and storing electronic media and information in a format that is easily retrievable if the project is put on hold for any time. It also includes storing electronic files and data such that the data is easily re -activated for continuation of design according to CLIENT direction. This task also includes archiving hard copy, financial, and other electronic files for storage and easy retrieval if necessary in the future. ASSUMPTIONS: • DEA will keep the project active on their ProjectWise server for seven (7) -years. Task 17.0 FINAL DESIGN (FUTURE SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT) Task 18.0 PS&E PREPARATION AND SUBMITTAL (FUTURE SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT) City of Spokane Valley Page 37 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 Estimated Project Sheet Count Scope of Work Task Number PS&E Anticipated Sheets Estimated No. of Sheets Preliminary Plans Intermediate Plans DEA HDR DEA HDR 12.7.1 Bridge Preliminary Plan - Barker Rd over BNSF 3 12.7.2 Bridge Preliminary Plan - Barker Rd over Barker Road 3 13.1 Index/Vicinity Map 2 9.1.5 Survey Control Sheet 2 13.2 Roadway Typical Sections 0 0 4 4 SR 290 2 SR 290/Barker Road IC Ramps 1 Barker Road 1 1 Wellesley Avenue 1 Flora Rd cul-de-sac 1 Miscellaneous roads 1 13.4 Interchange Plans for Approval 3 13.5 Roadway Paving Plan and Profile Sheets 0 0 40 22 SR 290 Plan 8 SR 290 Profile 8 WB On Ramp Profile 4 WB Off Ramp Profile 5 EB On Ramp Profile 4 EB Off Ramp Profile 5 Barker Road Plan 3 3 Barker Road Profile 3 3 E. Wellesley Ave Plan 7 E. Wellesley Ave Profile 7 N. Flora Road Plan 1 N. Flora Road Profile 1 13.6 Drainage Plans for SR 290 and Local Roadways 6 13.8 Channelization, Paveinent Marking, Signing, and Sign Structure Plans 22 13,9 Intersection Control Plans and Details 6 3 Barker Road/Wellesley Avenue 3 Barker Road/SR 290 EB Ramps 3 Barker Road/SR 290 WB Ramps 3 13.10 Maintenance of Traffic (MOT) Plans 0 0 0 15 MOT Index 1 City of Spokane Valley Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation Page 38 Scope of Services December 1, 2016 Scope of Work Task Number PS&E Anticipated Sheets Estimated No. of Sheets Preliminary Plans Intermediate Plans DEA HDR DEA HDR MOT Summary 1 MOT Stage 1- Overview Sheet 1 MOT - Generic Signing for shoulder work operation (Stage 1) 1 MOT- Stage II - Overview Sheet 1 MOT - Typical SR 290 Lane Closure for Constructing the Bridge 1 MOT - Typical Advanced Warning and Detour Sheets 4 MOT Stage 111 - Wellesley tie in and Flora Closure Detail 2 MOT - Typical Barker Lane Closure for single lane operation (Stage 3) 1 MOT - Detail Sheets 2 13.13 bridge Sheets 0 0 27 24 13.13.1 Barker Road over SR 290 Bridge 27 13.13.2 Barker Road over BNSF Bridge 24 Total Sheets per Consultant 3 3 106 74 Total Sheets Per Design Stage 6 180 City of Spokane Valley Page 39 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 Exhibit B DBE Participation Historical Research Associates - Small Business Enterprise Agreement Number: 16-175 WSDOT Form 140.089 EF Exhibit 8 Page 1 of 1 Revised 10/30/2014 Exhibit C Preparation and Delivery of Electronic Engineering and Other Data In this Exhibit the agency, as applicable, is to provide a description of the format and standards the consultant is to use in preparing electronic files for transmission to the agency. The format and standards to be provided may include, but are not limited to, the following: I. Surveying, Roadway Design & Plans Preparation Section A. Survey Data The electronic format and standards to be provided for this project arc identified in Exhibit A, Scope of Work. B. Roadway Design Files The electronic format and standards to be provided for this project are identified in Exhibit A, Scope of Work. C. Computer Aided Drafting Files The electronic format and standards to be provided for this project are identified in Exhibit A, Scope of Work. Agreement Number: 16-175 WSDOT Form 140-089 EF Exhibit C Page 1 of 4 Revised 10/30/2014 D. Specify the Agency's Right to Review Product with the Consultant AGENCY will provide review comments on all milestone deliverables, as identified in Exhibit A, Scope of Work. E. Specify the Electronic Deliverables to Be Provided to the Agency The deliverables to be provided for this project are identified in Exhibit A, Scope of Work. F. Specify What Agency Furnished Services and Information Is to Be Provided The Agency -furnished services and information to be provided for this project are identified in Exhibit A, Scope of Work. Agreement Number: 16-175 WSDOT Form 140-089 EF Exhibit C Page 2 of 4 Revised 10/3012014 II, Any Other Electronic Files to Be Provided The deliverables to be provided for this project are identified in Exhibit A, Scope of Work. III. Methods to Electronically Exchange Data E-mail, FTP site, or CD/DVD. WSDOT Form 140-089 EF Exhibit C Page 3 of 4 Revised 10/30/2014 A. Agency Software Suite The electronic format and standards to be provided for this project are identified in Exhibit A, Scope of Work. B. Electronic Messaging System Email. C. File Transfers Format The electronic format and standards to be provided for this project arc identified in Exhibit A, Scope of Work. WSDOT Form 140-089 EF Exhibit C Page 4 of 4 Revised 10/30/2014 Exhibit D City of Spokane Valley, WA Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation Phase I - Design Services Project No. 0143 David Evans and Associates, Inc. Direct Classification Hrs. x Rate = Cost 1 Project Manager 497 5 66.02 $32,812 2 DEA Transportation Lead 195 5 66.00 $12,870 3 Transportation QA/QC 82 5 68.00 55,576 4 Senior Transportation Engineer 227 $ 50.74 511,518 5 Transportation Engineer 112 5 35.00 $3,920 6 Transportation Designer 517 $ 42.00 521,714 7 Traffic Engineer Lead 280 $ 45.50 512,740 8 Traffic Analyst 244 $ 37.74 $9,209 9 GIS and Graphics Expert 108 $ 36.00 63,888 10 Bridge Task Lead 180 5 62.84 511,311 11 Bridge QC Engineer 112 $ 66.80 57,482 12 Bridge Engineer 204 $ 48.66 $9,927 13 Bridge Engineer 202 $ 41.40 58,363 14 Bridge CADD 412 $ 41.20 $16,974 15 Environmental Planning Lead 64 $ 45.30 $2,899 16 Environmental Planner 114 $ 40.30 $4,594 17 Survey Lead 46 $ 44.50 52,047 18 Project Surveyor 112 $ 36.00 S4,032 19 Survey Party Chief 66 $ 31.00 52,046 20 Surveyor 62 $ 28.00 $1,736 21 Mapping Technician 193 $ 30.00 55,790 22 Administrative Assistant 16 5 30.60 5490 23 Accountant 26 5 20.50 5533 4071 Salary Cost $ 192,470 Salary Escalation Cost (estimated) Escalation - % of Labor Cost 3-5% per year @ 0.75 year(s) 55,052 Total Salary Cost $ 197,522 Overhead Cost @ 181.82% of Direct Labor $ 359,135 Net Fee @ 31.0% of Direct Labor $ 61,232 Total Overhead & Net Fee Cost $ 420,367 Direct Expenses No. Unit Each Cost Notebooks 20 @ 515 leach $ 300.00 Hotels 5 @ 5120 /day 5 600.00 Parking 10 @ 58 /each 5 80.00 Mail/Deliveries/Fed Ex 8 @ 535 /each 5 280.00 Flights 5 @ $400 /trip $ 2,000.00 Car Rental 5 @ 550 /day $ 250.00 DEA Per Diem (Full days) 5 @ 564 /day $ 320.00 BNSF Processing Fee 1 @ 5775 /each 5 775.00 Traffic Counts Vendor 55,080.00 LiDAR Target material 0 @ 3200 50.00 DEA Mileage 610 miles @ 60.54 /mile $329A0 DEA Mileage (Survey) 2.00 miles @ 50.54 /mile 5 108.00 DEA Mileage (Other) 600 miles @ 50.54 /mile 5 324.00 David Evans and Associates Total Subconsultants $ 10,446 $ 628,336 GeoEngineers, Inc. $ 74,224 HDR Engineering, Inc. 6 561,999 Historical Research Associates, Inc. $ 9,472 Subconsultant Total $ 645,695 Direct Expenses Sub -Total (including Subconsultants) $ 656,141 Total Costs $ 1,274,031 Page 1 of 12 1.i Purs3s1S15pokane Va'idy. City orCon12O16_RaH_Oarker Road Interchange\Scope and Fee'2016-11-23 Badrer Rd • BNSF Grade Separation Phase I Fine; Cudgel Estimate r.;sx 11/28/2016 Exhibit D City of Spokane Valley, WA Barker Road1BNSF Grade Separation Phase I — Design Services Project N. 0143 David Evans and Associates, Inc. 1 2 2 4 5 0 7 e 0 10 11 13 11 14 11 10 17 1a 18 20 21 22 22 wort Element* Work Element `5 CD C L a a �3g .. O 8 1- 6 o G I e H $ eO 6 H 'ii c E. Inti c¢ 16 . 8 s s- Q a G L'+ a w et Traft Engineer Lead .. i es et GIS and Graphks Expert 1 Y m g m . eW� G :E. ffi ,6 Yi $ 8 E 6 It7 .^AI 8 pq6 8 g m '� G 1 ' gS C iZ Survey Lead ', 2 3 c a ,'ic 6 ,4 6 E m' L g si II. u ~ f .0 Z . E B I < 08A DEA A Total $ Total Tidal Total Toto) TMOt 70681 70101 Total Total Total TcW1 Total Tot& Total Told Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total tees hes his hes has les hes hes hes his 109 In ITS has hes tees Ids tax hes hes lira 199 IFS Total ten 132 32 16 14 10 20 33 164 226 677 28 26 6 15 8 16 45 34 34 8 8 8 13 36 64 24 70 38 4 265 1.o Project Management & Quality Control 1.1 Project Management 132 527,774 12 Projec1Wis4 and Pro_$el, 8 4 4 12 4 55 061 1,3 Subcon1ueanl Agreements end Coordirnll2n 6 8 52,615 1.4 Prepare Project Notebooks 4 2 6 51,87i 1.5 Project Quality Mnnalement Plan 2 2 4 1 2 51,826 1.6 Develop Project CPD Shcedulc and Updates I 12 E t 52,825 1.7 Monthly Progress Reports and Invoices 11 1 22 52,311 1.8 Pre em Teem Meetingand Council Moeling Presentations 68 22 18 22 15 22 4 4 535,837 10 Ouali_Contr0V0ualey Assurnnee Review 16 SD I 110 4 8 6 546,757 281 22 . 62 16 _-- _-._.. 16a 72 —2626_-112 12 4 12 12 _-- __—_-0-26 8129,437 Work Element TNI 2.0 Capacity Juetl116a1I0n Report Capncl_Iy Jusllfcnlftn Report 2 18 6 _ i 53,736 _21 1 Wort Element Toed 2_..._ �, -- _ _ _ 16 6.__ - -- - 53.736 _ 3.8 Corridor inventory r 0818 C0lle4tie n 3.1 Obtain As•8ulits and Contract Plan Documents 2 2 2 _ _ 51,019 32 Assemble Applicable Design Standards end Policies 1 4 e 1 2 2 2425 32 UpdaieNeriry 67560nmen1nl and Land Use Constraints 2 2 4 51,157 3.4 Vedty Existing Corridor Utilities and Develop Utility Conflict Matrix ''.. 3.5 She Visits 0 Obrsln Additional Intonation As Needed 4 4 4 4 53,579 2 6 Wort Element Total 7 4 6 6 4 6 - $72 160 4.0 Geotechnical Eng1neering 12 4 6 6 4 56,063 Work Element Total _._12. 4 _ - 6 6 _ _ _ a I 34ea.1 5.0 Confirm Planning Framework for the Project (Client 6 MOOT) 1 1 I 4 2 51,364 Work Bement Total 1 1 4 2 _ _— ___. ___ __. —_ _ 51,354 6.0 ITrod ic Modeling 8 Analysis 0.1 7mt11C Volumes Oslo Collection 2 4 3770 6.2 Develop Project Methods and Assumptions Document 1 2 8 4 _ 51 000 6.3 Travel Demand Forecasting In AM and PM Pent Hours 12 16 8 54,636 6.4 077r3llonal Aasennment 07 81udy Intersections 8 Corridors 36 48 511 117 6.5 Collision History Evaluation 12 8 8 52,937 6.6 Interccllan Central Analysts for Paged Intersections 8 8 36 24 510,175 6.7 Droll Trn102 Operollone! Analysis Report 2 2 16 12 8 I 55 343 6.8 Final Truffle Operotionnl Analysis Report 2 2 5841 20 - T 537.833 — _ _. _ _ Wert ElementTotal 5 6 2e 8 114 108 _.. _ _ Paget or 12 ktlw04449S0o1e+m volar.Cay o5WW201C_IIaM_Oskr Flood Lrsdvpi4s0Q sd 5d761611-75 e.1r -13461 frail. 6sprmr Prow 1 Fact 540E .ndashr PnrdM: 11/282018, 2:35 PM David Evans and Associates, Inc. 1 2 a 4 7 6 7 1 0 10 11 17 13 11 18 10 11 1e 18 7a 21 22 A Work Element t Work Element ca 1 o* $ DEA Transdealtun Lead c 4 8 g x H` s i & 1= N .4 ti `u u� A p. ,, 2 r a �n iy .� t1-, 5 u� OG$ `u ¢r u� ¢C� it 04 C I R a 2 70 i I 5 10 2 w E 1�i `o W it U 2 E v3 0 g e 1k i & * H fnlsVatrra Asslslanl I DEA _ _DEA _ Total 5 Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Toto) Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total hra hat !vs bra hrs lies has hrs hrs lira hrs hrs lila hes hrs hes lits hes has has lies hrs. hrs Total het 94 12 106 60 78 40 170 185 75 170 7.0 Public Involvement Program I ` 7,1 Public Open Meuse 18 20 20 10 16 10 710,020 7,2 Properly Owner Contact Meetings 4 8 :f 71,924 __.. $17.154 Work Element Totll 22 .20 26 10 _14 19 -- 0.0 NEPA DotumsntaliOn 8.1 Envimnmemaf 5h,eie5 0 20 26 57,090 0.2 ErwironmentatTccrmicnl memoranda i 30 46 710,005 8.3 IIEPA Cal torital Exclusion Documentation (CCD) Form 40 $5,198 56 _ _ _ Wort Ekneent Tota[,-_ _ 6 _ -. - ._ 174 _ ,. ®_. _ 323,)!9 9,4 Surveying S.7 DwcIop Conlrot Network 10 13 20 44 42 26 717,153 7,2 Aerial LIDAR Celltrclion 4 6 10 12 45 57,552 9.3 Perform Boundary/Right•of•Wny Surveying 13 84 10 10 82 519,253 9.4 Prepare Pant Base Mapping Products 4 10 2 I 30 46 466 20 55 8 18 58 126 6 30 44 74671 12. _.-_- _ _ 848,860 .-. Work Element ToW -__-3410006_,._62_.-103 _. 10.0 AlternotivOC A talV1ia -Interchange a Bridge Configuration 10.1 Develop Alternative Alignments - IIC and Bridge Alternatives 8 4 4 4 73,780 102 Evaluate Alternatives Traffic impacts 2 1 6 i 18 24 4 57.280 10.3 Develop Alternative Cost^ i 2 2 4 51,540 10.4 Develop an Allernatives Evaluation Matrix B 4 2 2 $3027 10.5 Develop Ahemotivos Evaluation Report B 4 2 4 8 2 _ $4217 11 6 -- 4 -- 610,540 - - - Work Bement Teal 26 4 22 20 12,.. __12_ - __-. -- 81.8 BNSF Coartinatio8 & Submittals 11.1 Prepare Temporary Ottupancy Application S Safely Plan 2 4 51.223 11.2 BNSF Design Pease A Package (Concept Railroad Submittal) 6 6 l 16 31.990 11.3 EDrJSF Design Phase a Package (30% Railroad Submatap 4 1 6 32 70,094 _ 20 46 80 100 130 2 2 42 42 315 512.967 Work Element Total 12 12.0 881165 BTV 30% Design 354 Design Approval 72.1 Refine 13TV 3096 Design Typical Sections (Deleted) 122.2 Refine 01-1/ 35% Design SR 270 0 interchange Ramp P2n7. (Deleted) - 12.2 Refine BTV 2014 Design Local Runaway Plans (10clet45) - - 12.4 Refine BTV 30% Dalian Larry Plant. (Deleted) -. 12.5 Reline B7V 00% Design Pavement Channerization Plans (Deleted) 12.5 Prepare Bridge and Wag 'Structures Type Alternatives Analysis 4 18 36 38 5 015,535 12.7 Pro5nro Bridge Prellminnry Plan (8 bridge sheets) 6 16 24 24 60 710,383 12.8 Prepare Cost Estimates for Refined BTV 30% De -inn (Deleted) 12.9 Submit Refined BTV 30% Design Package (Deleted) 2 3199 1210 Refined BTV 30% Design Review Meeting (Deleted) 2 5199 12.11 Prepare Basis of Design Memorandum 2 4 10 20 2 2 2 :6043 12.12 DosiOn Approval Memorandum 2 4 12 20 2 2 55 972 14 5 23 40 Were Element Tatar 4 24 0o AO 6A 8 #47.335 P065 3 01.12 IMPuro6Y84000mlraOm CY, deNereml6 aelLBelor Fami1tadrpl5aapeav ld2018-11.22 dose 04. MCI Carle Somalia -1 PIS 1 FM bagel EWntte.de' Printed: 1112812016. 2.35 PAA David Evans and ASSOClates. Inc. 1 2 2 4 S 0 7 5 0 10 11 12 10 14 16 16 17 13 0 30 21 22 21 Work Element Work Element ea S i a` REA Transportation Lead 1rip, 9 « it Sertkir Transportation Engineer 1 f p ITranspodatIon Des!gner 5g uE I w` .1 d` 7' (2 ti ii g O Y 8- m Z O ,y2ee r5 S 1r ,.t4et� a3 E iu m es c. o m 8' w G r S w` 44 i 1 w 13 a. rn L o a a g vi se F }i .n . gr E be = sc DEA DEA —TO kal— $ Total Total Total Total Total' Total Total Total Total Total 7001 Toto1 Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total _ hrs ars hrs hrs 1119 his has his 818 MS his hn ars hrs Ms h11 MS his hrs hrs his his hrs Toted hrs 8 42 42 544 24 5 155 91 32 10 800 52 28 56 1682 36 1G 43.0 Intermediate Design Documents 15.1 In600Mclnity Mop (2 sheets) 2 1 1 4 51,335 132 Roadway Typical Seclions (8 shack for 15 Typical Sections) 3 3 8 ! 30 56206 13.3 Pavement d Facial), RomovnvDemeliiioo Plans (Future Sunt Agmem.) 13.4 Inlcrrhange awls tor Approval (3 sheets) 3 6 0 24 _ 56.603 13.5 Roadway Paving Plan and Profile Sheets (62 sheet;) 1 34 68 102 340 - 564,034 13,8 Diamine Pions for SR 200 and Local Roadways (8 sheet) _- 12 6 6 54,753. 13.7 Hydraulic Ropon 8 01.603 13.8 Chang, Pavement MkR, Sinning, Sign 91roc1ure Plans (22 sheets) 11 1 4 22 11 40 86 521.084 1301 Intersection Control Plans {9 sheets) 6 1 4 10 10 35 30 512,454 33.10 Mainlenonce of Traffic {MOT) Plans (15 sheet) 8 8 18 55.968 11.11 Illumination Design and Plans (Future Suol, Afirmnl.) 31,12 Preliminary utlfay Pians (Future Supl. Anrmnt,) 13.13 8rldne Sheets (51 :beet;) 13.11,1 Barker Over SR 290 (Trent) 10 52,005 13.13.3 Parker Over 6N511 RR 40 140 140 280 585,721 13.13.3 Retaining Walt Through 6 13.13.4 Retaining Walt 7 (Rock Cat) 13,14 DMnil Shores (Four., Srrpl. Ailment.) 13.15 Prepare Itemized Cuanlity Takeoff and Cos? Estimate 4 8 8 24 4 2 2 56,227 13.16 Compllc and Submit Intermediate Dos1nn Package 8 4 8 4 4 54,413 13.17 intermediate Design Review Mooting 8 16 8 8 8 8 580 030 „- 8254,786 Work Element Total 107 188_ __188_, aL_v 4581_ 78 00 4 80,,40� 7e2._,.3C - _ 14,6 ROW P. Limited Across Acquisition Docs (Future Sunt Ailment.) Work Element Toad - - __-- ISA 65A APpcolse S Acquire ROW & Limited Access [Return Supt. Agrrnnt) -...,'— - — Te WorElementW k . 16,2 Temporary Project Closeout 8 8 12 4 4 I 1 56,376 ! Work Element Total !__. 8.� -. 12 4 4,_ - Sign 17.0 Float Design {Future Supt. Agrm nt.) I _1141118 Eksminl Tod1 18.0 _ P6EE Preparation and Submittal 'Future Supt. Agrrnntj 1 - - World Element Total _____ - _ ,-- - 1 EXPENSES I _—,...,. 1 510!746 PROSECT WORK ELEMENTS TOTALS 487 180 62 227 112 517 280 244 108 180 112 204 302 412 64 114 46 112 66 62 193 16 25 4071 5620,336 Page of 12 M3Pona1h404o1.0• Vallry, Cly d1Wmgetc_901-1_8rku R0.e ImrchnnOeLcepe ed Fad:01411.27 B.rhr Rd• 185F Ore& S.prrdbn Phone 1 9184 &MOrt 88684..)+.0 Printed: 11)2832016, 2:35 PM Exhibit E City of Spokane Valley, WA Barker Road/BASF Grade Separation Phase I — Design Services Project No. 0143 GeoEngineers, Inc. Direct Classification Hrs. x Rate = Cost 1 Associate 22 $ 50.40 $1,109 2 Senior Engineer 16 $ 43.69 $699 3 Senior Geologist 12 $ 54.50 $654 4 Project Engineer 2 86 $ 37.26 $3,204 5 Engineer 3 36 $ 29.52 $1,063 6 Engineer 1 92 $ 24.77 $2,279 7 Senior Technician 10 $ 22.60 $226 8 Technician 40 $ 18.27 $731 9 GIS Analyst / Developer 14 $ 34,85 $488 10 Administrator 3 20 $ 20.00 $400 11 Administrator 2 27 $ 18,00 $486 Total Hrs. 375 Salary Cost $ 11,338 Salary Escalation Cost (estimated) Escalation - % of Labor Cost per year @ year(s) $0 Total Salary Cost $ 11,338 Overhead Cost @ Net Fee @ Total Overhead & Net Fee Cost 212.67% of Direct Labor 30.0% of Direct Labor $ 24,114 $ 3,402 $ 27,515 Direct Expenses No. Unit Each Cost In-house Drifting 1 lump $9,194 $ 9,194.00 In-house Laboratory Services 1 lump $5,026 $ 5,026.00 Field Equip. (iPadfGPS/Truck) 1.5 day $100 $ 150.00 Subcontractor Costs Traffic Control 2 days @ $1,000 day $ 2,000.00 Backhoe Services 2 days @ $1,500 day $ 3,000.00 Drilling (Air Rotary) 1 lump $15,000 $ 15,000.00 Markup 0.05 $1,000 GeoEngineers, Inc. Total Page 5 of 12 $ 35,370 $ 74,224 11/28/2016 M,Wursuts5SlSpol..ane Va'ley. CAy o4Wen12016,RaH_Barker Road Inleichange5Scope and Fee12016-11-23 Barker Rd - E 1SF Grade SeparaL;on Phase 1 Final Budget Estimate xr;x Exhibit E City of Spokane Valley, WA Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation Phase I — Design Services Project No, 0143 GeoEngineers, Inc. 1 2 3 4 5 s 7 6 9 10 11 Work Element # Work Element of U ¢ sal W O 'E N o 0 r O 'c ui Project Engineer 2 M c 'rn w` Engineer 1 c 13 iii - '6 'E v!. c 'U E c'5i _ GIS Analyst / Developer Administrator 3 dministrator 2 GEO Total hrs GEO Total $ Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Tota! Total hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs 375 376 4.0 Geotechnical Engineering 22 16 12 86 36 92 10 40 14 20 27 $38,854 Work Element Total 22 10 12 86 36 92 10 40 14 20 27 $36,1154 E:XPF_NSES $35,370 PROJECT WORK ELEMENTS TOTALS 22 16 12 86 36 92 10 40 14 20 27 1 376 574,224 Page 6 of 12 11/28/2016 til 4PursuitslS\Spokano VatIey, City oRWon12016_RaH_9arker Road interchange\Scope and Fee@016-11-23 Barker Rd - WISE Grade Separaion Phase 1 Final Budget EstlmateAlsx Exhibit E City of Spokane Valley, WA Barker RoadIBNSF Grade Separation Phase 1- Design Services Project No. 0143 HDR Engineering, Inc. Direct Classification Hrs. x Rate = Cost 1 Principal In Charge 12 $ 91.35 $1,096 2 Transportation Lead (HDR PM) 431 $ 53.17 $22,916 3 Roadway QA/QC 110 $ 78.66 $8,653 4 Roadway / Utilities Lead 612 $ 50.00 $30,600 5 Roadway Design Engineer II 319 $ 37.32 $11,905 6 Roadway Design Engineer I 149 $ 26.65 $3,971 7 Civil Designer IV 673 $ 40.72 $27,405 8 Hydraulic Engineer 104 $ 70.00 $7,280 9 Maintenance of Traffic Leal 120 $ 50.47 $6,056 10 Bridge QA/QC 142 $ 71.47 $10,149 11 Senior Bridge Engineer 406 $ 61.54 $24,985 12 Bridge Engineer 236 $ 43.75 $10,325 13 Bridge CADD 288 $ 45.55 $13,118 14 BNSF Lead 126 $ 94.85 $11,951 15 ROW Principal 0 $ 75.17 $0 16 ROW Task Lead/Acquisition Agent 0 $ 40.88 $0 17 ROW Relocation Agent 0 $ 45.63 $0 18 ROW Technician 0 $ 23.36 $0 19 Controller 54 $ 23.00 $1,242 20 Project Assistant 42 $ 20.36 $855 Total Hrs. 3824 Salary Cost Salary Escalation Cost (estimated) Escalation - % of Labor Cost Total Salary Cost Overhead Cost @ Net Fee @ Total Overhead & Net Fee Cost 3.5% per year @ 0.9 year(s) 149.69% of Direct Labor 31.0% of Direct Labor $ 192,508 $6,064 $ 198,572 $ 297,242 $ 61,557 $ 358,799 Direct Expenses No. Unit Each Cost Printing (8.5x11) (B&W) 2000 pages @ $0.05 /page $ 100,00 Printing (11x17) (B&W) 4000 pages @ $0.10 /page $ 400.00 Printing (11x17) (Color) 1000 pages @ $0.32 /page $ 320.00 Printing (22x34) (Color on foam boar 6 pages @ $37.00 /page $ 222.00 Reports reports @ $15.00 /report $ - Plans 0 sets @ $2.00 /set $ - Parking 12 @ S40.00 $ 480.00 Mail/Deliveries/Fed Ex 40 @ $5.00 $ 200.00 Airfare (Portland to Spokane) 1 trips @ $300.00 $ 300.00 Airfare (Seattle to Spokane) 2 trips @ $300.00 $ 600.00 Mileage 2,500 miles @ $0.54 /mile $ 1,350.00 Lodging 3 nights @ $159.00 /night $ 477.00 Car rental 3 days @ $60.00 /day $ 180.00 Subtotal $ 4,629 HDR Engineering, Inc. Total $ 561,999 Page 7of12 11/28/2016 1.1:5Pursuits5S1Spokene Valley, City oRWon52016_RaH_Barker Road InterchangelScope and Fee12016•11-23 Barker Rd - BNSF Grade Separation Phase 1 Final Budget Eslimate.xlsx Exhibit E City of Spokane Valley, WA Barker RoadJBNSF Grade Separation Phase I — Design Services Project No. 0143 HDR Engineering, Inc. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 t0 11 12 12 14 10 16 17 16 10 2e Werk Element X Work Element p 0. _ a 1 CI it Z. ..- + K g' K $#b ori 1 K Li '' d a. re tu 2 Lt r b S g al c�•b .i j 0 o� 8 ui g mE c c i0 . to Z W . O rK Fit OW Task ea3'AcquisiVon Agent /IOW Relocation Agent K U r i e. MDR HDR Total Total Tots) Total Total Total Total Totat Total Total Total Tow Total Total Total Total Totat Total Total Tow hrs hrs hrs hrs his hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs Total hrt Totai 5 86 56 2 4 12 12 33 127 280 614 2 2 4 4 4 18 1B 46 26 4 4 1.0 Project Management & OYatity control 1.1 Project Management 88 513.525 12 ProjectWae and Project Setup 16 24 16 55.101 1.3 SuhoonsultamAgreements and Caordnaaon 2 3307 1.4 Prepare PTO d Notebooks 4 1 5E15 1.5 Project Quaky Management Plan 4 4 4 51,905 1.8 Develop Project CPD Schedule and Updates 12 51.844 1.7 Monthly Progress Reports and invoices 11 '.. 22 53 204 1.8 Projoct Team Meetings and Council Meeting Presentations 33 28 28 38 324273 1.9 Duality Control/Duality Assurance Review 8 4 110 142 18 557.582 Work Element _12_ 174_114.-_ 28 142 28 3$ _ _ 46_ _36_ $10$.462 2.0 Capacity Justification Report 2 5307 2.1 Capacity Justification Report Work Element Total _ 2 -.. 5307 3.0 Corridor Inventory! Data Collection 3.1 Obtain As -Bullis and Centred Plan Documents 4 5515 3.2 Assemble Applicable Design Standards and Policies 4 1 3015 32 UpdateNenty Environmental and Land Use Constraints 4 1 5615 3.4 Verify Existing Corridor Willies and Devolep Ut10ty Contlid Matrix 12 6 52,713 3.5 Site Visits to Obtain Addtbnal Information As Needed 8 8 52.576 57,133 - Work Element Total _..-24 - - 14------`--6 -. - .— - -- — -- 4.0 GeotecMkal Engineering 2 8 1 16 54.301 I Work EfemeoitTotal 2 8._.._-18_. ...__.-- - _541301 5.0 Confirm Planning Framework for the Project (Client 8 WSDOT) I 4 - 3015 ---- $61S Work Element Total _-_ 4 _ Page 8 0012 11282016 1PUMUIILLSLSC.40,10 VIOVY. GN nhWe^ 1P_RSH-0encv Rind kn4 vcheno 4Scope rod Feo120lG-11-11 Berko, Rtl- 100SF Credo Separation Phan 1 8nel Budge EahrnetoAlex HDR Engineering, Inc. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 8 1D 11 12 13 14 15 10 17 19 19 20 Work Element# Work Element t .& ransporta6on Dead HDR PM) 8 m 1 ,3 j I " a & o` 6' og is n a ec g V c x c S ri 1 & to m` 0 w ro U 0 SNSF Lead A a a c r rg CC c cc a 1- 'tr a 7, 5 0 w ,t HOF( HDR_ Total Total Total Total Total Total Total '70181 Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs Total hrs Total S 6.0 Traffic Modeling & Analysis 6.t Traffic Volumes Data Collection _ ________________ MEM Deveto•Pro'ectMethods and Assum•�• s Document ______ ____________ 6.3 Travel Demand Forecast • in AM and PM Peak Hours ___�_MIE_____ _ �O•.,..r.. 1. .,. .r..•r .! ,.•.. ,,. ..• --__________ ____E MMII Collision Histo Evaluation _____IMMIIM____ ____ _ 4 Intorsoctlon Control Anal is for Protect Intersection __ ________________ 6.7 1 Draft Traffics • erational Ana ..is Re ort 2 ____ ________ 2 2 3307 MEM FInaITraffic 0•crotionalAnalysis Report _®__________ ___ 5307 4 60 28 Work Element Total 4 _ _.. _5613 7.0 Public Involvement Program _____ _ ____n___ ® Publics... House _0 16 __________IMEMIl___ 57,478 7.2 Property Owner Contact Meetings ®IIMMI_____________ 64,197 24 4 _ 511,674 Work Element Total 2B 38 WIEM Environmental Technical Memoranda __ 111•111IM_IMIIIIIM_MIIM111_1___ 8.3 NEPA Cate•orical Exclusion Documentation CED Form --- Work Element Total i.� _11=11___1111.M1111.1111111111.11111.1=111=_l__ 9.1 Deve • . Control Network ________IIIIIIIIMMI_____ 92 Aerial LiDAR Colleciion _©_1.11111=_M1111M1__©_____ 53:48 9,3 Perform BoundaryfRight-of-WaySun/ - _11111111M_________MI__® 4 Pre• are Final BaseMo••In- Products __________________N 8869 Work Element Total 2_ __ - - ._.. 2_..._ 10.0 Alternatives Analysis - Interchange & Bridge Configuration _________.11._=1111M____ 10.1 Deveto• Alternative All nmenls- VC and Brid re Alternatives ___®_I___ 376 32 48 540,469 10.2 Evaluate Alternatives Traffic lm •acts _________ _______ 10.3 Devote.. Al1emative Costs E_____ 8 _________ 54,356 10.4 D��ev�- • • an Alternatives Evaluation Matrix 8 _®-___ 8 �___�__ 57,281 10.5 r•a•.a �.l�"Av"Innaair7.nr}i.r„a Ra......ILMIIIMIll 4 32 _11111111.111M __MINMI_'_ 40 496 24 55,957 40 12666 50 160 Work Element Totat 52 St?4,965 11.0 BNSF Coordination F. Submittals ______ _____NIM__ MM. Pre •aro Tem •ora Occu•ane A••Ileadon&Sato Plan IMINWE_©__©_MIIIIIIIIII_m _1111111M__ $5289 ® ENSF Dos1,n Phase A Package (Concept Railroad Submittal) m©MEM____ 30 ______ 102x270270 156 292 528,140 ® BNSF Design Phase B Package 30% Railroad Submittal 32 _®QOmm__ 8 _ 40 ______ 56 86 2 551.699 Work Element Total 55 8 6 36 16 12 Page 9 of 12 11282016 61;1PurcuIRASISpakona Valley, Clty o\Won5271C R5H,Barker Road lntarchoopelScopa and F002010-11-23 Barker Rd - 01CF Crl4n Soparason Pnrre 1 Fine/ Budget Enllmater Atk HDR Engineering, Inc. 1 2 3 4 2 6 7 0 0 1e 11 12 13 14 15 10 07 10 10 20 Work Element f1 Work Element Principal In Charge Transportation Lead (HEIR PM) m i m m 2 ,v i C m �� 3o 11. tit. a C m 7i i m tt W 2 U m $ S A a 5 m 1 Senior Bridge Engineer W4 W U -$� TC6 m.=.2 3 m W M o_ S ROW Task Lead/Acquisition Agent et cc C sm4_ H cc is U C 0. NOR HDR Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total T0ta1 Total Total Total Total Total Total hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs. hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hr5 hrs hes hrs 'hrs. hrs ha hrs hrs hrs 'Total 'hrs. Toll S 120 106 6 6 I 238 100 440 120 204 60 300 536 146 52 26 1984 36 35 12.0 Refine HN 30% Design and Design Approval 12,1 Refine BW 3095 Design Typical Sections (Deleted) 12,2 Refine STV 30% Design SR 290 8 interchange Ramp Plans (Deleted) 12.3 Reline STV 30% Design Local Roadway Plan, (Deleted) 12.4 Refine 13TV 30% Design Utility Plans (Deleted) 12.5 Refine BTV 30% Design Pavement Channefcatlon Plans (Delated) 12.6 Prepare Bridge and Wall Structures Typo Alternatives Analysis 4 4 60 32 20 618,543 12.7 Prepare Bridge Preliminary Plan (6 bridge sheets) 4 4 30 8 60 615,466 12.8 Prepare Cost Estimates for Reined ETV 30% Design (Deleted) 12.9 Submit Refined BTV 30% Design Package (Deleted) 12.10 Refined B7V 30% Design Review Meeting (Deleted) 12.11 Prepare Basis of Design Memorandum 2 2 2 5951 12.12 Design Approval Memorandum 2 2 2 5951 Work Element 12 12 94 40 80 S35112 - 13.0 Intermediate Design Documents 13.1 (ndexNicinity Map (2 sheets) 13.2 Roadway Typical Sections (B sheets for 15 Typical Sections) 5 40 55 513,091 13,3 Pavement E. Facility Removal/Demolition Plans (Future Supt. Agrmnt) 13.4 Interchange Plans for Approval (3 sheets) 13.5 Roadway Paving Pion and Pronto Sheets (62 sheets) 22 176 25 25 192 556,377 13,6 Drainage Plans for SR 290 and Local Roadways (6 sheets) 6 18 1 14 12 24 48 618,214 13.7 Hydraulic Report 1 4 20 80 40 20 40 325,830 13.8 Charm, Pavement Mkg, Signing, Sign Structure Plans (22 sheets) 13.9 Intersection Control Plans (9 shoots) 4 24 4 4 24 67,694 13.10 Maintenance of Traffic (MOT) Plans (15 sheets) 4 76 100 120 538,323 13.11 Rumination Design and Plans (Future Supt Format) 13.12 Preliminary Utility Plans (Future Supt. Agrrnnt) 13.13 Bridge Sheets (51 sheets) 13.13.1 Barker Over SR 290 (Trent) 8 8 152 168 200 677,160 13.132 Barker Over BNSF RR 13.13.3 Retaining Walls 1 through 6 13.13.4 Retaining Wall 7 (Rock Cut) 13.14 Detail Sheets (Future SupL Agrrnnt) 13.15 Prepare Itemized Quantity Takeoff and Cost Estimate 2 43 8 8 40 24 24 519,663 13.16 Compile and Submit Intermediate Design Package 12 4 4 4 12 4 4 8 56,879 13.17 Intermediate Design ReviewMeetirtg 10 8 6 54,113 _ Work Element Total 77 338_211 _83 467.;._ 1 , 120; 186 14, 20$ _. _ ___$287,3.43 14.0 ROW & Limned Access Acquisition Docs (Future Supt. Agrmnt.) { _ Work Element Total 16.0 Appraise 8 Acquire ROW 8 Limited Access (Future Supt. Agrrent,) Work Element Total 16.0 Temporary Project Closeout 8 8 6 l 8 4 $4,396 4 Work Element Total 8 8 8 8 4 $4,386 P390100112 11/282016 M;1PureultslSlSpekune Volley. Clly oflWda12116_RaH B3rtor Road lneorc1an5alSoape ono Fool20lO-1t 21 Barker Rct-5NSF Or000 Sapornnon Rhaee 1 Final Bonet Entlrnatvlrlec HDR Engineering. inc. 1 2 3 4 5 c 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 13 19 33 Work Element Work Element 1% U 0. T; ri Transportation Lead {HIR PMp U O d D i b re Roadway !Wires Lead a' d O- m w fi "ern K w c O_ m ..E. ri 117 w 7 w m © Ct `o- c C '� u = m H y c m m a U O v m` v c w c w dt p m 0 tit C W oo 2 r$ ❑ a U m m` 11 m Cr. a 7 Ee ROWTas% Lead/Acqui scion Agent a ¢ 4 a ? 7�t c .Z? u 0 = U _ c g ':,, tr m a` HDR Total has _HDR Total 3 Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total hr5 hrs hrs 1175 Pk-s hrs 1575 hr.. hr3 ti1S hrs hrs 877 tars hrs hrs hrs 1175 hr3 hrs 17.0 Final Design (Future Supi. Agrmnt.) f 1 Work Elemont Tota[ 180 PS&E Preparation and Submlt3! :Future Supt. Agrre at.t Work Element Total 54.027 E... EN_..:� PROSECT WORK ELEMENTS TOTAL$ 12 431 110 612 319 149 873 104 126 142 406 236 288 126 54 42 3824 5561,999 Page 11 of 12 11)28/2010 M,\Pumul0LLpokano Vufley, Gty oft Wen12018_ROH_6arkar Rood IntorehangalScepo and Fou12517-11-23 Barker Rd - 9NSF Grade Sopom581 Ph000 1 Fknol 377 n1 Emnmute.n/no Exhibit E City of Spokane Valley, WA Barker RoadIBNSP Grade Separation Phase I — Design Services Project No. 0143 Historical Research Associates, Inc. Labor Category Rate Task 1 Project Management and Coordination Hours Total Task 2 Health Et Safety Coordination Hours Total Task 3 Background and Archival Research Hours Total Task 4 Fieldwork Hours Total Task 5 Analysis and Reporting Hours Total PROJECT TOTAL Hours Total Senior Archaeologist • B Flicks 548.62 1 549 2 597 3 5146 Project Archaeologist- Dampf 527.58 4 5110 2 555 2 S55 10 5276 32 $883 50 $1,379 Research Archaeologist • $ Tamlan SI9.93 2 540 2 $40 4 580 10 5199 24 5478 42 5837 GIS Coordinator - G Frazier 528.34 2 557 4 $113 6 $170 ArchaeoioglcalTechnician 520.00 2 540 10 5200 12 5240 Health/Safety Coordinator - J Gilpin 527.99 4 5112 4 5112 Production Asst/Editor • D Vogel 524.04 2 546 2 546 Production Specialist - P Cobb 529.00 3 587 3 587 Office Manager/Clerical -M Watson 515.00 2 530 1 515 3 545 Project Administrator . 6 Curtis 52608 2 553 2 553 InfotmaUon System Specialist - D Muir $35.81 2 572 2 572 Labor Subtotal 13 5354 10 5247 6 5135 32 5732 68 51,722 129 53,169 Overhead 151.20% $535 5373 5204 51,106 52,603 54,821 Fee 30.00% 5106 574 540 5220 5516 5957 Labor Total 5994 5695 $379 $2,058 54,841 58,967 Reimbursable Expense Rate Units Total Units Total Units Total Units Total Units Total Units Total Travel Rental Car 570.00 i 570 I 570 Rental Car Operating Exp /Mile 50.35 40 514 40 514 Shipping / Postage 525.00 1 525 1 525 Tablet 520.00 i 520 1 520 Digital Camera Use 1 Day $2.00 1 $2 1 52 Digital Camera Image 50.10 50 55 50 55 CD Rom Gala/CD 55.00 2 $10 2 510 Report Production $0.15 200 530 200 830 Photocopy (tn-house) $0.10 20 52 20 52 Telephone/Fax 51,00 2 52 1 51 2 52 2 52 7 57 Safety Training (6115F, eRailsafe) 590.00 3 5270 3 5270 Miscellaneous Supplies 55.00 10 $50 10 550 Direct Subtotal 52 5270 51 5165 567 5505 TASK TOTAL 5996 5965 5380 52,223 54,908 $9,472 Page 12 of 12 k1.\Purauits'.S`.Spokana Varay, G.ty Won12616 RaH Barker Road InlerchanyiScope and Fea12016-11-23 Barker Rd- Br1SF Grada Separa"en Phase 1 Final Budget Estimate Ise 11/28/2016 Exhibit F Title VI Assurances During the performance of this AGREEMENT, the CONSULTANT, for itself, its assignees, and successors in interest agrees as follows: 1. Compliance with Regulations: The CONSULTANT shall comply with the Regulations relative to non- discrimination in federally assisted programs of the AGENCY, Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 21, as they may be amended from time to time (hereinafter referred to as the "REGULATIONS"), whieh are herein incorporated by reference and made a part of this AGREEMENT. 2. Non-discrimination: The CONSULTANT, with regard to the work performed during this AGREEMENT, shall not discriminate on the grounds of race, color, sex, or national origin in the selection and retention of sub -consultants, including procurement of materials and leases of equipment. The CONSULTANT shall not participate either directly or indirectly in the discrimination prohibited by Section 21.5 of the REGULATIONS, including employment practices when this AGREEMENT covers a program set forth in Appendix B of the REGULATIONS. 3. Solicitations for Sub -consultants, Including Procurement of Materials and Equipment: In all solicitations either by competitive bidding or negotiations made by the CONSULTANT for work to be performed under a sub -contract, including procurement of materials or leases of equipment, each potential sub - consultant or supplier shall be notified by the CONSULTANT of the CONSULTANT's obligations under this AGREEMENT and the REGULATIONS relative to non-discrimination on the grounds of race, color, sex, or national origin. 4. Information and Reports: The CONSULTANT shall provide all information and reports required by the REGULATIONS or directives issued pursuant thereto, and shall permit access to its books, records, accounts, other sources of information, and its facilities as may be determined by the AGENCY, the STATE, or the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to be pertinent to ascertain compliance with such REGULATIONS, orders and instructions. Where any information required of a CONSULTANT is in the exclusive possession of another who fails or refuses to furnish this information, the CONSULTANT shall so certify to the AGENCY, the STATE, or the FHWA as appropriate, and shall set forth what efforts it has made to obtain the information. 5. Sanctions for Non-compliance: In the event of the CONSULTANT's non-compliance with the non- discrimination provisions of this AGREEMENT, the AGENCY shall impose such AGREEMENT sanctions as it, the STATE, or the FHWA may determine to be appropriate, including, but not limited to: • Withholding of payments to the CONSULTANT under this AGREEMENT until the CONSULTANT complies, and/or; • Cancellation, termination, or suspension of this AGREEMENT, in whole or in part. 6. Incorporation of Provisions: The CONSULTANT shall include the provisions of paragraphs (1) through (5) in every subcontract, including procurement of materials and leases of equipment, unless exempt by the REGULATIONS, or directives issued pursuant thereto. The CONSULTANT shall take such action with respect to any sub -consultant or procurement as the STATE, the AGENCY, or FHWA may direct as a means of enforcing such provisions including satictions for non-compliance. Provided, however, that in the event a CONSULTANT becomes involved in, or is threatened with, litigation with a sub -consultant or supplier as a result of such direction, the CONSULTANT may request the AGENCY enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the STATE and/or the AGENCY and, in addition, the CONSULTANT may request the United States enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the United States. Agreement Number: 16-175 WSDOT Form 140-089 EF Exhibit F Page 1 of 1 Revised 10/30/2014 Exhibit G Certification Documents Exhibit G- l (a) Certification of Consultant Exhibit G -1(b) Certification of City of Spokane Valley Exhibit G-2 Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension and Other Responsibility Matters - Primary Covered Transactions Exhibit G-3 Certification Regarding the Restrictions of the Use of Federal Funds for Lobbying Exhibit G-4 Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data Agreement Number: 16-175 WSDOT Form 140-089 EF Exhibit G Page 1 of 1 Revised 10/30/2014 Exhibit G -1(a) Certification of Consultant 1 hereby certify that 1 am the and duly authorized representative of the firm of David Evans and Associates, Inc. whose address is 908 N. Howard St., Suite 300, Spokane, WA 99201 and that neither the above firm nor I have: a) Employed or retained for a commission, percentage, brokerage, contingent fee, or other consideration, any firm or person (other than a bona fide employee working solely for me or the above CONSULTANT) to solicit or secure this AGREEMENT; b) Agreed, as an express or implied condition for obtaining this contract, to etnploy or retain the services of any firm or person in connection with carrying out this AGREEMENT; or c) Paid, or agreed to pay, to any firm, organization or person (other than a bona fide employee working solely for me or the above CONSULTANT) any fee, contribution, donation, or consideration of any kind for, or in connection with, procuring or carrying out this AGREEMENT; except as hereby expressly stated (if any); I acknowledge that this certificate is to be furnished to the Washington State Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation in connection with this AGREEMENT involving participation of Federal -aid highway funds, and is subject to applicable State and Federal laws, both criminal and civil. David Evans and Associates, Inc. Consultant (Firm Name) Signature (Authorized Official of Consultant) Date Agreement Number: 16-175 WSDOT Form 140.089 EF Exhibit G Page 1 of 1 Revised 10/30/2014 Exhibit G -1(b) Certification of City of Spokane Valley I hereby certify that I am the: 0 City Manager ❑ Other of the City of Spokane Valley , and the City or its representative has not been required, directly or indirectly as an express or implied condition in connection with obtaining or carrying out this AGREEMENT to: a) Employ or retain, or agree to employ to retain, any firm or person; or b) Pay, or agree to pay, to any firm, person, or organization, any fee, contribution, donation, or consideration of any kind; except as hereby expressly stated (if any): I acknowledge that this certificate is to be furnished to the Washington State Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, in connection with this AGREEMENT involving participation of Federal -aid highway funds, and is subject to applicable State and Federal laws, both criminal and civil. Signature Date Agreement Number: 16-175 WSDOT Form 140-089 EF Exhibit G Page 1 of 1 Revised 10/30/2014 Exhibit G-2 Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension and Other Responsibility Matters - Primary Covered Transactions I. The prospective primary participant certifies to the best of its knowledge and belief, that it and its principals: A. Are not presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from covered transactions by any Federal department or agency; B. Have not within a three (3) year period preceding this proposal been convicted of or had a civil judgment rendered against them for commission of fraud or a criminal offense in connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain, or performing a public (Federal, State, or local) transaction or contract under a public transaction; violation of Federal or State anti-trust statues or commission of embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, making false statements, or receiving stolen property; C. Are not presently indicted for or otherwise criminally or civilly charged by a governmental entity (Federal, State, or local) with commission of any of the offenses enumerated in paragraph (I)(b) of this certification; and D. Have not within a three (3) year period preceding this application /proposal had one or more public transactions (Federal, State and local) terminated for cause or default. II. Where the prospective primary participant is unable to certify to any of the statements in this certification, such prospective participant shall attach an explanation to this proposal. David Evans and Associates, Inc. Consultant (Firm Name) Signature (Authorized Official of Consultant) Date Agreement Number: 16-175 WSDOT Form 140-089 EF Exhibit G Page 1 of 1 Revised 90/30/2014 Exception to the Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, and other Responsibility Matters Exception to subsection d. July 1, 2016 David Evans and Associates, Inc. (DEA) is not debarred from performing any work with any agency. DEA was terminated on a $25,000 task order by the Idaho Transportation Department (ITN, Despite the status of that task order, DEA's overall Term Agreement remained in place and was subsequently used for other projects. The DEA lead on this project is no longer with DEA and ITD has initiated over 21 agreements or task orders with DEA subsequent to this task order. Exhibit G-3 Certification Regarding the Restrictions of the Use of Federal Funds for Lobbying The prospective participant certifies, by signing and submitting this bid or proposal, to the best of his or her knowledge and belief, that: 1. No Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of the undersigned, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any Federal agency, a Member of Congress, a officer or employee of Congress, or any employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the awarding of any Federal contract, the making of any Federal grant, the making of any Federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative AGREEMENT, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of Federal contract, grant, loan or cooperative AGREEMENT. 2. If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any Federal agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this Federal contract, grant, loan or cooperative AGREEMENT, the undersigned shall complete and submit Standard Form - LLL, "Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying," in accordance with its instructions. This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction was made or entered into. Submission of this certification is a prerequisite for making or entering into this transaction imposed by Section 1352, Title 31, U.S. Code. Any person who fails to file the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000.00, and not more than $100,000.00, for each such failure. The prospective participant also agrees by submitting his or her bid or proposal that he or she shall require that the language of this certification be included in all lower tier sub -contracts, which exceed $100,000, and that all such sub -recipients shall certify and disclose accordingly. David Evans and Associates, Inc. Consultant (Firm Name) Signature (Authorized Official of Consultant) Date Agreement Number: 16-175 WSDOT Forrn 140-089 EF Exhibit G Page 1 of 1 Revised 10/30/2014 Exhibit G-4 Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data This is to certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, the cost or pricing data (as defined in section 2.101 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and required under FAR subsection 15.403-4) submitted, either actually or by specific identification in writing, to the Contracting Officer or to the Contracting Officer's representative in support of Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation as of November 23, 2016 are accurate, complete, and current This certification includes the cost or pricing data supporting any advance AGREEMENT's and forward pricing rate AGREEMENT's between the offer or and the Government that are part of the proposal. Firm: David Evans and Associates, Inc. Project Manager Signature Title Date of Execution***: 'Identify the proposal, quotation, request for pricing adjustment, or other submission involved, giving the appropriate identifying ber (e.g. project title.) * 1nsert the day, month, and year, when price negotiations were concluded and price AGREEMENT was reached. 'insert the day, month, and year, of signing, which should be as etosc as practicable to the date when the price negotiations were concluded and the contract price was agreed to. Agreement Number: 16-175 WSDOT Form 140-089 EF Exhibit G Page 1 of 1 Revised 10/30/2014 Exhibit 1 Alleged Consultant Design Error Procedures The purpose of this exhibit is to establish a procedure to determine if a consultant's alleged design error is of a nature that exceeds the accepted standard of care. In addition, it will establish a uniform method for the resolution and/or cost recovery procedures in those instances where the agency believes it has suffered some material damage due to the alleged error by the consultant, Step 1 Potential Consultant Design Error(s) is Identified by Agency's Project Manager At the first indication of potential consultant design error(s), the first step in the process is for the Agency's project manager to notify the Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer regarding the potential design error(s). For federally funded projects, the Region Local Programs Engineer should be informed and involved in these procedures, (Note: The Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer may appoint an agency staff person other than the project manager, who has not been as directly involved in the project, to be responsible for the remaining steps in these procedures.) Step 2 Project Manager Documents the Alleged Consultant Design Error(s) After discussion of the alleged design error(s) and the magnitude of the alleged error(s), and with the Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer's concurrence, the project manager obtains more detailed documentation than is normally required on the project. Examples include: all decisions and descriptions of work; photographs, records of labor, materials and equipment. Step 3 Contact the Consultant Regarding the Alleged Design Error(s) If it is determined that there is a need to proceed further, the next step in the process is for the project manager to contact the consultant regarding the alleged design crror(s) and the magnitude of the alleged error(s). The project manager and other appropriate agency staff should represent the agency and the consultant should be represented by their project manger and any personnel (including sub -consultants) deemed appropriate for the alleged design error(s) issue. Step 4 Attempt to Resolve Alleged Design Error with Consultant After the mecting(s) with the consultant have been completed regarding the consultant's alleged design error(s), there are three possible scenarios: • [t is determined via mutual agreement that there is not a consultant design error(s). If this is the case, then the process will not proceed beyond this point. • It is determined via mutual agreement that a consultant design error(s) occurred. If this is the case, then the Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer, or their representatives, negotiate a settlement with the consultant. The settlement would be paid to the agency or the amount would be reduced from the consultant's agreement with the agency for the services on the project in which the design error took place. The agency is to provide LP, through the Region Local Programs Engineer, a summary of the settlement for review and to make adjustments, if any, as to how the settlement affects federal reimbursements. No further action is required. • There is not a mutual agreement regarding the alleged consultant design error(s). The consultant may request that the alleged design error(s) issue be forwarded to the Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer for review. If the Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer, after review with their legal counsel, is not able to reach mutual agreement with the consultant, proceed to Step 5. Agreement Number: 16-175 WSDOT Form 140-089 EF Exhibit! Page 1 of 2 Revised 10/30/2014 Step 5 For ward Documents to Local Programs For federally funded projects all available information, including costs, should be forwarded through the Region Local Programs Engineer to LP for their review and consultation with the FHWA. LP will meet with representatives of the agency and the consultant to review the alleged design error(s), and attempt to find a resolution to the issue. If necessary, LP will request assistance from the Attorney General's Office for legal interpretation. LP will also identify how the alleged error(s) affects eligibility of project costs for federal reimbursement. • If mutual agreement is reached, the agency and consultant adjust the scope of work and costs to reflect the agreed upon resolution. LP, in consultation with FHWA, will identify the amount of federal participation in the agreed upon resolution of the issue. • If mutual agreement is not reached, the agency and consultant may seek settlement by arbitration or by litigation. Agreement Number: 16-175 WSDDT Form 140-089 EF Exhibit I Page 2 of 2 Revised 10/30/2014 Exhibit J Consultant Claim Procedures The purpose of this exhibit is to describe a procedure regarding claim(s) on a consultant agreement. The following procedures should only be utilized on consultant claims greater than $1,000. If the consultant's claim(s) are a total of $1,000 or Tess, it would not be cost effective to proceed through the outlined steps. It is suggested that the Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer negotiate a fair and reasonable price for the consultant's claim(s) that total $1,000 or less. This exhibit will outline the procedures to be followed by the consultant and the agency to consider a potential claim by the consultant. Step 1 Consultant Files a Claim with the Agency Project Manager If the consultant determines that they were requested to perform additional services that were outside of the agreement's scope of work, they may be entitled to a claim. The first step that must be completed is the request for consideration of the claim to the Agency's project manager. The consultant's claim must outline the following: • Summation of hours by classification for each firm that is included in the claim; • Any correspondence that directed the consultant to perform the additional work; • Timeframe of the additional work that was outside of the project scope; • Summary of direct labor dollars, overhead costs, profit and reimbursable costs associated with the additional work; and • Explanation as to why the consultant believes the additional work was outside of the agreement scope of work. Step 2 Review by Agency Personnel Regarding the Consultant's Claim for Additional Compensation After the consultant has completed step 1, the next step in the process is to forward the request to the Agency's project manager. The project manager will review the consultant's claim and will met with thc Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer to determine if the Agency agrees with the claim. If the FHWA is participating in the project's funding, forward a copy of the consultant's claim and the Agency's recommendation for federal participation in the claim to the WSDOT Local Programs through the Region Local Programs Engineer. lithe claim is not eligible for federal participation, payment will need to be from agency funds. If the Agency project manager, Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer, WSDOT Local Programs (if applicable), and FHWA (if applicable) agree with the consultant's claim, send a request memo, including backup documentation to the consultant to either supplement the agreement, or create a new agreement for the claim. After the request has been approved, the Agency shall write thc supplement and/or new agreement and pay the consultant the amount of the claim. Inform the consultant that the final payment for the agreement is subject to audit. No further action in needed regarding the claim procedures. If the Agency does not agree with the consultant's claim, proceed to step 3 of the procedures. Agreement Number: 16-175 WSDOT Form 140-089 EF Exhibit J Page 1 of 2 Revised 10/30/2014 Step 3 Preparation of Support Documentation Regarding Consultant's Claim(s) If the Agency docs not agree with the consultant's claim, the project manager shall prepare a summary for the Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer that included the following: • Copy of information supplied by the consultant regarding the claim; • Agency's summation of hours by classification for each firm that should be included in the claim; • Any correspondence that directed the consultant to perform the additional work; • Agency's summary of direct labor dollars, overhead costs, profit and reimbursable costs associated with the additional work; • Explanation regarding those areas in which the Agency does/does not agree with the consultant's claim(s); • Explanation to describe what has been instituted to preclude future consultant claim(s); and • Recommendations to resolve the claim. Step 4 Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer Reviews Consultant Claim and Agency Documentation The Director of Pubic Works or Agency Engineer shall review and administratively approve or disapprove the claim, or portions thereof, which may include getting Agency Council or Commission approval (as appropriate to agency dispute resolution procedures). If the project involves federal participation, obtain concurrence from WSDOT Local Programs and FHWA regarding final settlement of the claim. If the claim is not eligible for federal participation, payment will need to be from agency funds. Step 5 Informing Consultant of Decision Regarding the Claim The Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer shall notify (in writing) the consultant of their final decision regarding the consultant's claim(s). Include the final dollar amount of the accepted claim(s) and rationale utilized for the decision. Step 6 Preparation of Supplement or New Agreement for the Consultant's Claim(s) The agency shall write the supplement and/or new agreement and pay the consultant the amount of the claim. Inform the consultant that the final payment for the agreement is subject to audit. Agreement Number: I6-175 WSDOT Farm 140-089 EF Exhibit J Page 2 of 2 Revised 10/30/2014 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: January 10, 2017 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ['consent ❑ old business ® new business ['public hearing ['information ❑ admin. report ['pending legislation ['executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Motion Consideration: Pines Road Underpass Right -of -Way Acquisition GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: November 10, 2015, Adoption of the 2016 Annual Budget, which included funds for this acquisition; January 3, 2017, Admin Report. BACKGROUND: The Pines Road/BNSF Grade Separation Project replaces an at -grade crossing with an underpass of BNSF's railroad tracks; lowers the intersection and adds lanes at the nearby Pines Road/Trent Avenue (SR 290); and closes the at -grade crossing of University Road at the BNSF railway. As part of the project, Pines Road will be shifted to the east. This will require the acquisition of additional right-of-way. The owners of the property east of Pines Road, Pinecroft, LLC, approached the City last year requesting that either 1) they be allowed to develop their property or 2) the City should purchase from them the necessary right-of-way for the Pines Road/BNSF project. Pinecroft, LLC, City staff and City Councilmembers all agreed that it would be in the public's best interest to purchase the needed right- of-way now rather than allowing the property to be developed just to have to relocate all tenants and remove all improvements later when the Pines Road/BNSF project moves forward. Therefore, Council included the purchase of this right-of-way in the 2016 budget. Staff moved forward with the purchase of this property with the help of a real estate consultant. An appraisal and review appraisal were completed, an offer was made, negotiations ensued, a Boundary Line Adjustment was completed, and the final acquisition documents are now ready for approval. The City will acquire 62,669 square feet of land at a cost of $7.50 per square foot, for a total acquisition price of $470,000. OPTIONS: Motion to authorize the City Manager to execute the final documents for the purchase of the Pinecroft property as described or take other appropriate action. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute the documents for the purchase of the Pinecroft property for the Pines Road/BNSF Grade Separation project. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The cost of the right-of-way acquisition was included in the 2016 Budget, however, since this action will not occur until 2017, a 2017 budget amendment will be necessary. Funds for this purchase are provided by Capital Reserve Fund 312. STAFF CONTACT: Steve M. Worley, P.E. — CIP Manager Eric Guth, P.E. — Public Works Director ATTACHMENTS: Warranty Deed, Escrow Agreement, Real Property Voucher, REET Forms, BLA Exhibit *Wane jUalle3' Public Works Department Capital Improvement Program 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 + Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 ♦ Fax: 509.688-0261 • cityhall@spokanevalley.org December 9th, 2016 Pinecroft, LLC. 12310 E Mirabeau Parkway Suite 150 Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Re: Project: Bridging the Valley — Pines Road Realignment & Underpass Parcel Number: 45033.5001 Property Address: No Site Addresses Dear John Miller: In our letter dated September 2801, 2016, the City of Spokane Valley offered to purchase property and/or property rights owned by you and identified as parcel number 45033.5001. The appraisal which resulted in our offer has now been revised due to a design change. This revision makes it necessary to withdraw our earlier offer and make a new offer. Our offer is $470,000.00 (rd). Offer consists of $470,000.00 for 62,669 square feet of land in fee. You may wish to employ professional services to evaluate the state's new offer. However, the $750 evaluation allowance mentioned in our original offer letter is a one-time allowance only. Your rights, as summarized in our earlier offer letter, remain unchanged. May we please have your early reply as to acceptance or rejection of this offer? Thank you. Sincerely, 407 fr " By: Morgan B' 10 p Epic Lar d Solutions, INC. Acquisition agent mbishop@epicland.com 509-724-2796 Rece' t of . i l tte is he •e uncle sign i Sign ledged. I t does not fthis offer. � /37- (4, Date «� CRorT ?f'(t i 10 After recording return document to: City of Spokane Valley Attn: City Clerk 11707 East Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 99201 PLEASE NL4KE NO MARK IN THE MARGIN SPACE - RESERVED FOR COUNTY AUDITOR'S USE Document Title: Warranty Deed Reference Number of Related Documents: Grantor(s): Pinecroft, LLC. Grantee(s): City of Spokane Valley Legal Description: LTS 3-A of Survey #5576086 Being PTN SW114 3-25-44EWM Additional Legal Description is on Page 4 of Document Assessor's Tax Parcel Number: 45033.5001 WARRANTY DEED Bridging the Valley — Pines Road Realignment and Underpass The Grantors, PINECROFT, LLC, a Washington Limited Liability Company, for and in consideration of the sum of Four Hundred Seventy Thousand AND NO/100 1($470,000.00) Dollars, and other valuable consideration, hereby conveys and warrants to the CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, a Washington municipal corporation, Grantee, the following described real property situated in Spokane County, in the State l of Washington. For legal description and additional conditions See Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof. It is understood and agreed that delivery of this deed is hereby tendered and that the terms and obligations hereof shall not become binding upon the City of Spokane Valley unless and until accepted and approved hereon in writing for the City of Spokane Valley, by and through its authorized agent. I i Page 1 of 4 Pages Parcel No. 45033.5001 PLEASE MAKE NO MARK 1N THE MARGIN SPACE - RESERVED FOR COUNTY AUDITOR'S USE ONLY. WARRANTY DEED Date: % C°C�F'�,�J8" 4,5iz7/ PINEC Bv: LLC G. Miller, Manager BY: -41 -e_41 ---///t'*&% usan E. Mlle , Manager Accepted and Approved CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Department of Public Works By: Authorized agent Date: Page 2 of 4 Pages Parcel No. 45033.5001 PLEASE MAKE NO MARGIN THE MARGIN SPACE - RESERVED FOR COUNTY AUDITOR'S USE ONLY. PLEASE hLAKE NO MARK IN TI fE MARGIN SI'ACE - RESERVED FOR COUNTY AUDITOR'S USE ONLY_ WARRANTYDEED STATE OF WASHINGTON) ) ss County of Spokane ) On this /5 day of DeC&i be( , 6[6, before me personally appeared John G Miller and Susan E. Miller to me known to be the Managers of Pinecroft, LLC, a Washington Limited Liability Company that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said Limited Liability Company, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that they are authorized to execute said 'I'strument. (SEAL) fie OA 4 ,,, n11 O .77 ' G ,,Irl°t yWAS S' .a` Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at 6/40 My commission expires a/f l7 Page 3 of 4 Pages Parcel No. 45033.5001 PLEASE MAKE NO MARK IN THE MARGIN SPACE - RESERVED FOR COUNTY AUDITOR'S USE ONLY. WARRANTY DEED PLEASE MAKE NO MARK 1N THE MARGIN SPACE - RESERVED FOR CO1JN1 Y AUDITOR'S USE ONLY. EXHIBIT "A" THAT PORTION OF LOT 1, BLOCK 3, BINDING SITE PLAN BSP -03-03, AS PER; PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 2 OF BINDING SITE PLANS, PAGES 68, 69, 70 AND 71, RECORDS OF SPOKANE COUNTY, AND THOSE PORTIONS OF LOTS 5, 6 AND 7, BLOCK 34, LOUISVILLE ADDITION, AS PER PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME "C" OF PLATS, PAGE 78, RECORDS OF SPOKANE COUNTY, AND THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 25 NORTH, RANGE 44 EAST OF THE WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 1; THENCE SOUTH 73°07'18" WEST 117.63 FEET ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 1 TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING SOUTH 73°07'18" WEST 93.80 FEET; THENCE ALONG THE ARC OF A 476.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 16°49'11", AND ARC LENGTH OF 139.73 FEET. THENCE SOUTH 89°56'29" WEST 35.03 FEET; THENCE ALONG THE ARC OF A 27.50 FOOT RADUIS CURVE TO THE RIGHT, 3I THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 55°47'25", AND ARC LENGTH OF 2678 FEET j TO THE EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF PINES ROAD / SR -27 THENCE NORTH 00°00'25" EAST 239.47 FEET ALONG SAID EAST RIGHT -OF-,` WAY LINE, TO THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF THE NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILWAY (NOW BURLINGTON NORTHERN - SANTA FE RAILWAY); THENCE NORTH 65°4625" EAST 217.17 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE; THENCE SOUTH 16°34'50" EAST 305.53 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; SAID PROPERTY IS DELINEATED AS PARCEL 3-A OF THAT CERTAIN SURVEY. E RECORDED AUGUST 16, 2007, UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NO. 5576086 IN BOOK! 128 OF SURVEYS, PAGES 91, 92 AND 93, RECORDS OF SPOKANE COUNTY; EXCEPT THE EASTERLY 29.00 FEET THEREOF; E SITUATE IN THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, COUNTY OF SPOKANE, STATE OF WASHINGTON. i. Page 4 of 4 Pages Parcel No. 45033.5001 PLEASE MAKE NO MARK IN THE MARGIN SPACE . RESERVED FOR COUNTY AUDITOR'S USE ONLY. ESCROW AGREEMENT TO: Spokane County Title Company Northbank Building 1010 North Normandie Street, Suite 203 Spokane, 99201 WA Your Reference: SP7444 CUSTOMER REFERENCE: Bridging the Valley — Pines Road Realignment & Underpass Pinecroft, LLC Parcel No.: 45033.5001 Pinecroft, LLC., (Seller) and the City of Spokane Valley, (Purchaser), mutually agree and direct you to close this escrow in accordance with the following instructions: 1. The Seller hereby authorizes the issuance of payment to the above Escrow Agent, for our benefit. 2. Receive herewith a Warranty Deed and Excise Tax Affidavit from the Sellers to the City of Spokane Valley, Purchaser, conveying the lands described in your above - referenced preliminary commitment. 3. Receive the sum of $471,332.79 which includes the acquisition price of $470,000.00 plus $1,332.79 for payment of the escrow fee, excise processing fee, recording fees, and additional title premium. 4. The following is a summarized required disposition of all exceptions shown on your preliminary commitment dated November 28, 2016. 1: Delete: City Exempt 2: Delete: City Exempt 3: Delete: Hold policy pending partial release of Deed of Trust 4. — 21 Subject to — Show on Policy Pay the following charges: Escrow Fee of $380.45 Excise processing fee of $10.00 Recording fees of $76.00 Additional Title Premium of $866.34 Please do not withhold any sums to assure payment of any utility service charges. Any closing costs, including those fees listed as title charges, recording and transfer charges, and/or additional settlement charges, are to be charged to the Purchaser and shown as such on the settlement statement. No recording fee or excise tax is to be charged to the Seller. Fees are to be billed directly to our office at City of Spokane Valley, ATTN: City Clerk, 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106, Spokane Valley, WA, 99206. The County will cancel the balance of the current year's taxes and any refund due the seller may be obtained by presenting to the County Treasurer the attached "Tax Refund" letter. Page 1 of 5 Parcel No.: 45033.5001 5. When ready to vest title in the City of Spokane Valley, record the instruments shown in Instruction 2 above and prepare CLOSING DETAIL STATEMENT as explained on page 3 hereof. 6. Remit the balance by check to Sellers as follows: John G. and Susan E. Miller Pinecroft, LLC 12310 East Mirabeau Parkway, Suite 150 Spokane Valley, WA 99206 7. Issue standard form Owner's policy of title insurance in the sum of $470,000.00 insuring the City of Spokane Valley, as owner of the appropriate interest conveyed. 8. Upon completion of closing, mail recorded instruments, copy of closing detail statement, and title policy to City of Spokane Valley, ATTN: City Clerk, 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106, Spokane Valley WA 99206. Please also email a copy of the recorded instruments, settlement statement and copy of check from the City of Spokane to dressa(a7epicland.com. Purchaser: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY By: Title: Seller: PINS OFT, LLC Miller, Man Susan E. Miler, Manager Da telifAneeirl,t Phone No.., I9-- V.7--,777 7 Page 2 of 5 Parcel No.: 45033.5001 CLOSING DETAIL STATEMENT As indicated on the Escrow Agreement, the Escrow Agent shall furnish, upon completion of the closing of the escrow transaction, a CLOSING DETAIL STATEMENT, which shall show thereon: (a) The total amount of escrowed funds. (b) The fee for escrow services and a statement that the entire escrow fee has been paid solely by the City of Spokane Valley; (c) The date on which the Escrow Agent disburses funds to the Seller(s); (d) Date of closing of the escrow; (e) Detail of a deed of trust or mortgage payoff which includes: Principal unpaid balance and date Accrued interest and dates for which interest is paid Prepayment penalty assessed, if any Offset of reserves held by beneficiary or mortgagee Net amount paid to beneficiary or mortgagee and date (f) Sums, if any, withheld from distribution to Seller(s) at time of closing, and for what reason;* (g) Endorsements to the effect that 1. The statement has been read by the Seller(s), is approved, and acknowledgment of receipt of the funds indicated as the net balance due from the Escrow Agent. 2. The closing officer certifies that the statement is true and correct. *In case the Escrow Agent has withheld funds from distribution to the Seller(s) for any reason, the Escrow Agent shall furnish to the City copies of correspondence transmitting such withheld funds at the time of their final disposition. Page 3 of 5 Parcel No.: 45033.5001 City of Spokane Valley ATTN: City Clerk 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106 Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Parcel Number: 45033.5001 Attached is the information requested per the Escrow Agreement Document: Date Recorded Recording No. Document: Date Recorded Recording No. DATE OF DISBURSEMENT OF FUNDS: Spokane County Title Company Northbank Building 1010 North Normandie Street, Suite 100 Spokane, WA 99201 Page 4 of 5 Parcel No.: 45033.5001 John G. and Susan E. Miller Pinecroft, LLC 13210 East Mirabeau Parkway, Suite 150 Spokane Valley, WA 99206 RE: 45033.5001 This is to advise you that as a result of the City of Spokane Valley's acquisition of your property for public purposes, you may be entitled to a refund of certain prepaid real property taxes pursuant to the provisions of RCW 84.60.050(2). Your deed to the City of Spokane Valley will be recorded in the County Auditor's Office as a part of the escrow closing of your sale to the City. In order to determine whether this sale qualifies for such a refund, please take the following steps: Take this letter and the recording data for the deed to the County Assessor's and/or County Treasurer's Office. The Assessor of the County in which the real property is located will determine the amount of refund to which you may be entitled. The Treasurer of that county will make payment of such refund, if any. Sincerely, Morgan Bishop Epic Land Solutions, Inc. Page 5 of 5 Parcel No.: 45033.5001 REAL PROPERTY VOUCHER AGENCY NAME CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY ATTN: City Clerk I hereby certify under penalty of pequry- that the items and amounts listed herein are proper charges against the Agency, that the same or any part thereof has not been paid. and that I am authorized to sign for the claimant. 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106 SIGNATURE (INI`'N FOR EACH CLAIMANT DATED Spokane Valley, WA 99206 PINE 'ROE , LLC GRANTOR OR CLAIMANT (NAME, ADDRESS) TIN/SSN: X / SPOKANE COUNTY TITLE Northbank Building, Suite 100 . Miller, Manager 1010 North Normandie Street Spokane, WA 99201 .- PROJECT NO. AND TITLE Bridging the Valley - Pines Road Realignment & Underpass X ,/i ....- i FEDERAL AID NO. PARCEL NOS. 45033 .5001 usan E. Mil - r, Manager In full, complete and final payment and settlement for the Bile or interest convey.d or released, as fully set forth in: Warranty Deed DATED 5 AMOUNT LAND: Approximately 62,669 sf of land in fee + 5470,000.00 (rd) 'IMPROVEMENTS: + DAMAGES: Cost to Cure + Proximity + Other: + S SPECIAL BENEFITS JC (Just Compensation) Amount $470,000.00 REMAINDER: Uneconomic Remnant + Excess Acquisition + DEDUCTIONS: Amount Previously Paid Performance Bond Salvage Amount Pre Paid Rent Other ADMINISTRATIVE SETTLEMENT + STATUTORY EVALUATION ALLOWANCE + ESCROW FEE + 5380.45 REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX + 510.00 OTHER: recording tee: 573 for first page, $ t for each additional page additional title premium + $7b.0U 5866.34 ACQU]SIT1ON AGENT DATE Voucher No. TOTAL AMOUNT PAID 5471,332.79 AUTHORIZED AGENT FOR AGENCY DATE K LPA -321 10/2014 INSTRUCTIONS Note: To report a transfer of a controlling interest in roil property, please use die Real Estate Excise Tax Affidavit Controlling interest Transfer Return, Revenue Fort No. 84-0001B. This form is available online at http://dor.wa.gov. Section I: Enter the name(s) of seller/grantor. This is the person(s) conveying interest in the property. If sale is less than 100%, check the box "Check if partial sale" and fill in the percentage sold. Section 2: Enter the name(s) of buyer/grantee. This is the person(s) receiving interest in the property. List the percentage acquired after each name. Section 3: • Enter the name and address where you would like all future property tax information sent. • Enter the tax parcel number and current assessed value for real and personal property being conveyed. Check the box to indicate personal property. Section 4: • Enter the street address of the property. • Enter the county if in unincorporated arca. Enter city name if located within a municipality. • Enter the legal description of the property, Section 5: • Enter the appropriate land use code for the property. Please list all codes that apply on the lines provided in section 5. See WAC 458-53-030 (5) fora complete list. • 09 - Land with mobile home • 23 - Apparel and other finished • 10 - Land with new building products made from fabrics, • 11- Household, single family units leather, and similar materials • 12 - Multiple family residence (2-4 Units) • 24 - Lumber and itureu+aod) products (except fvm • 13 - Multiple family residence (5 +Units) • ,c Ft:m.,..-e and fixtures • 14 - Residential condominiums • 15 - Mobile home parks or courts • 16 • Hotels/motels • 17 • institutional Lodging (convalescent Ironies, nursing homes, etc) • 19 - All other residential not coded • 19 - Vacation and cabin • 21 - Food and kindred products • 22 - Textile mill products • 26 - Paper and allied products • 27 - Printing and publishing • 28 -Chemicals • 29- Petroleum refining and related industries • 30 - Rubber and miscellaneous plastic products • 31 - Leather and leather products • 32 - Stone, clay and glass products • 33 -Primary metal industries • 34 - Fabricated natal products • 35 - Professional scientific and controlling instruments: photographic and optical goods; watches/clocks manufacturing • 39 - Miscellaneous manufacturing • 50- Condominiums -other thaul residential • • 53 - Retail Trade - general rnerchandise • 54 - Retail Trade - food • 58 - Retail trade - eating 8 drinking • (restaurants, bars) • 59 - Tenant occupied, commercial properties • • 64- Repair services • 65 - Professional services (medical, lethal, etc.) • 71 - Cultural activities nature exhibitions • 74 - Recreational activities (golf courses, etc.) • 75 - Resorts and Croup camps • 80 - Water or mineral right • 81 - Agriculture (not in current use) 83 - Agriculture current use RC44.8434 86» Standing Timber (separate from land) 88 - Forest land designated RCW 8433 91 - undeveloped Land (land only) 94 - Open space land RCW 84.34 • 95 -Timberland classified RCW 84.34 • 96 - improvements on leased land Section 6: Indicate whether the property is designated as forest land per chapter 84.33 RCW, classified as current use (open space, farm, agricultural, or timber) per chapter 84.34 RCW, or receiving special valuation as historic properly per chapter 84.26 RCW. Section 7: • List personal property included in the selling price of the real property. For example, include tangible (furniture, equipment, etc) and intangible (goodwill, agreement not to compete, ete). • Use Tax is due on personal property purchased without payment of the sales tax. Use Tax may be reported on your Combined Excise Tax Return or a Consumer Use Tax Return, both available at http://dor.wa.gov. • If you are claiming a tax exemption, cite the specific Washington Administrative Code (WAC) number, section and subsection and provide a brief explanation. Most tax exemptions require specific documentation. Refer 10 the appropriate WAC to determine documentation requirements. Chapter 455-6IA WAC is available online at http:6'dor.wa.gov. • Enter the type of document (quit claim deed, statutory warranty deed, ere.), and date of document (MM/DDIYYYY) • Enter the selling price of the property. • Selling price: For tax purposes, the selling price is the true and fair value of the property conveyed. When property is conveyed in an arm's length transaction between unrelated persons for valuable consideration, there is a presumption that the selling price is equal to the total consideration paid or contracted to be paid, including any indebtedness. Refer to RCW 82.45.030 for more information about selling price. • Deduct the amount of personal property included in the selling price. • Deduct the amount of tax exemption claimed per chapter 458-61 A WAC. • Due Date, interest and Penalties: Tax is due at the lime of sale/transfer. if tax is not paid within ane month of the date aside/transfer, interest and penalties will apply. The interest rate is variable and determined per RCW 82.32.050. Delinquent penalties are 5% one month after the due date; 10% two months after the due date; and 20% three: months after the due date. (RCW 82.45.100) • State Technology Fee: A 55,00 Electronic Technology Fee that is due on alt transactions. (82.45.180) • Affidavit Processing Fee: A minimum of 55.00 shall be collected in the form of tax and processing fee. A processing fee is due on all transactions where no tax is due and on all taxable transactions where the tax due is less than 55,00. (RCW 82,45.180) Section 8: Both grantor (seller) and grantee (buyer), or the agent of each, must sign this form, certifying that all the information provided is correct. Note: Original signatures required on the "County Treasurer" copy. Signatures may be required on the "Assessors" copy. Check with your comity. Audit: Information you provide on this form is subject to audit by the Department of Revenue. Underpayments of tax will result in the issuance of a tax assessment with interest and penalties. Nate: in the event of an audit, itis the taxpayers' responsibility to provide documentation to support the selling price or any exemption claimed. This documentation must he maintained for a minimum of four years from date of sale. (R.C:W 82A5.100) Ruling requests: You may request a ruling on the taxability of the properly transfer. Go to our website at dor.wa.gov/rulings or fax your request to (360) 705-6655. Where to send completed forms: Completed forms must be submitted to the County Treasurer's or Recorder's Office where the property is located. For tax assistance, contact your local County Treasurer/Recorder or visit http:/;der.wa.gov or call (360) 534-1503, To request this document itt an alternate format, please call 1-800-647-7706. Teletype (TiY) users may ase the Washington Relay Service by calling 711. REV 84 0001 a inst. (09/14/16) 30' 42.50' LJ N N p OC Q co O 0 01 z cocc 10' UTILITY, DRAINAGE, COMM. EASEMENT 9aG1' g3 /03'03�G�S g� v of X28 LOTB 45033.5002 0 1 Er L, 71,475 FT2 o J"'-1,-.. LOTA w o, -4- ' 45033.5001 ' r 4' BORDER EASEMENT c; 71,475 FT2 ro N L: 26.79 fi 55'48'42" R: 27.50' T: 14.56' 03' — N S89'56'29"W 42.50' Nl 0 50 100 FOR: PINECROFT EXISTING SITE PLAN 10' UTILITY EASEMENT L:139.73 d 16'49'09" R: 476.00' T: 70.37--(33.$6<--- 3'0� J J inAecaofr*Nsf s -9' Oimpsom9En ineers Inc CVIL ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS N. 909 ARG❑NNE R❑AD, SPOKANE WA, 99212-2789 PHONE (509) 926-1322 FX (509) 926-I323 Founded 1946 1 30' 42.50' 10' UTILITY, DRAINAGE, COMM. EASEMENT 8 \ �p3' P p0�5 0� \I LOT A 45033-5001 of 62,669 FT2 N L: 26.79 A 55'48'42" R: 27.50' T:14.56' S89'56'29"W 42.50' 0 50 100 N FOR: PINECROFT PROPOSED SITE PLAN L:139.73 29 16'49'09" g-5 LOT B 45033.5002 80,281 FT2 OLD PARCEL LINE 4' BORDER EASEMENT r— 10' UTILITY EASEMENT r R:476.00' T: 70.37' 4�flr ! �_ s ampson Engineers, Inc. CIVIL ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS N. 909 ARG❑NNE R❑AD, SPOKANE WA., 99212-2789 PH❑NE (509) 926-1322 FAX (509) 926-1323 Founded 1946 2 PINECROFT BLA - PROPOSED LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS LOT A - PARCEL #45033.5001 LOT 3-A, PER BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT PORTIONS OF BSP -03-03, RECORDED IN BOOK 128, PAGES 91-93 OF OF SURVEYS; EXCEPT THE EAST 29.00 FEET OF SAID LOT 3-A; SITUATE IN THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON LOT B - PARCEL #55183.0904 LOT 3-B, PER BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT PORTIONS OF BSP -03-03, RECORDED IN BOOK 128, PAGES 91-93 OF OF SURVEYS; TOGETHER WITH THE EAST 29.00 FEET OF LOT 3-A OF SAID BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT; SITUATE IN THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON FOR: PINECROFT PROPOSED LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS tbe impson Engineers, Inc. CIVIL ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS N. 909 ARGI NNE ROAD, SPOKANE WA., 99212-2789 PHONE (509) 926-1322 FAX (509) 926-1323 Founded 1946 3 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: January 10, 2017 Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ information ® admin. report Department Director Approval: ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Railroad bridge repair/maintenance. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: 49 U.S.C. 20101-20167; 49 C.F.R. 1.1 et seq.; Title 81 RCW. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None. BACKGROUND: The City was contacted in 2016 by an individual who expressed potential safety concerns involving the two railroad bridges spanning the Spokane River between Trent and Sullivan Roads, which are owned by Union Pacific (UP) and Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF). This individual provided several photos which show what appears to be significant scour - related deterioration on the UP bridge near Sullivan Park. Since that time, staff has been researching what authority, if any, local jurisdictions have to require the bridge owners (UP and BNSF) to repair the bridges. The research focused primarily on whether the City or the state of Washington could require either BNSF or UP to engage in repairs of the bridges. In summary, the answer is very likely no. Federal Law and its Preemptive Effect on State Law: Article VI of the Constitution of the United States provides that the laws of the United States shall be the supreme law of the land; as such, any state law that conflicts with federal law is without effect. In other words, when federal law addresses the same or similar subject matter as a state law, the federal law will generally displace and preempt the state law. With regard to railroad maintenance and safety, the Federal Railroad Safety Act ("FRSA") is intended to "promote safety in every area of railroad operations and reduce railroad -related accidents and incidents." 49 U.S.C. 20101. The FRSA calls for national uniformity of the laws, regulations, and orders related to rail safety. Id. at 20106. Title 49 of the United States Code (USC) and its corresponding provisions of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) address virtually every area of railroad operations and, as a result, displace and preempt a large portion of state law. Although there are potential theoretical arguments the City could make to give it such authority, it is highly unlikely these would be successful based on prior appellate court decisions interpreting similar issues. For example, pursuant to the FRSA, a state or municipality may implement a more stringent law if it is necessary to eliminate a local safety hazard. Note, it is unlikely the City would prevail under the "local safety hazard" exception because courts have been reluctant to find a hazard an "essential local safety hazard." See, e.g., Union Pac. R.R. Co. v. Cal. PUC, 346 F.3d 851, 862 (9th Cir. 2003) (finding a "steep grade/sharp curve combination" not to be an essentially local safety hazard because it "can be adequately addressed by national standards."). Further, to fit within the exception, the law cannot unreasonably burden interstate commerce. Ultimately, the railroads, more likely than not, could prove that if the City could force it to repair its bridges, it would open the flood gates for other municipalities to do the same, thus, unreasonably burdening interstate commerce. Federal law does provide a mechanism for the City to request a public copy of a railroad company's bridge inspection reports from the Federal Railroad Administration. The City requested and received bridge inspection reports for the UP and BNSF bridges mentioned above. Unfortunately, the reports provided only minimal information before concluding, respectively, the "[b]ridge is confirmed to have the capacity to safely carry traffic being operated over the bridge." Copies of the bridge reports are provided for Council review. State Law within the Federal Statutory Scheme: Title 81 RCW addresses transportation generally. Chapters 81.28 through 81.61 RCW address common carriers and railroads, which includes all railroads and railroad companies. See RCW 81.04.010(11). After reviewing these chapters, staff located one statute that potentially provided a mechanism to address railroad bridge maintenance. RCW 81.44.020 provides that the WUTC may regulate "equipment, facilities, tracks, bridges, or other structures of any common carrier that are defective, and that the operation thereof is dangerous to the...public." Unfortunately, this provision is only a single sentence within RCW 81.44.020 and it is not easily segregated from the remainder of the provisions which regulate areas already displaced and preempted by federal law. Thus, while the City or state may point to this provision as a potential basis, likely courts would not consider outside of the remainder of RCW 81.44.020 and thus the entirety of RCW 81.44.020 would be considered displaced and preempted. Staff requested the WUTC provide all cases brought pursuant to this statute. Unfortunately, the WUTC could not locate any cases brought pursuant to this statute from 1989 to present. Further, the WUTC offered an informal opinion stating, "[the WUTC] no longer believe[s] that any action related to bridge safety brought under the provisions of RCW 81.44.020 has a chance of withstanding a preemption challenge." Additionally, staff reached out to the Federal Railroad Administration for an informal opinion on the FRSA's preemptive effect on RCW 81.44.020. The FRA confirmed that it is likely that any action brought under RCW 81.44.020 would likely lose on a preemption challenge because the subject is "covered" by federal law and, therefore, preempted. In summary, staff has not located any suitable legal options under which we believe we or the state could require the railroad companies to engage in repairs to their respective railroad bridges in the City. OPTIONS: Staff will continue to explore legal and non -legal options to alleviate potential public safety risks relating to the safety of the railroad bridges. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Discussion. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: N/A. STAFF CONTACT: Cary Driskell, City Attorney; Kristopher Morton, Legal Intern. ATTACHMENTS: (1) Photos of the base of a bridge support on the UP bridge; (2) copies of engineering reports from UP and BNSF for their respective bridges; and (3) PowerPoint presentation. �'i4qc Railroad Bridge Inspection Report - Public Version Current Date Railroad Company 109 01 Month Day [2016 1 Year Union Pacific Railroad Bridge Location Bridge ID Latitude Coordinate Mire Post 10.51 Spokane Subdivision 47.67719 N City, Town or County Location Bridge Landmark Reference Longitude Coordinate 117.2058 W Spokane Valley, WA Railroad Bridge Details Date of Last Bridge Inspection 105 1 16 2016 Month Day Year Type of Bridge Type of Structure Length of Bridge 461 feet steel beam and deck plate girder spans beam and deck plate girder spans on concrete abutment and piers, beam spans on steel pile bents Feature(s) crossed by bridge: over Spokane River NE of Spokane Valley Mall Condition of Bridge ▪ Bridge is contirrned to have the capacity to safely carry traffic being operated over the bridge. O Bridge is out of service. if out of service, please explain: Railroad Bridge Contact Information Bridge Contact Todd Martincialt-2, Director Ri1dg e rv1air,t2nance Email Address trmartin@up.com Address 1400 Douglas Street Street Address Stop 0910 1`hime \tirulnr 402 Area Code 5.14-5766 i'}n=ne Number Street Address Linc z Omaha NE Pity State / Province 168179 Postal / Zip Code Railroad Bridge inspection Report - Public Version Current Date j012 [2016 Month Day Year Railroad Company LSNSF Railway Company Railroad Bridge Details Bridge ID 0045-0062.600 Date of Last Bridge Inspection Month 21 2016 Day Year Bridge Location Latitude Coordinate 47.690620 City, Town or County Location Bridge Landmark Reference Type or Bridge Type of Structure Length of Bridge 532' Longitude Coordinate -117.231390 Spokane Valley, WA Deck Plate Girder, Riveted Deck Truss Steel Towers, Mass Concrete Features) crossed by bridge: Spokane River Condition of Bridge • Bridge is confirmed lo have the capacity to safely carry traffic being operated over the bridge. 0 Bridge is out of service. If out of service, please explain: Railroad Bridge Contact Information: Bridge Contact Email Address Ron Berry, General Director Structures Ironald.berry@bnsf.com Address IBNSF Railway Street ASJlress 4515 Kansas Avenue Street Addres line 2 (Kansas City City 66106 Pa.,t l / Zip Calc State / Pmvincc Phone Number 913 551-4164 Arca Code phone Number Railroad bridge safety discussion Cary Driskell City Attorney, City of Spokane Valley Erik Lamb Deputy City Attorney, City of Spokane Valley January 10, 2017 City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney i Bridge locations Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) bridge southeast of Trent near Kaiser. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney 2 Bridge locations Union Pacific bridge near Spokane Valley Mall. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney 3 Concerns expressed Cities across the country have expressed safety concerns relating to rail traffic, particularly over the past ten years, regarding hazardous materials and potentially hazardous materials being transported through population centers. There have been a number of train derailments during that time involving materials such as crude oil and anhydrous ammonia. Such accidents have resulted in death and injury. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney Who has authority to regulate railroads? The short answer is very likely not local jurisdictions. The Federal Railroad Safety Act (FRSA) is a statutory scheme regulating rail safety, and is intended to "promote safety in every area of railroad operations and reduce railroad - related accidents and incidents." The FRSA preempts state train safety regulations, with two narrow exceptions: Where the federal government has failed to regulate, but only until the federal government does regulate; and Where necessary to eliminate or reduce "an essentially local safety or security hazard," so long as it is not incompatible with federal law, and does not unreasonably burden interstate commerce. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney Reducing/eliminating essentially local hazard Although this exception appears on its face to be helpful, courts have interpreted this very narrowly. Case from California where a section of rail had a high derailment rate involving a steep grade and sharp corner. California attempted to regulate (presumably the speed of the trains), and the court said such regulation was preempted by the FRSA. In doing so, the court said there are grades and corners all across the country, so there was nothing unique to the situation. In our situation, if the City attempted to force local bridge safety regulations, a reviewing court is likely to say there is nothing unique about a bridge over a river, or unique about a river that exchanges water with an aquifer. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney Union Pacific bridge photos. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney 7 UP bridge photos - continued City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney 8 UP bridge photos - continued City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney 9 UP bridge photos - continued City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney io Safety reports The FRSA does allow the City to request safety reports for railroad bridge inspections. The FRSA delegates responsibility for conducting such inspections to the railroad company which owns the bridge. After receiving the photos from a citizen, the City requested copies of the bridge safety reports from the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), the agency responsible for railroad oversight, which requests them from the applicable railroad company. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney Safety report contents — UP bridge Feature(s) crossed by bridge: over Spokane River NE of Spokane Valley Mall Condition of Bridge • Bridge is confirmed lo have the capacity to safety curry traffic being operated over the bridge. Bridge is out of service. If out of service, please explain: City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney 12 Future efforts Staff will continue to research ways to positively impact rail safety in the City. Staff will reach out to Union Pacific in an attempt to engage them in discussions regarding their bridge. If that is not effective, the Council may consider contacting its federal legislative representatives if conditions exist which likely pose a threat to the life, health, or safety of our citizens. It is unclear whether this would be effective, but may be our best option if other efforts are ineffective. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney Questions? City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney 14 DRAFT ADVANCE AGENDA as of January 5, 2017; 8:00 a.m. Please note this is a work in progress; items are tentative To: Council & Staff From: City Clerk, by direction of City Manager Re: Draft Schedule for Upcoming Council Meetings January 17, 2017, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Taxicabs, Commercial Ridesharing — Cary Driskell 2. Oath of Office — Cary Driskell 3. Grant Reimbursement Authority — Cary Driskell 4. Amendment to SVMC 2.15.050 — Cary Driskell 5. Sidewalk Snow Committee Update — Cary Driskell 6. Service Animals — Erik Lamb 7. Sullivan Bridge — Steve Worley 8. Bidding History — Eric Guth 9. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins January 24, 2017, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. First Reading Proposed Ordinance Amending SVMC 2.15.050 — Cary 3. Proposed Resolution, Grant Reimbursement Authority — Cary Driskell 4. Fire Department 2016 Year in Review — Chief Collins 5. Admin Report: Siting of Sculptures — John Hohman 6. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins 7. Info Only: Department Reports January 31, 2017, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Advance Agenda [due Tue, Jan [0] (15 minutes) (15 minutes) (15 minutes) (10 minutes) (15 minutes) (15 minutes) (20 minutes) (30 minutes) (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 140 minutes] [due Tue, Jan 17] (5 minutes) Driskell (10 minutes) (10 minutes) (20 minutes) (20 minutes) (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 70 minutes] February 7, 2017, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. ACTION ITEMS: 1. Second Reading Ordinance Amending SVMC 2.15.050 — Cary Driskell NON -ACTION ITEMS: 2. City Hall Update — Steve Worley 3. Advance Agenda [due Tue, Jan 24] [due Tue, Jan 31] (10 minutes) (5 minutes) (5 minutes) February 14, 2017, Special Meeting, Winter Workshop, 8:30 a.m. — 2:00 p.m. Council Chambers Tentative Agenda Items Include: February 14, 2017 Formal Meeting, 6 pm: Cancelled February 21, 2017, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Accomplishments Report for 2016 — Mark Calhoun 2. Advance Agenda February 28, 2017, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins 3. Info Only: Department Reports Draft Advance Agenda 1/5/2017 8:42:29 AM [due Tue, Feb 14] (— 60 minutes) (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 65 minutes] [due Tue, Feb 21] (5 minutes) (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: minutes] Page 1 of 2 March 7, 2017, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. City Hall Update — Steve Worley 2. Advance Agenda March 14, 2017, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins March 21, 2017, Study Session Format, 6:00 P.M. 1. Advance Agenda March 28, 2017, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins 3. Info Only: Department Reports April 4, 2017, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. City Hall Update — Steve Worley 2. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins April 11, 2017, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins April 18, 2017, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins April 25, 2017, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins 3. Info Only: Department Reports May 2, 2017, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. City Hall Update — Steve Worley 2. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins May 9 2017, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins *time for public or Council comments not included OTHER PENDING AND/OR UPCOMING 8t' & McDonald follow-up Fee Resolution Food Event, City Sponsorship of, contract General Fund, Fund Balance Discussion SCRAPS Update Second Amendment Sanctuary City Term Limits Draft Advance Agenda 1/5/2017 8:42:29 AM ISSUES/MEETINGS: TPP Undergrounding Utility Facilities in ROW Utility Tax Washington State: 2 states [due Tue, Feb 28] (5 minutes) [due Tue, March 7] (5 minutes) (5 minutes) [due Tue, March 14] [due Tue, March 21] (5 minutes) (5 minutes) [due Tue, March 28] (5 minutes) (5 minutes) [due Tue, April 4] (5 minutes) (5 minutes) [due Tue, April 111 (5 minutes) [due Tue, April 18] (5 minutes) (5 minutes) [due Tue, April 251 (5 minutes) (5 minutes) [due Tue, May 21 (5 minutes) Page 2 of 2