12-070.00 URS Corporation: Shoreline Master Program3p6ene
,;oOVafley 10
April 13, 2012
John Patrouch
URS Corporation
920 N Argonne Road, Suite 300
Spokane Valley, WA 99212 -2722
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
CARY P. DRISKELL - CITY ATTORNEY
KELLY KONKRITE — DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY
11707 East Sprague Avenue Suite 103 ♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206
509.688.0235 ♦ Fax: 509.688.0299 ♦ cityattorney@spokanevalley.org
Re: Second Amendment to Professional Services Contract executed August 26, 2009.
Dear Mr. Patrouch:
The parties would like to execute a Second Amendment with URS, Corporation to that
agreement executed by the parties on August 26, 2009. This Second Amendment relates
to a rate adjustment for future services to be rendered, additional services provided not
within the original contract, and the addition of future services not previously
contemplated. The City proposes amending the Contract by requesting that both parties
sign this letter. This Second Amendment will change the terms to cover the $8,335 of
cost for services remaining to be provided and adjusts the fee to 2012 rates, and adds
$61,951 for additional tasks as noted in the letter dated March 22, 2012 and Exhibit 1,
Amended Scope of Services. The contract amount will be increased by $70,286 to pay
for the adjustments and additional tasks.
Upon execution, this letter will serve to amend the Agreement and Scope of Work as
follows:
Agreement for Professional Services
3. Compensation. The City agrees to pay the Consultant $143,000 213,286
as full compensation for everything done under this Agreement.
Exhibit 1 — Scope of Services
The Scope of Work is hereby amended as follows: Exhibit 1 Scope of Services is
deleted in its entirety and replaced by the Attached Scope of Services - Amended
April 24, 2012.
All other terms of the agreement shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect.
CDI� -- 070
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties
Agreement this day of , 2012.
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY:
ig anager
ATTES
i
Christ
ine e Bainbridge, City C rk
have executed this 1" Amendment to the
P" 04Y
URS Corporation
Qualified Representative
Tax ID No.
APPROVED A TO FOW:
fice ofahj City Morney
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
URS Corporation
THIS AGREEMENT is made by and between the City of Spokane Valley, a code City of the State of
Washington, hereinafter "City" and URS Corporation hereinafter "Consultant," jointly referred to as "parties."
IN CONSIDERATION of the terms and conditions contained herein the parties agree as follows:
1. Work to Be Performed. The Consultant will provide all labor, services and material to satisfactorily
complete the attached Scope of Services.
A. Administration. The City Manager or designee shall administer and be the primary contact
for Consultant. Prior to commencement of work, Consultant shall contact the City Manager or designee to review the
Scope of Work, schedule and date of completion. Upon notice from the City Manager or designee, Consultant shall
commence work, perform the requested tasks in the Scope of Services, stop work and promptly cure any failure in
performance under this agreement.
B. Representations. The City has relied upon the qualifications of the Consultant in entering
into this agreement. By execution of this agreement, Consultant represents it possesses the ability, skill and resources
necessary to perform the work and is familiar with all current laws, rules and regulations which reasonably relate to
the Scope of Services. No substitutions of agreed upon personnel shall be made without the written consent of the
City.
Consultant shall be responsible for the technical accuracy of its services and documents resulting
therefrom, and City shall not be responsible for discovering deficiencies therein. Consultant shall correct such
deficiencies without additional compensation except to the extent such action is directly attributable to deficiencies in
City furnished information.
C. Modifications. The City may modify this agreement and order changes in the work whenever
necessary or advisable. The Consultant will accept modifications when ordered in writing by the City Manager or
designee. Compensation for such modifications or changes shall be as mutually agreed between the parties. The
Consultant shall make such revisions in the work as are necessary to correct errors or omissions appearing therein
when required to do so by the City without additional compensation.
2. Term of Contract. This Agreement shall be in full force and effect upon execution and shall remain
in effect until completion of all contractual requirements have been met.
Either party may terminate this Agreement by ten (10) days written notice to the other party. In the
event of such termination, the City shall pay the Consultant for all work previously authorized and satisfactorily
performed prior to the termination date.
3. Compensation. The City agrees to pay the Consultant $140,000 as full compensation for everything
done under this Agreement.
4. Payment. The Consultant shall be paid monthly upon presentation of an invoice to the City.
Applications for payment shall be sent to the City Clerk at the below stated address.
The City reserves the right to withhold payment under this agreement which is determined in the reasonable
judgment of the City Manager or designee to be noncompliant with the Scope of Work, City Standards, City
Agreement for Professional Services Page 1 of 4
ordinances and federal or state standards.
Notice. Notice shall be given in writing as follows:
TO THE CITY: TO THE CONSULTANT:
Name: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Name: David Enos, Vice President — URS Corp.
Phone Number: (509)921 -1000 Phone Number: (509) 928 -4413
Address: 11707 East Sprague Ave, Suite 106 Address: 920 N. Argonne Road, Suite 300
Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Spokane Valley, WA 99206
6. Applicable Laws and Standards. The parties, in the performance of this agreement, agree to
comply with all applicable Federal, State, local laws, ordinances, and regulations.
7. Relationship of the Parties. It is understood, agreed and declared that the Consultant shall be an
independent Consultant and not the agent or employee of the City, that the City is interested in only the results to be
achieved, and that the right to control the particular manner, method and means in which the services are performed is
solely within the discretion of the Consultant. Any and all employees who provide services to the City under this
agreement shall be deemed employees solely of the Consultant. The Consultant shall be solely responsible for the
conduct and actions of all employees under this agreement and any liability that may attach thereto.
8. Ownership of Documents. All drawings, plans, specifications, and other related documents
prepared by the Consultant under this agreement are and shall be the property of the City, and may be subject to
disclosure pursuant to RCW 42.56 or other applicable public record laws. Any reuse or modification of Consultant's
work product by City without Consultant's permission shall be at City's sole risk.
9. Records. The City or State Auditor or any oftheir representatives shall have full access to and the
right to examine during normal business hours all of the Consultant's records with respect to all matters covered in
this contract. Such representatives shall be permitted to audit, examine and make excerpts or transcripts from such
records and to make audits of all contracts, invoices, materials, payrolls and record ofmatters covered by this contract
for a period of three years from the date final payment is made hereunder.
10. Insurance. Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement insurance
against claims for injuries to persons or damage to property which may arise from or in connection with the
performance of the work hereunder by the Consultant, its agents, representatives, or employees.
Consultant's maintenance of insurance as required by the agreement shall not be construed to limit the
liability of the Consultant to the coverage provided by such insurance, or otherwise limit the City's recourse to any
remedy available at law or in equity.
Consultant shall obtain insurance of the types described below:
A. Automobile Liability insurance covering all owned, non - owned, hired and leased vehicles.
Coverage shall be written on Insurance Services Office (ISO) form CA 00 01 or a substitute form
providing equivalent liability coverage. If necessary, the policy shall be endorsed to provide
contractual liability coverage.
The automobile liability policy shall have a minimum combined single limit for bodily injury and
property damage of $1,000,000 per accident
Agreement for Professional Services Page 2 of 4
B. 'Commercial General Liability insurance shall be written on ISO occurrence form CG 00 Oland
shall cover liability arising from premises, operations, independent contractors and personal injury
and advertising injury. The City shall be named as an insured under the Consultant's Commercial
General Liability insurance policy with respect to the work performed for the City.
The commercial general liability insurance policy shall be written with limits no less than
$1,000,000 per claim and $2,000,000 policy aggregate limit
C. Workers' Compensation coverage as required by the Industrial Insurance laws of the State of
Washington, as applicable to this agreement.
D. Professional Liability insurance appropriate to the Consultant's profession, with limits no less
than $1,000,000 per claim and $1,000,000 policy aggregate limit.
The insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions for automobile
liability, professional liability, and commercial general liability insurance:
A. The Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respect the City, except
professional liability and worker's compensation. Any insurance, self-insurance, or insurance pool
coverage maintained by the City shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not
contribute with it.
B. The Consultant's insurance shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be cancelled by
either party, except after thirty (30) days prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt
requested, has been given to the City, except for ten (10) days notice for cancellation due to non-
payment of premium.
Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best rating of not less than A:VII.
Consultant shall furnish the City with original certificates and a copy of the amendatory endorsements,
including but not necessarily limited to the additional insured endorsement, evidencing the insurance requirements of
the Consultant before commencement of work.
11. Indemnification and Hold Harmless. Each party shall indemnify and hold the other, its officers,
employees, agents and volunteers harmless from and against any and all claims, demands, orders, decrees or
judgments for injuries, death or damage to any person or property to the extent arising or resulting from any negligent
act or omission on the part of said party or its agents, employees or volunteers in the performance of this Agreement.
12. Waiver. No officer, employee, agent or other individual acting on behalf of either party has the
power, right or authority to waive any of the conditions or provisions of this agreement. No waiver in one instance
shall be held to be waiver of any other subsequent breach or nonperformance. All remedies afforded in this
agreement or by law, shall be taken and construed as cumulative, and in addition to every other remedy provided
herein or by law. Failure of either party to enforce at any time any of the provisions of this agreement or to require at
any time performance by the other party of any provision hereof shall in no way be construed to be a waiver of such
provisions nor shall it affect the validity of this agreement or any part thereof.
13. Assignment and Delegation. Neither party shall assign, transfer or delegate any or all of the
responsibilities of this agreement or the benefits received hereunder without first obtaining the written consent ofthe
other party.
14. Subcontracts. Except as otherwise provided herein, the Consultant shall not enter into subcontracts
for any of the work contemplated under this agreement without obtaining prior written approval of the City.
Agreement for Professional Services Page 3 of 4
15. Confidentiality. Consultant may from time to time receive information which is deemed by the City
to be confidential. Consultant shall not disclose such information without the express written consent of the City or
upon order of a Court of competent jurisdiction.
16. Jurisdiction and Venue. This Contract is entered into in Spokane County, Washington. Venue
shall be in Spokane County, State of Washington.
17. Cost and Attorney's Fees. In the event a lawsuit is brought with respect to this Agreement, the
prevailing party shall be awarded its costs and attorney's fees in the amount to be determined by the Court as
reasonable. Unless provided otherwise by statute, Consultant's attorney fees payable by the City shall not exceed the
total sum amount paid under this agreement.
18. Entire Agreement. This written agreement constitutes the entire and complete agreement between
the parties and supercedes any prior oral or written agreements. This Agreement may not be changed, modified or
altered except in writing signed by the parties hereto.
19. Anti- kickback. No officer or employee of the City, having the power or duty to perform an official
act or action related to this Agreement shall have or acquire any interest in this Agreement, or have solicited, accepted
or granted a present or future gift, favor, service or other thing of value from any person with an interest in this
Agreement.
20. Business Reeistration. Prior to commencement of work under this Agreement, Consultant shall
register with the City as a business.
21. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Agreement should be held to be
invalid for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity shall not affect the validity of any other
section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Agreement.
22. Exhibits. Exhibits attached and incorporated into this agreement are:
1. Scope of Services
2. Insurance Certificates
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement this day of d
2009.
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY:
David Mercier, City Manager
Consultant:
Owner
Tax ID No.
,,Y- -, APPPRO t FORM
ine Bainbridge, ity Clerk J Office the 06-2VItorney
Agreement for Professional Services Page 4 of 4
March 22, 2012
Ms. Lori Barlow, AICP
Senior Planner
City of Spokane Valley
11707 E. Sprague Avenue, Suite 106
Spokane Valley, Washington 99206
RE: City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program Update
Additional Work Scope
UPS Prouosal No.: 1158
Dear Ms. Barlow:
This letter provides the City of Spokane Valley (City) updated information requested by the City in
order to prepare a contract amendment for the URS Corporation (URS) Shoreline Master Program
Update (SMP) contract (contract #36310035, dated August 26, 2009). The letter provides an
overview of the work completed on the project, updates the budgets for the original tasks, and
provides budgets for new tasks developed by the City and the Washington State Department of
Ecology (Ecology). Attached as Exhibit 1 is a detailed updated Scope of Services for the work
remaining on the project.
Introduction/Background
The following provides a short summary of the project history.
• The original contract was initiated in August 2009. The project was originally scheduled to
be completed within approximately 1.5 years. After a pause, the project has resumed and is
anticipated to be completed in mid -2013.
• The Inventory and Analysis (Tasks 1, 2, and 3) was completed September 7, 2010 (Council
Review Draft).
• Shoreline Environmental Designations (Task 4) were developed and presented to the City in
a memorandum dated September 21, 2011. Completion of this task is dependent on City
review and approval. Based on discussions with the City, URS anticipates that no or only
minor revisions will be required prior to approval.
• Shoreline Goals and Policies were completed through the Shoreline Advisory Group
meetings. Public meetings and Planning Commission Council review has not yet occurred.
The City is leading this task with URS providing technical support.
• During the spring and summer of 2011, Ecology offered to assist with funding remaining
portions of the City's Shoreline Master Program Update. URS prepared a letter detailing the
work scope and budget, dated June 6, 2011. An agreement authorizing this funding was
signed in December 2011.
• Communications between the City and URS occurred February 6, 2012 to begin the process
of amending the URS contract. At this time, the City had selected legal counsel
(GordonDerr) to aid them in understanding the SNIP process. GordonDerr met with City
Council on February 21, 2012.
• A meeting was held on February 29, 2012 between URS and the City to discuss the revised
project scope and budgets.
URS Corporation
920 N. Argonne Road, Suite 300
Spokane, WA 99212
Tel: 509.928.4413
Fax: 509.928.4415
www.ursoorp.com
Ms. Lori Barlow
City of Spokane Valley
March 22, 2012
Page 2
Scope and Budget Adjustments
The work scope and budget has been revised based on the remaining work, the agreement between
the City and Ecology, URS' June 6, 2011 letter, and URS 2012 labor rates. The following table
shows the original tasks, proposed new tasks, and the net changes to the budget based on the project
scope discussed at the URS /City February 29, 2012 meeting.
Additional fees for Tasks 1, 2, 3, and Sa are included for additional work that was performed at the
request of the City. Original task budgets for Tasks 5b through Task 8 were adjusted to use URS
2012 labor rates.
New tasks include the tasks agreed between the City and Ecology that are described in the Ecology
Grant and the June 6, 2011 URS letter. The budgets for these tasks were adjusted to reflect 2012
labor rates. In addition to the Ecology grant-related tasks, additional scope and budget for Project
Management is requested due to the increased project length.
'Task ' "
f Number
I)escri ` tlon
p
Ori ' al Bud et ` ;
g
1
Ad usted Budget` `
jg.
' LL Net Ctia a tt
ng
Bud et
Original Tasks
1,2 ,3
Inventory and Analysis
$78,360
$81,700
$3,340(2)
4
Environmental
Designations
$4,440
$4,440
$0
5a
Goals and Policies
$8,154
---
---
Sa - extra
Technical Support)
$3 000
$13,554
$2,400(3)
5b
Regulations
$29150
$30,647
$1,497(4)
6
Cumulative Impacts
$6,016
$6,31-8
$302
7
Restoration Plan
$10,880
$11,500
$620
8
SW Plan Adoption
$3,009
$3,176
$176
TOTALS
$143,000
$151,335
$8,335
Budget Spent
$99119
Budget Remaining
$43,881
New Tasks
9
Public Access Plan
$20,000
$20,616
$616
10
Critical Areas Analysis
and Revisions
$20,000
$20,805
$805
11
No Net Loss Report
$8,500
$8,530
$30
12
Project Management
$0
$12000
$12,000(5)
TOTALS
$48,500
$61,951
$13,451
Grand Total
1
$191500
$213,286
$21,786
Notes:
(1) Original budget numbers are from the project estimate spreadsheet and indicate the anticipated cost for
each task. The original project was managed under a lump sum contract for all the work originally scoped
and the work tasks were used for project tracking. The original budget column includes the additional
work subcontracted to Haught Strategies (original budget was $2,000, total budget was $5,200).
(2) Task 3, Prepare Analysis Report and Map Portfolio, was delayed approximately one year at the request of
the City. During this year, the URS Project Manager and Environmental Scientist attended an additional
council meeting that required a flight from Portland. An additional "Council Review" Inventory and
Analysis document was prepared and published.
Proposal 1158 City of Spokane Valley SW Update
Ms. Lori Barlow
City of Spokane Valley
March 22, 2012
Page 3
(3) The Development of Shoreline Goals and Policies task was originally scoped to include three policy
meetings. The new Policy scope calls for eight meetings.
(4) Scope for the Regulations was revised. See Task 5b in the attached work scope.
(5) Additional Task for Project Management based on 8 hours per month for 12 months. The total project
length is approximately 17 months. It is anticipated that there will be periods where the City will be
reviewing and processing documents and meetings where URS will not be involved.
Revised Scope and Budget
A revised scope detailing the remaining work is attached as Exhibit 1. The current contract between
URS and the City is a lump sum contract. The Ecology grant may require a time and materials
contract for the work done under the Ecology grant. URS understands that the City will review the
Ecology grant conditions and URS and City will then coordinate how best to revise or replace our
existing contract.
The proposed budget for each remaining task is shown below. The total revised budget for the
remaining work is $113, 592.
Task Number
Description(l)
Bud et Amount (2)
i 2 3
inventory and Analysis
Completed
4
Environmental Designations
Completed
Sa
Goals and Policies
Completed
5b
Regulations
$30,647
6
Cumulative Impacts
$6,318
7
Restoration Plan
$11,500
8
SW Plan Adoption
$3,176
9
Public Access Plan
$20,616
10
Critical Areas Analysis and Revisions
$20,805
11
No Net Loss Report
$8,530
12
Project Management
$12,000
Total
$113,592
Notes:
(1) See attached Exhibit 1 for description of each task.
(2) The budget amount for each task is used for project estimating. However, the Project will be administered
at a project level, not at a task level.
Sincerely,
URS Corporation
/ 0' /�
John C. Patrouch, PE
Senior Civil/Environmental Engineer
JCPWE/tlr
Attachment: Exhibit 1— Updated Scope of Services
Proposal 1158 City of Spokane Valley SNIP Update
O f'�'
R. David Enos, LG, LHG
Vice President
Exhibit 1
City of Spokane Valley
Shoreline Master Program Update
Scope of Services
Amended April, 24, 2012
The following work tasks are made a part of the Agreement for Professional Services for the City of
Spokane Valley (City) Shoreline Master Program Update (SMP). These work tasks generally conform
to the requirements needed to assist the City to prepare an updated SMP. Additional work, not
specifically identified in these work tasks, may be needed to prepare, document, and acquire the
necessary local and state approvals for the City's SNIP update.
Task 1 Inventory and Map Shoreline Conditions
This task will result in an inventory of the City's shorelines using available information and results
from a field inventory. Primary available data sources include recent work done by the City of
Spokane for their SMP update, Spokane County Conservation District, Washington Department of
Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR), and Avista.
The following subtasks are to be performed by URS Corporation (URS) (Consultant).
1.1 Complete a Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) for the project. The QAPP will
be prepared consistent with Ecology's Guidelines and Specifications for Preparing
Quality Assurance Project Plans for Environmental Studies (Ecology Publication
No. 91 -16). The QAPP will be specific to environmental data measurement
collection and will reference Technical Guidance for Assessing the Quality of
Aquatic Environments (Ecology Publication No. 91 -78) as applicable. The QAPP
will be used to 1) determine the adequacy of previously collected data, and 2) define
the data quality objectives and methodology on data generated during the course of
this City SMP project.
1.2 Locate and assemble relevant local and other data sources that potentially contain
information related to City shorelines including aerial photographs, GIS layers,
habitat, geology /hydrogeology, environment, land use, archaeological /cultural
resource data, Spokane County Conservation District shorelines data, etc. URS will
contact potential User Groups to collect additional relevant information. URS will
review and categorize the data.
1.3 Analyze usable data that will include evaluating quality assurance and quality control
(QA /QC) and determine data gaps. URS will provide the City and Ecology with a
memorandum that lists usable data, unusable data, and data sources and
descriptions, and presents our opinion of data gaps and proposed approach to fill
data gaps.
1.4 A meeting with the City and Ecology will be held to review the data inventory,
identify missing information, and to develop a field work plan. This information
will also be sent to the Technical Review Group. It is anticipated that the Technical
Review Group will consist of federal, state, and local land use agencies and local
utilities. The Technical Review Group will be used to review relevant technical
information. We anticipate that our Project Manager and Inventory lead will
participate in the meeting.
1.5 Develop a field work plan to be submitted to the City and Ecology prior to
conducting field work.
1.6 Coordinate GIS mapping and databases with the City GIS Department.
1.7 Complete field reconnaissance activities to fill data gaps. It is anticipated that the
Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) will be estimated from available aerial
photography and field reconnaissance. Field reconnaissance will add information to
the GIS map books (See Subtask 1.9) as it is collected. Global Positioning Systems
(GPS) will be used where appropriate. URS has allocated for two weeks of field
work. The collected data will be incorporated into the project - mapping.
1.8 Prepare "Shoreline Characterization Reach Summary Tables" from the GIS
databases. (See subtask 1.11.)
The following subtasks are to be performed by the City with assistance from URS.
1.9 The City will create functional map tiles and overview maps for the shoreline areas.
URS will compile the map tiles into map books for field personnel prior to subtask
1.7.
1.10 The City will compile a list and contact private landowners within the shoreline
jurisdiction to allow URS access to the properties.
1.11 Prepare GIS databases and maps for all relevant information as determined by URS.
The databases will be prepared prior to Task 1.7.
Deliverables:
• QAPP
• Data List, Data Gaps Memorandum
• Field Work Plan Memorandum
• Shoreline Characterization Tables
• Copies of field notes and working field maps
• Digital working maps of inventory information displayed at appropriate
scale Digital maps (including all relevant metadata) in DOE and City
acceptable format and report in word and pdf electronic format. (Work
performed by the City with assistance from URS).
Task 2 Conduct Analysis
This task includes the analysis of information as it relates to development of a Shoreline Master
Program. Guidance for the analysis comes from the Shoreline Master Program Guidelines (WAC
173 -26) and the Coastal Training Program's "Preparing Shoreline Characterizations for SMP
Updates."
The analysis will include the following elements performed by the Consultant.
2.1 Ecosystem -Wide Processes will be characterized by identifying and evaluating
ecosystem -wide processes with the potential to impact shoreline function.
Characterization of ecosystem -wide processes will be confined to areas generally
adjacent to the shorelines or that have a direct impact. For example, it is anticipated
that the relationship of Saltese Flats to Shelley Lake will be described if sufficient
existing information is available. This task will include analyzing:
2.1.1 Geographic content including geology, soils, topography, climate,
vegetation, and drainage areas that may impact shoreline uses.
2.1.2 Location and nature of major land uses including buildings, trails, dams,
railroads, logging, aggregate mining, and irrigation.
2
2.1.3 Location and nature of regulatory activities including TMDLs, ESA, and
contaminated sites (including sites cleaned up by the EPA as part of the
Bunkerhill Superfund Site).
2.1.4 Opportunities to protect and /or restore upland and adjacent areas essential
to maintain shoreline form and function.
2.2 The Shoreline Analysis will characterize shoreline functions including identification
and evaluation of physical, biological, and land use components as well as historic
changes in shoreline development patterns along and immediately adjacent to the
shorelines. This task will evaluate and define shoreline functions in relation to the
requirements of the Shoreline Master Program regulations. Changes to shoreline
development patterns will be limited from 1975, the date of the last Shoreline
Master Program, to 2008. Description of the changes will be limited to readily
available data including planning and zoning data and existing aerial photography.
This task will result in the identification of existing shoreline functions,
identification of opportunities and impediments for protection, restoration, public
access, and other shoreline uses. The working draft document will present findings
specific to each shoreline functional area /reach.
2.2.1 Description and mapping of the OHWM from aerial photography and field
reconnaissance.
2.2.2 Evaluate and define shoreline functions in relation to the requirements of
the SMP regulations.
2.2.3 Identify opportunities and impediments for protection, restoration, public
access, and other appropriate shoreline uses.
2.2.4 Prepare a Use Analysis of the shorelines.
2.2.5 Prepare a working draft report for City and Ecology review and comment.
2.2.6 Attend one public Open House to present the findings and to gather
additional information. Provide materials suitable for public review. The
City will lead the Open House with URS in support.
The following subtasks are to be performed by the City with assistance from URS.
2.3 Prepare GIS databases and maps for the Use Analysis.
Deliverables:
• Working Draft Inventory and Analysis Report. Email working draft
report to City Staff, Ecology and the Technical Review Group for review
and comment. Submit working draft report in word and pdf electronic
format.
Task 3 Prepare Analysis Report and Map Portfolio
This task revises the working draft Inventory and Analysis Report prepared under Task 2 based on
City, Ecology, and public comments. This task is preparation of the final report and maps suitable
for use by the City Planning Department for preparation of the Shoreline Master Program.
The following subtasks are to be performed by the Consultant.
3.1 Meet with the City and Ecology and contact the Technical Review Group by email
to review results of the analysis prepared in Task 2.
3
3.2 Prepare a draft and final Inventory and Analysis Report and Map Portfolio that will
include the following:
3.2.1 Description of project area and the SMP update process.
3.2.2 Overview of the analysis including a description of the shoreline
jurisdiction, shoreline functions, "no net loss," cumulative impacts, and
restoration opportunities.
3.2.3 Description of ecosystem -wide processes that affect shoreline function.
3.2.4 Detailed characterization and analysis of the shorelines on the reach level.
3.2.5 Shoreline Use Analysis.
3.2.6 Detailed inventory information in appendices.
3.2.7 Map Portfolio. The City will produce the map portfolio.
3.3 Attend one public Open House to assist City staff in presenting the findings.
Attend one Planning Commission work session, one Planning Commission Public
Hearing, and one City Council meeting. It is anticipated that the URS Project
Manager will attend these meetings and the Inventory and Analysis Lead will attend
one of the meetings.. Provide materials suitable for public review.
Deliverables:
• Draft and Final Inventory and Analysis Report and Map Portfolio. Draft
and final digital copies and three hard copies of final report. Digital
maps (including all relevant metadata) in DOE and City acceptable
format and report in word and pdf electronic format.
Task 4 Develop Shoreline Environment Designations
This task assists the City in developing shoreline designations in compliance with the SMA and SMP
Guidelines.
The following subtasks are to be performed by the Consultant.
4.1 Prepare initial environmental designations and supporting documentation of the City
shorelines according to WAC 173 -26 -15(5) for review by the City.
4.2 Meet with the City to review and discuss the initial designations.
4.3 Attend one public Open House to assist City staff in presenting findings. Attend one
Planning Commission work session, one Planning Commission Public Hearing, and
one City Council meeting. It is anticipated that the URS Project Manager will attend
these meetings and the Inventory and Analysis Lead will attend one of the meetings.
Provide materials suitable for public review.
4.4 Prepare the final environmental designation support documentation providing the
justification and rationale for the designations.
The following subtasks are to be performed by the City with assistance from URS.
4.5 Prepare initial environmental designation GIS maps for review.
4.6 Prepare the final environmental designation GIS maps showing 12roposed designations.
Deliverables:
• Draft and Final Environmental Designations Memorandum. Draft and
final digital copies and three hard copies of final memorandum. Maps to
be provided by the City.
4
Task 5 Develop Shoreline Goals, Policies, and Regulations
This task provides assistance to the City with preparation of their shoreline goals, policies, and
regulations. The City will prepare the Goals and Policies with assistance from URS. URS will prepare
regulations conforming to the Goals and Policies developed by the City and the SNIP guidelines (WAC
173 -26). The City will lead the Public Processes with assistance from URS. The following subtasks are
anticipated.
5A- Development of Shoreline Goals and Policies
The City will lead development of Shoreline Goals and Policies with URS assistance.
5.1 URS will assist the City to research and review existing shorelines guidelines and
policy information, review and work with 2003 Shoreline Master Program Guidelines
(Chapter 173 -26 WAC) and the current Shoreline Master Program, search for and
review appropriate shorelines master programs from other jurisdictions, and review
the Spokane County Shorelines guidelines to develop consistency, particularly where
the jurisdictions interface.
5.2 URS will provide a professional facilitator for ttree seven public /policy committee
meetings. In addition, the work scope includes participation in an additional meeting
with either the SAGproup or city officials at no additional fee if requested by City
staff. The URS project manager will also attend and participate in the meetings to
assist the City.
5.3 Attend one Planning Commission work session, one Planning Commission Public
Hearing to assist City staff in presenting findings, and one City Council meeting. It
is anticipated that the URS Project Manager will attend these meetings and the
Inventory and Analysis Lead will attend one of the meetings. Provide materials
suitable for public review
5B- Development of Regulations (amended)
URS will develop the Shoreline Master Program Regulations with City assistance. The shoreline
regulations will conform to the Goals and Policies developed by the City and the SNIP guidelines (WAC
173 -26) and the Shoreline Management Act.
5.4 URS will prepare two drafts of the Shoreline regulations: a Working Draft for staff
review and comment and a Staff Recommendation draft for review by the Planning
Commission The Shoreline Regulations will be similar in format to the City of
Spokane Valley's Chapter 21.40 "Critical Area" regulations The City will finalize the
shoreline reg- ulations.
54 URS wM N f, b
prepare v vv
Draft fbr staff review and eon-Anent; ft Staff R-eean-Anendatiatt di!aft far- r-eNiew by
171 %� r.l1 P y-� draft for G •l -i
afinwing �—rS it �' O
f- t.,.«,— 29 AA A » 1 TTD; 'll QIQR.
X5.5 URS will present the drafts to the City staff and planning commission - ~-' be ---f±1a
It is anticipated that the URS Project Manager will attend all
meetings and the Regulation Lead will attend onetwo meetings. Revisions made after
the staff recommendation draft.adeption preeess will be made by the City_ -
--
-
assistattee
Communication and Coordination
The following assumptions have been made related to development of Goals, Policies, and Regulations
The City will lead the Public Involvement Process with URS assistance. It is anticipated that the City
will prepare public notices, locate meeting space, and prepare most of the exhibits needed for public,
planning commission, and council meetings.
Deliverables:
URS will work with City staff to identify and meet with stakeholder groups to identify
potential shorelines issues and opportunities. These groups might include but are not
limited to the public, environmental groups, river and shoreline users, property
owners and managers, city departments, neighboring jurisdictions, state agencies, and
Tribes.
URS will work with City staff and participant groups to develop issue discussions
centered on the Shoreline Management Act goals and policies.
URS will consult with City staff to hold informational workshops for public input. In
this effort, URS will assist the City to develop a public information strategy that invites
and engages a broad cross - section of the affected public.
• Draft regulations for review by the City and Ecology. It is anticipated
that two drafts will be prepared for City and Planning Commission
Review .
• Final shoreline regulations for- CoUneil aetion.
• Three hard copies of the regulations and in word and pdf electronic
format.
Task 6 Address Cumulative Impacts
Task 6 is an evaluation of the potential cumulative impacts of land use policies, environmental
designations, and other regulations consistent with the Shoreline Management Act. The Cumulative
Impacts Report provides documentation of the steps taken during the SMP update process to avoid
cumulative impacts. The evaluation will determine the potential impacts to shoreline ecological
functions as well as the other SMA- defined functions and uses from future activities that may occur.
A Cumulative Impacts Report will be prepared. The report will include the following:
6.1 Description of shorelines and current circumstances affecting shoreline conditions.
6.2 A description of reasonable foreseeable future development and uses.
6.3 An analysis of potential cumulative impacts including a description of existing regulatory
programs, review of the Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies, Critical Areas
Ordinance, and the proposed shoreline regulations.
6.4 A description of the regulatory framework including environmental designations,
shoreline jurisdiction and buffers, mitigation sequencing, vegetation conservation, and
unanticipated impacts and mitigation measures.
6.5 Prepare draft report.
6.6 Prepare final report.
6.7 Attend one public Open House to assist City staff in presenting findings. Attend one
Planning Commission work session, one Planning Commission Public Hearing, and one
City Council meeting. It is anticipated that the URS Project Manager will attend.
Provide materials suitable for public review
Deliverables:
• Draft Cumulative Impacts Analysis for review by the City and Ecology
G9
and Technical Review Group.
Three hard copies and the final Report in word and pdf electronic
format.
Task 7 Restoration Plan
URS will assist the City with development of the Shoreline Restoration Plan required for the SMP. The
plan will establish overall goals and identify priority restoration areas. This task includes coordination
of the restoration plan with other potential restoration activities along the river. The following
subtasks are to be performed by the Consultant.
7.1 Catalog restoration opportunity sites delineated in the inventory and provide brief
descriptions for each site.
7.2 Identify existing and ongoing projects and programs currently being implemented. This
includes projects identified by other agencies.
7.3 Develop general restoration goals based on the findings of the Inventory and Analysis and
from existing restoration goals found in regional watershed planning and restoration
documents. Develop a prioritization checklist in order to identify high priority projects.
7.4 Apply the prioritization checklist to prioritize restoration projects.
7.5 Identify potential funding sources.
7.6 Develop project schedule, including benchmarks.
7.7 Prepare the draft Restoration Plan.
7.8 Prepare final Restoration Plan.
7.9 Attend one public Open House to assist City staff in presenting findings. Attend one
Planning Commission work session, one Planning Commission Public Hearing, and one
City Council meeting. It is anticipated that the URS Project Manager will attend these
meetings and the Inventory and Analysis Lead will attend one of the meetings. Provide
materials suitable for public review
Deliverables:
Draft Restoration Plan for review by the City and Ecology.
Three hard copies and the final Restoration Plan in word and pdf
electronic format.
Task 8 SMP Plan Adoption
Provide assistance to the City during the adoption process. This task involves attending two public
meetings and providing support and presentation materials for the inventory and analysis portion of the
SMP and for the regulations prepared by the Consultant. Revisions to the regulations identified during
the adoption process will be made by the City.
Task 9 Public Access Plan (New)
A public access plan incorporated into the SMP will be prepared to identify appropriate shoreline
access The public access plan will consider both physical and visual access. The public access plan
will provide a description of shoreline uses, physical access, and identify 12 facili ty
improvements The Inventory and Characterization Report, prepared by URS, contains much of the
base information needed to develop the Public Access Plan The work items shown below were
developed from Ecolog's Shoreline Public Access Handbook, February, 1990. The work items
7
include:
1. Define Public Access Goals.
2. Relate access and recreational uses to land uses.
3 Identifv and describe special opportunities for access.
4 Review and incorporate existing hark and recreation plans into the access plan.
5 Develop implementation strategies and means for continued maintenance.
6 Develop strategies for determining and dealing with conflicts between public access, private
property privacy, and conservation goals.
7 Develop standards for setbacks,VrWerty dedications, facilities and landscaping.
8 Develop materials and participate in up to two public meetings. (Assumes the City will
coordinate and lead the meetings).
9 Develop draft and a final Public Access Plan document for inclusion into the SMP.
Deliverables:
0 Electronic draft Public Access Plan for review by the City and Ecology.
• Final Access Plan to be included in the SMP.
• Three hard copies of the final Access Plan in MS Word and in pdf
electronic format.
Task 10 Critical Areas Analysis and Revisions (New)
The SMP includes a Critical Areas element The intent of the initial agreed scope of services between
the Citv and URS was to refer to the City's Critical Areas Ordinance (CAOI or to copv the CAO
nroti isions into the SNP. Ecologv has vrovided additional guidance (April 20 2011) on the
integration of the CAO provisions into SMP's.
The work includes the following elements:
1 Acquire and review the existing City Critical Areas Ordinance.
2 Complete both the Critical Area Update Checklist and the Best Available Science checklist
(Commerce Guidance Checklists).
3 Develop a method to integrate Critical Areas into the SMP with City staff.
4 Revise existing Critical Area regulations for inclusion into the SMP. URS anticipates that
this work will be performed in con .jnction with preparation of the other SNP regulations.
Deliverables:
O Critical Area Update Checklist and Best Available Science Checklist for
review by the City and Technical Advisory Committee.
Task 11 No Net Loss Report (New)
The latest Ecology SMP work scope includes preparation of a "No Net Loss Report" that
demonstrates how the recommended shoreline management measures together with the cumulative
impacts analysis and the restoration plan are reflected in the proposed SNP and achieves no net loss.
Deliverables:
O Draft No Net Loss Report for review by the City and Ecology.
• Final No Net Loss Report to be included in the SW.
• Three hard copies and the final Access Plan in word and pdf electronic
format.
Task 12 Project Management (New)
The Project Management task includes a budget for an additional 12 months of project work.
Project Management tasks include coordination of the project between City staff and the URS
project team and administrative tasks including invoicing and scope and budget tracking.
Assumptions
• URS assumes that the City and /or Ecology will provide staff, assistance, and direction when
needed and as appropriate as a cost - saving measure. We are approaching this project as a
partnership with the City with the common goal of meeting project objectives using available
resources.
• URS assumes that GIS and other data will be available at no cost. We have included budget
for limited copying and travel charges.
• The only water bodies included in this project are the Spokane River, Shelley Lake, and the
two gravel pits. No waterbodies outside of lakes and ponds associated with these streams
will be investigated.
• The City of Spokane VaHU will provide the majority of the work on GIS databases and GIS
mapping required by the SMP update.
• The Ci& of Spokane Valley will conduct the Public Involvement activities with consultant
assistance necessary for this project's success.
'0