The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSWP272171(40) "I-HE CITY OF RENTON i DEPARTMENT OF i 1j �h� w h� SJao.+.nMVt-.ww �' PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKSn— L _I FOURTH FLOOR 200 MILL AVENUE SOUTH I RENTON, WASHINGTON 98055-2189 FAX: 235-2541 F� f . � l FAX TRANSMITTAL DATE: 61 ` I/— 9Y TO: 7—Anuy v>^r-kli5nj 1-C FAX#: FROM: SCa rr r,J o d o o, ^t PHONE#: 6/7 SUBJECT: L-AA) (.A'rIGAd NaT/GC p �5� � fi Pre -r�� A-i-r�,c446jP JVN� l7/ l g`S3 . �"�/�1✓lCS Number of pages excluding cover sheet: II/funn:/mi.c/fAXCOVI?K IX)C/hh ..i;/11:116 CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE CSR PW ISSUE DATE(MM/DD/YY) PARIN-1 05/21/93 PRODUCER THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE Hurley, Atkins & Stewart, Inc. DOES NOT AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE 1800 Ninth Ave. , #1500 POLICIES BELOW. Seattle WA 98101 COMPANIES AFFORDING COVERAGE Diane Brooke 206-682-5656 COMPANY LETTER A American States Insurance Co COMPANY B planet I INSURED LETTER �w COMPANY C 1 LETTER COMPANY D MAY '� Parametrix Inc LETTER 1993 P 0 Box 460 Sumner WA 98390 COMPANY E LETTER CITY CF RENTON COVERAGES ineering Dept THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED, NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. CO CR TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER POLICY EFFECTIVE POLICY EXPIRATION LIMITS DATE(MM/DD/YY) DATE(MM/DD/YY) GENERAL LIABILITY GENERAL AGGREGATE $ 2,000,000 A X COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY 02CC2947474 10/20/92 10/20/93 PRODUCTS-COMP/OPAGG. $ 2,000,000 CLAIMS MADE X OCCUR. PERSONAL&ADV.INJURY $ 11000,000 OWNER'S&CONTRACTOR'S PROT. EACH OCCURRENCE $ 1,000,000 X EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FIRE DAMAGE(Any one fire) $ 50,000 MED.EXPENSE(Any one person) $ 5,000 AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY COMBINED SINGLE A X ANY AUTO 02CC2947474 10/20/92 10/20/93 LIMIT $ 11000,000 ALL OWNED AUTOS BODILY INJURY SCHEDULED AUTOS (Per person) $ HIRED AUTOS BODILY INJURY $ NON-OWNED AUTOS (Per accident) GARAGE LIABILITY PROPERTY DAMAGE $ EXCESS LIABILITY EACH OCCURRENCE $ UMBRELLA FORM AGGREGATE $ OTHER THAN UMBRELLA FORM WORKER'S COMPENSATION STATUTORY LIMITS AND EACH ACCIDENT $ 11000,000 A EMPLOYERS'LIABILITY 02CC2947474 10/20/92 10/20/93 DISEASE—POLICY LIMIT $ 1,000,000 DISEASE—EACH EMPLOYEE $ 1,000,000 OTHER B PROFESSIONAL NTF2015876-01 11/12/92 11/12/93 11000,000 EACH CLAIM LIABILITY 2,000,000 AGGREGATE DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS/LOCATIONSNEHICLES/SPECIAL ITEMS RE: Project #55-1779-07, Wetland Mitigation Banks. CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, THE ISSUING COMPANY WILLiIV61P MAIL 3 0 DAYS WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER NAMED TO THE City Of Renton LEFT, Attn: Scott Woodbury T 200 Mill Ave. S. Renton WA 98055 AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE f Diane Brooke ACORD 25-S (7/90) ©ACORD CORPORATION 1990 4",RCITY OF RENTON Office of the City Attorney Earl Clymer, Mayor Lawrence J. Warren MEMORANDUMS L �' 1993 To: Scott Woodbury C1 T Y OF RENTON From: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Engineering Dept. Date: July 6, 1993 Subject: Agreement with Parametrix, Inc. for Wetland Mitigation Bank Plan Project I have reviewed the above-referenced document and the same is approved as to legal form. However, does the design criteria in Section 1I on page 2 provide any guidance on how to handle this task? Perhaps the scope of work may resolve any difficulty. Lawrence larren LJW:as. cc: Mayor Earl Clymer A8:99:18. Post Office Box 626 - 100 S 2nd Street - Renton, Washington 98057 - (206)255-8678 THIS PAPER CONTAINS SOO/RFCVC T FD MATFRIAI lfwl„Pf1C T'f'()NCI II/FR CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT REQUEST FOR INFORMATION OR CONCURRENCE DATE: ��Z 5��3 �,' C �a�u.y TO: 3bvjkL_f Ncso� C�LoDE 1993 FROM: Sir, woap$u/Zy �27�-SSY�� CITY OF RENT ON CONTACT PERSON: Engineering Dept. SUBJECT: (,off i c-Arjc rrt (-AT)�YJ P^N PLA j 1.1 U-7-/l , S 41c.11�FS /41 S U 2A10 c'6- Attached for your review, changes and/or comments is the . �Nso�,s.ter S6Nv cam% C�.rRgc�- Please return to staff contact person for subsequent action by . A s s oo ,s Po SSi Q(� Thank you. REVIEWER#1 CONCURRENCE 1 Name Date forms/CONCURQT.DOC/LAG/bh CITY OF RENTON t Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator June 30, 1993 Tracy P. McKenzie Parametrix, Inc. 5808 Lake Washington Blvd. NE Kirkland, WA 98033 SUBJECT: CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK PLAN Dear Ms. McKenzie: Attached are two original contracts for execution as we discussed in our telephone conversation today. Please replace Exhibits A, B, and C with original documents when you return the signed contracts. Once we have received the signed contracts from your office, they will be presented to the Mayor for his signature. We have collected more information your use in the project. Please find enclosed the following: General information: • Soils Reports • Investigation for the Seattle Times by Dames & Moore. Feb 11, 1991 . • Study for Mystic Company by Earth Consultants Inc. Jan 25, 1985. • Test pit logs for Alaska Distributors by Hart-Crowser. Attached to Feb 13, 1990 letter by Lance Mueller and Associates. • Geotechnical study for Al Pac Container by Earth Consultants. Aug 17, 1987. • Wetland Information • Preliminary Wetlands Evaluation of Al Pac by IES and Scoles. April 18, 1990. • Wetland Determination of Boeing CSTC by Shapiro. Dec 1991 . • Wetland Mitigation Plan for Puget Western by Raedeke. Feb 14, 1992. • Wetland assessment for Puget Western by Raedeke. Sept 6, 1988. • Bird surveys by Ted and Jeanne Mallory • Longacres wetland • Black River Pump Station pond • GIS survey information compiled by Bob Mac Onie (see attached sheet for summary) • City of Renton • Drafting standards • Shoreline Master Program • Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance • Mining, Excavation, and Grading Ordinance • Storm and Surface Water Drainage Ordinance 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 THIS PAPER CONTAINS 501/.RECYCLED MATERIAL,10%POST CONSUMER Tracey P. McKenzie, Parametrix, Inc. City of Renton Wetland Mitigation Bank Page 2 Information regarding Parcel 14 (Mitigation bank site 1) • Sheet 12 of Green River topographic map from April 16, 1980 aerial survey for Corps of Engineers Information regarding Parcel 8 (Mitigation bank site 2) • Full scale 0 " =50') ALTA/ACSM survey of Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4 of Block 8 If you have any questions, please call me at (206) 277-5547. Sincerely, �co-ZT wCA+<? Scott Woodbury, Project Manager Surface Water Utility C:DOCS:93-633:SSW:ps CC: Gregg Zimmerman Ronald J. Straka Enclosures CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT REQUEST FOR INFORMATION OR CONCURRENCE DATE: 6—/Z 5/93 LARR'r �vq� TO: 35vF-2LY AleLSo/J 6.LaDf FROM: Sc-o rf w caD$u" (2-)-�-55YJ) CONTACT PERSON: SUBJECT: W6 r L A,)n M� (�ArJOn� &^pt PLAa CeNSuur^" S,6Ame'F5 /,VSu/2A^/C(- n vp Attached for your review, changes and/or comments is the . Co V-T0LT^,-r 55"I Z5 C,V,✓rPACT- Please return to staff contact person for subsequent action by_ AS S'owo ,ors PaSSiQL,E, Thank you. REVIEWER#1 CONCURRENCE Name Date forms/CONCURQT.DOC/LAG/bh w CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM DATE: June 28, 1993 TO: Mayor Earl Clymer FROM: Lynn Guttma STAFF CONTACT: Ron Straka Scott Woodbury x-5547) SUBJECT: Wetland Mitigation Bank Plan Consultant Services ISSUE: The Planning/Building/Public Works Department requests approval of the contract for consultant services to create a Wetland Mitigation Bank Plan. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning/Building/Public Works Department recommends your approval and execution of the Wetland Mitigation Bank Plan consultant services contract. BACKGROUND: On May 18, 1992, the City executed a wetland mitigation banking agreement with the Glacier Park Company, as authorized by the City Council. Under this agreement, the City was given two properties in the Black River drainage basin totaling 45 acres which were to be used as mitigation sites for impacts to wetlands on six other Glacier Park parcels. In exchange for the two mitigation sites, the City issued Glacier Park permits to fill up to 0.99 acre of low quality wetlands on each of six parcels. The City also agreed to mitigate for these impacts on the mitigation sites which it acquired from Glacier Park. Mitigation for these impacted wetlands, which total 5.33 acres, is the City's priority concern. After fulfilling the requirements of the Glacier Park agreement the City will use the remaining available acreage on the mitigation sites to mitigate for wetland impacts from both public and private projects. In order for the City to complete the Glacier Park mitigation and have a framework to guide future mitigation projects, a wetland mitigation bank plan needs to be established by an environmental consultant_ The plan will include an analysis of the mitigation sites, June 28, 1993 Page 2 criteria for using the mitigation sites, master plans for wetland creation and recreational opportunities, detailed grading and planting plans for the required Glacier Park mitigation, program cost estimates, and requirements for program operation, such as monitoring and maintenance procedures. The consultant will also coordinate with state and federal resource and regulatory agencies throughout the project. The consultant services contract expenditure required to create the Wetland Mitigation Bank Plan is $39,999. The 1993 approved Surface Water Utility Capital Improvement project budget appropriation for the project is $45,000. The balance of the 1993 budget of$5,001 will cover staff time associated with consultant contract development and management. cc: Gregg Zimmerman Mary Lynne Myer David Saxen 93-342.DOC/SW/bh CONCURRENCE DATE 1 ZS 19 ENGINEERING NAME INITIAUDATE CONSULTANT AGREEMENT Scxq- W S w (Lod s THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into on this , day of y an the CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION HERE "CITY," and the consulting firm PARAMETRIX, INC. whose address is, 5808 Lake Washington Blvd NE, Kirkland, WA 98033 at which work will be available for inspection, hereinafter called the "CONSULTANT." PROJECT NAME: WETLAND MITIGATION BANK PLAN WHEREAS, the City has not sufficient qualified engineering employees to provide the engineering within a reasonable time and the City deems it advisable and is desirous of engaging the professional services and assistance of a qualified professional consulting firm to do the necessary engineering work for the project, and WHEREAS, the Consultant has represented and by entering into this Agreement now represents, that it is in full compliance with the statutes of the State of Washington for registration of professional engineers, has a current valid corporate certificate from the State of Washington or has a valid assumed name filing with the Secretary of State and that all personnel to be assigned to the work required under this Agreement are fully qualified to perform the work to which they will be assigned in a competent and professional manner, and that sufficient qualified personnel are on staff or readily available to Consultant to staff this Agreement. WHEREAS, the Consultant has indicated that it desires to do the work set forth in the Agreement upon the terms and conditions set forth below. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms, conditions, covenants and performances contained herein below, the parties hereto agree as follows: c:93-337/bh 1 �R. ` CONCURRENCE DATE CITY OF RENTON NAME INITIAL/DATF � s MEMORANDUM J DATE: June 28, 1993 Ooc— TO: Mayor Earl Clymer FROM: Lynn Guttmann STAFF CONTACT: Ron Straka Scott Woodbury (X-5547) SUBJECT: Wetland Mitigation Bank Plan Consultant Services ISSUE: The Planning/Building/Public Works Department requests approval of the contract for co sultant s rvices to create a Wetland Mitigation Bank Plan. �/I6U BACKGROUND: n May 18, 1992yeuFsignatu , as author3 the city Council, executed a wetland mitigation banking agreement wit the Glacier Park Company. Under this agreement, the city was given two properties in the Black River drainage basin totaling 45 acres which were to be used as mitigation sites for impacts to wetlands on six other Glacier Park parcels. In exchange for the two mitigation sites, the city issued Glacier Park permits to fill up to 0.99 acre of low quality wetlands on each of six parcels. The city also agreed to mitigate for these impacts on the mitigation sites which it acquired from Glacier Park. Mitigation for these impacted wetlands, which total 5.33 acres, is the city's priority concern. After fulfilling the requirements of the Glacier Park agreement the city will use the remaining available acreage on the mitigation sites to mitigate for wetland impacts from both public and private projects. In order for the city to complete the Glacier Park mitigation and have a framework to guide future mitigation projects, a wetland mitigation bank plan needs to be established by an environmental consultant. The plan will include an analysis of the mitigation sites, criteria for using the mitigation sites, master plans for wetland creation and recreational opportunities, detailed grading and planting plans for the required Glacier Park mitigation, program cost estimates, and requirements for program operation, such as monitoring and maintenance procedures. The consultant will also coordinate with state and federal resource and regulatory agencies throughout the project. The consultant services contract expenditure required to create the Wetland Mitigation Bank Plan is $39,999. Mayor Earl Clymer 2 Wetland Mitigation Bank Plan The 1993 approved Surface Water Utility Capital Improvement project budget appropriation for the project is $45,000. The balance of the 1993 budget of$5,001 will cover staff time associated with consultant contract development and management. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning/Building/Public Works Department recommends your approval and execution of the Wetland Mitigation Bank Plan consultant services contract. cc: Gregg Zimmerman Mary Lynne Myer David Saxen Ji.:;-?8-93 MON 10:04 PARAMETR I X FAX NO, 206 889 8808 P. 01 Parametrix, Inc. 5808 Lake Washington Blvd. N.E. Kirkland, WA 98033 206-822-8880 FAX TRANSMISSION COVER PAGE FAX # 206-889-8808 Number of Pages (not including this page) To: aL,4i b•-vu From: TP Receiving FAX Number: i Date: Time: 1 4 " 03 Comments: JU�,-?8-93 MON 10;05 PARAMETRIX FAX NO, 206 889 8808 P, 02 accommodate, and the extent and type of wetlands that could potentially be impacted within the project area. A site visit will be conducted at the mitigation sites to correlate the literature information on the sites with current filed conditions. In addition, representative wetlands (e.g., one Category 1, one Category 2, and two or three Category 3 wetlands) within the watershed project area (with emphasis on wetlands within city limits), that were identified by Jones and Stokes will be visited to verify the wetland's type and character. The site visit with the Corps will be to verify the "adjacency" status of the wetlands within the mitigation areas. On-site hydrology will be evaluated during the site visits. Product: Task 1D will result in an analysis and five draft reports on opportunities and constraints of the site to meet the overall goals and objectives of the mitigation program, requirements for use of the mitigation sites, and recommendations for the type of mitigation program that could best serve the City's near-term and future needs. Five copies of a draft checklist or matrix identifying conditions under which projects needing mitigation could use the mitigation sites will be prepared as part of the analysis. Five copies of any figures, maps, etc., showing any additional information collected during the site visits will be provided to the City. This information will be integrated onto the base maps. One set of completed base map drawings and electronic copy shall be submitted to the City. Parametrix will incorporate the comments from the City into the final mitigation plan developed in Task 1E. Meetings; One meeting is included in this task to review the results of the physical conditions and financial assessments, to discuss and finalize the goals and objectives for the project, and to determine the type of mitigation program to be developed. One meeting will be held with resource agencies to present results of this task. The purpose of this meeting will be to present and seek input on the goals and objectives of the project and mitigation program. If time permits, Parametrix will also present the site plan for Alternative 1. Assumptions: One meeting with the City will be 2 hours with 1 hour of travel time and the agency meeting will be three hours with hour of travel. Tune 2a 1993 S5-1779-07 h:fusers I tracey Brenton 1renton.scp JUN-28-93 MON 8:59 PARAMETRIX FAX NO. 206 889 8808 P, 0I/04 Parametrix, Inc. 5808 Lake Washington Blvd. N.E. Kirkland, WA 98033 206-822-8880 1993 CIV OF RENTON FAX TRANSMISSION COVER PAGE Engineering Dept. FAX # 206-8894808 Number of Pages (not including this page) To: From: 4u(kQY�SU Receiving FAX Number: Date; —�;.= � Time: Comments: JUN-28-93 MON 9:00 PARAMETRIX FAX NO. 206 889 8808 P. 02/04 accommodate, and the extent and type of wetlands that could potentially be impacted within the project area, A site visit will be conducted at the mitigation sites to correlate the literature information on the sites with current filed conditions. In addition, representative wetlands (e.g., one Category 1, one Category 2, and two or three Category 3 wetlands) within the watershed project area (with emphasis on wetlands within city limits), that were identified by Jones and Stokes will be visited to verify the wetland's type and character. The site visit with the Corps will be to verify the "adjacency" status of the wetlands within the mitigation areas. On-site hydrology will be evaluated during the site visits. Product: Task 1D will result in an analysis and five draft reports on opportunities and constraints of the site to meet the overall goals and objectives of the mitigation program, requirements for use of the mitigation sites, and recommendations for the type of mitigation program that could best serve the City's near-term and future needs. Five copies of a draft checklist or matrix identifying conditions under which projects needing mitigation could use the mitigation sites will be prepared as part of the analysis. Five copies of any figures, maps, etc., showing any additional information collected during the site visits will be provided to the City. This information will be integrated onto the base maps. One set of completed base map drawings and electronic copy shall be submitted to the City. Parametrix will incorporate the comments from the City into the final mitigation plan developed in Task 1E. Meetings: One meeting is included in this task to review the results of the physical conditions and financial assessments, to discuss and finalize the goals and objectives for the project, and to determine the type of mitigation program to be developed. One meeting will be held with resource agencies to present results of this task. The purpose of this meeting will be to present and seek input on the goals and objectives of the project and mitigation program. If time permits, Parametrix will also present the site plan for Alternative 1. Assumptions, Both meetings will be 2 hours with 1 hour of travel tim un�theage_h meeting is expected to take 3 ho June 25, 1993 8 55-1779-07 h:f users�rraceyVenton�renton.scp JUN-28-93 MON 9:01 PARAMETRIX FAX NO. 206 889 8808 P, 03/04 A summary of the issues and solutions identified by coordinating with the resource and regulatory agencies that can be incorporated into the mitigation plan (either as a section or an Appendix) developed in Task 1E. TASK IC - MITIGATION GOALS AND OBJECTIVES AND POLICY ISSUES Purpose: To develop goals and objectives for the overall mitigation program. The identification of specific coals and objectives of the mitigation sites will be developed as part of Task 1E. To define draft eligibility requirements for use of the mitigation sites. To identify policy issues that require resolution by the City and provide recommendations for solutions to these issues. To meet with resource and regulatory agency representatives. Description: Preliminary goals and objectives have been developed by the City through their wetland's ordinance and their agreement with Glacier Park. These will be reviewed and any additional goals and objectives will be developed for establishing a mitigation program. Based on the City's review of the preliminary list of goals and objectives, Parametrix will prepare a draft and final list suitable for presentation and discussion with the resource and regulatory agencies. Additional mitigation program objectives will be based, in part, on the potential future impacts to wetland functions, and acreage, applicability of replacement ratios (based on City's ordinance), and the type of program (i.e., mitigation banking or off-site mitigation) that could be implemented at the mitigation sites. Eligibility requirements for use of the site will be based on the wetland type and size, functions and values, relative quality of the habitat, required replacement ratios, compliance with sequencing and the City's ordinance, off-site replacement feasibility, and location within the basin's landscape. Two policy issues were identified in the May 21, 1993 kick-of meeting with the City. They are as follows: • Availability of mitigation for public projects • Use of the mitigation sites does not necessarily preclude impacts to Category 2 wetlands (as defined by the City's ordinance) June 25, 1993 4 55-1779-07 h:1 users�tracey 1 seitton 1 Benton,scp EXHIBIT 8 DRAFT SCHEDULE OF COMPLETION C- CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION PROGRAM r13 may June July August September October November December 0 1 0 CC) 1A Project Management CD Kick-off Meeting Notice to Proceed ra co 1B Regulatory Coordination/Requirements I C Goals and Objectives Meet with Agencies :3> ID Field and Conditions ........... CT I Mapping Office Assessment >< Field Analysis/Report .. .......... City Review Meet with City Meet with Agencies IE Mitigation Plan ProgranunaLic Plan => Technical Plan Alternative Site Plan I (entire site) I N Alternative Site Plan 2 CD CD co Alternative Site Plan 3 co co Meetings with City co 3 A. 70% 9D% co CD Draft Report Rc%riew co Meet with Agencies 75% Final Report 1F Public Involvement Legend: 0 = specific dates CD -- = prreparafion/evahiatiordonalysig of information to complete subtask = designates range of time where numfings will be scheduled and held CD .91 = reflects entire length of time to complete task when wadL actually occurs to complete task review by City THE CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF � u PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS _ - FOURTH FLOOR 200 MILL AVENUE SOUTH I " RENTON, WASHINGTON 9805 5-2 1 89 ' FAX: 235-2541 �. '9> l FAX TRANSMITTAL 2y DATE: 6--'Z� " 93 TO: TP ACFy FAX#: -ZOO- 889-9808 FROM: SCOT' Woo 03UM PHONE#: 1 77 - 55y-7 SUBJECT: l)C-or,tvde-,.rs Ty -Jw4 n, 1913 P4/o5A4.- 2-) AD017-10NAI, ( .aNTRs'c-_ LA,46-VAC,& To 56c r/6,J )0/J . Pl-EASIc emu- 1 F rHiJ rs 6kAq , /�P'(Lo COPY 1�4 Fa(.CoW IN r►1pIl Number of pages excluding cover sheet: 11/1 mn:/m i:c/FA X CO V li K.I)OC/hh A� { vq e, L:quirc, nt shall verify, when submitting first payment invoice and annually thereafter, po3shayll ity of Renton business license while conducting work for the City. The Consultprovide verification upon request, that all subconsultants participating in a Cityrent City of Renton business license. I1ie Consultant shall provide, and obt traffic control plan prior to conducting work in City right of way. The Consultant's relation to the City shall be at all times as an independent contractor. XIV SUBLETTING OR ASSIGNING OF CONTRACTS The consultant shall not sublet or assign any of the work covered by this Agreement without the express consent of the City. XV ENDORSEMENT OF PLANS The Consultant shall place their certification on all plans, specifications, estimates or any other engineering data furnished by them in accordance with RCW 18.43.070. XVI COMPLETE AGREEMENT This document and referenced attachments contain all covenants, stipulations, and provisions agreed upon by the parties. Later Task Orders will be in writing and executed and will become part of this agreement. 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 an amendment to this Agreement. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision in this Agreement shall not affect the other provisions hereof, and this Agreement shall be construed in all respects as if such invalid or unenforceable provision were omitted. w/contract/agrn t_frm/2/28/91 12 JUN-17-93 THU 11 : 17 PARAMETRIX FAX N0, 206 889 8808 P. 01/15 �i'111Gi 3 Parametrix, Inc. 5808 Lake Washington Blvd_ N-E. Kirkland, WA 98033 206-822-8880 FAX TRANSMISSION COVER PAGE FAX # 206-889-8808 Number of Pages (not including this page) To: LLD From: Receiving FAX Numbers Date: . _ Time: !�_ Comments: oria" (7 /i93 warLk PLAN 061141: : 13: 16 001 RTIFICATE OF INSURANCE aR p I/f UE D.,L tMM;DD,VY, 06/24/93 7. THIS Cr. IF CAtE 18 ISSUP.6 A3 All OF Tl ONLY AND \ CONFER NO RIGHTS UPON THE CER IF1C TE HOLD . THIS ERTIFIOATE a Stewart, Inc. DOES NOT AMEND,EXTFNO OR ALT THE C VERA E AFFOADED BY THE ve. , #1500 POLICIES BELOW, 98101 Di -e Brooke D (g; � \\f f j , COMPANIES AFF RDINQ COV RApE 206-682-5656 COMPANY LC,TER A Amsricaa StatsA znsuranca Co INSURED JUN 14 1993 LETTER"Y B Plant 2neuran a company CITY OF RENTON COMPANY C Engineering Dept. Parametrix Inc i�R"Y D P O Box 460 Sumner WA 98390 COMPANY E LETTER COVERAGES THIS IS TO CGRTIrY THAT THE POLICFE5 OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NA weD ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPICT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREI IS SUBJECT TO LL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. CO TYPE Of INSURANCE LTR POLICY NUMBER rOIJCY EFFEC I Ire POLICY EIPqFigTI011 DATE 4MMIDOrYY1 DATE(MMMDIYYI LIMITS GENERAL LIABILITY A XCOMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY 02CC2947474 10/20/92 10/20/93 LTIEAAL AREGATE 4 21000,000 OOUCTS-COMP/OPAGG. • CLAIMS MADE X OCCUR. 2.ppp,OOp cS-ONAL a ADY.iNAJrn 4 11000,000 OWNER'S A CONTRACTOR'S PROT, CII OCCURRZNC[ 11000,000 X EMPLOYER BENEFITS RE DAMACQ(Any on$(;re) 4 50,000 CD.EXPENOE(Any a Defeunl 7 AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY 51000 COMBINED SINGLE A X ANY 02CC2947474 10/20/92 10/20/93 LIMIT a 1,000,000 ALL OWWNENE D auTpS ECI ICDULED AUTOS DOILY WURY f Or oenenl 4 HIRED AUIOS NON-OWNED AUIU:i ODILY INJ(BIY [ 01 ArciArxl 4 GARAGE LIABILITY OPERTY DAMAGE EXCESS LIABILITY Cti OCCU tNCE 4 IJAABRELLA FURM OREGATE OTIIER THAN UMBRELLA FOkM riORKER'S COMPENSATION STATUTORY LIPOTS AND EACH ACCIDENT 4 11000,000 A EMPLOYERS'LIABILITY 02CC2947474 10/20/92 10/20/93 0�6EA3r LIM(T 4 11000,000 OTHER SEASE—EACM E:MFII YEE 4 1,000,000 B PROFESSIONAL 1NTF2015876-01 11/12/92 11/12/93 1,00000to RACH CLAIM LIABILITY 2100010 0 AWRRGATE DESCRIPTION OF OPEMAI10NSILOCATIONSNEHICLES/SPECIAL ITEMS RE: Project #55-1779-07, Wetland Mitigation Banka. CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANC.ELLA 3011E SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED FOLICIES BE CANC LLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION OAT!THEREOF, )HE ISSUING COMPANY WILL MAIL_ DAYS WRIT FEN NOTICE TO 11HE CERTIFICATE F OLDER NAMED TO THE City Of Renton LEFT �Sg7mCx R�[�R Attn: Scott Woodbury xmqaKxxx)E 200 Mill Ave. S. Xx Rentax, WA 98055 7TH0NZED REPRMENTATrVE ' A17 Arnlon ec .. .-....... Diane Brooke 1n� 0 A,A eA U it- CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE CSR PW IS SUE DATE(MM/DD/YY) PARIN-1 05/21/93 PRODUCER THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER.THIS CERTIFICATE Hurley, Atkins & Stewart, Inc. DOES NOT AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE 1800 Ninth Ave. , #1500 POLICIES BELOW. Seattle WA 98101 COMPANIES AFFORDING COVERAGE Diane Brooke 206-682-5656 COMPANY A American States Insurance C .........._ _ ....... .... ........ ......... COMPANY g planet I INSURED LETTER COMPANY `. LETTER ............. COMPANY '� Parametrix Inc LETTER ° 199.3. P O Box 460 ..... ___ Sumner WA 98390 COMPANY E ITY OF RENTON LETTER COVERAGES En7FI1C1�Ftt THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TOT INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED,NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT,TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACTS R OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN,THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICiE DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDOQED BY PAID CLAIMS. CO POLICY EFFEC POLICY EXPIRATION LTR TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER DATE(MM/ NY) DATE(MM/DD/YY) LIMITS GENERAL LIABILITY GENERAL AGGREGATE 8 2,000,000 j� X COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY 02CC2947474 1 /2O/92 10/20/93 PRODUCTS-COMP/OP >t 2,000,000 _.. _ .. .. CLAIMS MADE X : OCCUR. PERSONAL&ADV.INJURY 4 11000,000 ... OWNER'S&CONTRACTOR'S PROT. /yt EACH OCCURRENCE S 1....QO0 0OO q/ _ . X EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 1\ FIRE DAMAGE(Any one fire) 8 5O OOO .. ..... ..... . . !` ...... .... 1. MED.EXPENSE(Any one person)8 5,000 AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY A X :02CC2947474 /20/93 COMBINED SINGLE $ 11000,000 : ANY AUTO \ 1 O/2 O/9 2 10 :LIMIT ALL OWNED AUTOS _................... ......... . BODILY INJURY S SCHEDULED AUTOS ! (Per person) .... ..................... HIRED AUTOS BODILY INJURY 8 NON-OWNED AUTOS (Per accident) GARAGE LIABILITY PROPERTY DAMAGE 8 EXCESS LIABILITY EACH OCCURRENCE 8 UMBRELLA FORM : AGGREGATE $ OTHER THAN UMBRELLA FORM WORKER'S COMPENSATION - STATUTORY LIMITS EACH ACCIDENT 8 1 000 000 AND :.... __... ...... .1.. ._.._ DISEASE—POLICY LIMIT S 11000,000 A EMPLOYERS'LIABILITY CC2947474 10/20/92 10/20/93 DISEASE—EACH EMPLOYEE S 11000,000 OTHER B.PROFESSIONAL /NTF2015876-01 11/12/92 11/12/93 1,000,000 EACH CLAIM LIABILITY 2,000,000 AGGREGATE DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS/LOCATI S/VEHICLES/SPECIAL ITEMS RE: Project #55-17 9-07, Wetland Mitigation Banks. CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION. SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, THE ISSUING COMPANY WILL ENDEAVOR TO MAIL 30 DAYS WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER NAMED TO THE City Of Renton LEFT, BUT FAILURE TO MAIL SUCH NOTICE SHALL IMPOSE NO OBLIGATION OR Attn: Scott Woodbury LIABILITY OF ANY KIND UPON THE COMPANY, ITS AGENTS OR REPRESENTATIVES. 200 Mill Ave. S. Renton WA 98055 AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE t If Diane Brooke ACORD 25-S 17/901 ,,CORD CORPO AT10N 1990 CITY OF RENTON "LL Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator FAX •d m' TO June 11, 1993 c ,v Ms. Tracey McKenzie Parametrix, Inc. FAX _ 44 3808 Lake Washington Blvd. NE Kirkland, WA 98033-7350 Dear Tracey: Members of the Design Team have reviewed the draft scope, schedule, and budget submitted by Parametrix on June 4, 1993. In general, we feel that all of the issues are addressed, but we need to see more specificity in each of the tasks. Our concerns have been synthesized into the comments below. General Comments /1 . As mentioned above, tasks need to be described in greater detail and / supplemented with clear rationales. �/ 2. Some tasks are too broad and overlapping, making them confusing. We suggest dividing tasks for additional clarity. For example, Regulatory Agency Coordination/Requirements and Mitigation Goals and Objectives could be separate tasks. We realize that some tasks are not necessarily sequential in timing, but feel that they will be more easily understood as separate items. V13. Unless absolutely necessary, meetings should be no longer than two hours with one additional hour of paid travel time. /4. We would like to see one meeting eliminated, perhaps by combining two where feasible. /5. References to the City's tentative scope and Parametrix proposal should be removed so that the final scope stands alone. The City tentative scope was intended to be only a guideline. Because wetland mitigation banking is a new concept we are relying on the Parametrix team's knowledge and experience to present a work plan that will best facilitate establishment of a wetland / mitigation bank. V 6. Include an hour and dollar estimate breakdown for each task in Exhibit C. We need to reduce the budget to $40,000 as had been discussed in our meeting on May 21 . Unfortunately this is all the appropriation we have to work with this year. Please give me a call if you would like to discuss options for reducing the budget. J7. Address the issue of obtaining construction funding in the scope. 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 Parametrix, Inc. Page 2 ti .Q Under Assumptions on page 1 , the Springbrook Creek right of way is owned by ✓ King County Drainage District #1 , which may necessitate an obtaining a construction easement to allow constructing a hydraulic connection to Springbrook Creek within the district property. The City and Parametrix need to clarify this and any other assumptions. Specific Comments by Task Task 1 A - Project Management �• Possibly eliminate 1 meeting. ✓• Clarify agenda for meeting(s) with regulatory agencies and when these meetings will take place in the schedule in Exhibit B. Task 1 B - Conditions Assessment and Field Work �• Clearly define all features to be assessed and the rationale for analyzing each feature. Of particular importance is outlining how analysis to determine if sufficient hydrology is available. For all features also state the extent of data collection needed to supplement existing data. • Further define the financial assessment section on page 3 beginning "Financial information..." Perhaps acquisition of funding could be addressed here. The financial assessment could also be a subtask. • State responsibilities for the three policy issues mentioned. Should these policies issues fall under new task "Regulatory Requirements"? ✓• Combine the two meetings for Task 1 B? �'• Separate out goals and objectives for new task. ✓• Explain the process and rationale for use of the "gross" capacity analysis for the valley. • Parametrix site visit should occur when Corps can visit the site. Parametrix should arrange this meeting. Task 1 C - Mitigation Plan Preparation and Reporting �• The level of graphic detail in each of the plans needs to be clearly stated as well as all of the components to be included in the mitigation program. ;'• As you suggested in the optional section, we feel that agency review should be included before the 50 percent completion point of this task. y The monitoring plan must include provisions for monitoring the sites well after construction. Is this what is meant on page 6 by "monitoring (construction and implementation)"? Parametrix, Inc. Page 3 • 12 foot contour intervals are available for mitigation site 1 . Task 1 D - Public Involvement v%• Leave this task in as an optional task. The assumptions are accurate. The City needs to determine what type of public involvement it will conduct. New Task - Mitigation Goals and Objectives Since there are different "layers" of goals for the mitigation sites (for example, the general goal of "no net loss" vs. specific goals for the physical design of the site), clarification is needed to avoid confusion. Explain specifically what types of goals need to be established and what the rationale is for establishing them. Also where this fits in to the project. New Task - Regulatory Agency Coordination/Requirements State the regulatory agencies and issues likely to be encountered in the process. Clarify when agencies will be consulted in the process. Address when a Memoranda of Agreement would be necessary and what would the methods be to establish the agreement. All meetings with the agencies should be included on the schedule. Please revise your work plan and resubmit by June 17, 1993. We want to avoid too many rounds of revisions and the associated cost. Because the June 4 draft work plan was too general for final approval, we will need a revised draft for detailed review and hopefully final approval. The delay will also allow Mary Lynne Myer to participate in the review when she arrives back from her vacation June 17. We are targeting the June 24 deadline for submittal to the Council agenda bill process. The earliest contract execution date is then July 13. Please call me at 206-277-5547 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Scott Woodbury, Proj ct Manager Surface Water Utility C:DOCS:93-555:SSW:ps CC: Ron Straka Mary Lynne Myer David Saxen THE CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS FOURTH FLOOR 200 MILL AVENUE SOUTH RENTON, WASHINGTON 98055-2189 i r< T•. FAX: 235-2541 I . i FAX TRANSMITTAL DATE: -/- 2 o - 93 TO: 7-R-A y A^Ce,4flJ a I FAX#: 989- 9808 FROM: S C-0 %/ Cj po�jDg U PHONE#: 2-7 7 juc 20/ l�I g 3 LF—,7 SUBJECT: C-/�y O� krjT(y di� AA) N a 0 C-�l'y Ta T UL-U w. Number of pages excluding cover sheet i��G,nn>�n,;<c/�nxc:c>vrtt ucx i,i, CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator July 20, 1993 Tracy P. McKenzie Parametrix, Inc. 5808 Lake Washington Blvd. NE Kirkland, WA 98033 SUBJECT: CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK PLAN Dear Ms. McKenzie: Enclosed is an original, fully executed contract for the above-referenced project authorizing your team to proceed with the project and perform the services outlined in the contract scope of work. Also enclosed is the following information collected for your use in the project: • Environmental Site Assessment Broadacres Property Vol 1. (Landau Associates, 1990) • City of Tukwila SE Central Business District Drainage Study. (Gardner Consultants, 1992) • Preliminary Wetland Delineation Van Woerden Tract. (Shannon & Wilson, 1992) • Report Geotechnical Engineering Services Boeing Longacres Park. (GeoEngineers, 1991) • Mosquito Abatement Program 1993 Survey and Final Report. (Shapiro &Assoc, 1993) As we discussed earlier, please arrange with Allan Johnson at 277-6187 for transmittal of the capacity analysis information needed for your work. Thank you for your efforts in the scope of work development and contract execution. I look forward to working with you toward the successful completion of this project. If you have any questions, or need anything else, please call me at (206) 277-5547. Sincerely, Scott Woodbury, Project Manager Surface Water Utility H:SWM/ETL-BNK/SSW:lf Enclosure cc: Ronald J.Straka 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 THIS PAPER CONTAINS 50%RECYCLED MATERIAL,10%POST CONSUMER CITY OF RENTON CITY CLERK'S OFFICE MEMORANDUM DATE: July 19, 1993 TO: Scott Woodbury FROM: Connie Williams SUBJECT: CAG-93-080 The attached original document has been fully executed and is being returned to you. Please transmit the original to the contractor and retain a copy for your file. An original document is also retained by the City Clerk. Thank you and have a nice day. Enclosures: (1) I CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM DATE: July 16, 1993 TO: Marilyn Petersen FROM: Scott Woodbury S w SUBJECT: WETLAND MITIGATION BANK PLAN CONSULTANT AGREEMENT Attached for execution are two original Wetland Mitigation Bank Plan consultant agreements. Accompanying the agreements, for your file, is a copy of the contract checklist with the required attachments. An issue paper memorandum dated June 28, 1993 from Lynn Guttmann to Mayor Clymer recommending execution of the agreement is also attached. Thank you for your assistance. If you have any questions please call me at X-5547. r r CONTRACT CHECKLIST STAFF NAME&EXTENSION NUMBER: S C,c i `'`' 6,0 6 u/i-� l k - 5 S y 7 DIVISION/DEPARTMENT: UJ A Tr"! U,'/L l r,1 CONTRACT NUMBER: TASK ORDER NUMBER(if applicable): CONTRACTOR: PURPOSE OF CONTRACT: I C LL A,1 0 Ty, , T 61\nl l< /LAPj 1. LEGAL REVIEW: (Attach letter from City Attorney) 9L6 c,5-/, T r� 2. RISK MANAGEMENT REVIEW FOR INSURANCE: (Attach letter) le i �.,� 71(-19 j 3. RESPONSE TO LEGAL OR RISK MGMT CONCERNS: (Explain in writing how concerns have been met.) 4. INSURANCE CERTIFICATE AND/OR POLICY: (Attach original) 5. PROOF OF RENTON BUSINESS LICENSE: (Attach copy.) 6. ATTACHED CONTRACTS ARE SIGNED BY CONTRACTOR: (If not,provide explanation) rf%rA cti E0 7. FISCAL IMPACT: A. AMOUNT BUDGETED: (LINE ITEM)(See 7.b)* B. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: 3 % GO C 8. COUNCIL APPROVAL REQUIRED: (Prepare Agenda Bill): ILI/.a CONTRACT OR TASK ORDER IS $50,000 OR OVER: (Refer to Council committee for initial contract approval;place subsequent task orders on Council agenda for concurrence.) ,B' *FUND TRANSFER REQUIRED IF CONTRACT EXPENDITURE EXCEEDS AMOUNT BUDGETED. (Refer to Council committee.) ,C! SOLE SOURCE CONTRACTS. (Refer to Council committee.) 9. DATE OF COUNCIL APPROVAL: I'VIA 10. RESOLUTION NUMBER(If applicable): N�>� 11. KEY WORDS FOR CITY CLERK'S INDEX: A. � n-i L y AT/C� C. L�(_AC14-P- P/\r,ic L-C rL-VA")o fiA,�K H)fomis/contract/CKLIST.DOC 7/12/93 Parametrix, Inc. Ell Zg To: J U L 1.5 1993 Scott Woodbury CITY OF ON Date: July 14, 1993 City of Renton Engineering Depkoject No: _ 55-1779-04 (01) 200 Mill Ave. South Renton, WA 98055 From: Washington Oregon Hawaii ❑ 5700 Kitsap Way ❑ 1231 Fryar Avenue ❑ 7820 N.E. Holman ❑ 1164 Bishop Street Suite 202 P.O.Box 460 Suite B-6 Suite 1600 Bremerton,WA 98312-2234 Sumner,WA 98390-1516 Portland,OR 97218-2859 Honolulu, HI 96813-2832 206-377-0014 206-863-5128 503-256-5444 808-524-0594 206-383-1835 206-838-9810 206-694-5020 Fax:808-523-2995 Fax:206-479-5961 Fax:206-863-0946 Fax:503-256-4221 X: 5808 Lake Washington Blvd. N.E. 25 N.Wenatchee Avenue Kirkland,WA 98033-7350 Suite 207 206-822-8880 Wenatchee,WA 98801-2236 Fax:206-889-8808 509-664-3290 Fax:509-663-8816 We are transmitting the following materials. Two original Engineering Consulting Agreements for initicAls and signatures. Comments See green flags for required initialization. Please return our copy of the fully executed agreement to the attention of Tracey McKenzie. These are: Per your Request For your Information For your Review and Approval For your Files X For your Action Sincerely, cc: ShanmmEarris, Technical Assistant � h CITY OF RENTON Office of the City Attorney Earl Clymer, Mayor Lawrence J. Warren MEMORANDUMh j,'-!' 111993 To: Scott Woodbury CITY OF RENTON From: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Engineering Dep�• Date: July 13, 1993 Subject: Revisions to Agreement with Parametrix, Inc. for Wetland Mitigation Bank Plan Project The changes requested by the consultant in Section III of the contract are hereby approved. The page can be retyped or the portions to be eliminated lined through and initialed by both parties. 67 4Law�renceJ. arren LJW:as. cc: Mayor Earl Clymer A8:99:40. Post Office Box 626 - 100 S 2nd Street - Renton, Washington 98057 - (206)255-8678 THIS PAPER CONTAINS 50%RECYCI.FD MATERIAL.10%POST CONSI IUFR THE CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS �� FOURTH FLOOR ', 1, i z ` 200 MILL AVENUE SOUTH I RENTON, WASHINGTON 98055-2189 FAX: 235-2541 µ FAX TRANSMITTAL DATE: 7/ J 2/%3 TO: ANn/i' SA,ros FAX#: 2-57 5Y7y FROM: 5C.00, c-Joloeum PHONE#: Z 7 2 — �sy7 m'T 16 A-•r/CtJ /3AnJlc t°rLq SUBJECT: TG 3f 1\rJ 0A-0 6erv7i2AC-f-. S`65 fr a u 6,,,7 p'a y Q wt 3 /v�lrra 6�C»a/�o„ e� Aflpvp�, car T19� (,��TLA.�O n�>rlvs+Tlor� /f.4,uK /OLAN A 6AiA,,ENrOf 74 H-AS A5ich-q Foyt r/drr- �k9,a.�GES 5JIOW DAJ 7Aif. f=ol.LawiNb PAc�k ��J� TLJk Urvs��rAnlf— w��✓f 7-0 Li^vC OUT T1l,6 S rs�,,.c�S .ONO INIYIAc, T Gd9 G,f , V5 7`y/S a kA t? w ov+•0 W(r OAfL, ^444 'i o I.w,iaL AvF4-r ra 71)6 CbfAnJ641 a/L ov z ti"O ra Number of pages excluding cover sheet: Z ' ,, ;r G/U(,lfjA 19uZ}-S4. A�vlSri 145 Soad ^s PaSSiQ`* . 6. Washington State Department of Transportation, "Manual of Highways Hydraulics," except hydrologic analysis as described in item 14. 7. Washington State Department of Transportation, "Materials Laboratory Outline." 8. Transportation Research Board, "Highway Capacity Manual." 9. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, "Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways." 10. Washington State Department of Transportation, "Construction Manual." 11. Washington State Department of Transportation, "Local Agency Guidelines." 12. Standard drawings prepared by the Agency and furnished to the consultant shall be used as a guide in all cases where they fit design conditions. Renton Design Standards, and Renton Specifications shall be used as they pertain. 13. Metro Transit, design criteria. 14. King County Surface Water Design Manual, Sections 1.2 and 1.3 of Chapter 1, and Chapters 3, 4, and 5. 15. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, "A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets." III ITEMS TO BE FURNISHED TO THE CONSULTANT BY THE AGENCY The City will furnish the Consultant copies of documents which are available to the City that will facilitate the preparation of the plans, studies, specifications, and estimates within the limits of the assigned work. H:fonns/contract/PRJS PECN.DOC/10/91/bh 3 All other records needed for the study must be obtained by the Consultant. The Consultant will coordinate with other available sources to obtain data or records available to those agencies. The Consultant shall be responsible for this and any other data collection. rhP Consultant;rill hold and cave harmless the City for the rrouirdino of erroneous or out-of=date data, records,or infb=atian The C to iusurc they represe-sitle-ld conditions. Should field studies be needed,the Consultant will perform such work. The City will not be obligated to perform any such field studies. 1&1L*GRApy wf S,a-/NTA N -r 7e IV OWNERSHIP OF PRODUCTS AND DOCUMENTS TO BE FURNISHED BY THE CONSULTANT Documents, exhibits or other presentations for the work covered by this Agreement shall be furnished by the Consultant to the City upon completion of the various phases of the work. All such material, including working documents, notes, maps, drawings, photo, photographic negatives, etc. used in the project, shall become and remain the property of the City and may be used by it without restriction. Any use of such documents by the City not directly related to the project pursuant to which the documents were prepared by the Consultant shall be without any liability whatsoever to the Consultant. All written documents and products shall be printed on recycled paper. Use of the chasing-arrow symbol identifying the recycled content of the paper shall be used whenever practicable. All documents will be printed on both sides of the recycled paper, as feasible. V TIME OF BEGINNING AND COMPLETION The work detailed in the Scope of Work will be performed according to Exhibit B, Time Schedule of Completion, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though fully set forth. It is agreed that all the Consultant's services are to be completed and all products shall be delivered by notwithstanding delays due to factors that are beyond the control of the Consultant. The Consultant shall not begin work under the terms of this Agreement until authorized in writing by the City. If, after receiving Notice to Proceed,the Consultant is delayed in the performance of its services by factors that are beyond its control,the Consultant shall notify the City of the delay and shall prepare a revised estimate of the time and cost needed to complete the Project and submit the revision to the City for its approval. Time schedules are subject to mutual agreement for any revision unless specifically described as otherwise herein. Delays attributable to or caused by one of the parties hereto amounting to 30 days or more affecting the completion of the work may be considered a cause for renegotiation or termination of this Agreement by the other party. VI PAYMENT II:fonns/contract/MSPECN.DOC/10/91/bh 4 CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM DATE: July 9, 1993 TO: File FROM: Scott Woodbury (X-5547) SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO LEGAL CONCERNS OF JULY 6, 1993 MEMO FROM LARRY WARREN Larry questioned whether the design criteria in Section II on page 2 provided any guidance on how to handle this task. He supposed that the scope of work resolved any difficulty. In response I concur that the scope of work provides the additional guidance necessary to accomplish the work. The design criteria in Section II also provides guidance in the preparation of the engineering drawing products identified in the scope of work. JUN-25-93 FRI 10:07 PARAPIETRIX FAX NO, 206 889 8808 P. 01 Parametrix Inc. 5808 Lake Washington Blvd N.E. , Kirkland, WA 98033 Phone: 206-822-8880 Fax: 206-889-8808 FAX TRANSMISSION COVER PAGE FAX # 206-889-8880 Number of Pages (not including this page), 14 To: Scott Woodbury From: Tracey McKenzie Receiving FAX Number: 235-2541 Date: 6/25/93 Time: 11:00 Comments: Attached please find the Scope of Work and Schedule revised per the City's comment letter dated 6124193. A hard copy will follow regular mail. If you have any questions please call. ig JUN-25-93 FRI 10: 10 PARAMETRIX FAX N0, 206 889 8808 P. 05 A summary of the issues and solutions identified by coordinating with the resource and regulatory agencies that can be incorporated into the mitigation plan(either as a section or an Appendix) developed in Task 1E. TASK 1C - MITIGATION GOALS AND OBJECTIVES AND POLICY ISSUES Purpose: To develop goals and objectives for the overall mitigation program, The identification of specific goals and objectives of the mitigation sites will be developed as part of Task 1E. To define draft eligibility requirements for use of the mitigation sites. To identify policy issues that require resolution by the City and provide recommendations for solutions to these issues. To meet with resource and regulatory agency representatives. Description: Preliminary goals and objectives have been developed by the City through their wetland's ordinance and their agreement with Glacier Park. These will be reviewed and any additional goals and objectives will be developed for establishing a mitigation program. Based on the City's review of the preliminary list of goals and objectives,Parametrix will prepare a draft and final list suitable for presentation and discussion with the resource and regulatory agencies. Additional mitigation program objectives will be based, in part, on the potential future impacts to wetland functions, and acreage, applicability of replacement ratios (based on City's ordinance), and the type of program (i.e., mitigation banking or off-site mitigation) that could be implemented at the mitigation sites. Eligibility requirements for use of the site will be based on the wetland type and size, functions and values, relative quality of the habitat, required replacement ratios, compliance with sequencing and the City's ordinance, off-site replacement feasibility, and location within the basin's landscape. 7-,, Three policy issues were identified in the May 21, 1993 kick-off meeting with the City. They are as follows: • Availability of mitigation for public projects • Use of the mitigation sites does not necessarily preclude impacts to Category 2 wetlands (as defined by the City's ordinance) June 25, 1993 4 55-1779-07 h:1 users�tracey�renlon,renton.scp J UN_2b_U3 r H l l U: 13 NAKAME'l K 1 X f•AX NU, 2UU 88U 83U8 accommodate, and the extent and type of wetlands that could potentially be impacted within the project area. A site visit will be conducted at the mitigation sites to correlate the literature information on the sites with current field conditions. In addition, representative wetlands (e.g., one Category 1, one Category 2, and two or three Category 3 wetlands) within the watershed project area (with emphasis on wetlands within city limits), that were identified by Jones and Stokes will be visited to verify the wetland's type and character. The site visit with the Corps will be to verify the "adjacency" status of the wetlands within the mitigation areas. On-site hydrology will be evaluated during the site visit. Product: Task 1D will result in an analysis and five draft reports on opportunities and constraints of the site to meet the overall goals and objectives of the mitigation program, requirements for use of the mitigation sites, and recommendations for the type of mitigation program that could best serve the City's near-term and future needs. Five copies of a draft checklist or matrix identifying conditions under which projects needing mitigation could use the mitigation sites will be prepared as part of the analysis. Five copies of any figures, maps, etc showing any additional information collected during the site visits will be provided to the City. This information will be integrated onto the base maps, One set of completed base map drawings and electronic copy shall be submitted to the City. Parametrix will incorporate the comments from the City into the final mitigation plan developed in Task 1E. Meetings: One meeting is included in this task to review the results of the physical conditions and financial assessments, to discuss and finalize the goals and objectives for the project, and to determine the type of mitigation program to be developed, One meeting will be held with resource agencies to present results of this task. Assumptions: Both meetings will be 2 hours with 1 hour of travel time,unless the agency meeting is expected to take 3 hours. June 25, 1993 8 55-1779-07 h. users�tracey�renton+renton.sep EXHIBIT B DRAFT SCHEDULE OF COMPLETION C— CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION PROGRAM , :2-- 1�3 CT7 MAY June July August Se tember October November Dooember I IA Project Management -T7 Kick-off Meeting Notice to Proceed ❑ Ill Regulatory Coordination/Requirements rn IC Goats And Objectives Meet with Agencies WINE ::E> :7C ID Field and Conditions => Mapping Office Amtssrr-wut Field Analysis/Report .......... City Review Meet with City Meet with Agencies IE Mitigation Plan ....................Progranixuatic;PbPlan .. ......... ............. Technical Plan Alternative Site Plan I (entire site) Alwirriative Site Plan 2 CD Alternative Site Plan 3 00 cc �p6 co Meetings with City cc 0C C=) Draft Report Review cc Meet with Agencies Final Report 0 .......... M.Ig/g IF Public Invotvcment NO Legend. 0 = specific dates pcLparation/evtiluatiori/amly,,%is of information to complete subtask designates range of tirne where meetings will be scheduled and held reflects entire length of tirne to complete taA when work actually occur%to complete task review by City Parametrix, Inc. I D 11 T"-� JUN 2,8 1993 To: CITY OF RENTON Mr. Scott all Engineering Dept. 6/25/93 Date: City of Renton Project No: 55-1779-07 200 Mill Ave. S. Renton, WA 98055 _ From: Washington Oregon Hawaii ❑ 5700 Kitsap Way ❑ 1231 Fryar Avenue ❑ 7820 N.E.Holman ❑ 1164 Bishop Street Suite 202 P.O.Box 460 Suite B-6 Suite 1600 Bremerton,WA 98312-2234 Sumner,WA 98390-1516 Portland,OR 97218-2859 Honolulu, HI 96813-2832 206-377-0014 206-863-5128 503-256-5444 808-524-0594 206-383-1835 206-838-9810 206-694-5020 Fax:808-523-2995 Fax:206-479-5961 Fax:206-863-0946 Fax:503-256-4221 a5808 Lake Washington Blvd.N.E. _' 25 N.Wenatchee Avenue Kirkland,WA 98033-7350 Suite 207 206-822-8880 Wenatchee,WA 98801-2236 Fax:206-889-8808 509-664-3290 Fax:509-663-8816 We are transmitting the following materials: _ Revised Scope of Work and schedule. Comments: These are: ❑ Per your Request ❑ For your Information ❑ For your Review and Approval ❑ For your Files ❑ For your Action Sincerel cc: Tracey McKenzie Parametrix, Inc. Consultants in Engineering and Environmental Sciences 5808 Lake Washington Blvd.N.E. Kirkland,WA 98033-7350 206-822-8880•Fax:206-889-8808 0 Mr. Scott Woodbury June 4, 1993 City of Renton 55-1779-07 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 Dear Scott: Enclosed is a draft of Exhibit A - Scope of Work, Exhibit B - Schedule, and Exhibit C - Budget for the City's review and comment. If comments could be provided to me by close of business Monday June 7, 1993 or by mid-day Tuesday June 8, 1993, I can finalize the scope, schedule, and budget in time for inclusion into the packets for the Commission. You will notice that the proposed budget is $5,467.00 over the budget quote of $40,000.00 provided to us during the kick-off meeting. The total estimated budget of $45,467.00 represents what the project team believes to be the level of effort necessary to produce the types of products anticipated by the City. After you have had a chance to review the proposed scope, we should discuss where some time could be reduced on portions of the tasks to reduce overall costs. I recognize that we will revise the budget based on your comments on the draft scope of work. Let me know what you think. Thanks for your input - it helped me to prepare the enclosed draft scope. Please call me at (206) 822-8880 or on the backline number (206) 828-4202 (dial extension 3459) if you have any questions or need additional information. Sincerely, PARAMETRIX, INC. Tracey P. McKenzie Enclosure �0� Printed on Recycled Paper EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF WORK CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Background and Objectives: The City of Renton proposes to develop and implement a wetland mitigation program and plan that will result in no net loss of wetlands. The project boundary includes land primarily within the City of Renton limits (especially the valley) as well as land outside City limits that may be annexed in the future ("sphere of influence"). The City's overall objective is to facilitate development on private lands and allow public projects that may affect lower quality wetlands by establishing large contiguous wetlands on City property along or nearby Springbrook Creek in the Black River drainage basin. Other objectives of the wetland mitigation program are: • to provide 1:1 replacement for 5.33 acres of impacted Category 3 wetlands as per the agreement between the City and Glacier Park. • to reduce severity of flooding by increasing flood water storage capacity • to improve the quality of water entering the Green River • to increase habitat and habitat value for fish and wildlife • to provide passive recreational and educational opportunities Assumptions: The mitigation sites do not pose significant health risks and clearance or verification concerning its status will be available from the City. The mitigation program will be a City action and will not be affected by overlying jurisdictions (e.g., drainage districts, METRO). Approach: Four tasks have been identified to meet the objectives and are described below. TASK IA - PROJECT MANAGEMENT Purpose: Project management is necessary to ensure that all aspects of the project are coordinated and managed to meet the objectives on schedule and within budget. DRAFr 55-1779-07 June 2, 1993 h:\users\tracey\renton\renton.scp 1 Description: This task includes scheduling,budget tracking, invoicing, monthly progress reporting to the City, in-house coordination and coordination with the rest of the project team. Attend 3 meetings as outlined in the City's tentative scope under Task 1, Project Coordination. Products: Progress reports will accompany each invoice and will include a description of activities conducted, progress made, and problems encountered, if any, and their resolution during the reporting period. Meeting minutes (except the first kick-off meeting) will be prepared by Parametrix and submitted to the City. Meetings: Three meetings are included in this task. The first meeting is to finalize the scope, project coordination, and schedule (meeting occurred May 21, 1993). Initial agency coordination with regulatory agencies and review of the overall goals for the mitigation program will occur in the second and third meetings. Assumption: Each meeting will be approximately 4 hours long (including travel) and will be held at the City of Renton office. TASK 1B - CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT AND FIELD Purpose: To review baseline information on the wetland resources, determine how much and what type of mitigation (in terms of acreage and function) is feasible on the mitigation sites, determine how much wetland acreage is potentially eligible to use the mitigation sites. To meet with the US Army Corps of Engineers on-site to determine if the wetlands within the mitigation areas are above the head waters or adjacent. To conduct a site visit to the mitigation sites and to representative categories of wetlands within the watershed project boundary identified by Jones and Stokes. To prepare draft goals and objectives for the overall mitigation program and define draft eligibility requirements for use of the mitigation sites. DRAFr 55-1779-07 June 2, 1993 2 h:\users\tracey\renton\renton.scp To determine regulatory requirements associated with implementing the mitigation program. To identify policy issues that require resolution by the City. Description: Existing information provided by the City will be reviewed and synthesized. The wetland inventory map completed by Jones and Stokes will be used as a base map of the entire project area. The existing electronic copies of the wetlands delineated in the mitigation sites will be integrated onto a base topographic map produced for the mitigation sites. The topographic map for Mitigation Site 1 will consist of 5-foot contours; Mitigation Site 2 will consist of 1-foot contours (available topography per telephone conversation with Scott Woodbury, June 3, 1993). Both contour maps will be digitized onto AutoCAD from the maps provided by the City. Other important features will also be incorporated onto the base map of the mitigation sites. The base maps of the mitigation sites will also be produced at a scale suitable to use to prepare site, grading, and planting plans. Financial information regarding mitigation site development, administration, maintenance, etc. will be assembled. Financial scenarios depicting a range of mitigation programs will be prepared. A site visit will be conducted at the mitigation sites to correlate the information on the sites with current field conditions. In addition, representative wetlands (e.g., one Category 1, one Category 2, and two or three Category 3 wetlands) within the watershed project area (with emphasis on wetlands within city limits) that were identified by Jones and Stokes will be visited to verify the wetland's type and character. The site visit will be coordinated with the Corps to meet on site to verify the "adjacency" status of the wetlands within the mitigation areas. Three policy issues were identified in the May 21, 1993 kick-off meeting with the City. They are as follows: • availability of mitigation for public projects DRAFT 55-1779-07 June 2, 1993 3 h:\users\tracey\renton\renton.scp • use of the mitigation sites does not necessarily preclude impacts to Category 2 wetlands (as defined by the City's ordinance) • City oversight of the mitigation program versus joint City, State, and Federal oversight Other policy issues will be identified during Task 1B and will be presented to the City. Product: Task 1B will result in an analyses and 5 draft reports on opportunities and constraints of the site to meet the overall goals and objectives of the mitigation program and the requirements for use of the mitigation sites. Five copies of a draft checklist or matrix identifying conditions under which projects needing mitigation could use the mitigation sites will be prepared as part of the analysis. Five copies of any figures, maps, etc showing any additional information collected during the site visits will be integrated on to the base maps. Five draft technical memorandums outlining the goals and objectives will be prepared and submitted to the City for review. Separate technical memorandums will be prepared outlining the policy issues. Parametrix will incorporate the comments from the City into the draft and final mitigation plan. Meetings: Two meetings are included in this task. The first is to review the results of the physical conditions and financial assessments and to determine the type of mitigation program to be developed. The second meeting is to discuss and finalize the goals and objectives for the project. Assumptions: Each meeting will be 4 to 5 hours including travel and will be held at the City of Renton office. DRAFT 55-1779-07 June 2, 1993 4 h:\users\tracey\renton\renton.sT The wetlands inventoried by Jones and Stokes as well as the other written information regarding delineated wetlands by David Evans and watershed plans, etc. are basically complete and thorough and suitable to use to develop the mitigation program. The Corps will be able to visit the site concurrent with the project teams scheduled site assessment and the Corps will make a determination on the status of the wetlands within the mitigation sites relatively quickly. The City will be able to review the draft products and provide comments to the project team within two weeks from the time the information is submitted. A draft "gross" capacity analysis for future industrial, commercial, and residential development will not be available for 2 to 4 weeks (personal communication Scott Woodbury, June 3, 1993). The project team will use the draft when it becomes available to evaluate existing and proposed land use. If the capacity analysis is completed by August, 1993, the project team will be able to include the final and more detailed information into the final mitigation plan. TASK 1C: MITIGATION PLAN PREPARATION AND REPORTING Purpose: To prepare a programmatic and technical mitigation plan. To prepare an overall site plan for the mitigation areas (Alternative 1) and two alternative scenarios (Alternatives 2 and 3) to show a range of implementation costs. To prepare a detailed grading and planting plan for the 5.33 acres of impacted wetlands of immediate concern. To prepare conceptual grading and planting plans for the Alternatives 1 and 2. DRAFT 55-1779-07 June 2, 1993 5 h:\users\tracey\renton\renton.sq Description: The mitigation plan will at a minimum include the following elements: the program goals and objectives, mitigation program requirements, results of Task 113, monitoring (construction and implementation), maintenance, contingencies, and operating costs. Three alternative site plans will be prepared ranging from a conceptual overall plan to a detailed plan for the 5.33 acres of immediate concern. An overall conceptual grading and planting plan will be prepared for both mitigation sites (Alternative 1) (assumes full mitigation development). The overall site plan will also include opportunities for access trails and interpretive signs/centers. Alternative 2 will consist of a site plan showing a detailed conceptual grading and planting plan for mitigation development between 5.5 acres and 19.35 acres (amount of upland habitat available on the mitigation sites) and how the phasing of mitigation efforts could occur. Alternative 3 will consist of a detailed grading and planting plan for the 5.33 acres of impacted wetlands of immediate concern. Products: Five copies of the draft mitigation plan complete with figures, tables, and text will be prepared for City review. Parametrix will respond to one round of review comments and prepare a final document. One bound (with associated drawings) and one reproducible (electronic) copy of the final mitigation plan. Meetings: Three meetings are included in this task. The City's tentative scope indicates that the purpose of the meetings will be to discuss the mitigation program protocol, project level goals, site plans, and phasing of mitigation. We propose that the status of the overall project be included as a topic of the meetings. In addition, we propose to hold the first meeting when the project is about 30 percent complete, the second when the project is about 80 percent complete, and the third meeting when the project is about 90 percent complete (see Exhibit B). We propose to include the agencies in the third meeting. Assumptions: The City will be able to review the draft products and provide comments to the project team within two weeks from the time the information is submitted. DRAFr 55-1779-07 June 2, 1993 6 h:\users\tracey\renton\renton.sT L� The three meetings will be 4 to 5 hours (including travel) and will be held at the City of Renton office. The additional proposed meeting (see Option below) with the regulatory agencies will be 4 to 5 hours (including travel) and will be held at the City of Renton office. Option: Based on the City's tentative scope and our approach outlined in our proposal there is no opportunity for agency input during development of the mitigation plan. We have included one additional meeting in the schedule (see Exhibit B) and proposed budget to meet with the agencies and seek their input when the mitigation plan is about 40 or 50 percent complete. Limitations: The topographic map for Mitigation Site 1 with 5-foot contour intervals will preclude development of a detailed grading plan. OPTION TASK 11): PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Purpose: To develop public consensus on the mitigation program. Description: A public workshop should be held to inform the public about the mitigation program and to seek their input. Several media are available to inform and seek input from the public (i.e., public meetings, a public workshop, surveys). Based on our discussion with City of Renton employees working on this project, there was general agreement that one public workshop would be appropriate. Assumptions: Some form of public participation will occur during the project. The City will take the lead in deciding on the type and extent of public involvement that is necessary. The City will take the lead in scheduling and planning for public participation. DRA ]r 55-1779-07 June 2, 1993 7 h:\users\tracey\renton\renton.scp c► At least one public participation meeting/workshop will be held. The City would require that a key member of the Parametrix project team be present at the meeting. The public participation meeting/workshop would be 6 to 8 hours including travel. The meeting/workshop results in one more meeting than identified in the tentative scope of work prepared by the City and our proposal. The total estimated budget includes time for one public meeting/workshop. Material suitable for presentation would result in increased expenses. DRAT r 55-1779-07 June 2, 1993 g h:\users\tracey\renton\renton.scp EXHIBIT B SCHEDULE OF COMPLETION CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION PROGRAM July August September October November December Notice to Proceed 1B Field and Conditions Mapping ................................ ................................ Office Assessment Field ................................. ................................ Analysis/Report City Review Meeting Goals and Objectives Meeting 1C Mitigation Plan --- --- --- Programmatic Plan ..................../././././././......./....-.......:..%../:././././:././.%.:././././.././././../././././/.. ...............:.............. . .. :::.. : ...: ...../... .. .. . /... . . ././. /.. :. //././././././. /. --- --- - Technical Plan .:.::::::::. Alternative Site Plan 1 (entire site) `' ".. Alternative Site Plan 2 --- --- --- --- --- :... Alternative Site Plan --- --- :<:>' --- --- --- --- ---- Meetings M 30% mom80% Draft Report Review Meet with City 90% Meet with Agencies* Final Report 1D Public Involvement/ * This meeting is outside scope of work(see Exhibit A,Task 1 C for explanation) Exhibit C Cost Estimate City of Renton Wetland Mitigation Program PMX Overhead PMX Fee Direct PMX TAIL Direct Subcontractor Handling Subcontractor Project Labor 169% Subtotal 12.50% Costs Total Labor Costs Subtotal Fee Total Total Task 1 A-Project Management $1,119 $1,891 $3,010 $376 $34 $3,420 $2,288 $100 $2,388 $239 $2,627 $6,047 Task 1B-Condition Assessment $3,939 $6,657 $10,596 $1,325 $154 $12,075 $3,395 $195 $3,590 $359 $3,949 $16,024 and Feld Task 1C-Reporting and Mitigation Plan $5,018 $8,480 $13,498 $1,688 $34 $15,220 $6,350 $500 $6,850 $685 $7,535 $22,755 Task 1 D-Public Involvement(OPTION) $208 $352 $560 $70 $11 $641 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $641 Project Total $45,467 CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator June 4, 1993 Tracy P. McKenzie Parametrix, Inc. 5808 Lake Washington Blvd. NE Kirkland, WA 98033 SUBJECT: CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Dear Ms. McKenzie: This letter and enclosures are provided for your use. Please find enclosed the following: General project information • Application for City of Renton Business License. Jan 1988. (It is a new requirement for consultants to be licensed. Please apply as soon as possible.) Information common to both Parcel 14 and Parcel 8 (Mitigation bank sites 1 and 2) • Timeline Regarding the Glacier Park Property and the East Side Green River Valley Watershed. No date. • Letter from Corps to the city dated May 22, 1992 concerning the mitigation bank and issuance of separate Nationwide Permits to the donor sites. • Existing Conditions and Mitigation Bank Conceptual Plan. Feb 21, 1992. This information is referred to in the above Corps letter. • Pictorial history of valley land use, wetlands, and fill areas. 10 sheets. • Agreement per AF# 9206241804 • Agreement per AF#9206241805 • Restrictions per AF# 9206241806 • FEMA FIRM #53033C0328D. Sept 29, 1989. • Fill Plans for the Orilla Industrial District. 1975. 10 sheets. • Environmental Assessment Review by Golder Assoc. May 4, 1992. Information regarding Parcel 14 (Mitigation bank site 1) • Title report- Policy No 0860805A. June 24, 1992. • Excepted portion per Auditor's File No (AF#) 8911170955 • Easement per AF# 8405180708 • Easement per AF# 8408070543 • Boundary Survey by Bush, Roed & Hitchings. Jan 16, 1991. • Wetland Survey by Bush, Roed & Hitchings. Oct 14, 1991. • Level II Environmental Assessment by Golder Assoc. June 12, 1992. (See pg 4 for discussion of Parcel 14) • Preliminary Environmental Assessment by Hart Crowser. Oct 11, 1991. Information regarding Parcel 8 - Lot 1 of Lot Line Adjustment 92-090 (Mitigation bank site 2) • Title report- Policy No 0860804A. June 24, 1992. • Recorded plat Burlington Northern Industrial Park Renton II per AF# 7907240890 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 Tracey P. McKenzie Page 2 Parametrix, Inc City of Renton Wetland Mitigation Bank • Release of easements per AF# 8909110687 • Conveyance deed per AF# 8306090701 and correction per AF# 8308050568 • Conveyance deed per AF# 9206171306 • Easement per AF# 8112020484 • Easement per AF# 8202080435 • Easement per AF# 8306240522 • Agreement per AF# 9206119003 • ALTA/ACSM survey by Bush, Roed & Hitchings. Dec 18, 1990. • Wetland Survey by Bush, Roed & Hitchings. Oct 14, 1991. • Preliminary Environmental Assessment by Kennedy/Jenks/Chilton. Dec 29, 1989. • Preliminary Surface Water and Sediment Quality Assessment Springbrook Creek by Hart Crowser. Oct 21, 1991 If you have any questions or want to discuss the project and contract, please call Scott Woodbury at (206)277-5547. Sincerely,6 Scott Woodbury, Pr ect Manager Surface Water Utility cc: Ronald J.Straka enclosures CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM OF MEETING DATE: May 26, 1993 MEETING DATE: May 21 , 1993 LOCATION: City of Renton Municipal Building PRESENT: Representing Parametrix (P): Tracey McKenzie Kittie Ford Representing Talasaea Consultants (TC): William Shiels Representing City of Renton (COR): Scott Woodbury Ron Straka Mary Lynne Myer David Saxen SUBJECT: WETLAND MITIGATION BANK PROJECT This purpose of this memo is to document that the above meeting was held and what is the immediate plan of action. The draft scope, budget, and schedule to be submitted by P/TC will more fully disclose what was discussed. OVERVIEW OF PROJECT COR and P/TC discussed the history and current status of the project. DEVELOP SCOPE OF WORK The majority of the meeting focused on identification of the critical issues, milestones, goals, and objectives to be included in the scope of work and discussion of a plan of action to address these concerns. DEVELOP PRELIMINARY SCHEDULE AND BUDGET The COR 1993 budget appropriation for the project is $40,000 and will be reflected in the P/TC draft budget. Construction is planned for 1994. May 21 , 1993 Meeting WETLAND MITIGATION BANK PROJECT Page 2 CONCLUSION AND PLAN OF ACTION The COR will continue to provide background and other supplement information for P/TC, the most important item being a copy of the Corps approval to consider the donor sites as individually regulated parcels. It was agreed that P/TC will submit a draft scope, schedule, and budget by June 7, 1993 for approval of the city design team and subsequent presentation to the city council for approval. Approval of the full council, authorizing the mayor to execute the project consultant contract, is scheduled for June 28, 1993. The next council approval date would not be until July 12, 1993. To achieve the June 28 approval, initial submittal to the council through the city agenda bill process must be made no later than June 10, 1993. The City of Renton looks forward to working with the Parametrix team on the Wetland Mitigation Bank project. We appreciate your participation in this project. If you have any questions or if there are any corrections or additional items which you would like included please contact me at 206-277-5547. Sincerely, Scott Woodbury,tPrect Manager Surface Water Utility C:DOCS:93-506:SSW:ps CC: All present Gregg Zimmerman 41 R CITY OF RENTON "LL Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator May 21, 1993 Tracy P. McKenzie Parametrix, Inc. 5808 Lake Washington Blvd. NE Kirkland, WA 98033 SUBJECT: CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Dear Ms. McKenzie: This letter and enclosures are provided in response to your request for information in .your May 18, 1993 letter. For each item in the May 18, 1993 letter, please find the following: Item 1. Wet/and delineation reports of mitigation sites by David Evans & Associates The following reports are enclosed: • Renton #2 Parcel. Nov 16, 1991 • Renton #5 Parcel. Nov 12, 1991 • Renton #6 Parcel. Nov 12, 1991 • Renton #8E Parcel. Nov 12, 1991 • Renton #8W Parcel. Nov 16, 1991 • Renton #9 Parcel. Nov 12, 1991 • Renton #14 Parcel. Dec 3, 1991 Also provided are the following supplement letters by Lance Mueller & Associates to the David Evans & Associates wetland delineation reports: • Regarding Renton #2 Parcel. Nov 20, 1991 • Regarding Renton #5 Parcel. Nov 19, 1991 • Regarding Renton #6 Parcel. Nov 21, 1991 • Regarding Renton #BE Parcel. Nov 26, 1991 • Regarding Renton #8W Parcel. Nov 26, 1991 • Regarding Renton #9 Parcel. Nov 26, 1991 • Regarding Renton #14 Parcel - to be provided Item 2. City of Renton Black River Water Quality Managment Wetland Inventory Report by Jones and Stokes Associates • Appendix F of the enclosed Black River Water Quality Management Plan, Volume 3. May 1993. 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 THIN PA VFR(Y)NTAINC�RF('V(i PT)AAA-TAT 1/1M Pn'ZT CO( XI IA,IFQ Tracy P. McKenzie Parametrix, Inc. City of Renton Wetland Mitigation Bank Item 3. City of Renton Wetlands Study • City of Renton Wetlands Study. February 1981 . Item 4. Level 1 Hazardous Substance Assessment Report. • Level 1 Hazardous Substance Assessment Report. date? Item 5. Electronic version etc. Bob McOnie of the city Technical Services Department will compile the electronic information requested within the next two weeks. He will contact Alf Shepard of your office to determine how the information is to be transferred. Bob McOnie will document on what the city GIS topography and other information is based. Any hard copy plots of the GIS wetland inventory or topography can be made by Parametrix staff. Also enclosed are two copies of the following topography maps: • Section 25-23-4 at 1 "=200' created from an 1962 aerial survey which includes the mitigation sites, Renton Parcels 8W and 14. • INCA Engineers Preliminary Planning Map for HNTB. Dec 11, 1992. • Sheets 6, 7, 10, 11 of Green River Topographic Maps from April 16, 1980 aerial survey Item 6. Aerial photographs of the drainage basin. Aerial photographs from a number of different years are available at the city Planning Department. You are welcome to review the file and check out what you need for the project. Item 7. Any studies on the drainage basin. • Critical Areas Inventory. June 1991 . • Black River Water Quality Management Plan Volumes 1, 2, and 3. May 1993. • East Side Green River Watershed Management Plan • Current Conditions Document. Oct 1991 . • Project Summary Document. Dec 1991 . • Hydrologic Analysis. Dec 1991. • Hydraulic Analysis Report. March 1992. Item 8. Any information of wildlife within the drainage basin. • Appendix H of the enclosed Black River Water Quality Management Plan, Volume 3. May 1993. • Critical Areas Inventory. June 1991. • Other GIS information to be provided by Bob McOnie. Tracy P. McKenzie Parametrix, Inc. City of Renton Wetland Mitigation Bank Item 9. Any information from the Parks Department etc. • Trails Master Plan. Sept 1990. • Comprehensive Park Recreation and Open Space Plan. June 1 , 1992. • FEIS. Comprehensive Park Recreation and Open Space Plan. Feb 21 , 1992. If you have any questions or want to discuss the project and contract, please call me at (206) 277-5547. Siinncerely,I l o�c.o=- W Scott Woodbury, P ject Manager Surface Water Utility C:DOCS:93-495:SSW:ps CC: Ronald J. Straka Mary Lynne Myer Enclosures THE CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS � D�.« s FOURTH FLOOR " X"1 200 MILL AVENUE SOUTH I .: RENTON, WASHINGTON 98055-2189 FAX: 235-2541 I : I FAX TRANSMITTAL DATE: 21 , �-2 3 TO: /- W4177l1 PUeT-A13 E FAX#: FROM: SC,,,g "0@0 6VgAM PHONE#: SUBJECT: CITY Number of pages excluding cover sheet: 1/G inns/mist/IA XCU V lil(.I)OC/hh CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM DATE: May 19, 1993 TO: Bob McOnie FROM: Scott Woodbury ' 5-W SUBJECT: WETLAND MITIGATION BANK WORK ORDER NO. 65119 Please compile the information listed on items 5 and 8 of the attached list, per the project consultant's (Parametrix) request, over the Black River Basin area shown on the attached map's highlighted area. Contact Alf Shepard of Parametrix at 206-822-8880 to discuss format and media. Also document on a transmittal form what you are sending, what the information is based on, and any other relevant background information. Let me know when you are finished and I will relay the information to Parametrix. Please let me know if you have any questions. I appreciate your help. Thanks. . a LIST OF DOCUMENTS AND OTHER ITEMS REQUESTED BY PARAMETRIX 1. Wetland delineation reports of mitigation sites by David Evans & Associates 2. City of Renton Black River Water Quality Management Plan Wetland Inventory Report by Jones and Stokes 3. City of Renton Wetlands Study 4. Level 1 - Hazardous Substance Assessment Report 0 Electronic version of wetlands inventory, topography, land use, zoning, lot lines, streets, and utilities. of ra ,area 2 6. Aerial photographs of the drainage basin (on loan for duration of project) 7. Any studies on the drainage basin 08. Any information on wildlife within the drainage basin 9. Any information from the Parks Department that would be useful in preparing the master plan and alternatives, and educational and interpretive opportunities • � N RE TON � PP �na�Pas South Renton Subbasin !— Pumping4 Station k Basin/Study Area Boundary Rolling \, _ sw 16,n si Hills Drain -------------------- \•, Rolling Hills Subbasin 1 o�t )j P-9 Charm t ,m U m 181 Panther Creek Valley Subbasin Wellandi sw san si l SW 43m si Panther Creek Subbasin c� -,\ 6 167 ¢ 1m S.192nd SI. LEGEND -- Stream/Drainage Channel Springbrook T z Springs .-------------- Storm Drain Pipe ¢ d $ 1 Subbasin Subbasin Boundary o ` 0 1000 2000 3000 ,\ SCALE IN FEET 1 ;1`.. Black River Basin Water Quality Management Plan Figure 2. Subbasin boundaries 6 _TAI. f9.._...... _ ... ....... _. ._ _ _T _ ._._. ►�� , PAh _ _ .._ k1. �.__._ �! D� _.� A �IL-�x_._._..._ _ _._.__._.__..__._.._..___._._.___.___._ _.... AA _ ..... ..._....._ ___..._.._...___._ _..___._.___.. .._._._. ._..._.___._.__.___...___-.____...__._._._.__.._.--- ..._..._.._.. -_......_ L.�J�.lt-MIL_.._._ .(rA Gov✓» _ ._— lam.._.. r�!?�lz ._.!�" _._._._.__ ..-_..._._ _._. _ __ - a: . .__._ _._. ? ?C•��_ .R ._.._. '4n�F. _'�1. _...._.... _.CeNp .,N A?I1 ._.._._ lU1w- _ r � _._.......... .___._._.___.._.._.._..__.._.._-..__....___.__.____ �E _._-.__r�I�±w��-ra L fi 4x VA; fl __.._.._.._.. S�pt..... _ ..._.... ___.._ P/44 CSC S ........ T,�sr Z Ca^idl7/�wS �ss6ss�� f��.✓�r Uu �NF r�r rlu� 15/�WO 0 13 cK/�✓U L ,LC, /'vfrto SUS/L�d S/ s r ce�✓T/�erg- ��, <� 61(" l arrl ,�, �s ,��,," PT lCAZ /U&f, ®� /-/0 (.ua��2 CJ�nvrfq � 3y �o� . o /.try GUU� VFhB/d-L S� PP�n�. &Wk �T t A.Ftre -,)o /. ti✓.� ��, v ask r<fk OF L-AOD USA L o D}C y CA{'ACIT-t {�06�M r/�L /k•�x� C.G1 rtlb I t/G G u��y b y �G7 L A nro O Mo/N 4,-zC 6vA-C Na n,ET L,ss Pp 4 L��.4 Corte r-/c s' 74 P/s MILis""E . �UQ G 12r,up, �i1UrV TO PUC.JC� w rr 11) C��FiS C rf �SrvH/a N G��, L _ _._....._.._ ____..._ ___..._ _ ..._.._ _ ._ .... ....._........ ........ _........ .... ...._...._ _ ..........._.... _.__..._.. 64�✓rJL y._ _SCuPE_ _ Ord ..__...PGL/.... ►...._.. �_.1 - _.._ ._._._2.. __ __ '_ _._ _._ cs►� .___._ _.__.__._. . ._...__ _ __._._.__..._... _ _ _... _ _ oN GUr �f� Oe S/6N1^.j6 _.._..r'4tv {3c u�. swE__._.... rimE..__._1Ley►..�.�.._..._ ..../_1�11-iG ----------- ........ y t( ti ii fi (I Ij Ij _._._.._..._..._.._._. .._.._..._..._._.._.._. �i l j( Is L ...... fj Parametrix, Inc. Consultants in Engineering and Environmental Sciences 5808 Lake Washington Blvd. N.E. Kirkland,WA 9803EX 206-822 8880 Fax:206 889 8808 `Y/( MAY 1 9 1993 Mr. Scott Woodbury CITY OF RENTON May 18, 1993 City of Renton Engineering Dept. 55-1779-07 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 Dear Scott: Enclosed is an agenda for our meeting May 21, 1993 at 2:30 pm for your use. I am enclosing several copies for you to distribute to other meeting participants. Also enclosed is a preliminary list of background documents and other items we would like the City to provide. We do not have a Bernoulli box to accommodate 5-inch square computer discs. With respect to the electronic versions of the wetlands inventory, topography, land use, zoning, lot lines, streets, and utilities, I recommend that our GIS specialist, Alf Shepard, talk with Bob McKoney, City of Renton, or another GIS specialist at the City to determine the most appropriate format and media for the electronic version. You should have received a certificate of insurance from our insurance company. Please notify me if you have not yet received it. I will bring the contract and a revised Exhibit D, Cost Plus Net Fee Determination for your review. Basically, it is an update of the information that Vicki Sironen provided to the City for a different contract. I will be out of the office from Wednesday May 19 through the morning of Friday May 21. Please call Kittie Ford if you have any questions or need additional information before our 2:30 pm meeting May 21, 1993. Sincerely, PARAMETRIX, INC. tom P MN . Tracey P. McKenzie cc: Kittie Ford Bill Shields �0� Printed on Recycled Paper CITY OF RENTON - WETLAND MITIGATION BANK AGENDA Date: Friday May 21, 1993 Time: 2:30 pm Location: City of Renton offices 1. Overview of Project • Historical background • Current status 2. Develop Scope of Work This agenda item will probably consume the bulk of our time. To prepare a detailed scope of work we will: • discuss our scope as presented in Parametrix's proposal and the City's tentative scope • discuss the City's ultimate goals, immediate needs, timing, and budget • identify tasks necessary to meet the goals and objectives of the City • describe the activities necessary to complete the tasks and identify the ramifications to project costs and schedule • identify cost saving options • reach consensus on tasks and activities necessary to complete tasks • identify task phasing options and the ramifications to project costs and schedule 3. Develop Preliminary Schedule and Budget • review budget and select phasing according to available funding • identify task start-up and completion dates, critical paths, non-critical items, and milestones, according to selected phasing 4. Conclusions and plan of action LIST OF DOCUMENTS AND OTHER ITEMS REQUESTED BY PARAMETRIX 1. Wetland delineation reports of mitigation sites by David Evans & Associates 2. City of Renton Black River Water Quality Management Plan Wetland Inventory Report by Jones and Stokes 3. City of Renton Wetlands Study 4. Level 1 - Hazardous Substance Assessment Report 5. Electronic version of wetlands inventory, topography, land use, zoning, lot lines, streets, and utilities. We would also like two hard copies of the wetland inventory at a scale of 1 inch = 100 feet and two hard copies of the topography maps of the drainage basin area at the same scale, if possible. 6. Aerial photographs of the drainage basin (on loan for duration of project) 7. Any studies on the drainage basin 8. Any information on wildlife within the drainage basin 9. Any information from the Parks Department that would be useful in preparing the master plan and alternatives, and educational and interpretive opportunities �s THE CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF1<' g' q y ' PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS £, FOURTH FLOOR 200 MILL AVENUE SOUTH RENTON, WASHINGTON 98055-2189 FAX: 235-2541 ' FAX TRANSMITTAL DATE: 5-17 -93 TO: TMOjI `y%�,k dz iE FAX#: -Z o6- rib 08 FROM: SC.og- Lj000Buj�j PHONE#: SUBJECT: Ca^nsF.N?S M Fl4,,h /hAV 2J 14g3 I'hF' mj& .A&6,,va4 PLI(ASF C- a f- ,F Vol) PAve Awl Q U6- rloN s. 71jA'jICS_ Number of pages excluding cover sheet: 11/1orm./mist/M XCO V IiR.I)OC/hh A Mr. Scott Woodbury City of Renton May 14, 1993 Page 2 CITY OF RENTON • WETLAND MITIGATION BANK AGENDA Date: Friday May 21, 1993 Time: 2:30 pm Location: City of Renton offices 1. Overview of Project h)ST6P(Ak- ggCICG/Z�� f I r,,IF� sTArus 2. Develop Scope of Work This agenda item will probably consume the bulk of our time. To prepare a detailed scope of work we will; 4 fora- ox • discuss our scope as presented in-the proposal a.J • discuss the City's ultimate goals, immediate needs, anff timing/ e,4 Jajef • identify tasks necessary to meet the goals and objectives of the City • describe the activities necessary to complete the tasks and identify the ramifications •-to project costs and schedule • identify cost saving options • reach consensus on tasks and activities necessary to complete tasks I / • laic„�,1'7 -k,, �DhHfi,, ��f)1t .S , 1 f At 17AM1 fi cw4`1en f f> CifaJect CuSf' 41 1 $Ghefa�e 3, Develop Preliminary Schedule rid 194W l- I e rr-V)cw Sp leM, fi�Ar,n9 Acicor)ie/ �o aVA114bi� • identify tas start-up and completion dates, critical paths, non-critical items, and milestones, 4n ralea*&-d /°Af"4 4, o Gow CLLS/GIU /ALA�J of ^Cir1uN. NAY-1;, 93 FR I 15:56 PARAPIETR I X FAX N0, 206 889 8808 P, 01/04 16 Parametrix, Inc. 5808 Lake Washington Blvd_ N.E. Kirkland, WA 98033 206-822-8880 FAX TRANSMISSION COVER PAGE FAX # 206-889-8808 Number of Pages (not including this page) 3 To: Sc.ci4 oa-a From: TrAM4 7 Receiving FAX Number: 2_35 0SH 7 Date: S' 11 23 Time: 4,4S Comments: � ran -L L or armed qzyGI C3,2- MAY-14-93 FRI 15:57 PARAMETRIX FAX N0, 206 889 8808 P, 02/04 Mr. Scott Woodbury May 14, 1993 City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 Dear Scott: Enclosed is a draft agenda for our meeting May 21, 1993 at 2:30 pm for your review and comments. Please send me your comments via facsimile as soon as possible and I will prepare a final agenda and send copies to you. Also enclosed is a preliminary list of background documents and other items we would like the City to provide, You should have received or will be receiving a certificate of insurance from our insurance company. I am meeting with Jon Boyce of our office to coordinate on the information that Vicki Sironen submitted as part of another contract. I will bring the contract and a revised Exhibit A to our meeting, Please give me a call at (206) 822-8880 if you have any questions or need additional information. Sincerely, PARAMETRIK, INC. Tracey P. McKenzie cc: Kittie Ford Bill Shields MAY-11 93 FRI 15:57 PARAMETRIX FAX N0, 206 889 8808 P, 03/04 Mr. Scott Woodbury City of Renton May 14, 1993 Page 2 CITY OF RENTON - WETLAND MITIGATION BANK AGENDA Date: Friday May 21, 1993 Time: 2:30 pm Location: City of Renton offices 1. Overview of Project 2. Develop Scope of Work This agenda item will probably consume the bulk of our time. To prepare a detailed scope of work we will; • discuss our scope as presented in the proposal • discuss the City's ultimate goals, immediate needs, and timing • identify tasks necessary to meet the goals and objectives of the City • describe the activities necessary to complete the tasks and identify the ramifications to project costs and schedule • identify cost saving options • reach consensus on tasks and activities necessary to complete tasks 3. Develop Preliminary Schedule • identify task start-up and completion dates, critical paths, non-critical items, and milestones. 4, Review of Budget MAY-14 93 FRI 15:58 PARAMETRIX FAX NO, 206 889 8808 P, 04/04 Mr, Scott Woodbury City of Renton May 14, 1993 Page 3 LIST OF DOCUMENTS AND OTHER ITEMS REQUESTED BY PARAMETRIX 1. Wetland delineation reports of mitigation sites by David Evans & Associates 2. City of Renton Black River Water Quality Management Plan Wetland Inventory Report by Jones and Stokes 3. City of Renton Wetlands Study 4. Level 1 - Hazardous Substance Assessment Report 5. Electronic version of wetlands inventory, topography, land use, zoning, lot lines, streets, and utilities. We would like the files saved in a transfer format for Arc-Info. 6. Aerial photographs of the drainage basin (on loan for duration of project) 7. Any studies on the drainage basin 8. Any information on wildlife within the drainage basin 9. Any information from the Parks Department that would be useful in preparing the master plan and alternatives, and educational and interpretive opportunities CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator May 7, 1993 Eric D. Metz W&H Pacific, Inc. 3025 - 1 12th Avenue NE Bellevue, WA 98009-9304 SUBJECT: CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Dear Mr. Metz I want to thank you and your team for your fine presentation to our interview panel on May 3, 1993, regarding the above-mentioned project. We appreciate the significant effort invested in the presentation and your demonstrated interest in the project. While your team presentation exhibited many of the qualities needed for the project, we have, however, selected another consultant. I do hope that you will consider other consulting opportunities with the City of Renton. If you have any questions, please contact David Saxon at (206) 277-2475. Sincerely, Ronald J. Stra a, P.E. Engineering Supervisor Surface Water Utility H/STORM/WETLNRJS/SSW cc: David Saxon Scott Woodbury 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 THIS PAPER CONTAINS 50%RECYCLFD MATERIAL.I W%POSTCONSUMER r CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator May 7, 1993 Dean L. Ritchhart, Managing Principal Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc. 2820 Northrup Way, Suite 100 Bellevue, WA 98004-1419 SUBJECT: CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Dear Mr. Ritchhart: I want to thank you and your team for your fine presentation to our interview panel on May 3, 1993, regarding the above-mentioned project. We appreciate the significant effort invested in the presentation and your demonstrated interest in the project. While your team presentation exhibited many of the qualities needed for the project, we have, however, selected another consultant. I do hope that you will consider other consulting opportunities with the City of Renton. If you have any questions, please contact David Saxon at (206) 277-2475. Sincerely, Ronald J. Straka, P.E. Engineering Supervisor Surface Water Utility H/STORM/WETLNRJ4/SSW cc: David Saxon Scott Woodbury 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 THIS PAPER CONTAINS 50%RECYCLED MATERIAL,10%POST CONSUMER CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator May 7, 1993 Ronald D. Kranz, Vice President David Evans & Associates, Inc. 415 - 1 18th Avenue SE Bellevue, WA 98005-3553 SUBJECT: CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Dear Mr. Kranz: I want to thank you and your team for your fine presentation to our interview panel on May 3, 1993, regarding the above-mentioned project. We appreciate the significant effort invested in the presentation and your demonstrated interest in the project. While your team presentation exhibited many of the qualities needed for the project, we have, however, selected another consultant. I do hope that you will consider other consulting opportunities with the City of Renton. If you have any questions, please contact David Saxon at (206) 277-2475. Sincerely, /I,V P 4 ka�— Ronald J. Straka, P.E. Engineering Supervisor Surface Water Utility H/STORM/WETLNRJ3/SS W cc: David Saxon Scott Woodbury 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 THIS PAPER CONTAINS 5W,RECYCLED MATERIAL.I POSTCONSUMER f CITY OF RENTON .� Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator May 7, 1993 Jay Brueggeman, Manager Environmental Services Ebasco Environmental 10900 NE 8th Street Bellevue, WA 98004-4405 SUBJECT: CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Dear Mr. Brueggeman I want to thank you and your team for your fine presentation to our interview panel on May 3, 1993, regarding the above-mentioned project. We appreciate the significant effort invested in the presentation and your demonstrated interest in the project. While your team presentation exhibited many of the qualities needed for the project, we have, however, selected another consultant. I do hope that you will consider other consulting opportunities with the City of Renton. If you have any questions, please contact David Saxon at (206) 277-2475. Sincerely, A'A' Ronald J. Straka, P.E. Engineering Supervisor Surface Water Utility H/STORM/W ETLNRJ2/SS W cc: David Saxon Scott Woodbury 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 THIS PAPER CONTAINS 50%RECYCLED MATERIAL,M POST CONSUMER 410 CITY OF RENTON R.� Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator May 7, 1993 Marc E. Boul'e, Senior Vice President Shapiro & Associates, Inc. 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 1700 Seattle, WA 98101-3000 SUBJECT: CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Dear Mr. Boul'e: I want to thank you and your team for your fine presentation to our interview panel on May 3, 1993, regarding the above-mentioned project. We appreciate the significant effort invested in the presentation and your demonstrated interest in the project. While your team presentation exhibited many of the qualities needed for the project, we have, however, selected another consultant. I do hope that you will consider other consulting opportunities with the City of Renton. If you have any questions, please contact David Saxon at (206) 277-2475. Sincerely, �WY�L Ronald J.Straka, P.E. Engineering Supervisor Surface Water Utility H/STORM/WETLNRJ/SSW cc: David Saxon Scott Woodbury 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 THIS PAPER CONTAINS 50%RECYCLED MATERIAL,10%POST CONSUMER CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM DATE: May 7, 1993 TO: Gregg Zimmerman FROM: Ron Straka STAFF CONTACT: Scott Woodbury SUBJECT: CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK SUMMARY: The purpose of this memorandum is to inform you of the section of Parametrix, Inc for the above- mentioned project and to describe the selection process used. THE SELECTION PROCESS: Twelve consultants submitted written Statements of Qualifications (SOQ) in response to our Request for Proposal published in the Valley Daily News on March 22, 1993 and March 29, 1993. The consultant's SOQ's were ranked using the total sum of the weighted criteria shown on the attached project specific tabulation spreadsheets. The six consultants with the highest scores were selected for an interview. The consultants interviews were conducted on May 3, 1993. Each selection team member ranked each consultant based upon the total sum of the weighted criteria shown on the attached project specific tabulation spreadsheets. The ranking assigned each consulant by the selection team members were then summed to compute an average rank. The consultant with the lowest average rank, Parametrix Inc, was selected for the project. j City of Renton Wetland Mitigation Bank Consultant Interview Evaluation PRIME CONSULTANTS: Parametr;x Shapiro Ebasco 'David Jones & W & H Evans Stokes Pacific Individual Ranks Score Sheet #1 2 5 1 3 4 6 Score Sheet #2 1 5 3 4 6 1 Score Sheet #3'' 1 3 6 2 3 5 Score Sheet #4, 4 2 3 1 6 5 Score Sheet.#5 1 5 3 4 6 2 Average Rank 1.8 4 3.2 2.8 5 1 3.8 Final Rank 1 5 3 1 2 1 6 4 CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Consultant Statement of Qualifications Evaluation PRIME CONSULTANTS Perametriz Shapiro EbBsco Sheldon Shannon :L Lea'' Rsvid Jones & El 12 E Watershed '''W & H 5pringwood & Wil6ort Evans Stokes ` Pacifid EVALUATION CRITERIA, 1, Designated Approach 60 53 56 41 41 41 36 56 51 52 34 49 44 2. Affirmative Action 10 9 9 8 9 8 8 8 8 9 8 8 9 3. Firm Availability 10 9 9 9 9 9 5 9 8 8 8 10 7 4, History of Performance 80 72 70 75 64 65 65 72 69 64 48 72 59 5, Office .ocatioh 10 6 8 8 8 8 8 9 8 10 5 9 8 6 Proposed Team 30 25 26 30 24 24 28 25 25 23 21 30 20 TOTAL'POINTS 200 174 178 171 155 155 150 179 169 166 124 178 147 RANK 4 2 5 8 8 10 1 6 7 12 2 11 S+NApI 20 l i e WtH r,,c+Ftc. 110 ?,cr�V-Mx 17 4 MA-Sco I i go4lrn f STrore:s I(pR PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT EVALUATION OF QUALIFIED RESPONDENTS (Side A) Contract/Project Title: W r TC A rJ o m I T l(7 Ar-1 o w 8ANh Date Advertised: &Alm 2Z" 1453 e AAkc 14 Total No. of Respondents: Z No. of Qualified Respondents: 6g, Sborur us7fO Selected Firm: (,2f-\tz nnn67'R i e NAMES OF QUALIFIED FIRMS B i E C F EVALUATION CRITERIA SUM OF RATING Written Application A B C D E F 1 Designated approach to work program or project (Organization& thoroughness of proposed activities) 2 Affirmative action& minoritybusiness usage 3 Firm's availability(Tech. materials&staff) 4 History of Performance (Includes prior service to Ci ) 5 Office Location 6 Additional Significant Criteria(list) Oral Application 1 Key Personnel Assigned (Insight, leadership& judgement) 2 Knowledge and Abilities (Demonstrated knowledge and potential ability to perform required task.) 3 Appropriateness of education 4 Municipal government experience. 5 Addt'1 Significant Criteria (List) v�l's.�,> I r._r- /. 3 .z -z.8 SUMMARY Comments/Conclusion r-,�A� rfiwk 3 z y f/contract/conteval/I.AG/bh CONTRACTING PROCEDURE COMPLETION DATE ACTION 3 2'L 3/19/93 • Advertised for services. (circle one) telephone vertisin f/93 • Reviewed proposals according to City criteria and any specific criteria for scope of work(attached sheets or see below) 3 • List all applicant names SL)ArN-- �L-Ajor� 3-12 SH"�.PI n e L ` uE WAF6A5'REo F&A 3 C'V"0J5 u) �k) pp,c rF,C. SN(:e oon> �uN(S g SYit E SPK),J&wooD yI/9 s3 List of top 3 to 6 candidates/firms ,PAN(LA A ErA,4 S C ri)c(S' A P)►tO tf�e\✓'c' GvA"'s i x"rq f, / 3 Conducted interviews, using criteria shown on other side of this form r � 9 SELECTION TEAM MEMBERS Name AFFLIATION 1-01,1 /' g�TL-,a Ct &fz-ks P6 pr. OtAVID SAAruN LrIWG k4d6E fLA,vNlN6 h'1L1/Af LYIVNE i'h'If Z-f v OZAN6fz lv\, P-k-- tOyw6L OLL0P c ` City of Renton Wetland Mitigation Bank Consultant Interview Evaluation PRIME CONSULTANTS: Parametrix Shapiro Ebasco David Jones & >W & H Evans Stokes Pacific EVALUATION CRITERIA: 1. Project Approach 25 21 15 23 20 22 16 2. Wetland Creation & 20 18 18 20 18 15 15 Restoration Experience 3. M;i,igation Banking Experience 15 12 12 15 10 10 12 4. Regulatory Agency 15 12 12 15 12 10 10 Coordination`Experience 5. Strength,of Project Manager 15 12 10 13 10 12 10 and Team 6. Resod I nse to Questions 5 4 4 5 4 4 4 7. Clarity of Presentation 5 5 3 4 1 4 4 4 TOTAL POINTS 100 84 74 95 78 77 71 RANK 2 5 1 3 4 6 City of Renton Wetland Mitigation Bank Consultant Interview Evaluation PRIM E CONSULTANTS Paramerix Shaparo Ebasco David Jonas & W & H I Evans Stokes Pacific EVALUATION CRITERIA- 1-_ Project A' roach 25 20 18 20 20 20 20 2_ Wetland'creation & 20 18 14 19 17 10 17 Restoration Experience: 3. Mitigation Banking Experience 15 12 10 14 12 7 12 4 Regulatory Agency 15 13 10 10 13 6 14 Coordination Experience 5. Strength of Project Manager 15 14 13 14 12 14 14 and Team 6.11Res onse to Questions 5 5 3 4 4 4 5 7. Clarity of Presentation 5 4 1 4 4 4 4 TOTAL POINTS 100 86 69 85 82 65 86 RANK 1 5 3 4 6 1(2) I I City of Renton Wetland Mitigation Bank Consultant Interview Evaluation PRIME CONSULTANTS: Parametrix Shapiro Ebasco David Jones & W & H Evans Stokes Pacific'. EVALUATION CRITERIA: 1. Prolect:A. roach 25 20 15 10 20 20 15 2. V+letkand Greatior & 20 15 15 15 10 10 15 Rest&atiun Ex 6666ce 3. M'ti.gati0n Banking Experience 15 15 10 15 10 10 10 4. .ReguIaCory Agency 15 15 20 15 15 10 12 Coorb'�nation'Ex er,efnce 5 Sfrength:of Project Manager : 15 10 10 10 15 15 10 and Team 6. R'es onse to Ouestions 5 10 10 5 10 10 10 7. Clarity of Presentation 5 10 5 5 10 10 10 11 TOTAL POINTS 100 95 85 75 90 85 82 RANK 1 3 6 2 3 5 City of Renton Wetland Mitigation Bank Consultant Interview Evaluation PRIME CONSULTANTS: Parametrix'' Shapiro Ebasco David Jones & W & H Evans >s Stokes Pacific EVALUATION CRITERIA: 1. Project Approach 25 20 21 23 22 20 20 2. Wetland Creation & 20 13 18 13 20 10 15 Restoration'Ex erience 3. M,rogation Banking Experience 15 10 14 10 13 1 1 8 4. Regulatory Agency 15 12 13 15 15 10 10 Coordination Experience 5. Strength of, Project Manager 15 1 1 12 13 15 9 10 and Team 6. Response to Questions 5 4 5 5 5 4 5 7. CIarit of Presentation 5 4 5 5 4 5 4 TOTAL POINTS 100 74 88 84 94 69 72 RANK 2 3 1 6 5 I I I I City of Renton Wetland Mitigation Bank Consultant Interview Evaluation PRIME CONSULTANTS: Parametrix Shapiro Ebasco David Jones & Evans Stokes Pacific EVALUATION CRITERIA: 1. Project'A proach 25 23 20 20 24 21 21 2. Wetland-Creation &SS 20 17 20 15 18 18 17 Restoration'Ex erience 3. ail dgati0n Banking Experience' 15 14 12 15 12 1 1 14 4. Regufatary Agency is 14 13 15 13 13 14 Coordination Experience 5. Strength'of Project Manager 15 13 13 15 12 12 14 and Team 6. Response to Questions' 5 5 4 1 4 4 1 3 5 7. Clarit of Presentation L 5 5 3 4 4 3 4 TOTAL POINTS 100 91 85 88 87 81 89 RANK 1 5 1 3 1 4 1 6 1 2 I I I I I I City of Renton Wetland Mitigation Bank Consultant Interview Evaluation PR(ME GONSI3CTAPiTS: Param*etrix Shapiro Eb3sco' David.:::..::;., Jones & W &N Evans Stokes Pacific EVAL.UATI©E l>GRITERIA: 1_ Project Ap roach 25 2 Wetland.Creation & 20 Restaraiipn Ex" eriertce �_� 3 Mitigatfon Banking Experience 15 4. Regulatory Agency_. 15 Coordination Experience 5. Strength of ProjecIt Manager 15 _ and Team 6. Response to Questions 5 7_:.CEai�t of Presentation 5 - J TOTAL>POII�TS 100 RANK' i City of Renton Wetland Mitigation Bank Consultant Interview Evaluation PRIME CONSULTANTS ::::Parametrix Shapiro Ebasco David Jones & 1N &H Evans Stokes Pacific EVALUATION?;CRITERIA 7. Project Approach 25 2 D / O 7,0 oZ d 2_ Wetland Creatinrt & 20 Restorati l 3. Mitigation Banking Expenence 15 / z 7 /Z 4. R e g u lat&yo.Agency; 15 Coordination Experience 5. Strength of Project Manager 15 and Team 6_ CIa Response to Questions 5 3 y 7. rit Pre senta tion, n 5 TOTAG''POINTS 100 RANK '' City of Renton Wetland Mitigation Bank Consultant Interview Evaluation PRIME:CONSULTANTS: Pafametrtx Shapiro Ebasco': David Jones& CN &N, Evans Stokes Pacific EVAI U ATIQ. :CRITERIA:. 1. ProleCt>ApProach 25 2_ Wetland 20 Restorati.bn Esc` ernencz 3 Mrpg8ti0n Bank�nq E1.xperiertCe........ 15 4.�Regulatory Agency 15 Coordmatton Experience t' I 5. Strength of Project Manager 15 and Team 6. Res or1.se to Questions 5 7. Ctarit of:Pi'eseritadbn TQTAL>PfliNTS: 100 sc S RANK I I City of Renton Wetland Mitigation Bank Consultant Interview Evaluation PRIME CflNSUL1 ANTS: Parametrix Shapiro< Ehasco David Jones & W & H I' Evans Stokes Pacific' EVALuAT.IQ CRITERIA: 7_ PrpteCt gppr0acr 25 2_ Wetland Greatior & 20 Restofrataon Fx enence 3. Mltigatioh Banking Experience 15 /L J 4. Regulatory ggeney 1 5 , � �J Coordination Ex erience 5. Strength of Protect Manager 15 and Team ( I2i 6. Res onsei:to Questions 5 5 7. Clarit of.Preserltation 5 TOTAL POINTS 100 Y RANK S City of Renton Wetland Mitigation Bank Consultant Interview Evaluation PRIME CONSULTANTS: rParametrix Shapiro Ebasco David Jones & W & H € Evans Sto ces Pacific EVALUATION CRITERIA: 1. Project Approach 25 2. WetlandCreat Qn & 20 __ _ . _. Restoration Ejx p enence 15 3. Miti qanon Bank I i n Ex erience 14 12 15 II 14 4 :::Regulatory Agency 15 Coordination Experience 13 5. Strength of Pro}ect Manager 15 and Team 1 3 !3 l 5 Z 12 1¢ 6. Response to Questions 5 5 7_ Cladt of Presentation 5 3 TQTAL PAINTS 100 8,5 T f3& Y,"7 �I RANK I 3 C� Z -- CITY OF RENTON g, Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator May 6, 1993 Tracy P. McKenzie Parametrix, Inc. 5808 Lake Washington Blvd. NE Kirkland, WA 98033 SUBJECT: CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Dear Ms. McKenzie: I want to thank you and your team for your fine presentation to our interview panel on May 3, 1993, on the above-mentioned project. I am pleased to inform you that your team has been selected as the consultant for the project. Please find attached the following: • City standard contract for your review and approval. • City of Renton Insurance Information form to be completed. • Copy of direct and non-direct salary costs and overhead exhibit Vicki Sironen of your Sumner office submitted as part of another contract in March 1992. Updated versions of these documents could be used as a portion of the attached contract Exhibit"C". Please contact Scott Woodbury at (206) 277-5547 to set up a meeting date with the City design team for the purpose of establishing a detailed scope of work, budget, and schedule. Please prepare an agenda for our review and approval prior to the meeting. We will provide your firm with a briefing of the project, as well as the background documents listed in the City's Tentative Scope. Please let us know in advance any additional items you would like the City to provide at the meeting. If you have any questions regarding the project or contract, please call Scott Woodbury at the above number. Sincerely, Ronald J. Straka, P.E. Engineering Supervisor Surface Water Utility H:L-PA-01/S S W Attachments cc: Gregg Zimmerman Scott Woodbury Mary Lynne Myer 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 THIS PAPER CONTAINS 5Wb RECYCLED MATERIAL,I POST CONSUMER PLANNING/ BUILDING/ PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT rti`�Y O�> MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 v �� O UTILITY SYSTEMS DIVISION - 235-2631 NT 0 TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION - 235-2620 TO: L.cJ � /1 PAGI/-,(- DATE: zi b-f3 JOB NO. 02- ,AVf- 1V RE: tvff Pvll"(AjlIorl /ANk R 800 1- 9 a ATTN: vt'-R, c. `P 2; GENTLEMEN: WE ARE SENDING YOU jsr ATTACHED ❑ UNDER SEPARATE COVER VIA THE FOLLOWING ITEMS: ❑ SHOP DRAWINGS ❑ PRINTS ❑ REPRODUCIBLE PLANS ❑ SPECIFICATIONS ❑ COPY OF LETTER ❑ COP7IES DATE NUMBER nn..��DnnESCRIPTION^^AND/IREMARKS LAW 44 /y ROXAL, yho PAOX 0A 'Of-e I'M Fr t.J bko P / AR lc/J Gtil OILI LL $ L-d 7 / 2 B V l o 6V4.Ar Nav IC4 119 THESE ARE TRANSMITTED AS CHECKED BELOW: ❑ FOR APPROVAL o APPROVED AS SUBMITTED ❑ RESUBMIT COPIES FOR APPROVAL W FOR YOUR USE ❑ APPROVED AS NOTED ❑ SUBMIT COPIES FOR DISTRIBUTION ❑ AS REQUESTED ❑ RETURNED FOR CORRECTIONS ❑ RETURN CORRECTED PRINTS ❑ FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT ❑ ❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US COPIES T0: 1 SIGNED W TITLE IF ENCLOSURES ARE NOT AS NOTED, KINDLY NOTIFY US AT ONCE PLANNING/ BUILDING/ PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 Ei ♦ }a- UTILITY SYSTEMS DIVISION - 235-2631 ��l 0� NT 0 TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION - 235-2620 TO: W / PAC/--le- DATE: - JOB NO.: 3 0 ZS - 11-L "A ,wc Ni RE: (- ),vJ I>A/-)c Q vv,tc W.n, 'f S06g.93ay ATTN: ", FMC. M f 7 -2: GENTLEMEN: WE ARE SENDING YOU b� ATTACHED o UNDER SEPARATE COVER VIA THE FOLLOWING ITEMS: ❑ SHOP DRAWINGS o PRINTS ❑ REPRODUCIBLE PLANS ❑ SPECIFICATIONS ❑ COPY OF LETTER ❑ COPIES DATE NUMBER DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS fA 6MAO v ""Ar x3 Hxo P CUWIJT- O o C-u OA fr2 6 QCl- 91 KC-- C-1 6r- C. z s- 23ff - 1 c-9 19owS /i5ro"c (P2u F/u..) L �v�i �uas THESE ARE TRANSMITTED AS CHECKED BELOW: ❑ FOR APPROVAL ❑ APPROVED AS SUBMITTED o RESUBMIT COPIES FOR APPROVAL FOR YOUR USE o APPROVED AS NOTED ❑ SUBMIT COPIES FOR DISTRIBUTION ❑ AS REQUESTED ❑ RETURNED FOR CORRECTIONS o RETURN CORRECTED PRINTS ❑ FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT o ❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US COPIES TO: SIGNED TITLE IF ENCLOSURES ARE NOT AS NOTED, KINDLY NOTIFY US AT ONCE `' CITY OF RENTON .g Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Y Y Lynn Guttmann,Administrator April 19, 1993 Tracy P. McKenzie Parametrix, Inc. 5808 Lake Washington Blvd. NE Kirkland, WA 98033 SUBJECT: CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Dear Ms. McKenzie: I want to thank you for your interest in responding to our Request for Qualifications on the above- mentioned project. I am pleased to inform you that your team has been selected for an interview in the final phase of our selection process. The oral presentations have been scheduled for Monday, May 3, 1993 in the first floor conference room at Renton Municipal Building, 200 Mill Avenue South. Your oral presentation may be supplemented with any additional written handouts as needed. You will have 30 minutes for a presentation of your team's qualifications and approach to the project and fifteen minutes for questions and answers. Please be prepared to address at least the following issues: • knowledge of issues and concerns that are anticipated to be important to the success of the project; • experience and success in conducting projects with similar tasks and objectives; and • approach to-the complete mitigation bank project as outlined in a scope of work recommended by the proposed team. The presentation schedule is as follows: 8:30-9:15 AM Parametrix, Inc 9:30-10:15 AM Shapiro & Associates, Inc 10:30-11:15 AM Ebasco Environmental 1:00-1:45 PM David Evans & Associates, Inc 2:00-2:45 PM Jones & Stokes Associates,"Inc 3:00-3:45 PM W & H Pacific, Inc The interview will be conducted by the City Design Team. If you have any questions, please contact Scott Woodbury at (206) 277-5547. We look forward to meeting with you on May 3, 1993. Sincerely, Ronald J. Straka, P. E., Engineering Supervisor Surface Water Utility C:DOCS:93-387:RJS:SSW:ps CC: David Saxon Mary Lynne Myer •,6PQ6t 1NaP0mry 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 THIS PAPER CONTAINS 50%RECYCLED MATERIAL,10%POST CONSUMER �_ CITY OF RENTON "u Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator April 19, 1993 Marc E. Boul'e, Senior Vice President Shapiro & Associates, Inc. 1201 Third Avenue - STE 1700 Seattle, WA 98101-3000 SUBJECT: CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Dear Mr. Boul'e: I want to thank you for your interest in responding to our Request for Qualifications on the above- mentioned project. I am pleased to inform you that your team has been selected for an interview in the final phase of our selection process. The oral presentations have been scheduled for Monday, May 3, 1993 in the first floor conference room at Renton Municipal Building, 200 Mill Avenue South. Your oral presentation may be supplemented with any additional written handouts as needed. You will have 30 minutes for a presentation of your team's qualifications and approach to the project and fifteen minutes for questions and answers. Please be prepared to address at least the following issues: • knowledge of issues and concerns that are anticipated to be important to the success of the project; • experience and success in conducting projects with similar tasks and objectives; and • approach to the complete mitigation bank project as outlined in a scope of work recommended by the proposed team. The presentation schedule is as follows: 8:30-9:15 AM Parametrix, Inc 9:30-10:15 AM Shapiro & Associates, Inc 10:30-1 1:15 AM Ebasco Environmental 1:00-1:45 PM David Evans & Associates, Inc 2:00-2:45 PM Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc 3:00-3:45 PM W & H Pacific, Inc The interview will be conducted by the City Design Team. If you have any questions, please. contact Scott Woodbury at (206) 277-5547. We look forward to meeting with you on May 3, 1993. Sincerely, X Ronald J. Straka, P. E., Engineering Supervisor Surface Water Utility C:DOCS:93-387a:RJS:SSW:ps CC: David Saxon Mary Lynne Myer Sit Woodbury 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 THIS PAPER CONTAINS 50%RECYCLED MATERIAL,10%POST CONSUMER % - CITY OF RENTON "LL Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator April 19, 1993 Eric D. Metz W & H Pacific, Inc. 3025 - 112th Avenue NE Bellevue, WA 98009-9304 SUBJECT: CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Dear Mr. Metz: I want to thank you for your interest in responding to our Request for Qualifications on the above- mentioned project. I am pleased to inform you that your team has been selected for an interview in the final phase of our selection process. The oral presentations have been scheduled for Monday, May 3, 1993 in the first floor conference room at Renton Municipal Building, 200 Mill Avenue South. Your oral presentation may be supplemented with any additional written handouts as needed. You will have 30 minutes for a presentation of your team's qualifications and approach to the project and fifteen minutes for questions and answers. Please be prepared to address at least the following issues: • knowledge of issues and concerns that are anticipated to be important to the success of the project; • experience and success in conducting projects with similar tasks and objectives; and • approach to the complete mitigation bank project as outlined in a scope of work recommended by the proposed team. The presentation schedule is as follows: 8:30-9:15 AM Parametrix, Inc 9:30-10:15 AM Shapiro & Associates, Inc 10:30-11:15 AM Ebasco Environmental 1:00-1:45 PM David Evans & Associates, Inc 2:00-2:45 PM Jones & Stokes Associates; Inc 3:00-3:45 PM W & H Pacific, Inc The interview will be conducted by the City Design Team. If you have any questions, please contact Scott Woodbury at (206) 277-5547. We look forward to meeting with you on May 3, 1993. Sincerely, Ronald J. Straka, P. E., Engineering Supervisor Surface Water Utility C:DOCS:93-387e:RJS:SSW:ps CC: David Saxon Mary Lynne Myer Scott Woodbury 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 THIS PAPER CONTAINS 50%RECYCLED MATERIAL,10%POST CONSUMER 1 ;O CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator April 19, 1993 Dean L. Ritchhart, Managing Principal Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc. 2820 Northup Way - STE 100 Belevue, WA 98004-1419 SUBJECT: CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Dear Mr. Ritchhart: I want to thank you for your interest in responding to our Request for Qualifications on the above- mentioned project. I am pleased to inform you that your team has been selected for an interview in the final phase of our selection process. The oral presentations have been scheduled for Monday, May 3, 1993 in the first floor conference room at Renton Municipal Building, 200 Mill Avenue South. Your oral presentation may be supplemented with any additional written handouts as needed. You will have 30 minutes for a presentation of your team's qualifications and approach to the project and fifteen minutes for questions and answers. Please be prepared to address at least the following issues: • knowledge of issues and concerns that are anticipated to be important to the success of the project; • experience and success in conducting projects with similar tasks and objectives; and • approach to the complete mitigation bank project as outlined in a scope of work recommended by the proposed team. The presentation schedule is as follows: 8:30-9:15 AM Parametrix, Inc 9:30-10:15 AM Shapiro & Associates, Inc 10:30-11:15 AM Ebasco Environmental 1:00-1:45 PM David Evans & Associates, Inc 2:00-2:45 PM Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc 3:00-3:45 PM W & H Pacific, Inc The interview will be conducted by the City Design Team. If you have any questions, please contact Scott Woodbury at (206) 277-5547. We look forward to meeting with you on May 3, 1993. Sincerely, /Ld F4;k) Ronald J. Straka, P. E., Engineering Supervisor Surface Water Utility C:DOCS:93-387d:RJS:SSW:ps CC: David Saxon Mary Lynne Myer Scoff;Woodbury 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 THIS PAPER CONTAINS S0%RECYCLED MATERIAL,10%POST CONSUMER CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator April 19, 1993 Ronald D. Kranz, Vice President Director of Natural Resources David Evans & Associates, Inc. 415 - 118th Avenue SE Bellevue, WA 98005-3553 SUBJECT: CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Dear Mr. Kranz: want to thank you for your interest in responding to our Request for Qualifications on the above- mentioned project. I am pleased to inform you that your team has been selected for an interview in the final phase of our selection process. The oral presentations have been scheduled for Monday, May 3, 1993 in the first floor conference room at Renton Municipal Building, 200 Mill Avenue South. Your oral presentation may be supplemented with any additional written handouts as needed. You will have 30 minutes for a presentation of your team's qualifications and approach to the project and fifteen minutes for questions and answers. Please be prepared to address at least the following issues: • knowledge of issues and concerns that are anticipated to be important to the success of the project; • experience and success in conducting projects with similar tasks and objectives; and • approach to the complete mitigation bank project as outlined in a scope of work recommended by the proposed team. The presentation schedule is as follows: 8:30-9:15 AM Parametrix, Inc 9:30-10:15 AM Shapiro & Associates, Inc 10:30-11:15 AM Ebasco Environmental 1:00-1:45 PM David Evans & Associates, Inc 2:00-2:45 PM Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc 3:00-3:45 PM W & H Pacific, Inc The interview will be conducted by the City Design Team. If you have any questions, please contact Scott Woodbury at (206) 277-5547. We look forward to meeting with you on May 3, 1993. Sincerely, Ronald J. Straka, P. E., Engineering Supervisor Surface Water Utility C:DOCS:93-387c:RJS:SSW:ps CC: David Saxon Mary Lynne Myer Scott Woodbury 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 THIS PAPER CONTAINS 50%RECYCLED MATERIAL,10%POST CONSUMER CITY OF RENTON "LL Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator April 19, 1993 Jay Brueggeman, Manager Environmental Services Ebasco Environmental 10900 NE 8th Street Bellevue, WA 98004-4405 SUBJECT: CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Dear Mr. Brueggeman: I want to thank you for your interest in responding to our Request for Qualifications on the above- mentioned project. I am pleased to inform you that your team has been selected for an interview in the final phase of our selection process. The oral presentations have been scheduled for Monday, May 3, 1993 in the first floor conference room at Renton Municipal Building, 200 Mill Avenue South. Your oral presentation may be supplemented with any additional written handouts as needed. You will have 30 minutes for a presentation of your team's qualifications and approach to the project and fifteen minutes for questions and answers. Please be prepared to address at least the following issues: • knowledge of issues and concerns that are anticipated to be important to the success of the project; • experience and success in conducting projects with similar tasks and objectives; and • approach to the complete mitigation bank project as outlined in a scope of work recommended by the proposed team. The presentation schedule is as follows: 8:30-9:15 AM Parametrix, Inc 9:30-10:15 AM Shapiro & Associates, Inc 10:30-11:15 AM Ebasco Environmental 1:00-1:45 PM David Evans & Associates, Inc — 2:00-2:45 PM Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc 3:00-3:45 PM W & H Pacific, Inc The interview will be conducted by the City Design Team. If you have any questions, please contact Scott Woodbury at (206) 277-5547. We look forward to meeting with you on May 3, 1993. Sincerely, Ronald J. Straka, P. E., Engineering Supervisor Surface Water Utility C:DOCS:93-387b:RJS:SSW:ps CC: David Saxon Mary Lynne Myer Sc*tt Woodbury 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 THIS PAPER CONTAINS 50%RECYCLED MATERIAL.10%POST CONSUMER 4% CITY OF RENTON ..0 Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator April 19, 1993 Susan L. Burgemeister, President B-Twelve Associates, Inc. 521 South Washington Avenue Kent, WA 98032 SUBJECT: CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Dear Ms. Burgemeister: I want to thank you for your interest in responding to our Request for Qualifications on the above-mentioned project. We received many fine, well presented proposals and have selected six firms to interview in the final phase of our selection process. I am sorry that we were not able to include you in that group, but I do hope that you will consider other consulting opportunities with the City of Renton. If you have any questions, please contact Scott Woodbury at (206) 277-5547. Sincerely, Ronald J. Straka, P.E., Engineering Supervisor Surface Water Utility C:DOCS:93-388c:RJS:SSW:ps CC: David Saxon Mary Lynne Myer Scat Woodbury 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 THIS PAPER CONTAINS 50%RECYCLED MATERIAL,10%POST CONSUMER CITY OF RENTON "E I N Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator April 19, 1993 Dyanne Sheldon, Principal Sheldon & Associates 5031 University Way NE Seattle, WA 98105 SUBJECT: CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Dear Ms. Sheldon: I want to thank you for your interest in responding to our Request for Qualifications on the above-mentioned project. We received many fine, well presented proposals and have selected six firms to interview in the final phase of our selection process. I am sorry that we were not able to include you in that group, but I do hope that you will consider other consulting opportunities with the City of Renton. If you have any questions, please contact Scott Woodbury at (206) 277-5547. Sincerely, Ronald J. Straka, P.E., Engineering Supervisor Surface Water Utility C:DOCS:93-388:RJS:SSW:ps CC: David Saxon Mary Lynne Myer Scott Woodbury 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 THIS PAPER CONTAINS 5001b RECYCLED MATERIAL,10%POST CONSUMER R CITY OF RENTON ii Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator April 19, 1993 Lyndon C. Lee, Ph.D L. C. Lee & Associates, Inc. 221 First Avenue West - STE 415 Seattle, WA 98119 SUBJECT: CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Dear Mr. Lee: I want to thank you for your interest in responding to our Request for Qualifications on the above-mentioned project. We received many fine, well presented proposals and have selected six firms to interview in the final phase of our selection process. I am sorry that we were not able to include you in that group, but I do hope that you will consider other consulting opportunities with the City of Renton. If you have any questions, please contact Scott Woodbury at (206) 277-5547. Sincerely, Ronald J. Straka, P.E., Engineering Supervisor Surface Water Utility C:DOCS:93-388b:RJS:SSW:ps CC: David Saxon Mary Lynne Myer VU ,,".—godbury 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 THIS PAPER CONTAINS 50%RECYCLED MATERIAL,10%POST CONSUMER CITY OF RENTON "LL Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator April 19, 1993 A. William Way, President The Watershed Company 10327 NE 68th Street - STE B Kirkland, WA 98033 SUBJECT: CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Dear Mr. Way: I want to thank you for your interest in responding to our Request for Qualifications on the above-mentioned project. We received many fine, well presented proposals and have selected six firms to interview in the final phase of our selection process. I am sorry that we were not able to include you in that group, but I do hope that you will consider other consulting opportunities with the City of Renton. If you have any questions, please contact Scott Woodbury at (206) 277-5547. Sincerely, Ronald J. Straka, P.E., Engineering Supervisor Surface Water Utility C:DOCS:93-388d:RJS:SSW:ps CC: David Saxon Mary Lynne Myer Ott Woodbury 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 THIS PAPER CONTAINS 50%RECYCLED MATERIAL,10%POST CONSUMER '_ CITY OF RENTON .rt Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator April 19, 1993 Frank W. Pita, P.E. Shannon & Wilson, Inc. 400 North 34th Street - STE 100 Seattle, WA 98103 SUBJECT: CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Dear Mr. Pita: I want to thank you for your interest in responding to our Request for Qualifications on the above-mentioned project. We received many fine, well presented proposals and have selected six firms to interview in the final phase of our selection process. I am sorry that we were not able to include you in that group, but I do hope that you will consider other consulting opportunities with the City of Renton. If you have any questions, please contact Scott Woodbury at (206) 277-5547. Sincerely, Ronald J. Straka, P.E., Engineering Supervisor Surface Water Utility C:DOCS:93-388a:RJS:SSW:ps CC: David Saxon Mary Lynne Myer Scott Woodbury 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 THIS PAPER CONTAINS 5W.RECYCLED MATERIAL,10%POST CONSUMER 4% ?=- CITY OF RENTON "LL Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator April 19, 1993 Sono Hashisaki, President Springwood Associates, Inc. 1726 NE 58th Street Seattle, WA 98105 SUBJECT: CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Dear Ms. Hashisaki: I want to thank you for your interest in responding to our Request for Qualifications on the above-mentioned project. We received many fine, well presented proposals and have selected six firms to interview in the final phase of our selection process. I am sorry that we were not able to include you in that group, but I do hope that you will consider other consulting opportunities with the City of Renton. If you have any questions, please contact Scott Woodbury at (206) 277-5547. Sincerely,, Ronald J. Straka, P.E., Engineering Supervisor Surface Water Utility C:DOCS:93-388e:RJS:SSW:ps CC: David Saxon Mary Lynne Myer Scott Woodbury 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 THIS PAPER CONTAINS 50%RECYCLED MATERIAL,10%POST CONSUMER CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM DATE: April },T", 1993 TO: Ron Straka, Surface Water Scott Woodbury, Surface Water Mary Lynne Myer, Long Range Planning Mark Pywell, Development Services Leslie Betlach, Parks Bob Transportation FROM: David Saxen, Long Range Planning, ext. 2475�11G SUBJECT: Wetland Mitigation Bank consultant selection: Design Team meeting and consultant interviews. The City received 12 consultant proposals for the wetland_ mitigation bank plan. Long Range Planning and Surface Water Utility hav o iiew 6 of these firms. We hope to interview the selected firms o onday, May 3, beginning at 8:30 AM and ending around 3:00 PM with a brea for lunch. The next possible date is Monday, May 10. Later possibilities are May or 1GIay 14. Prior to conducting the interviews, the Design Team will meet to review the proposals of the finalists, discuss the interview process, review questions, etc. This meeting is scheduled for 3:30 PM, Wednesday, April 21 , in the first floor conference room. If you have any questions, please call David Saxen, Long Range Planning, ext. 2475. CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM DATE: April 5, 1993 TO: Ron Straka Scott Woodbury Mary Lynne Myer FROM: David Saxen SUBJECT: Review criteria for consultant proposals for the mitigation bank. Review of Proposals Consultant SOO's for the mitigation bank project are due April 5th, after which we can begin reviewing the proposals. We will meet at 2:00 PM on April 7 in the third floor library for one hour+ (?) to discuss the criteria to be used in reviewing proposals and to work out the next steps of the selection process. We should establish a short-list with a maximum of 4 consultants no later than Friday, April 16. We should be receiving 2 copies of each proposal. The proposals will be divided up between Long Range and Surface Water to review. Based on the general criteria outlined, we will rank each proposal, then compare our prioritized lists and come to a consensus on which consultants to short-list. Wetland Creation Wetland creation and restoration is part science and part art incorporating a number of different professional disciplines. It is a relatively new endeavor, therefore it lacks a well established methodology. Little professional training for wetland creation is available. Most knowledge about wetland creation and restoration has come from trial and error in the field. To date, the errors have been many, though inadequate funding and lack of enforcement of mitigation requirements account for many of the failures. The limited understanding of wetland creation makes the criteria for selecting a consultant somewhat arbitrary. Past experience and demonstrated success in wetland creation are obviously important qualifications to note. The selection criteria are tentatively prioritized below. Prioritized Selection Criteria 1 . Past wetland creation/restoration project experience and success; experience and knowledge of individual team members in each element of wetland creation/restoration (hydrology, soils, wetland vegetation). For past mitigation projects: How big were the projects? How complex? Budget size? Regulatory agency involvement? 2. Experience with wetland mitigation banking. Not many consultants will have direct experience implementing mitigation banking programs. A few will have written papers on different approaches to mitigation banking. 3. Designated approach to the project and proposed scope. Organization and thoroughness of proposed scope. History of performance and, if applicable, quality of work performed for the City on past projects. 5. Experience coordinating with regulatory agencies. 6. Approach to project management. 7. Familiarity with site and basin. Familiarity with the City. Has the consultant done work in the Green River Valley, or in a similar landscape? 8. Affirmative action and minority business usage. 9. Consultant's demonstrated enthusiasm about project. 10. Firm's availability. 1 11� Office location. 12, Other? These are tentative selection criteria. We can decide whether any of these criteria should be prioritized differently at the meeting on Wednesday. I obviously feel that the first items on the list should be given the most weight in the selection. I am a little less certain about the order of the less important criteria. Ultimately, selection will be based on the whole package. For the interview process, we will use a matrix to rate each of the finalists for the project. Attached are a few potential interview questions. Please review these and feel free to offer others. CITY OF RENTON Wetland Mitigation Bank Interview Questions 1 . What do you think are the most critical elements in wetland creation/restoration? What do you see as the most vital tasks in this project? Jf2: What was your largest mitigation project? How successful was this project? What were the major limitations? 3. What would you say are the main reasons mitigation projects don't meet their goals? 4. What is your experience in mitigation banking? What are some of the different approaches to wetland "mitigation banking"? What are the opportunities and limitations of each of these approaches? 5 What are your form* greatest ads? What are the weaknesses of your firm? 6. What are the current limitations on implementation of mitigation banks? How could implementation of wetland mitigation banks be improved and made more successful? 7. Given a very limited budget, what aspects of the site analysis (conditions assessment) would you consider to be absolutely necessary? What could be left out? What do you think the chances for success of this particular project are? 8 Describe the most complicated-� TT-pr�;ect vour�firm h attempted? --' Describe how you ed the complexities. l� Wr 9. What i ax{a e ory agencies? How 4&-tml'd you a ach regular age 0ordination? t, ,}- yd...,;.�,� ,,�.�,It,Q Yu� cr`s• 10. What problems would you expect to encounter in a project of this nature? ' (Inadequate budget?). Describe the most satisfyi_rig_mitigation--project imwf•r n you Clave been in_volue ?-�Mttamade it satisfying? Ilk 17� How did you learn to do wetland creation and restoration? 7 )Vf►bt-i7!�,lygure�<pe(iercc 'wor g ith c i'es? ave y_oy-wo-eked n Re ? i't12e City'# Renton tw 'tuJ StV- A- Pn0&,6;w-" wITK --VtV 6"V-M� 4Et93 C14277 vWM&dev> (!5, City of Renton Wetland Mitigation Bank Consultant Interview Evaluation PRIME CONSULTANTS: Parametrix Shapiro Ebasco David Jones & W $s H _ Evans` Stokes 1 at ifc Individual Ranks Score Shea#1 2 5 1 3 4 6 Score Sheet #2 1 5 3 4 6 1 Score 1,Sheet #3 1 3 6 2 3 5 Score Shee# 4 4 2 3 1 6 5 Score Sheet #5 1 5 3 4 6 2 Average Flank 1.8 4 3.2 2.8 5 3.8 Final Rank 1 5 3 2 6 4 � Y City of Renton Wetland Mitigation Bank Consultant Interview Evaluation PRIME CONSl3LTAN S Pararrttr[x :hap�rv'i Ebasc:.c� Qav�d ones ,' W &H Evans S4�It5 ,.. IaCf €> EVALUATION CRITERIA: 7.. Prri ect! ' �&Gt 25 21 15 23 20 22 16 2, Vltelart#Creatirt& 20 18 18 20 18 15 15 Restarafrtta ef1E1'EG4' . .... 3':.N1itigt� r1:;Bikttg Expetje�C-;; 15 12 12 15 10 10 12 .................................................................... ......................................................................... ......................................................................... ......................................................................... .......................................................................... ......................................................................... .......................................................................... ......................................................................... .......................................................................... ......................................................................... .......................................................................... ........................................................................ .......................................................................... 4. Regulatgr}r Agartii±y 15 12 12 15 12 10 10 Coordination'Ex erience 5. Strength,of Project Manager 15 12 10 13 10 12 10 r3 T 6 Res vr,se to Questions 5 4 4 5 4 4 4 ofPreserttation 5 5 3 4 4 4 4 TC)TAL POINTS 100 84 74 95 78 77 71 RANKI 2 5 1 3 4 6 � f City of Renton Wetland Mitigation Bank Consultant Interview Evaluation PRIME CONSULTAtNTS >::: Paramstf�x Shapiro :: El�ascia [3av�d s : :'.::>:;a!V'.$ Evans .! ..:.::.::.;:.::.:.;..........:X..;:.;:.;:.;:.;;:. EVA!"UATIQf�I CRITEflW ::>::> :>:::>:::>:: ::>::: ..: Gt rpaGtl 25 20 18 20 _ 20 20 20 ............................. : ffitltGreaftt ;> [ 20 18 14 19 17 10 17 ......................................................................... ......................................................................... Er�errc ..... ............... :: i < jtit.:) krttg epi 15 12 10 14 12 7 12 ........................................................................ I. ......................................................................... .......................................................................... 4 Reg#tat•"ry -gency 15 13 10 10 13 6 14 Caordrna6oWlx errnce .,.::Sfit39t13''af Prajecf.M.ariagec, 15 14 13 14 12 14 14 ......................................................................... .......................................................................... ......................................................................... and 8 F Os ohse t0 13�iestEons > 5 5 3 4 4 4 5 7. CIO rit flf Pt sem tlon 5 4 1 4 4 4 4 TQT.AI PAINTS 100 86 69 85 82 65 86 RANK 1 5 3 4 1 6 1 1(2) JI City of Renton Wetland Mitigation Bank Consultant Interview Evaluation PRI1Vl C©1vSULTAN i'arametrix Shaparo Ehasca [?avid JcirFes & W&M>: !:vans........ Stokes I'acifre;::; VALUATION'CRITERIA 9 P.:C�S BCt.A r4G 25 20 1 5 10 20 20 15 V1t�fland CreSti ,&. 20 15 1 5 15 10 10 15 Resta atac�n... erg ce 3 Mittg3t74'r Bar3kl tg & Onence 1 5 1 5 10 15 10 10 10 ............:..............................:.............................. ......................................................................... .......................................................................... ......................................................................... .......................................................................... ............................................................______.. ......................................................................... .......................................................................... ......................................................................... .......................................................................... ................................................................ .......................................................................... 4 RegutataEy Agerey 1 5 1 5 20 1 5 1 5 10 12 Coordination: ,c erg nce S..Wbgtf� of Project Manager 15 10 10 10 15 1 5 10 80 ,`'rrt 6 Res ortse to Questions 5 10 10 5 10 10 10 7fnt r�fPreseiitatiori 5 1 C 5 5 10 10 10 ]IITQTALPQINTS 100 95 85 75 90 85 82 RANK' 1 3 6 2 3 5 City of Renton Wetland Mitigation Bank Consultant Interview Evaluation PRIME CONSULTANTS: Parametrix Shapiro Ebasca David Jones & W&H Evans St0Ctes E'acitia>' EVALUATION CRITERIA: 1. Prr�ect A' roach 25 20 21 23 22 20 20 2, Wetlandreatioii & 20 13 18 13 20 10 15 Restoration Ex erierce 3. Mitigetigr Bankl,.h Expenence 15 10 14 10 13 11 8 4. Regulatary Agency 15 12 13 15 15 10 10 Coordination Experience 5. Strength of Project Manager 15 11 12 13 15 9 10 and Team 6. Res onse`to Questions 5 4 5 5 5 4 5 7_ Clarit 6 Presentation 5 4 5 5 4 5 4 TOTAL POINTS 100 74 88 84 94 69 72 RANK 4 2 3 1 6 5 City of Renton Wetland Mitigation Bank Consultant Interview Evaluation PRIMA:CO.. Parametnx Shapiro > EbaSco tlav�d Jpr�es.& alU& H E .... :.::.. Bt4E.. IS�C....... EVALUATION CRITEMA ...::...: _. 1 Alt ECt t0Gt1: 25 23 20 20 24 21 21 Vettanct: reation 20 17 20 15 18 18 17 Res rati�zn:' f�ers e:::>::>::>::i<<:: .. >' t11 $4r1; nktg>" O8tOC 15 14 12 15 12 11 14 .........:.................:............::.::............................. ......................................................................... .......................................................................... ......................................................................... .......................................................................... ......................................................................... .......................................................................... ......................................................................... .......................................................................... _ . .......................................................................... ........................................................................ ............................................................ ............. 4:'.;';ReguEato:i}v Agemy 15 14 13 15 13 13 14 ...........................................:.._ .. ........................................... ................. ......... ..... . Coerrtiinat��rIc erience 5 st.€:erlgth o Project Manager 1 5 13 13 15 12 12 14 and T'' m 6 ResP onse:to Questions 5 5 4 4 4 3 5 7t...L rat �f PtBs�r�atEOn 5 5 3 4 4 3 4 TQTAi PQEtVTS 100 91 85 88 87 81 89 RANK 1 5 3 4 6 2 City of Renton Wetland Mitigation Bank Consultant Interview Evaluation PRIME CONSULTANTS Pararrtetrix.. Shaparo Ehasco: David Jorres & V1t &H Euans Stakes Pacific; EVALUATION;.CRITERIA 1_ Pr❑ject A 'taaCh 25 2_ Wetland Cri?at8i 20 Restaratiun Ex"enerrce 3 Mftigati4n Ban k�rfgExpene?�ee 15 4. .Regula dN.*Agency 1 5 Goardiriation Ex erience 5. Strength of Project'Manager 15 and Team 6_ Res ottse to Questions 5 7_ CEaflt of PresentatFon 5 TOTAL'POENTS 100 RANK 7r- L ' �u;�� •z City of Renton Wetland Mitigation Bank Consultant Interview Evaluation PRIME:Ct7N5ULTANT;S Paramettix Shaparo Ebasca> Day�cf Jones>& Evans to. Pac�f�c EVALUATION::.CRITERIA Prd ect A raaeh .. 25 Wetland Creat�ort& 20 Restara*6 n Ex`eritm�::::�x....11, / 3 Mgat�on Banking Expenenee 15 12 4 RegOatary Agersey Coordinat�an Ex erienee s 5 Strength of>:Pralect Manager 15 and Team .... .... 6_. Res'apse to Questions 5 7 CEaFt of Presentation 5 TOTAL POtMTS 100 ,Z.. RANK City of Renton Wetland Mitigation Bank Consultant Interview Evaluation PRIME CONSULTANTS Parametrix. Shapiro Ehasca. David Janes & W&N Evans Stokes Pacatc EVALUATION CRITERIA }. Project A p4aCh 25 2_. Weti:and Creafien&. 20 Restar3fi�zn Ex'enece I 3. Mitig8ti4n Bank�ng £xperiettce 15 4. Regulalary Agency:: 15 Go Ord rnation a erience t r 5. Strength Of',Prolect Manager 15 and.Tearn 6_ Res onse::to Questions 5 U 7. Clarit of Presentation 5 TOTAL PQiNTS 100 r RANK �, City of Renton Wetland Mitigation Bank Consultant Interview Evaluation PRIMA CONSULTANTS...", Parametrix S.:Fiapiro Ebasco p.avid Jones & 1N& H ; Evans StoEc'es Pacific EUAll1ATIQi>I CRkTEFilA ....... 1_ Ar[i18ct ,0.' r0acl 2590 2 a, aD 2 Wetland creat 20 3 /3 a0 Resto►ation Ex erienee 3 Mit3gaOn Banking Experience 15 4 RegutatorY Agency 15 7 Coordination Ex erience 5 Strength of Praieet Manager 15 and Team �� 13 6. Res onset to Questions 5 7_ Ctant ofPresentation 5 TOTAL PQiNTS 100 RAIUK 5 City of Renton Wetland Mitigation Bank Consultant Interview Evaluation PRIME CONSULTANTS; Parametr'rx Shapiro.:' Eb.a..s.c..o David Jones [_vans Stokes ;Pacific'. EVAIUATIQAI CRITERIA: . .. .._ . 1. Pe bji kvAopt6.6eh 25 23 Zd Zd Z Z� 2. Wetland Creation ffi 20 _ _ . _. Restaration > 0rier ce 1� 15 l�j Id 1 .............. ........................................................ . ... 15 3. Miti anon Sankin Ex enence;' 14 12 15 1 SII 14 4. Regulatory Agency 15 CoordinatiOmEx erienee 1+ 1 3 1 13 13 11 5. Strength cf Project Manager 15 and Team 1 3 13 15 1Z 12 &. Res 0 onse to Questions 5 S '+ 7. Clarit afPresentation 5 3 TOTAL POINTS 100 05 6& 6-7 6�I RANK I I g I3 U 1 2 CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Consultant Statement of Qualifications Evaluation PRIME CONSULTANTS: Perametrix Shapiro Ebasco Sheldon Shannon L.C. Lee' David Janes`& B-12'' Watershed' W & H. Springwood' &Wilson Evans Stokes Pacific EVALUATION CRITERIA`. 1. Designated Approach 60 53 56 41 41 41 36 56 51 52 34 49 44 2. Affirmative Action 10 9 9 8 9 8 8 8 8 9 8 8 9 3. Firm Availability 10 9 9 9 9 9 5 9 8 8 8 10 7 4. History of Performance 80 72 70 75 64 65 65 72 69 64 48 72 59 5. Office Location 10 6 8 8 8 8 8 9 8 10 5 9 8 6. Proposed Team 30 25 26 30 24 24 28 25 25 23 21 30 20 TOTAL'POINTS' 200 174 178 171 155 155 150 179 169 166 124 178 147 RANK 4 2 5 8 8 10 1 6 7 12 2 11 CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Consultant Statement of Qualifications Evaluation PRIME CONSULTANTS; Parametrix Shapiro Ebasco Sheldon Shannon L.C. Lee David Jones & B-12 Watershed W&'H Springwood' & Wilson Evans i Stokes Pacific EVALUATION CRITERIA: 1. Designated Approach 60 53 56 41 41 41 36 56 51 52 34 49 44 2. Affirmative Action 10 9 9 8 9 8 8 8 8 9 8 8 9 3. Firm Availability 10 9 9 9 9 9 5 9 8 8 8 10 7 4. History of Performance 80 72 70 75 64 65 65 72 69 64 48 72 59 5, Office Location 10 6 8 8 8 8 8 9 8 10 5 9 8 6.' Proposed Team 30 25 26 30 24 24 28 25 25 23 21 30 20 TOTAL POINTS 200 1 174 1 178 1 171 155 155 150 179 169 166 124 178 147 RANK 4 2 5 S 8 10 1 6 7 12 2 11 CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Consultant Statement of Qualifications Evaluation PRIME CONSULTANTS; Parametrix Shapiro Ebasco Sheldon Shannon L.C. Lee David Jones & B-12 Watershed W & H ;Springwood & Wilson Evans Stokes Pacific EVALUATION CRITERIA': 1.'' Designated Approach 60 53 56 41 41 41 36 56 51 52 34 49 44 2. Affirmative Action 10 9 9 8 9 8 8 8 8 9 8 8 9 3. Firm Availability 10 9 9 9 9 9 5 9 8 8 8 10 7 4. History of Performance 80 72 70 75 64 65 65 72 69 64 48 72 59 5.r-Office Location 10 6 8 8 8 8 8 9 8 10 5 9 8 6. Proposed Team 30 25 26 30 24 24 28 25 25 23 21 30 20 TOTAL:'POINTS 200 174 178 171 155 155 150 179 169 166 124 178 147 RANK'' 4 2 5 8 8 10 1 6 7 12 2 F 11 CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Consultant Statement of Qualifications Evaluation PRIME CONSULTANTS': Paratf etrix Shapiro Ebasco Sheldon Shannon L.C,Lee David Jones & B 1 2 1Natershed V/& H Spfingwood'' & Wilson Evans Stokes Pacific EVALUATION CRITERIA; 1. Designated Approach 60 25 27 21 15 18 17 30 24 25 17 22 21 28 29 20 26 23 19 26 27 27 17 27 23 2. Affirmative Action 10 5 5 4 5 4 4 4 4 5 4 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3. Firm Availability 10 5 5 5 5 5 2 5 4 4 4 5 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 5 4 4, History of Performance 80 36 33 40 28 30 30 37 33 29 28 34 25 36 37 35 36 35 35 35 37 35 20 38 34 5. Office Location 10 2 4 4 4 4 4 5 4 5 2 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 3 4 4 6, ;Proposed Team 30 12 12 15 11 11 13 13 12 11 11 15 7 13 14 15 13 13 15 12 13 12 10 15 13 TOTALi'POINTSI 200 174 178 171 155 155 150 179 169 166 124 178 147 RANK 4 2 5 8 8 10 1 6 7 12 2 11 CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Consultant Statement of Qualifications Evaluation PRIME CONSULTANTS Pararrietrix Shapiro'' Ebasco Sheldon Shannon L.C, Lee David Jones & B-T-� Watershed!' W& H Springwood' & Wilson Evans Stokes Pacific EVALUATION CRITERIA; 1. Designated Approach 60 25 27 21 15 18 17 30 24 25 17 22 21 28 29 20 26 23 19 26 27 27 17 27 23 2. Affirmative'Action 10 5 5 4 5 4 4 4 4 S 4 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3. Firm Availability 10 5 5 5 5 5 2 5 4 4 4 5 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 5 4 4, History of Performance 80 36 33 40 28 30 30 37 33 29 28 34 25 36 37 35 36 35 35 35 37 35 20 38 34 5. Office Location 10 2 4 4 4 4 4 5 4 5 2 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 3 4 4 6, Proposed Team 30 12 12 15 11 11 13 13 12 11 11 15 7 13 1 14 1 15 13 13 1 15 12 13 12 10 15 13 TOTAL'POINTS'' 200 174 178 171 155 155 150 179 169 166 124 178 147 RANK', 4 2 5 8 8 10 1 6 7 12 2 11 CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Consultant Statement of Qualifications Evaluation PRIME CON SULTANTSi Parametrix Shapiro.', Ebasco Sheldon Shannon L,C,Lee David Jones'& B-12 Watershed W& H Spriigwood` Wilson Evans Stokes Pacific EVALUATION CRITERW 1, Designated Approach 60 25 27 21 15 18 17 30 24 25 17 22 21 28 29 20 26 23 19 26 27 27 17 27 23 2. Affirmative Action 10 5 5 4 5 4 4 4 4 5 4 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3. Firm Availability 10 5 5 5 5 5 2 5 4 4 4 5 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 5 4 4. History of Performance 80 36 33 40 28 30 30 37 33 29 28 34 25 36 37 35 36 35 35 35 37 35 20 38 34 5. Office Location 10 2 4 4 4 4 4 5 4 5 2 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 3 4 4 6, Proposed Team 30 12 12 15 1 1 11 13 13 12 11 11 15 7 13 14 15 13 13 15 12 13 12 10 15 13 TOTAL'rPOINTS 200 174 178 171 155 155 150 179 169 166 124 178 147 RANK 4 2 5 8 8 10 1 6 7 12 2 11 CITY OF RENTON •' W WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Consultant Statement of Qualifications Evaluation PRIME CONSULTANTS; Parametrix Shapiro Ebasco Sheldon Shannon Lt. Lee David Jones & „ B-12 Watershed I W& H i Sprih6wb6d>. & WiESor1 Evans Stokes Pacific EVALUATION CRITERIA: 1. Designated Approach 60 53 56 41 41 41 36 56 51 52 34 49 44 2: Affirmative Action 10 9 9 8 9 8 8 8 8 9 8 8 9 3 Firm Availability 10 9 9 9 9 9 5 9 8 8 8 10 7 4. History of Performance 80 72 70 75 64 65 65 72 69 64 48 72 59 5 Office Location 10 6 8 8 8 8 8 9 8 10 5 9 8 6. Proposed Team 30 25 26 30 24 24 28 25 25 23 21 30 20 li[TOTAL 200 174 178 171 155 155 150 179 169 166 124 178 147 RANK 4 2 5 8 8 10 1 6 7 12 2 11 544At'1 2v lie W t V POC4 Ftc- 119 1pkq-e�vmK 114 "'ASC-0 fit doareg + S-ror. ws 1(pR r CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Consultant Statement of Qualifications Evaluation PRIME CONSU TANTS Parametrix Shapiro'' Ebasco Sheldon Shannon '? L,C,Lee David Jones &';, B-1'2 Watershed W& H Springwood> &,Wilson Evans Stokes'' Pacific EVALUATION CRITERIA; 1. Designated Approach 60 25 27 21 15 18 17 30 24 25 17 22 21 � 28 29 20 26 23 19 26 27 27 17 27 23 "bl 2. Affirmative Action 10 5 5 4 5 4 4 4 4 5 4 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3, Firm Availability 10 5 5 5 5 5 2 5 4 4 4 5 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 5 4 4. History of Performance 80 36 33 40 28 30 30 37 33 29 28 34 25 36 37 35 36 35 35 35 37 35 20 38 34 5. Office Location 10 2 4 4 4 4 4 5 4 5 2 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 3 4 4 6. Proposed Team 30 12 12 15 11 11 13 13 12 11 11 15 7 13 14 15 13 13 15 12 13 12 10 15 13 lilTOTAL 200 174 178 171 155 155 150 179 169 166 124 178 147 RANK 4 2 5 8 8 10 1 6 7 12 2 11 CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Consultant Statement of Qualifications Evaluation f RE►I5 #. A� S' P ?h7�# k: uh !f►: :: bG S#1kj4�1.:: hl?K! .. ..G>::# ::::::.>A? 4:.. .;: ; : e ::::::::.:::.................... ... ......:..:::.:::::::........... ..............................:,::::................................:::::::::::::.....P! .......... :.. ................... ....................................... ....................................&':..::.Elan..........:::: : »: xra�f ;:.::;.;:.:talcs....:.........................:.:::::::.:. . :::.:::::::.:........................................:::::..:::::...:...........................................:::::.:::...............................:.::pf ......................... AL A:aCEf xill /� e S 7 1 �8 / 3 21-1 4 5 S 5 S S Z 5 5 3 L ' 0 30 �27 33 29 zS 28 y s y � z s Z /�215 r 1 / S 2/3 1 ll 1 �3 S / 7 xx /i "60 4b Low Sf�.roMp 6—lc, �ooti 'L F� 0 IZ'& /4vF4," 80-Go `cob . 90- F A<L W CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Consultant Statement of Qualifications Evaluation RW N . .1.......... mef . p ........x. X,x: ........... ..... ........................................................................................I.................................I. ... ..... .......................... ............ ............................ .......... ...... ...... ..................................V...........V....... a..t...d .:.r., ...... .V... .... . ............ ct . .. .. . ......... ........ ........... ........ :::-:: ..................... ........ ............................. ........ .................. ....... ..... . ........ ...... ... ........ .................. ....... ............... . ......... ....................xx ........X ........ .................... ...................... ........ ....................... ...... .............. ........ .... - :.:.:. .,::::: . - ii�i................... ........ .............. ... .......... ........ . ............... . .......................... ... ............. .................... ....................... . ......................................... .................... ...........................:. .::.................................... ....�..,.........-.....,...... ..:: , .................. . . ........ ... ............. ....................... ....................... ......... ................. ......................... .......................................... ................... ........ ........ ...... .......... ............... .......... . ...... ......... .... ......... ........ .................................. ... .X .U.: Sig Vt.ad.-A Pr » 30 -,7-T .................. 2:Affirmo, A00 ............. 5 ... ......... 5 ...................... ............................... ............ 40 XHiswi f .. ............ 5;.:flftiCe ...... .......... ....... ............ ... .................. 5 ............................... W.T....M: 15 ea .......................... ..................... ............... ... ........................... ....................... ...................... ............... /3 1-3 ......b...... _71 .I - - I I ..................... 100 ........... .......... !I W t..)i H 5HtftRw _- S -J0,4e5j Shtr,3 — 3 PAA W#H p CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Consultant Statement of Qualifications Evaluation ;M2 ............ :j:j. ................. T . ........ She 0 n... ............. K" ........... ... ....................: ................ 7" . ..................... .................... .......... .......... ............. .......... ..... ........ ........... ......... ............. I...... .................... ... ......... ... --- ------------------ ---------- .................... ... ........... .... .................. ...... :m'XiX ...... .. ............. ... . .... ... .......... .............. ........ ...... .................. ......... .............. . ......... . .... .. ................... ......... ...... .. .......... . ...... . ... . . .. .... .... ... . .... 30 ..................... . .................. rAffffn 46 .... ......... 5 . ...... . .. .... 40 .......... 5 ...................... .................. ....... .............. ... ......... ............. . 15 L--J 13 ... ......... 100 ................ fAl�t PL SHIM" Jones LIM SAM F&-J S-12 L CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Consultant Statement of Qualifications Evaluation ....... .......... . .... ....... ... ........ E.P.., S X Be ........... ....................................... ........... .. ..... -0.12 W" n M X.. j j bod, PRIM SI..... ..... . :.::X. ....... .. ow ... .gw ............ ........... ............ ............ ........................................... ...................................... ...... ............ ........ ........ .................. ......* — -:- ......................... ................. ......... .. ........ .......................... ................X. ................. ......................... ................... ............... .................. .:..... :: ...... ........... ....................... ........ .............. ....... .. ................. ................................................... ................ .. .. ................. ...... ..... .......:::::: ............ .. .. ............. ........ .... ............................... ................................ ....... ... ..................................................................................................................... ...... . ....... . ..... ..................... ..... ................ ........ . ........ ....... ......................... :: ............ ....................... , ......................................... ................ .... ........ ........................ ...................... ...................................... ..................................... ........................ ....................... ............................ ................ ..................................... ..................... .......... ......................... ............................................. .............................................. ....... ................. ................ .. ..................... ..... .......... .... ............................... ....... .. ........... ....... .................................. ............... ................... .......... ............... . ................. .... . .............................. ................ .............................. .......................................... ..................... .......... . .... . . ........................... ................. ...................... ..................... ................. ....................... ................... ..&U. OWCRITERIA, ................. ...................... ................... ....................... ...................... ........................ ............... ................ .............. ... ............... ............I.......................................... .... .. .....-........ ...................................... ........ ......... ................ ......... ............................................................. ........ ......................... .....:.... %.-.-.-.-. ... ............................................ ....... ........... ..... .......... ....... .................. ........... .......... ................................ .............. ...................... ............................. ........... ................1. ........ ............. ............. ................. -7 2-7 2 3 AfEi .. .......... ......................... . .... .... ........ .. ................... . ..... ... ................ ............. ............ ......................I... .................................. 5 ...................... ............. .......... .... 5 .................... ....................... ............ ........... A"::HOW 0.1 40 ............!... ............ ...................................%... 5 9-7 -7 9 3 7 125 3.157 73 35 2D . ........................... ....................... ...................................... ..................... 5 .................. ... ................... ............ L/................................. 4................ .......... 15 T............... ..................... .............b........ .......... ........ .. ................................. ...... .......... 1_7 14 /3 ........... 100 .................................... .................... CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Consultant Statement of Qualifications Evaluation .......... ........... . ..................... ... ........ U.C..1.... w... ....... 14 U ....... . ..... ...... VON. A. e......... .... .. .. .......... ...................... . ............................ ip .. ...0.... ......... ... ............ Ax --t W,p �iA)Je *.*.o "d, 6d-'W" ............................. . .0 XM. .............. ............... . . .... ........... ......... .................. .. ... ......................... ............. ....... ............... X ................ ......... ...... .:Xsw ... ........... ...... :::::: XIX...... ........................................... ............ .............................. .... ... .. X-, X., X .......... ..... ................. .......... . . .... ............ , ..... . ,,:::: ........X.:.: :............... X .. ...... .... . .... : W: ......... .... . ...................... ....................... ........................................ ....... .......... ....... ........... ........ ................ ---------------- ................. .................................... U.' R ERI IT a ..... X X: ...... X, X .... ..................... X X, 30 . .......... ............. ............ cj 1! ..NX xww-............. .4 5 ................. ..................... ... . ............................. ..................... ...... .................... ........... dd ;?.... ........... ;-T -b-7 �r, 9A CPO.... ..... W 40 ............ ........... .... ........... ............................ ............ ....... ... ........ .. ............ .. ............. r idT 15 op.a ..................... ................ 14 i i314 1 ............... 1 '7 1 I q............... 100 0 FAA ............... -7.................. + so's - - 5&,m s s-we A C 4 e WIP rwvo-js sw"zi,40-0 4 of is pe. cer vi CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Consultant Statement of Qualifications Evaluation PRIME CONSULTANTS: Parametrix Shapira Ebasco Shaldon Shannon L.C.,Lee David Jones & 8-12 Watershed W H' Springwood' & Wilson Evans Stokes PaGiffp EVALUATION CRITERIA; 1. Designated Approach 60 25 27 21 15 18 17 30 24 25 17 22 21 � 28 29 20 26 23 19 26 27 27 17 27 23 `LC 2. Affirmative:Action 10 5 5 4 5 4 4 4 4 5 4 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3. Firm Availability 10 5 5 5 5 5 2 5 4 4 4 5 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 5 4 4. History of Perlormance 80 36 33 40 28 30 30 37 33 29 28 34 25 36 37 35 36 35 35 35 37 35 20 38 34 5, Office Location 10 2 4 4 4 4 4 5 4 5 2 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 3 4 4 6, Proposed Team 30 12 12 15 11 11 13 13 12 11 11 15 7 13 14 15 13 13 15 12 13 12 10 15 13 IL- ITOTAL POINTS 200 1 174 178 171 155 155 150 179 169 166 124 178 147 RANK 4 2 5 8 8 10 1 6 7 12 2 11 ^VEAL A 6 C s 2 -] 8 9 10 2 2 5 I Z 1 1 /INK CIF R6UtkUj6LJ CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Consultant Statement of Qualifications Evaluation . ..... ... on: ......... . . ................. .. .... ... - ------------- ... . . .:.. ............ ...... . ............. PRIM ....... . ..... . ........ —-------------------- .-A0 . .. . .......... .............. 30 5' 27 2 I A5' ........... 211 2-5 /1 5 S 40 -3 2-8 30 3b 130 37 33 12-7 2-9 ......... .......... 5 ...... ... .......... ... ...... 15 /�7 eta I7V l76 bb 190 CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Consultant Statement of Qualifications Evaluation gn ................. M o ...........am Via onx ..... . .. . ........... ..........i: van ............... hl .... .................... ..... .............. . ......... ........ ....... .............. ........... -7 :Z7 rt.:, .... 5 4'�::H to, OPOW 40 31e 1-3 100 t4iq ptclple- J2 ' 5m4ftAo -- 2 JO,4.e,-15'f Shows — 3 E,-17, CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Consultant Statement of Qualifications Evaluation nx�li: PON ... ........ NAP .T 'hWO.n ..1 ha -W. am ... ......... .... ...... ...... ........... ........... ........... .................. ................... ........... ......... L A: ........... .............. ....... ...... .................. .......... . ................. �gd jq Z-7 4..N jigno 30 ................ . ... .......... .......... .............. 5 F5 r 9f 140 -7 37 5............. ............ Tonx; 13 ...... .... IT 100 q J1 3 f I"Finoxg MAI 51(npvi4 -51' CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Consultant Statement of Qualifications Evaluation W,....:M.. e...... ........ p f4*n ba" Oil I R -ORMTA ....%::.......... .......... Shapho. i".X'*� jN wig N 0...... ....-............. ...... .... ....... ........... ............ ... .............POO... ............ ............. ............... .... .......... ........................... ... ........................ ............ ................................... AX: ..............I i�� ... .............. ............ ................ .............................. ..... ................. ......................... .................... .......... -:-X.............. .............. ........................... ............. �.:.................. ............................... .......... ...... .......... . ............. ........... WA 'I ....... ..... ............ . .................... ...... .......... .... ..... ... .......... .............. .......................... . ................. ........... .. ... ...... .. ................ .......................... ............. ......... ............ . .. ...... 30 'z 29 1-7 Z-7 . ............ . ....... ....... ... ...... f--7 .... ................... ..... ..................... A00 ............ ............... Jim 5 23 A0411 0 ........... r.00 3-7, 0 35 3.5 3 5 3 7 35 5 On: ....................... 4- .................... .................... .................... T .................... 15 14 3 ....... . ........ TO ..........!T A UP0 01 N T 1008y170 03 1 50 1 e 6 CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK Consultant Statement of Qualifications Evaluation ........... :Mx TAW. W . .......... i�1i� h .. . ......... ........... ............ ...... .... ......... ... .... .......... .. ..... ....... ............ ... ... ...... ... : YVXQ!#�O� ............... PRA f�p q ................... pd: xv.. ..... . ...... .......... . :::::::;::; . , :!:.,Va . : .... ....... ... ........... . ...... ... . ... . ... . ...... ......... ..... ...... ::Xx : ........................... ... .... ........... ....... .............. ....... ........................... ... . ...... .. ............ ...... .... ....... .... ... ....... ........ .......... ..........— - ! --- --- ------------- ............. .. ......... . ......... 30 1*.................... ................... f. ................. 5 ................... 4- 14 ........... 40 .. .................. ............ 'fw, r : .................. 5 4 .. ........ ........... ..... . ......... T 15 10 .......... F1 .................. ................. ......... 100 0 M o t, 1 5ff 0+ �C, + am e' t (�0 0 or v CITY OF RENTON Wetland Mitigation Bank Interview Questions 1 . What do you think are the most critical physical components of wetland creation or restoration? What would you say are the main reasons wetland mitigation projects don't meet their goals? 2. What are the current problems with the implementation of mitigation banks? 3. What regulatory problems do you expect this project to encounter? What permits might the project need? 4. Given a very limited budget, what aspects of the project would you consider to be absolutely vital? If the budget is too small to complete the entire project at once, how might the project be phased? 5. How would you balance wetland mitigation with the City's other needs in the Valley such as flood control, habitat protection, water quality and recreation? Other possible questions: • What funding is available for this kind of project? What experience and success does your firm have in acquiring such funding? • What are some of the different approaches to wetland "mitigation banking"? What are the opportunities and limitations of each of these approaches? What type of banking program do you see the City implementing? Why? • How could implementation of wetland mitigation banks be improved and made more successful? • What do you see as the opportunities and constraints of the mitigation sites? • Describe the most complex wetland mitigation project your firm has attempted. What problems did you have and how did you resolve them? City of Renton Wetland Mitigation Bank Consultant Interview Evaluation PRiM CQNSILAtTS Paarrtei€ix. Shapira Ehasco E3avi+ ..Janes'& V!&N Euans Stc Eces P WHio 11AElZAT.IQAI CRfTERIAk ........ ..Prt' t>€ '.,;:raGt> <><>< <ii >>;<[» 25 ... 2:<<tlffr~tiiarlt; retitlert:8 ;;;:; ::::>. > 20 e .:.......:..............................................................: s: :: F.esi a.ite � e enc Caardrriat►ch..EX erience Sirength .. Project. . anaaer 15 a 6. Response to Questions.., 5 7_ CEart cif Preser�tatEon 5 TOTAL:POEMG.S 100 RANK F-jti Vie c,�s PARAMETRIX History of Performance 1. listed experience w/mit banking in everett wa and other 2. demonstrated quality experience, especially in wetland mit 3. experienced w/all sizes of projects 4. experienced w/agencies 5. no evidence that team has worked together before 6. lead firm has worked w/the city on sewer replacement 7. participation w/superfund site w/coe section10/404 permits and doe wqc 8. worked w/doe funded project on sumner wetland inventory Designated Approach 1. good methods description 2. good, clear scope which expounded on the city scope 3. good understanding of regulatory agency role Proposed Team 1. experience/education w/ mit banking 2. all disiplines of rfp represented w/sufficient experience 3. too many team members (13), some resumes missing Affirmative Action Lead firm MBE Firm Availability 1. expressed ability to meet city schedules Office Location 1. kirkland office SHAPIRO History of Performance 1. no applied experience w/ mit banking 2. demonstrated quality experience 3. experienced w/all sizes of projects 4. understanding of coe 404 and doe sma excellent .5. team has worked together before .6. firm has conducted wetland delineation in renton for cstc using 87 and 89 methods .7. no firm experience working for renton Designated Approach 1. excellent, clear scope which expounded on the city scope 2. good understanding of regulatory agency role Proposed Team 1. mit banking opportunities and constraints reports for snohomish co 2. possible weakness in hydrology w/strength in regulatory agency work Affirmative Action Lead firm wmbe Finn Availability 1. expressed ability to meet city schedules Office Location 1. seattle office EBASCO History of Performance 1. subconsultant experienced w/ mit banking agreements subconsultants educated regarding banks 2. demonstrated quality experience 3. experienced w/all sizes of projects 4. most of team has worked together before .5. lead firm and subconsultant experienced w/wetland projects .6. firm/team experience working for renton 7. good understanding of agencies implied by experience Designated Approach 1. did not present scope because funding unknown 2. experience shown w/ banks lends to confidence in future scope development success 3. clear explanation that scope development will be based on client priorities and funding Proposed Team 1. included banking expert, hydrology expert as consultants 2. two subconsultants do not have professional liability insurance; may be covered under prime 3. all disciplines represented w/experienced staff Affirmative Action wbe and mbe subconsultants Firm Availability 1. expressed ability to meet city schedules Office Location 1. bellevue office SHELDON History of Performance 1. lead firm established for only 2 years. no experience w/city 2. all subconsultants have experience w/city 3. rw beck knowledgable of valley through esgrwp 4. did not demonstrate experience w/banking projects or studies 5. demonstrated experience w/wetlands 6. subconsultants demonstrated experience w/all sizes of projects projects listed lead firm did not exceed $40k 7. no evidence team has worked together before 8. work w/agencies implied by experience, average Designated Approach 1. inclusion of banking research is asking for funding to educate team with knowledge they should have already 2. statement that if excess credit then city may consider mit for out of watershed loss suggests uninformed about agency reqmts 3. scope deviates from rfp scope too much 4. use of usfws to classify wetlands not consistent w/wetland reg Proposed Team 1. team does not include surveyors. other disciplines represented 2. no experience w/banking Affirmative Action 1. lead wbe w/ mbe subconsultant Firm Availability 1. expressed ability to meet city schedules Office Location 1. seattle office SHANNON &WILSON History of Performance 1. lead has extensive knowledge of surface and subsurface conditions of valley 2. all have experience w/city 3. did not demonstrate experience w/ banking projects or studies 4. demonstrated experience w/wetlands 5. subconsultants demonstrated experience w/all sizes of projects 6. team has worked together before 7. work w/agencies implied by experience, average Designated Approach 1. good method description 2. scope perceived to include five tasks of rfp scope. focused on general methods of scope development, execution, and completion and not on project specific scope of work Proposed Team 1. no experience w/banking 2. qualification of team member assigned for agencies involvement seems slanted toward EIS work, not wetland mitigation 3. all disciplines of rfp represented according to team organization chart Affirmative Action 1. sub wbe Firm Availability 1. expressed ability to meet city schedules Office Location 1. seattle office LEE History of Performance 1. indirect experience w/city through longacres project. presented as the major selling point. 2. did not demonstrate experience w/ banking projects or studies 3. demonstrated experience w/wetlands 4. subconsultants demonstrated experience w/all sizes of projects 5. no evidence team has worked together before 6. performed contract work for acoe 7. moderate number of team members Designated Approach 1. limited information provided Proposed Team 1. no experience w/ banking 2. all disciplines of rfp represented according to proposal Affirmative Action 1. lead firm appears to meet mbe requirements but has not applied Firm Availability 1. did not document availability Office Location 1. seattle office DAVID EVANS History of Performance 1. dea staff assigned to banking also involved w/glacier park project and agreement 2. familiar with site and city 3. demonstrated experience w/wetlands and 404 permitting 4. lead and subconsultants have multiple experiences with city seattle times project, comprehensive plan and deis, glacier park 5. demonstrated experience w/ banking agreements w/ proponents but not agencies 6. experienced w/all sizes of projects 7. team has worked together before 8. performed contract work for acoe and doe Designated Approach 1. very detailed scope expounding on rfp scope Proposed Team 1. experience w/ banking agreements with proponents, but not w/agencies 2. too many team members (14) 3. all disciplines of rfp represented according to proposal 4. subconsultant azous worked w/city developing critical areas and wetlands ordinance 5. subconsultants stiefel and azous educated about banking 6. excellent experience w/wetlands 7. stiefel experienced project manager w/team and agencies Affirmative Action 1. subconsultant has applied for wbe status Firm Availability 1. expressed ability to meet city schedules Office Location 1. bellevue/kent offices JONES &STOKES History of Performance 1. experienced w/city and familiar w/valley area boeing deis, wetland inventory, esgrwp, brwgmp, gma, metro nepa eis 2. experienced w/projects of all sizes 3. no evidence team has worked together before 4. experience w/ banking study 5. experience w/agencies, but not in banking Designated Approach 1. organized scope into diagram and indicated it needs refinement in negotiation w/city 2. did not expound on rfp scope Proposed Team 1. all disciplines of rfp represented and experienced 2. knowledge w/ banking, but no experience in implementation 3. too many team members (15) Affirmative Action 1. subconsultant wbe Firm Availability 1. all but one subconsultant expressed ability to meet schedules Office Location 1. bellevue office B-TWELVE History of Performance 1. did not following rfp format 2. experienced w/city and familiar w/valley area tukwila projects, black river corp park 3. experienced w/ projects of all sizes 4. team has worked together before 5. experienced w/wetlands 6. did not demonstrate experience or knowledge of banking sim to this project 7. experience w/agencies, but not in banking Designated Approach 1. organized scope into diagram and indicated it needs refinement in negotiation w/city 2. did not expound on rfp scope Proposed Team 1. all disciplines of rfp represented except fisheries not certain 2. experience in implementation not clear. question whether banking project cited sim to city project. Affirmative Action 1. lead and subconsultant wbe Firm Availability 1. expressed ability to meet schedule Office Location 1. kent office WATERSHED History of Performance 1. not all subconsultants followed rfp format 2. did not demonstrate experience w/city familiarity w/valley area 3. experienced w/ projects of all sizes 4. not sure team has worked together before 5. experienced w/wetlands 6. did not demonstrate experience or knowledge of banking sim to this project 7. experience w/agencies, but not in banking Designated Approach 1. did not expound on rfp scope 2. did not demonstrate understanding of project through scope Proposed Team 1. all disciplines of rfp represented 2. no education or experience in banking demonstrated Affirmative Action 1. two subconsultant wbe and one mbe Firm Availability 1. lead expressed ability to meet schedule. three subconsultants did not Office Location 1. kirkland office W&H PACIFIC History of Performance 1. did not demonstrate experience w/ city or familiarity w/valley area 2. did not follow rfp format closely 3. experienced w/ projects of all sizes and with banking 4. team has worked together before 5. experienced w/wetlands 6. experience w/agencies Designated Approach 1. did not expound on rfp scope but communicated understanding of agencies coord Proposed Team 1. all disciplines of rfp represented 2 education and experience in banking demonstrated Affirmative Action 1. subconsultant wbe Firm Availability 1. expressed ability to meet schedule Office Location 1. bellevue office SPRINGWOOD History of Performance 1. did not demonstrate experience w/ mit banking at firm level 2. lead firm established for only 2 years. no direct experience w/city by lead or team 3. current lead firm insurance exclusions probably unacceptable 4. no evidence that team has worked together before 5. subconsultants did not follow rfp form 6. one subconsultant did not provide firm experience Designated Approach 1. scope is generally acceptable however knowledge of agency involvement in mit banking is not demonstrated Proposed Team 1. did not demonstrate experience/education w/mit banking 2. project manager degree in landscape architecture, 3yrs experience in project management 3. wetlands 27/3=approx 9 yrs ave 4. hydrology 15/1=15 yrs ave 5. water quality 6. fisheries 7. soils 8. surveying/mapping no wildlife specialist Affirmative Action Lead firm WMBE Mapping/surveying MBE Firm Availability 1. subconsulants did not indicate project workload 2. lead firm major part of workload finish by june Office Location 1. seattle offices PLAN HOLDER'S LIST Project Name Bid Date Project Eng: Time Phone# Place Consultant Eng's Estimate Phone# SUBMIT BID TO CITY CLERKS OFFICE BEFORE BID OPENING Nam Address 2(oO I ZS ? - 2© City State Zip Phone# Fax# Name P Address 94cl MW,n d Gt �fo_ 5$$ `+f o-nmR c1S,402- City State Zip Phone# Fax# Names?.�1.1e11 Address 7S 1:7 AL) E �,X�rTu �t g/O z- City State Zip Phone# Fax# Name Address City State Zip Phone# Fax# HT NUSC: PLAN HOLDER'S LIST Project Name Bid Date Project Eng: Time Phone # Place Consultant Eng's Estimate Phone# SUBMIT BID TO CITY CLERKS OFFICE BEFORE BID OPENING J f Name CH IZI' Tn KIA SI W J J . D. W+(I T-e Address Api 11 U 1 501 3W VA6ZyUJ lE WA City State Zip � G Phone# Fax# Name n Address z6 2S i�A k AA) :-;k , z. cs-,c n City State Zip Phone# Fax# Name, , L&--k is Address Pros c� City State zip Phone# Fax# Name zinnmtn1A-n 1 o10 , Lm.4 M%n12,r� Address $ 0 City State zip Phone# Fax# HTLNUSI': PLAN HOLDER'S LIST Project Name Bid Date Project Eng: Time Phone# Place Consultant Eng's Estimate Phone# SUBMIT BID TO CITY CLERKS OFFICE BEFORE BID OPENING Name -Al D I o, L nq1 Pe Address �`t 0 C l cI S [-P-n 5P(1 lid S V 1�-Q 3 0 S 53 `f 0 I0S-2q2! P City State Zip Phone# Fax# o.J R--�,2 Name 0$0- -1f Address `7��s— t 194', Ati e S E g©0 5 City State Zip A- Phone# tf SS- 3 S 7/ Fax# Name Address �J `F AV Stj �- JM E& City State Zip Phone# Fax# Name Address as , \ �((, City State zip Phone# 6P 3oo Fax#_ z7'0 HTLNUSI': PLAN HOLDER'S LIST Project Name Bid Date Project Eng: Time Phone # Place Consultant Eng's Estimate Phone# SUBMIT BID TO CITY CLERKS OFFICE BEFORE BID OPENING F v k er Name Pen i-ec- t= nv,ru cco�a9 / Address Q0 1 k�a-a �)(i Lit-L� S u i� e A--7 E d rn m& WA �2t City Stat Zip Phone# Fax# Name ,AC-C IC G C`_er FRGtss D Z h frz>,�ftTU C k--- Address SV I l e ��lJ t D Q 00 I .), � �'rt M 9 q ()Q L/ City State zip Phone# Fax# Name_C--T n q r A I I 1 t 0 r Address ( 5 Av AJ E S ZDO City State Zip Phone# Fax# Name C01\ e- �DUQa(1-"�G�C �y(1�11 �' drJl.l (� Address _ Ao m, J U l-k- 5, spa 0% C al City State Zip Phone# Fax# H:PINLIST: i PLAN HOLDER'S LIST Project Name Bid Date Project Eng: Time Phone# Place Consultant Eng's Estimate Phone# SUBMIT BID TO CITY CLERKS OFFICE BEFORE BID OPENING Name "CL r bo-fa- 12MnC.hl� r 1)02— S Ll Mon C:LS -* AssacAddres h d S as D City State Zip Phone# Fax# t C(� Name CA� t.l r"f}1 r\v I ro n tYl"io-Q Address WA qpcm City State Zip Phone# Fax# Name Address O City State Zip Phone# Fax# Name MbAQ Address 6' Iy ly V city StateZip Phone# Fax# HTLNUSC: PLAN HOLDER'S LIST Project Name Bid Date Project Eng: Time Phone # Place Consultant Eng's Estimate Phone# SUBMIT BID TO CITY CIERKS OFFICE BEFORE BID OPENING Name C��ftceL ES /T%EN 6�,e G— n7 //U C Address A/- R/L L&?,J,(7 &- -" U // City State Zip Phone# Fax# 82 7 -516 77 Name i 1 �2,1 i o Cm1&x- ftOc . / Address �I O�i `Q� KE �O os a �j City State zip Phone# Fax# Name J OACO 0(CQ-vL- vJ ✓ Address G -q 6 I vo 15ell IFV vo Vw4 Itoo7 City State G G zip Phone# `` a Z 2 4 Fax# Name �e(1 G. Jief1Sb��, 9)a4 Address RbX q g� City State Zip Phone# Fax# HT MUST: PLAN HOLDER'S LIST Project Name Bid Date Project Eng: Time Phone# Place Consultant Eng's Estimate Phone# SUBMIT BID TO CITY CLERKS OFFICE BEFORE BID OPENING I Name E 11 f u�Ce / Address �Z311 e-'J QP Hie- City State Zip Phone# Fax# Name A dt� fS C .� Address City State p Phone# Fax# F �Q,YI TIc - A P 0v" c�,", �S Ci 1 �L0 city State zip Phone# Fax# FAddres 1 ZGtQ, Z emep i p 11 p `-,� n r��-- ,� 0 5 Q O � t y Ay f�e�mOl1.1 q is o Z City State Zip Phone# Fax# H: LNUST: PLAN HOLDER'S LIST Project Name Bid Date Project Eng: Time Phone # Place Consultant Eng's Estimate Phone# SUBMIT BID TO CFI'Y CLERKS OFFICE BEFORE BID OPENING Name Ca - ya352t0 -U M I a-t t cY\� hss o C d pI p Address O L �r d V 5 U, +2 u o O. , 9 0/6 City State Zip Phone# Fax# Name Ed C mac- � '/ Address _CnZ�� ,`� Uf�lnis U� Z� ��I(•F- R-d� City State Zip Phone# Fax# ame Cm6el-, Q Inl O,S L•C . Le 2 ar. kso C . Address aD- I l- A V W. a 0. g,? i City State Zip Phone# Fax# Name ��Yla�7a �• �VC'3 \/0lnts 15�o/F�S Address 04CZO NCR Y A a &)J!, /l�d/lP Id 44 City State Zip Phone# g 7 1 0 7 7 Fax# HT NUSI': PLAN HOLDER'S LIST Project Name Bid Date Project Eng: Time Phone # Place Consultant Eng's Estimate Phone # SUBMIT BID TO CITY CLERKS OFFICE BEFORE BID OPENING Name-f • P I k e-, n ft-CLJ c u) E og F / Address _I 69M U E O ' 4\ & i S b 1 {e 3QQ Cal '- U City State Zip Phone# Fax# Name tli rS+en Kr uea2r E RC Group Address �ul �`�� City State zip Phone# Fax# Name Key MG(NooM ChZ m �(•� � Address 1'U R off( q City State Zip Phone# Fax# Name PAy F- Wi L lA A M 5 P ZA- i4(��rAc Address I�F- 2Z u wd\( I P-lG�A op qFO --67 10 City State Zip Phone# Fax# HTLNUST: PLAN HOLDER'S LIST Project Name Bid Date Project Eng: Time Phone# Place Consultant Eng's Estimate Phone# SUBMIT BID TO CITY CLERKS OFFICE BEFORE BID OPENING Name <� ' I�1 Q )��t t UO)SQ'- Address I �1 �Q.\� l � L SQG`- 4 / lJ City State Zip Phone# Fax# Name 1.n&, C O•V 12 LG-fAa u AS S O C f Address p g bX 1 �ot`'� dmcxds q�oZ Q City State Zip Phone# Fax# Name t7 �'� U J : nc— Address O I MD LI "Y "l, _ Q1�� A ,1 Lp l� City State Zip Phone # Fax# Name RIC.k W hl}2 Ide Law Address o�l SZ) N tJ t`� LJ M-) Q E 1.33 City State Zip Phone# Fax# HT NUST: PLAN HOLDER'S LIST Project Name Bid Date Project Eng: Time Phone # Place Consultant Eng's Estimate Phone # SUBMIT BID TO CITY CLERKS OFFICE BEFORE BID OPENING Name )ha,Q I Assoc J Address 11D I r6 hV Ur�-1- "n City State Zip Phone# Fax# T0ff)eA-T-1:g c Z t e, Name G Address (1 �� h w 11 R) K t r l cuA d "I 0 D 3 3 City State Zip Phone# Fax# ('i cc-- Name E. c.) P-�S P_d CD Address I)L I v��9�C UAQ X-4 V1� City State Zip Phone# Fax# Name (s�k Spnngwood Asoc Address 2 Zn N l� '5�� ']A Spa-We (� Spa-We �"1��z)J5- City State Zip Phone# Fax# HTLNUST: PLAN HOLDER'S LIST Project Name Bid Date Project Eng: Time Phone # Place Consultant Eng's Estimate Phone# SUBMIT BID TO CITY CLERKS ONCE BEFORE BID OPENING Name �� I� n C- ✓ Address ZD � 1 f C--I ) I �y q City State Zip Phone# Fax# Name S/ �L eO A/ ¢ 55-0 C . Address _ S'0 3 h &f'� IV, lit,A V N•L4• 5idCA. w 43 H. 9 7l O 5-- City State Zip Phone# Fax# Name P R-C• 2 vfoewM ANT4 L. Ai mo Ldyd!!'ti7- --K444v r4g4d Address VON",SW 745 72o 5-64. 79'/0 r City State Zip Phone# Fax# Name Address ,4 BIN ( q City State Zip Phone# Fax# HTLNUST: PLAN HOLDER'S LIST Project Name Bid Date Project Eng: Time Phone # Place Consultant Eng's Estimate Phone# SUBMIT BID TO CITY CLERKS OFFICE BEFORE BID OPENING Name Cd ex) i 5k-I I i'nQ s - Conno v Address 3 Elvd a j City '� to Zip Phone# Fax# Name Address 3-7 9 C) SE Mile 4111 Dr. Nff orcrrAf�,j City State zip Phone# Fax# Name M c�-f 1 e can Cof-p Address _W03Z �� 2dmapd ��J�Z City State Zip Phone# Fax# Name Rcic . McJZ w� 00-CI JP,C Address _ )0 Y, C-Q -s�(LJ 1. 04\J Q 0 q City State Zip Phone# Fax# HT NUSt: PLAN HOLDER'S LIST Project Name Bid Date Project Eng: Time Phone# Place Consultant Eng's Estimate Phone# SUBMIT BID TO CITY CLERKS OFFICE BEFORE BID OPENING Name Ent 1 ' l x pin `� (Ob U a Lp Address P V X s IL)am cr 3-as 1 � Y v City State Zip Phone# Fax# Name / Address /V U� I 1 I Oa haw► ��J�} Gg 22 City State zip Phone# Fax# Name La ury)l 1 n "Ono , P-) - 7ik)el v e Ass o ctc�� / Address _5 Q / 2� ( i )osb, na+(m A-ye LL� q -0 Q V City State Zip Phone# Fax# Name KIm Sm4h nco E no nc v Address n d -st 1 I y Q kLu City State zip Phone# Fax# H: LNUST: PLAN HOLDER'S LIST Project Name Bid Date Project Eng: Time Phone# Place Consultant Eng's Estimate Phone# SUBMIT BID TO CYI'Y CLERKS OFFICE BEFORE BID OPENING Name TM E E n m ra-n m m-bJ S)a-viCles Address -- O l� Ave S V 1+t 3w'� D1afYw-c* q E,--S 10 City State Zip Phone# Fax# Name GOB U a(�r -nd S Arc (4.e-r - Address 35ba Ff mrnA 36d-4 Qa1 ncs / city State zip Phone# Fax# Name r I 1e;e_I I' Address _DQ5Ia U3-01 AN Se tac Q3b3 1 Q 10 S , city State Zip Phone# Fax# Name I Q L"�l Q u ►1`(�) C / i - v d Address 1 0 n E -Sulfe city State Zip Phone# Fax# H:PLNUST: CITY OF RENTON NOTICE TO CONSULTANTS FOR STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS The City of Renton's Planning/Building/Public Works Department is soliciting Statements of Qualifications from a consultant or team of consultants which can provide expertise in all of the following areas for a wetland mitigation project in the Renton Valley Industrial Park: A. Wetland Analysis B. Wetland Mitigation/Mitigation Banking C. Wetland Creation/Restoration D. Fish and Wildlife Habitat E. Soils Engineering F. Hydrology G. Survey/Mapping H. Community/Regulatory Agency Involvement The Planning/Building/Public Works Department of Renton is seeking a consultant or team of consultants to provide services entailing the establishment of a wetland mitigation program and the design of large freshwater wetlands. Major elements of the project include, but are not limited to: 1) analysis of existing and historic wetlands and uplands; 2) site survey; 3) setting goals and objectives; 4) establishment of a mitigation program; 5) coordination with and understanding of an existing flood control project; 6) master plan; 7) grading plan; 8) planting plan; 9) monitoring and maintenance plan; 10) contingency plan; and 1 1 ) coordination with Federal, State, City, and other local agencies. If your firm wishes to submit a Statement of Qualifications, please request a project information packet from the Surface Water Utility Section of the Planning/Building/ Public Works Department, Renton Municipal Building, 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington 98055 at (206) 235-2631 . Information packets may also be picked up in person at the 4th floor information counter in the Municipal Building. Deadline: Statements of Qualifications are to be directed to the Surface Water Utility Section no later than April 5, 1993, at the address listed above. Questions are to be directed to David Saxen at (206) 277-2475 on Monday and Wednesday afternoons, or all day Friday. Date of Publication: March 22, 1993 and March 29, 1993 CITY OF RENTON APPLICATION PROCEDURES FOR CONSULTANT WRITTEN STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS WETLAND MITIGATION BANK The City of Renton's Planning/Building/Public Works Department is soliciting Statements of Qualifications from a consultant or team of consultants for the creation of a wetland mitigation program and plan. The selected firm or team shall have expertise in all of the following disciplines and shall submit a Statement of Qualifications for each discipline: A. Wetland Analysis B. Wetland Mitigation/Mitigation Banking C. Wetland Creation/Restoration D. Fish and Wildlife Habitat E. Soils Engineering F. Hydrology G. Survey/Mapping H. Community/Regulatory Agency Involvement Submission of Statement of Qualification The following general non-project specific information (section A) is required from each applying consultant, to which shall be attached project-specific information (section B) for each discipline. Section C is mandatory and section D is optional depending on the firm's abilities. A. General Information Required 1 . Qualifications and Expertise of firm. In two pages or less, describe the following: A.) History of your firm. B.) Your financial capability (ability to provide insurance and meet bonding requirements) C.) Project workload and experience. List project experience, including location, scope, engineer estimates and actual cost. Do not include projects worked on by previous members of your firm if they are now employed by another firm. D.) Provide information substantiating your firm's ability to meet such schedules and budgets. 2. Approach to the project. In two pages or less, explain your firm's approach to the following: A.) Project management and product delivery. B.) Indicate your methods for establishing scopes of work, cost estimates and schedules. C.) Describe through a scope of work how your firm will complete the project. • `x B. Project Specific Information Required 1 . In-House Team Qualifications Indicate, in two pages or less the following: A.) The proposed team members from your firm that have qualification in the particular area of expertise applicable to the project, and each members proposed role. B.) Identify the proposed project manager. Briefly explain their education and experience. C.) Provide resumes for each team member. 2. Project Experience Project experience pages shall have the project name centered at the top of the page. A.) List the location, scope, and size of each project, and reference the sponsor's name, position or function, and phone number. Include only those projects managed by the above project manager or including more than one-half of the above listed team members. C. Affirmative Action & Minority Business Usage A firm's Affirmative Action program and use of minority business will be evaluated in the selection process. Interested firms should include a narrative on their Affirmative Action program and any prior usage of minority businesses. D. Multi-Consultant Teams 1 . Consultant Team Requirements If firms choose to combine resources to apply for this project, each firm must meet the requirements of sections A, B, and C above that are applicable to their field of expertise. 2. Principal Consultant When applying as a team, one of the firms must be the principal firm and all other firms will be considered subcontractors to the prime firm. List all firms associated with the team and their status as either the prime or a sub. Summary Consultants may apply for consideration individually if they can provide expertise for all disciplines or they may form their own teams to meet all the requirements listed above. Two (2) complete sets of Statements of Qualification shall be submitted with each application for which consideration is requested. 1 ' I Deadline Statements of Qualifications must be submitted no later than April 5, 1993, to the Surface Water Utility Division of the Planning/Building/Public Works Department, Renton Municipal Building, 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington 98055, . There will be no exceptions to the deadline. For additional information, contact David Saxen at 277-2475 on Monday and Wednesday afternoons, or all day Friday. •\` \� pro, _....._ __ _ _ � �:::�\, �� 1 � .. J VALLEY JZ�l —' H'ST RR —��-s- -�_ --- — RR o — — _________ ________ ___ _ I " QO p ^------ RR (� JACKSON SW —� I o�� RO A CETR ACK `1 Ih AV C OAKESDALE AV SW__ _ • - • POWEL II♦\ I s 1 x ♦ 1 c� � 1 I > `� r r 5 P R {L o o K G R t; e M- UHD E w � r AV SW UND _......-- -- AV S 08 E VALLEY RO ___.._ A-� A-3= _-- — --_. °�♦` _ - ug!1 __- LAKE ST S S TAL80T CREST DR `4 s —__ - ul�-`� _.IC J _JL st�ATTucK -- - AV N _I _ A uoRRIS AV �- r�f -r/`— 981h AY j N J(�� F�g-- i�l 911nfRS(19 '�-- J IJ � S CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION BANK PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND TENTATIVE SCOPE Project Description Overall Goals The City of Renton has acquired properties in the Green River Valley (Black River drainage basin) on which exist scattered low quality wetlands. The City intends to use two of these properties, which total 45 acres, to establish a wetland mitigation site consisting of one or two large contiguous wetlands. The City's primary goal is to achieve no net loss of wetlands. The City will facilitate development on private parcels with scattered low quality wetlands by establishing larger, more contiguous, and higher quality wetlands on its property along Springbrook Creek in the Black River drainage basin. Project Objectives With increasing urbanization upstream of the project site, water quantity in Springbrook Creek will likely increase while water quality decreases. The Springbrook Creek corridor is subject to periodic flooding, thus one objective of the project is to reduce the severity of flooding by increasing flood water storage in the lower part of the basin. Another objective is to improve the quality of water entering the Green River and Puget Sound. Along with the above two objectives, the City intends to increase the habitat value for fish and wildlife as well as providing environmental education and passive recreation opportunities for residents and employees in the vicinity of the project. Glacier Park Mitigation Agreement As part of the bank site acquisition agreement with the Glacier Park Company, the City is obligated to provide mitigation for impacts to five acres of class III wetlands. This mitigation is to occur on the bank site. Mitigation of these impacts is the City's first concern. After fulfilling the requirements of the Glacier Park mitigation agreement, the City will consider additional public and private mitigation projects for the remainder of the site. Mitigation Program The City's mitigation site will initially be used for off-site mitigation projects on a case by case basis. When possible, implementation of separate projects will be coordinated to decrease construction costs as well as impacts to existing wetlands on the site. Construction of a mitigation project will occur in advance of or concurrently with the impact, but not after the impact. If feasible, the City will, in conjunction with off-site mitigation projects, create additional wetland acreage to be used at a later date to compensate for unknown future impacts. If a surplus of wetland acreage can be established, the mitigation site will function as a mitigation bank selling credits to compensate for wetlands lost elsewhere in the drainage basin. Tentative Scope Task 1 - Project Coordination 1 .1 Description Coordination between the City's Project Manager (Manager) and the Consultant will be established. The Manager will be responsible for scheduling meetings to accomplish this coordination. A close working relationship is expected between the Manager and Consultant. Input will be solicited from the City's Interdepartmental Design Team, regulatory agencies, and a Focus Group during the project. A total of eight (8) meetings between the Manager, Consultant, Interdepartmental Design Team, Focus Group, and other subconsultants will occur over the course of the project. The Consultant's Project Manager will be responsible for project coordination, data collection and analysis, creation of the mitigation plan, and all other products. The City's Project Manager will review products, monitor, and coordinate the project. Three meetings will occur during the project coordination task. The project coordination, schedule, and scope will be finalized in the first meeting. Initial coordination with regulatory agencies and review of the overall goals for the mitigation program will occur in the second and third meetings. The City will provide the following documentation: wetland delineations on the mitigation sites (David Evans & Assoc.), City of Renton Black River Water Quality Management Plan Wetland Inventory Report (Jones and Stokes, 9-22-92), City of Renton Wetlands Study, (Feb. 1981), and a level I hazardous substance assessment report. The following are available from the City's mapping system (Geo-Sequel): Wetlands inventory, streets, utilities, lot lines, topography, land use, and zoning. 1 .2 Timing One (1 ) week. The project coordination task will begin with the notice to proceed. 1 .3 Product A memorandum will be submitted to the Manager documenting the Consultant's understanding of the results of the coordination. Meeting minutes will also be submitted. The mitigation goals and objectives, analysis, mitigation plan, and monitoring and maintenance plan should include narrative text, matrices, maps, charts, graphs, tables and illustrations as appropriate. The final plan should include a title page, executive summary, table of contents, list of figures, and a glossary of terms. All products should be submitted both as camera ready hard copy, and on 3-1/2" computer disk, using software that is compatible with the City's . 1 system. The City uses the following software on an IBM system: Microsoft Word for Windows, Auto CAD and Geo-Sequel. Task 2 - Conditions Assessment 2.1 Description Analyze physical conditions of the mitigation site to determine the most suitable location and type (i.e. emergent, scrub-shrub, forested) of wetlands to be created. Analyze the financial feasibility of using the mitigation site for potential users. 2.1 a Physical Conditions Analyze the mitigation bank sites and adjacent City properties identifying all physical factors pertinent to wetland restoration/creation. This should include analysis of soils, hazardous materials, topography, water source and hydrologic conditions, relationship within the watershed and to existing bodies of water, wetland and upland vegetation, fish and wildlife populations, existing upland and wetland habitat, adjacent existing and proposed land use, and future basin-wide drainage and water quality projects. Provide an opportunities and constraints analysis to address the potential of the site to meet the goals and objectives. This should include analysis of the buffer potential on the site. 2.1 b Financial Conditions Assess the acreage of wetlands in the drainage basin eligible to use the mitigation bank. Project the extent of mitigation which the mitigation site might entertain and ensure that, in a mitigation banking scenario, any created credit will eventually be used. This preliminary analysis will be used to determine the most appropriate mitigation program and fee structure. One (1) meeting will be required to discuss results of the physical and financial assessments and to determine the type of mitigation program to be pursued. This meeting will involve participation from the Focus Group and regulatory agencies. 2.2 Timing Six (6) to ten (10) weeks. 2.3 Product Chapter in the mitigation plan. Meeting minutes. Task 3 - Mitigation Goals and Objectives 3.1 Description Define requirements of the mitigation bank for future needs. Assess both quantity and quality of wetlands likely to be impacted within the Black River drainage basin, determine functional values to achieve in the wetlands created, and determine what replacement ratios will be required based on the City's wetland ordinance. Establish regulatory agency permitting requirements of the plan. 5 ► Establish a protocol, or checklist, for conditions under which projects needing mitigation could use the mitigation site. One (1 ) meeting will be required to discuss and finalize the goals and objectives for the project. Further coordination and agreement with regulatory agencies, Focus Group, and Design Team will occur during this meeting. 3.2 Timing Two (2) weeks. 3.3 Product The consultant will submit meeting minutes and a draft of the goals and objectives for the Design Team to review. The goals and objectives will be included as a chapter in the mitigation plan. Task 4 - Mitigation Plan 4.1 Description The mitigation plan will consist of a programmatic and a physical component. The mitigation plan will be established based on the site analysis, input from the Design Team and the Focus Group, and financial considerations including cost to participants and comparison of off-site costs to on-site costs. The plan will demonstrate how to achieve the goals and objectives for the mitigation bank. The programmatic component of the mitigation plan should foremost define the mitigation program protocol and should include a monitoring and goal assessment plan, a contingency plan, and a maintenance plan. In a banking scenario, the mitigation plan should also include a credit-debit accounting procedure, and a credit evaluation methodology. The second component should illustrate the physical layout and phasing of the mitigation site. These tasks are outlined as follows: 4.1 a. Determine the mitigation program to be implemented (banking vs. off- site) and develop guidelines for its use. This should include a detailed mitigation protocol based on financial analysis and input from City staff, the Focus Group, and regulatory agencies. It should document the obligations of the City, the developer, and permitting agencies in the mitigation agreement. 4.1 b. Wetland Type Determine the type of wetlands to be created including wetland and upland plant communities (buffers). Target wetland types and plant communities should seek to emulate as much as possible historic wetlands which may have existed in the vicinity of the mitigation site. 4.1 c. Proiect Goals Establish specific goals for mitigation projects upon which the success of the projects will be based as well as rough estimations for how long projects might take to meet certain criteria. These criteria might include certain plant species densities, both biotic and chemical water quality indicators, the presence of certain species of fish and wildlife, and public satisfaction and frequency of use. 4.1 d. Master Plan Create a master plan for the mitigation sites showing the location of an initial mitigation project and subsequent mitigation projects. The master plan should illustrate open water, emergent, and upland zones, as well as access trails and interpretive signs/centers. The master plan should illustrate a vision for the site and, as much as possible without knowing the extent of each mitigation project, should show the phasing of mitigation efforts. 4.1 e. Grading Plan Create a grading plan showing through elevations and contours the physical configuration of the excavation. The grading plan should be drawn by a professional civil engineer registered in the State of Washington. 4.1 f. Planting Plan Create a planting plan illustrating species of wetland and upland plants, quantity of each species, planting locations, and planting details. The planting plan should be drawn by a landscape architect registered in the State of Washington. 4.1 g. Fee Structure In order to create an accurate fee structure, establish "build-out" estimates for three alternative master plans ranging in expense from high to low. The cost of build-out for the entire mitigation site should include consultant fees, City staff hours, excavation, planting, maintenance, monitoring, and operating costs. The yearly cost of operating the bank should be estimated as well. Task 4 will require three (3) meetings. The meetings will be used to discuss the mitigation program protocol, project level goals, and to review the master plan and phasing. 4.2 Timing Six (6) to eight (8) weeks. 4.3 Products Chapter(s) in the mitigation plan. Planting and grading plans. Illustrations for site master plan and phasing. Meeting minutes. 5. - Monitoring and Maintenance Plan 5.1 Description Set up a program to monitor construction and development of mitigation projects and to evaluate the level of success for completed mitigation projects based on the goals for these projects. Establish a plan to address expected maintenance of the mitigation site. 5.1 a. The degree of success should be determined by a monitoring program that evaluates wetland functions such as the following: plant species composition and density; presence of certain fish and wildlife species; water quality to determine pollutant loading and changes; water quantity for base S 1 and peak flows; and sedimentation rates. The monitoring program should also address economic development facilitated by the mitigation program, and public use of and satisfaction with the mitigation site. The monitoring plan should explain these measurements, state when they should be performed and the frequency with which they should be performed. It should include base measurements or standards from which subsequent measurements can be evaluated. 5.1 b. The maintenance plan should identify expected maintenance issues such as control of invasive non-native species, irrigation, pruning, and dredging to removed sediment. 5.1 c Establish a contingency plan for resolving conflicts and revising elements of the mitigation plan in the event that the goals of the plan are not being met. 5.2 Timing Include in task 4. 5.3 Products Chapter in the mitigation plan. 1 City of Renton Wetland Mitigation Bank Historical Background As part of the requirements under the Growth Management Act, the City of Renton prepared a critical areas inventory. The result of the wetlands portion of the inventory concluded that the City essentially had only three categories of wetlands (1) very high quality wetlands, (2) medium high quality wetlands and (3) very low quality wetlands. This three category system is different from the usual four categories identified by many jurisdictions. The largest percentage of wetlands were very low quality wetlands, with the second most prevalent type being high quality wetlands. In addition, most of the very low quality and the very high quality wetlands were located in the Green River Valley. The Green River Valley floor, in recent history, consisted of rich agricultural land interspersed with high quality historic wetlands. However, up until 1979, before the value of wetlands was recognized, the City had allowed roughly 800 acres of land to be filled. The fill was imported, impermeable glacial till. On the filled parcels that remained vacant, rainwater collected on the surface of the fill eventually resulting in perched wetlands--the lower quality wetlands. These wetlands, scattered across the filled areas, fit the COE definition of wetlands. In addition, in the same area, some large historic wetlands still existed, having not been filled. These are high quality wetlands which provide important wetland functions for the City including: fish and wildlife habitat, flood water storage, aquifer recharge, and water quality improvement. Research in wetland creation and restoration suggests that if the fill is removed from the valley floor, re-establishment of historic wetlands would have a very good chance of success. The historic seedbed is still present, the hydrology is suitable, and hydric soils likely remain under the fill. In development terms, the presence of the perched wetlands on the filled parcels substantially reduces the development potential of the parcels, even though full infrastructure is available to service these parcels. The City held focus group meetings with property owners, wetland regulators, environmental groups and citizens. A strong consensus emerged from the property owners to fill the smaller wetlands up to the COE limit of one acre per site. Regulators, environmental groups and citizens believed that re-establishment of historical wetlands could work, but they wanted to be certain. Smaller wetlands could be filled if a reasonable degree of success was evident for the re-establishment of the historic wetlands. The City then wrote its wetland ordinance setting up the framework for the mitigation bank. The SEPA mitigation priority sequencing was written into the ordinance, i.e. avoidance, minimization, etc., and had to be considered before a banking situation would be allowed. Replacement ratio, monitoring and re-establishment plans were required in the ordinance for any banking situation. All eligible properties had to be within the same drainage basin as well. Crucial to development of a banking program was the acquisition of a suitable piece of property to use as the bank site. Fortunately, the Glacier Park Company was directed to liquidate its land holdings in the Green River Valley by its parent company, Burlington Northern. Two Glacier Park properties had existing high quality wetlands adjacent to generous areas of fill, which could be excavated to re-establish historic wetlands. Other parcels were restricted by low quality wetlands, leaving little area for industrial development. Glacier Park donated the two large parcels to the City. In exchange, the City agreed to issue Glacier Park permits to fill up to one acre of low quality wetlands on each of their six remaining parcels. The City also assumed the obligation of mitigating the impacts to the six acres of wetlands likely to be filled after these properties sold. The City Council approved the acquisition of the site and the mitigation bank concept, and executed a wetlands mitigation bank agreement with Glacier Park on May 18, 1992. The City Council's decision to acquire the site was the most critical step in the implementation of the wetland mitigation bank. The City intends to operate, maintain, and monitor the mitigation site in perpetuity. ► a a c G D2Cv n'.iIC�:Str' � e� N g ++a c vJig Lnc c uj so 1 Q 0 3 floO CM ----------------- - ---•--- C1 yv�� ! rt_any p�n E --------------------------- LLI ' 1 Z ------------ ......... ............... .............. -- --------- . ................ -- - '............................ . � � � ! � inn( =!. T aL E ....... ........ ..... ....... ..............�: ....0. ....... .. ...... i > . ..- 73-•.. ........... 4 r •�Nlnrm N l9 N tD to L CV ^-o-oo to 3 q c4 to `•:{ d c to^CO to to ._.. v N 3 N 4 .... �:._.:LLI t : _" •: i 3111 U " ..................... { ----- - ------ -- --- --- ,.r i t OUTLINE OF MITIGATION BANK AGREEMENT A. Parties : Glacier Park Company ( "GPC" ) and City of Renton ( "City•, ) B. Recitals i . WHEREAS the City desires to encourage economic development in the Orillia area consistent with city zoning, comprehensive plans, and past investments for public infrastructure; 2 . WHEREAS the City desires to establish a more flexible, creative method of regulating development in and around emerging wetlands that can serve as a model program for future development in -the city and other jurisdictions; 3 . WHEREAS the City desires to establish and expand a regional wetland system located near Springbrook Creek and other significant wetlands; 4 . WHEREAS the City desires to increase flood storage along the Springbrook Creek corridor; 5 . WHEREAS the City desires to implement a master plan for addressing stormwater control, recreation facilities, open space, and the preservation of critical areas; 6 . WHEREAS the City desires to obtain sites that may be used to mitigate and offset the loss of wetlands that may result from City-sponsored projects; 7 . WHEREAS GPC owns several large tracts of property located within the City; 8 . WHEREAS portions of the GPC property have been filled with City approval in the past; 9 . WHEREAS -GPC mitigated the prior fill activity by dedicating a wetland in excess of fifteen acres to the City; 10 . WHEREAS the previously filled portions of the GPC property have some low quality emergent wetlands; 11 . WHEREAS portions of the GPC property that have not been filled contain some high quality wetlands,- - 1 - l l 12 . WHEREAS it is necessary to fill the low quality wetlands in order to obtain a reasonable economic use of the GPC property; 13 . WHEREAS GPC has paid local improvement district assessments for infrastructure in anticipation of being ' able to develop its property; 14 . WHEREAS the local improvement district assessments paid by GPC affect both previously filled areas and unfilled high quality wetland areas; 15 . WHEREAS GPC desires to eliminate special assessments and property tax liabilities on properties that will never be developed; 16 . WHEREAS the City is willing to allow fill material to be placed in low quality wetlands provided wetland losses are mitigated; 17 . WHEREAS the City believes that wetland mitigation banking can provide a large, consolidated, and high quality wetland rather than the small, scattered, and low quality wetlands presently located on the filled portion of the GPC property; 18 . WHEREAS GPC and the City recognize that a wetland mitigation bank could be used by other property owners and the City to offset the losses of low quality wetlands on their properties; 19 . WHEREAS GPC is in the process of liquidating its assets and dissolving the company; 20 . WHEREAS GPC is willing to dedicate to the City the property necessary to establish a wetland mitigation bank; 21 . WHEREAS the City can gain an economic benefit by formulating a mitigation bank with GPC; and 22 . WHEREAS GPC and the City are desirous of establishing an agreement to allow the consolidation of wetland mitigation in a central mitigation bank; NOW THEREFORE, the parties agree: C. Terms 1 . Mitigation Bank. a. The Mitigation Bank shall consist of two parcels shown on Exhibit A. - 2 - b. GPC shall provide, a conceptual design of the completed Mitigation Bank demonstrating the available mitigation credits . 2 . Use of Mitigation Bank by Other Property Owners . • a. The City may allow other property owners within a specified area to use the Mitigation Bank to offset the fill of wetlands . b. The City may require other property owners who use the Mitigation Bank to pay the City a specified amount of money. 3 . Conveyance of Mitigation Bank to City. a. GPC shall deed the Mitigation Bank to the City. b. The City shall approve any lot line adjustments necessary to configure the Mitigation Bank as separate legal lots . The Mitigation Bank shall be conveyed to the City within 20 days after the Mitigation Bank is configured as separate legal lots . C. The deed to the Mitigation Bank shall contain a covenant obligating the City to allow use of the Mitigation Bank pursuant to Section 2 above. d. Unless there are probable significant adverse environmental impacts that are not related to the fill of the wetlands, the City shall issue determinations of non-significance for the development of each of the Benefitted Properties . e. The City shall not require any wetland mitigation on account of the development of any of the Benefitted Properties regardless of any agency comments received by the City. If any wetland mitigation is required, the City shall pay for and complete any such required mitigation. 4 . Permission to Place Fill Material. a. In exchange for GPC providing the property for a wetland mitigation bank, the City shall permit all the wetlands, as shown in the David Evans and Associates wetland studies, on each of the legal lots (the"Benefitted Properties" ) to be filled. In addition, the City shall approve a vegetation management plan with grading and filling provisions for the upland portions of the Benefitted Properties . 3 - t b. The fill material may be placed at any time after the mitigation bank properties (the "Mitigation Bank" ) have been dedicated to the City of Renton. 5 . Assumption of Indebtedness . The City shall assume the obligation for and shall pay all outstanding and future amounts owed for LID assessments and property taxes for the Mitigation Bank to be conveyed to the City pursuant to this Agreement. 6 . Support of Wetland Mitigation Banks by the City. The City shall intervene on behalf of the owners of the Benefitted Properties if the U. S . Army Corps of Engineers or the Department of Ecology do not cooperate with the formation of the Mitigation Bank or if such agencies seek to require additional mitigation in conjunction with the filling of the wetlands on the Benefitted Properties . 7 . Future Public Improvements . The Benefitted Properties shall not be subject to any LID assessments for the future extension of Oakesdale Avenue or the future construction of the P-1 channel or the P-9 channel . 8 . Effect of Intervening Ordinances . This Agreement, the agreements contained herein, and the development of the Benefitted Properties shall not be subject to, and shall not be controlled by, and shall be exempt from, any regulations that the City may adopt for the protection or regulation of wetlands . 9 . Successors and Assigns . The Agreement shall run with the land and shall benefit the Benefitted Properties and GPC and its successors and assigns . I56421.M 24 02/19/92 4 - CITY GOALS MITIGATION BANK FOR THE GREEN RIVER VALLEY A mitigation bank shall meet the following goals: 1. Achieve "no net loss" of wetlands being replaced. ---2: Function within the same drainage basin as the wetlands being replaced. 3. Perpetuate the existing functions and values of Valley wetlands and may increase the functions and values of the wetlands. ,4-.- Protect wetlands and other environmentally sensitive areas associated with the sending and receiving properties in a manner consistent with local ordinances. 5. Consolidate in one or two locations a replacement area for many scattered wetlands. 6. Promote joint agreements between the City and property owner for mechanism and running of the bank. Conform to City ordinances and state regulations concerning wetlands. 8. Increase the property owner's ability to use the sending properties for the uses specified in City ordinances and plans. 9. Encourage public access to wetlands for use when sensitive habitats are protected. n 10. Incorporate monitoring plans and methods for evaluation of its effectiveness which may be used to change the bank to provide remedies for problems and/or deficiencies. /�LS� �•�c c,ur��o TV,6 Wf",oD 0 R DW A rvC& � � G v� 47 _ pl t 96 VM'3111V3S OSOII%OB aa.a<awwoo_J'o lu"W o f� Wetland mitigation (Name of project) zpz rn RENTON The city of Renton 0 rn requests qualifications to provide services entailing the establishment cr of a we mitigation program z and the design of large freshwater wetlands. For an information pack- (Price at which contrac^ as agard' et, call Public Works at 235-2631. —ti c_. Questions are directed to David Saxen at 277-2475. Qualifications (Name of contract winner, address, city, stat are due by April 5 to the City of Renton, Planning/Bldg./Public Works Dept., Renton Municipal Bldg., 200 Mill Ave. S, Renton, WA 98055. (public notice in this Issue) (Name, address of awarding agency) CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM DATE: March 17, 1993 TO: Sam Chastain, Parks J Gregg Zimmerman, Utilities Division J Jim Hanson, Development Services Mel Wilson, Transportation Kay Shoudy,�tp Range Planning FROM: Lynn Guttm STAFF CONTACT: David Saxen, ng Range Planning, x-2475, MWF SUBJECT: Wetland Mitigation Bank Interdepartmental Design Team and Agreement. The City is establishing a wetland mitigation banking program in the Valley (Black River drainage basin) and is in the process of selecting an environmental consultant to create a wetland mitigation plan, which will consist of a protocol for running the mitigation program and a physical plan for wetland construction on the two sites. An Interdepartmental Design Team will be formed to assist in the consultant selection process, provide input for the City's project manager, and review the consultant's products. The Design Team will meet periodically throughout the planning process to accomplish these tasks. The Design Team will consist of representatives from each department with an interest in the project including Parks, Surface Water, Development Services, Transportation, and Long Range Planning. One representative from each department should be designated to participate on the Team. The first task of the Design Team will be to approve the RFP and assist in selection of the consultant. A meeting to accomplish these preliminary tasks will be scheduled within the next two weeks at which time each department's representative should be designated. Please inform David Saxen of the staff member designated to participate on the Design Team by March 24. cc: Larry Warren MARK W. ST/EFEL, P.E. t CONSULTING • CIVIL ENGINEERING • PLANNING • PROJECT MANAGEMENT • WETLAND PERMITTING January 5, 1993 Sm, 4 22 Ms. Mary Lynne Myer Principal Planner, Long Range Planning City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Subject: Orillia Wetland Mitigation Bank Dear Mary Lynne: Thank you for updating me on the status of the Orillia Wetland Mitigation Bank program. I understand that the city has obtained funds to pursue the next phase of work. You intend to request proposals from consultants in mid January. As you know, I am very interested in assisting the city follow through on the Wetland Mitigation Bank. Therefore I am requesting that you send me a copy of the RFP documents. Once I have reviewed the information I will be better able to respond and provide the necessary information. As you suggested, I have contacted DOE Wetland Section and requested information on the current draft Mitigation Bank Agreement and other reference materials for use in preparing for this project. It is a pleasure working with you. Sincerely, Mark W. Stiefel, MWS/mws rmitban k.let 22312 113th AVE. S.E. TEL: (206) 854-7472 KENT, WASHINGTON 98031-2651 FAX: (206) 854-7472 WETLAND MITIGATION BANK INTERDEPARTMENTAL DESIGN TEAM MEETING WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 30, 1992 AGENDA 1. Finalize Work Program/Organizational Structure ■ Staff Schedule and Work Program (Attachment A) ■ Project Schedule (Attachment B) ■ Communication Structure (Attachment C) 2. Project Management Plan and Scope of Work ■ Staff/Consultant division of tasks. ■ Project management of consultant/project. ■ Project objectives (Attachment D) 3. Other Business for Discussion ■ Citizen's Oversight Committee? Should a Citizen's Advisory Committee be created to assist in the formulation of the plan. The committee might consist of representatives and potentials users from the community, local environmental interests, Boeing, Metro, WDOT, and businesses adjacent to the mitigation sites such as the Seattle Times. The Committee would offer suggestions on how to make the mitigation program financially attractive and would review drafts of the mitigation plan. ■ Potential users of the mitigation site. Possible coordination of mitigation projects? ■ Pro-forma contract (Attachment E) What does the developer have to do? What are the City's obligations? 4. To Do: Wetland Mitigation Bank Staff Schedule and Work Program DIVISION MANAGEMENT TASKS 93 94 ROLE D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N Long Range Pro-planning Concept development Mitigation protocol Organizational structure O oral' s Interdopt. team saloctio Work program Intor-agoncy coordination Consultant soloction/scope of work .D. other bank sites Propose land use amendments Other stakeholdors/Funding sources Storm Water Mitigation Plan Project rnanagomont with interdopt. loam (lion review and adoption Mainlonanco and monitoring wator channels culvorts insoct control wator quality flood control Parks Construction/ Project manogomont with intordopt. toarn Implementation Plan review and adoption Maintenance and monitoring vegetation trails rocroation facilities Educational/interprotive programs Dev. Services Program Project managomont with intordopt. toorn Operation Program operation Accounting Crediting Permitting Monitoring and review I.D. other bank sitos Propose L.U. Amendments Pago 1 M��-i•tt•t� M►L�s�r�.tcs t9`f rtau C,0)4 t0 19q 3 1 t4oTlc-e Tb EZb 1✓f,� 1-7 L �pQci.S f'd-t P pr=�J F�-Tl�/t✓S `� �2 4V t✓��s� GO(.tbITI D $45' 'ASS T 7 r4 199 3 "I Mt rt taaT104 S L �UtJE � T r �1 ? JLN� ,�.lt� 1 199� cor�Pt_�rrou S•c"t. 1 • I`T9�= G�� M1T_ ��a�ctyi Tl E -c C;7rtzA-n 0►� t GDM M UN l CAM STgUGTU R;F-- tJ u 7 G!-riz"75 1,ArCr-y GT�{rcR oVrc9sr&-u-t Ael---H E-5 vt JM GDMMI'7T�'� I►�� V14 Tzj t Gt t`{ �'Q!FAT Go N StS LT�T 4LO ------------------ WETLAND MITIGATION BANK GOAL STRUCTURE 1. Mitigation Program Goals The City's reasons for pursuing a mitigation program. ■ Achieve no net loss of wetlands. ■ Facilitate development in the Green River Valley. FPrlectives rojects should be designed for. e flooding. e water quality. e and increase fish and wildlife habitat. e recreation opportunities. e interpretive/educational information. 3. Project Objective Criteria and Goals Specific criteria to measure the amount success for each project objective. For example, a project designed primarily to provide habitat might have as a goal the presence of 6 Great Blue herons within 5 years of completion. Criteria might include: ■ Plant species densities. ■ Biotic and chemical water quality indicators. ■ Presence of certain species of fish and wildlife. ■ Public satisfaction and frequency of use. Group Discussion: The more we can clarify and prioritize the Project Objectives for all mitigation projects, the more likely consecutive mitigation efforts will be consistent over time, and the more likely mature mitigation projects will meet their initial objectives. Any objectives to add? Which objectives are the most important? Which are most realistic and feasible to achieve? T Wetland Mitigation Bank Contract for Use Permittee agrees to: 1. Abide by the rules of the City's Wetland Ordinance. 2. Demonstrate no net loss of wetland functional value. 3. Demonstrate that all practicable means of avoiding the impact have been explored and that potential on-site mitigation is unfeasible. 4. Provide a fee-in-lieu of performing the mitigation. This will be paid in advance of the impacts (how far in advance?). 5. Provide for the City an complete assessment of existing conditions at the wetland to be impacted including wetland and upland vegetation types, fish and wildlife species, and acreage. The City agrees to: 1. Apply the permittee's fee-in-lieu of mitigation entirely to wetland creation/restoration on the City's mitigation site, administration of the project, planning of the mitigation program, and maintenance of completed projects. 2. Implement the mitigation project upon the signing of this contract. 3. Supervise the implementation of the mitigation project. 4. Perform follow-up monitoring and maintenance on the mitigation project. 5. Manage the mitigation property in perpetuity. Permittee Date City Manager Date D R A F T WETLAND MITIGATION BANK PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN 1. AGREEMENT HIGHLIGHTS Consultant Schedule Start of contract: January 30, 1993 Notice to proceed: February 10, 1993 End of contract: August 1, 1993 City Schedule Completion of mitigation program planning phase: August-September, 1993 Start-up of mitigation program: September, 1993 Total Project Budget $43,000 Other key information-public involvement, political process, media management? 2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Overall Goals The City of Renton has acquired adjacent properties in the Green River Valley (Black River drainage basin) on which there exist scattered low quality wetlands. The City intends to use two of these properties, which total 45 acres, to establish a wetland mitigation site consisting of one or two large contiguous wetlands. The City's primary goal is to achieve no net loss of wetlands. The City will facilitate development on private parcels with scattered low quality wetlands by establishing larger, more contiguous, and higher quality wetlands on its property along Springbrook Creek in the Black River drainage basin. Project Objectives (SEE ATTACHMENT D) With increasing urbanization upstream of the project site, water quantity in Springbrook Creek will likely increase while water quality decreases. The Springbrook Creek corridor is subject to periodic flooding, thus one objective of the project is to reduce the severity of flooding by increasing flood water storage in the lower part of the basin. Another objective is to improve the quality of water entering the Green River and Puget Sound. Along with the above two objectives, the City intends to increase the habitat value for fish and wildlife as well as providing environmental education and passive recreation opportunities for residents and employees in the vicinity of the project. GROUP DISCUSSION.- The more we can clarify and prioritize the Project Objectives for all mitigation projects, the more likely consecutive mitigation efforts will be consistent across time. And the more likely the mature mitigation project will meet the initial objectives. Any objectives to add? What objectives are most important? Most realistic and feasible? Mitigation Program The City's mitigation site will initially be used for off-site mitigation projects on a case by case basis. When possible, implementation of separate projects will be coordinated to decrease construction costs as well as impacts to existing wetlands on the site. Construction of a mitigation project will occur in advance of or concurrently with the impact, but never after the impact. If feasible, the City will, in conjunction with off-site mitigation projects, create additional wetland acreage to be used at a later date to compensate for unknown future impacts. If a surplus of wetland acreage is established, the mitigation site will function as a mitigation bank selling credits to compensate for wetlands lost elsewhere in the drainage basin. Roles and Responsibilities (SEE ATTACHMENT A) An environmental consultant will be hired to analyze the mitigation site, draft a mitigation plan, and create a conceptual master plan showing phasing of projects. The plan will document the mitigation procedure to be used and will establish a framework which will ensure that all mitigation projects are implemented under consistent goals. The City's Interdepartmental Design Team will be responsible for project management during the establishment of the mitigation plan. After implementation of the mitigation program, the Design Team will be responsible for periodically evaluating and, if necessary, revising the mitigation program. Upon completion of the mitigation plan and opening of the mitigation program, Development Services will operate the program processing all applications and permits, and coordinating mitigation projects when possible. Storm Water and Parks will administer construction of projects and be responsible for routine maintenance. Additional Participation A Citizen's Advisory Committee will be created to assist in formulation and review of the plan. The Advisory Committee will consist of representatives and potential users from the community, local environmental interest groups, Boeing, Metro, WDOT, and businesses adjacent to the mitigation site such as Seattle Times. Initial coordination with the pertinent regulatory agencies will occur during the project coordination task (Task 1) in the scope of work. At the start of the mitigation plan task (Task 4), agreement between the City and regulatory agencies on operation of the mitigation program will be achieved. 3. SCOPE OF WORK TASK 1.- PROJECT COORDINATION 1.1 Description Coordination with the City's Interdepartmental Design Team (Design Team), Citizen's Advisory Committee (Advisory Committee), and subconsultants not part of the Consultant's team will be established. The City Project Manager (Manager) will be responsible for scheduling meetings to accomplish this coordination. A close working relationship is expected between the Design Team, Consultant, and Advisory Committee during the project. A total of eight (8) meetings between the Design Team, the Consultant, and other subconsultants will occur over the course of the project. The Consultant's project manager will be responsible for project coordination, data collection and analysis, creation of the mitigation plan, and all other products. The City's project manager (Manager) will review products, monitor, and coordinate the project. Three meetings will occur during the project coordination task. The project coordination, schedule, and scope will be finalized in the first meeting. Initial coordination with regulatory agencies and review of the overall goals for the mitigation program will occur in the second and third meetings. The City will provide the following documentation: wetland delineations on the mitigation sites (David Evans & Assoc.), City of Renton Black River Water Quality Management Plan Wetland Inventory Report (Jones and Stokes, 9-22-92), City of Renton Wetlands Study, (Feb. 1981), and a level I hazardous substance assessment report. The following are available from the City's mapping system (Geo-Sequel): Wetlands inventory, streets, utilities, lot lines, topography, and land use and zoning. Other pertinent maps or data? 1.2 Timinz One (1) week. The project coordination task will begin with the notice to proceed. 1.3 Product A memorandum will be submitted to the Manager documenting the Consultant's understanding of the results of the coordination. Meeting minutes will also be submitted. The mitigation goals and objectives, analysis, mitigation plan, and monitoring and maintenance plan should include narrative text, matrices, maps, charts, graphs, tables and illustrations as appropriate. The final plan should include a title page, executive summary, table of contents, list of figures, and a glossary of terms. All products should be submitted both as camera ready hard copy, and on 3-1/2" computer disk, using software that is compatible with the City's system. The City uses the following software on a DOS system: Microsoft Words, AutoCAD and Geo- Sequel, Excel, Others software? 1.4 Budaet $3,000 TASK 2.- MITIGATION GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 2.1 Description Define requirements of the mitigation bank for future needs. Assess both quantity and quality of wetlands likely to be impacted within the Black River drainage basin, determine functional values to achieve in the wetlands created, and determine what replacement ratios will be required based on the City's wetland ordinance. Project the extent of mitigation which the mitigation site might entertain and ensure that, in a mitigation banking scenario, any created credit will eventually be used. Establish a protocol, or checklist, for conditions under which projects needing mitigation could use the mitigation site. One (1) meeting will be required to discuss and finalize the goals and objectives for the project. Further coordination and agreement with regulatory agencies, Advisory Committee, and Design Team will occur during this meeting. 2.2 Timing Two (2) weeks. 2.3 Product The consultant will submit meeting minutes and a draft of the goals and objectives for the Design Team to review. The goals and objectives will be included as a chapter in the mitigation plan. 2.4 Budget $2000 TASK 3.- CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT 3. 1 Description Analyze conditions of the mitigation site and the Black River drainage basin to determine both the most suitable location and type (i.e. emergent, scrub-shrub, forested) of wetlands to be created and the most appropriate type of mitigation process to be implemented. 3. la Physical Conditions: Existing and Historic Analyze the mitigation bank sites and adjacent City properties identifying all physical factors pertinent to wetland restoration/creation. This should include analysis of soils, hazardous materials, topography, water source and hydrologic conditions, relationship within the watershed and to existing bodies of water, vegetation, fish and wildlife populations, existing upland habitat and wetlands, adjacent existing and proposed land use, and future drainage projects. Provide an opportunities and constraints analysis to address the potential of the site to meet the goals and objectives. This should include analysis of the buffer potential on the site. Limits need to be set on the extent of information to be gathered on each of these factors. Any methods or ideas on how to limit this in the contract? 3.lb Financial Conditions: Existint and Future Perform a cost-benefit analysis to support mitigation program fee structure. Identify vacant and partially vacant parcels in the drainage basin on which class II or III wetlands exist and determine their potential increase in value should off-site mitigation be utilized. Estimate the cost of "build-out" for the entire mitigation site including consultant fees, City staff hours, excavation, planting, maintenance, monitoring, and operating costs. Potential benefits (increase in land value for restricted sites) should be weighed against the costs of establishing the mitigation program. Since the mitigation site serves as an amenity, increases in value for parcels adjacent to the site should also be considered. This analysis will be used to determine the most appropriate mitigation program and fee structure. One (1) meeting will be required to discuss results of the physical and financial assessments and to determine the type of mitigation program will be pursued. This meeting will involve participation from the Advisory Committee and regulatory agencies. 3.2 Timing Six (6) to ten (10) weeks. 3.3 Product Chapter in the mitigation plan. Meeting minutes. 3.4 Budget $10,000 TASK 4.- MITIGATION PLAN 4. 1 Description The mitigation plan will consist of a programmatic and a physical component. The mitigation plan will be established based on the site analysis, input from the Design Team and the Advisory Committee, and financial considerations including cost to participants, comparison of off-site costs to on-site costs, and a cost-benefit analysis for mitigation site. The plan will show how to achieve the goals and objectives for the mitigation bank. The first component of the mitigation plan should foremost define the mitigation program protocol and should include a monitoring and goal assessment plan, a contingency plan, and a maintenance plan. In a banking scenario, the mitigation plan should also include a credit-debit accounting procedure, and a credit evaluation methodology. The second component should illustrate the phvsical layout and phasing of the mitigation site. These tasks are outlined as follows: 4.1a. Determine the mitigation program to be implemented (banking vs. off-site) and develop guidelines for its use. This should include a detailed mitigation protocol based on financial analysis and input from City staff, the Advisory Committee, and regulatory agencies. It should document the obligations of the City, the developer, and permitting agencies in the mitigation agreement. The yearly cost of operating the bank should be estimated. The City needs to set the economic/financial parameters which will define the type of mitigation process used. An application and a contract for mitigation projects should be drafted. 4. lb. Determine the type of wetlands to be created including wetland and upland plant communities (buffers). Target wetland types and plant communities should seek to emulate as much as possible historic wetlands which may have existed in the vicinity of the mitigation site. 4.1c. Establish specific goals for mitigation projects upon which the success of the projects will be based as well as rough estimations for how long projects might take to meet certain criteria. These criteria might include certain plant species densities, both biotic and chemical water quality indicators, the presence of certain species of fish and wildlife, and public satisfaction and frequency of use. 4.1d. Create a master plan for the mitigation sites showing the location of an initial mitigation project and subsequent mitigation projects. The master plan should illustrate open water, emergent, and upland zones, as well as access trails and interpretive signs/centers. The master plan should illustrate a vision for the site and, as much as possible without knowing the extent of each mitigation project, should show the phasing of mitigation efforts. Task 4 will require three (3) meetings. The meetings will be used to discuss the mitigation program protocol, project level goals, and to review the master plan and phasing. 4.2 Timing Six (6) to eight (8) weeks. 4.3 Products Chapter(s) in the mitigation plan. Conceptual planting and grading plans. Illustrations for site master plan and phasing. Meeting minutes. 4.4 Budget $15,000� 5.- MONITORING AND MAINTENANCE PLAN 5.1 Description Set up a program to monitor construction and development of mitigation projects and to evaluate the level of success for completed mitigation projects based on the goals for these projects. Establish a plan to address expected maintenance of the mitigation site. 5.la. The degree of success should be determined by a monitoring program that evaluates wetland functions such as the following: plant species composition and density; presence of certain fish and wildlife species; water quality to determine pollutant loading and changes; water quantity for base and peak flows; and sedimentation rates. The monitoring program should also address economic development facilitated by the mitigation program, and public use of and satisfaction with the mitigation site. The monitoring plan should explain these measurements, state when they should be performed and the frequency with which they should be performed. It should include base measurements or standards from which subsequent measurements can be evaluated. 5.lb. The maintenance plan should identify expected maintenance issues such as control of invasive non-native species, irrigation, pruning, dredging to removed sediment, and mosquito abatement. 5.lc Establish a contingency plan for resolving conflicts and revising elements of the mitigation plan in the event that the goals of the plan are not being met. 5.2 Timing Same as task 4. 5.3 Products Chapter in the mitigation plan. 5.4 Budget $5000 4. WORK PLAN Project Schedule: (ATTACHMENT B) Staff Schedule and Work Program: (ATTACHMENT A) Communication Structure: (ATTACHMENT C) Final Wetland Mitigation Plan Budget: Consultant: $35,000 Contingency: $8,000 Not to Exceed: $43,000 Other Possible Funding Sources: Bullitt Foundation Northwest Areas Foundation Weyerhauser Department of Ecology - Stormwater Management Assistance, CZM Pilot Program for Mitigation Banking (?) Department of Wildlife (Urban Wildlife Habitat Demonstration Project) Metro - West Point Mitigation $? Centennial Clean Water Grant 5. INTERENTITY ARRANGEMENTS Where significant parts of the work are to be assigned to other entities, define budget, schedule, responsibilities, and special communications, and public involvement, and political process. 6. COMMUNICATION PLAN The City's Project Manager will be responsible for coordinating with the consultant's project manager, the Design Team, the City Manager, regulatory agencies, the Advisory Committee, and the press. Information will be dispersed to the press only after its approval by the Project Manager. Correspondence related to establishment of the mitigation program between the Design Team, Parks, Storm Water, Development Services, and Long Range should be routed through the project manager. 7. DOCUMENTATION PLAN The lead division for each phase of the project will be responsible for filing correspondence and documentation. Copies of all documentation will be filed in a single project file with development services. Copies of important items will be distributed to each member of the Design Team. Upon start-up of the mitigation program, all correspondence with users of the program, including contracts, application fees, and invoices for mitigation projects, will be filed and maintained by Development Services. 8. SCOPE CHANGES Should the need for changes in the consultant's scope of work or the City's organizational structure arise, the Design Team will be responsible for amending the existing protocol. 9. SUBCONSULTANTS All subconsultants will be required to operate in accordance with the goals and objectives for the mitigation program as well as in accordance with any applicable City policies. Subconsultants for the project might include the following: ■ Water quality specialists (Horner/Center for Urb Water Resources) ■ Nurseries (for wetland and upland plants) ■ Construction/Excavation Companies (for wetland excavation) ■ Habitat biologists/wetland ecologists (for habitat consideration) ■ Engineers for hydrological analysis 10. PROJECT COST ESTIMATES The fee structure for use of the mitigation site will be based on the cost of the mitigation plan, construction, maintenance, monitoring, subconsultants, staffing, etc. If the cost of any element of the overall effort to establish the mitigation program appears to be excessive, the Design Team should evaluate that element and seek ways to reduce the cost. Elements of the plan should be prioritized based on their importance in achieving the goals for the project. The costs of establishing the plan, including consultant fees, staffing hours, and other extraneous fees, should be carefully recorded so that these costs can be included in the fee structure. All costs related to construction should be carefully documented as well. The city manager should be involved in all cost decision and revisions. 11. CHANGE REQUIREMENTS A contingency plan will be included in the mitigation plan. Should changes be needed in any aspect of the mitigation program or plan, the Design Team will be responsible for reviewing the problem and agreeing upon a solution. Certain changes might require input from the Consultant or regulatory agencies. Changes must be approved by the City Manager. 12. MONITORING The Design Team will be responsible for monitoring the progress and success of the mitigation plan both during and after completion of the plan. During the planning process this monitoring will generally occur through meetings with the Consultant. Additional meetings will be scheduled should they be needed for updating the Design Team or reviewing sections of the plan. 13. ACTION PLANS ■ Start-up and advertise program. ■ Engage other stakeholders: DNR demonstration projects Educational/interpretive programs Implement trails and recreation facilities construction D R A F T WETLAND MITIGATION BANK PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN 1. AGREEMENT HIGHLIGHTS Consultant Schedule Start of contract: January 30, 1993 Notice to proceed: February 10, 1993 End of contract: August 1, 1993 City Schedule Completion of mitigation program planning phase: August-September, 1993 Start-up of mitigation program: September, 1993 Total Project Budget $43,000 Other key information--public involvement, political process, media management? 2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Overall Goals The City of Renton has acquired adjacent properties in the Green River Valley (Black River drainage basin) on which there exist scattered low quality wetlands. The City intends to use two of these properties, which total 45 acres, to establish a wetland mitigation site consisting of one or two large contiguous wetlands. The City's primary goal is to achieve no net loss of wetlands. The City will facilitate development on private parcels with scattered low quality wetlands by establishing larger, more contiguous, and higher quality wetlands on its property along Springbrook Creek in the Black River drainage basin. Project Objectives With increasing urbanization upstream of the project site, water quantity in Springbrook Creek will likely increase while water quality decreases. The Springbrook Creek corridor is subject to periodic flooding, thus one objective of the project is to reduce the severity of flooding by increasing flood water storage in the lower part of the basin. Another objective is to improve the quality of water entering the Green River and Puget Sound. Along with the above two objectives, the City intends to increase the habitat value for fish and wildlife as well as providing environmental education and passive recreation opportunities for residents and employees in the vicinity of the project. GOAL LAYERS: Mitigation Program Goals The City's reasons for pursuing a mitigation program are to: ■ Achieve no net loss of wetlands. ■ Facilitate responsible development in the Green River Valley as specified in the comprehensive plan. 0 Preserve and protect shorelines and wetlands already existing on the site. ■ Preserve and protect open space. ■ Replace scattered low quality wetlands with contiguous high quality wetlands in the Green River Valley. ■ Conform to the City ordinances and state regulations concerning wetlands. Functional Objectives for the Bank Site Examples of objectives for which the project(s) should be designed: ■ Provide flood water storage. ■ Improve water quality. ■ Preserve and increase fish and wildlife habitat. ■ Increase groundwater recharge. ■ Provide passive recreation opportunities where possible. ■ Provide interpretive/educational information where possible. Criteria for Bank Site Functional Objectives These are specific criteria to measure the amount success for each project objective. For example, a project designed primarily to provide habitat might have as a goal the presence of 6 Great Blue herons within 5 years of completion. Criteria might include: ■ Plant species densities. ■ Biotic and chemical water quality indicators. ■ Presence of certain species of fish and wildlife. ■ Public satisfaction and frequency of use. Group Discussion: The more we can clarify and prioritize the Objectives for the bank site for all mitigation projects, the more likely consecutive mitigation efforts will be consistent over time, and the more likely mature mitigation projects will meet their initial objectives. Any objectives to acid? Which objectives are the most important? Which are most realistic and feasible to achieve? Mitigation Program The City's mitigation site will initially be used for off-site mitigation projects on a case by case basis. When possible, implementation of separate projects will be coordinated to decrease construction costs as well as impacts to existing wetlands on the site. Construction of a mitigation project will occur in advance of or concurrently with the impact, but never after the impact. If feasible, the City will, in conjunction with off-site mitigation projects, create additional wetland acreage to be used at a later date to compensate for unknown future impacts. If a surplus of wetland acreage is established, the mitigation site will function as a mitigation bank selling credits to compensate for wetlands lost elsewhere in the drainage basin. Roles and Responsibilities An environmental consultant will be hired to analyze the mitigation site, draft a mitigation plan, and create a conceptual master plan showing phasing of projects. The plan will document the mitigation procedure to be used and will establish a framework which will ensure that all mitigation projects are implemented under consistent goals. The City's Project Manager will be responsible for project management during the establishment of the mitigation plan. The City's Project Manager will coordinate with the Consultant's Project Manager, the City's Interdepartmental Design Team, regulatory agencies, and will also solicit input from a Focus Group. After implementation of the mitigation program, the Project Manager will be responsible for coordinating periodic evaluation of the mitigation program and, if necessary, administering revisions in the program. The City's Stormwater and Parks divisions will be involved in review and adoption of the mitigation plan as part of the Interdepartmental Design Team. Upon completion of the mitigation plan and opening of the mitigation program, Development Services will operate the program processing all applications and permits, and coordinating mitigation projects when possible. Storm Water and Parks will administer construction of individual mitigation projects and be responsible for routine maintenance. Additional Participation A Focus Group will be created to provide input to the City's project manager. The Focus Group will consist of select representatives from the community and potential users of the mitigation program. Members of the Focus Group might include representatives from local environmental interest groups, Boeing, Metro, WDOT, and businesses adjacent to the mitigation site, such as Seattle Times. Initial coordination with the pertinent regulatory agencies will occur during the project coordination task (Task 1) in the scope of work. At the start of the mitigation plan task (Task 4), agreement between the City and regulatory agencies on operation of the mitigation program will be achieved. 3. CONSULTANT'S SCOPE OF WORK The City has tenatively outlined for the consultant the tasks that will be necessary to establish a mitigation plan. These are preliminary tasks which are subject to change in scope and order depending on input from the consultant and the project budget. TASK 1.- PROJECT COORDINATION 1.1 Description Coordination between the City's Project Manager (Manager) and the Consultant will be established. The Manager will be responsible for scheduling meetings to accomplish this coordination. A close working relationship is expected between the Manager and Consultant. Input will be solicited from the City's Interdepartmental Design Team, regulatory agencies, and a Focus Group during the project. A total of eight (8) meetings between the Manager, Consultant, Interdepartmental Design Team, Focus Group, and other subconsultants will occur over the course of the project. The Consultant's Project Manager will be responsible for project coordination, data collection and analysis, creation of the mitigation plan, and all other products. The City's Project Manager will review products, monitor, and coordinate the project. Three meetings will occur during the project coordination task. The project coordination, schedule, and scope will be finalized in the first meeting. Initial coordination with regulatory agencies and review of the overall goals for the mitigation program will occur in the second and third meetings. The City will provide the following documentation: wetland delineations on the mitigation sites (David Evans & Assoc.), City of Renton Black River Water Quality Management Plan Wetland Inventory Report (Jones and Stokes, 9-22-92), City of Renton Wetlands Study, (Feb. 1981), and a level I hazardous substance assessment report. The following are available from the City's mapping system (Geo-Sequel): Wetlands inventory, streets, utilities, lot lines, topography, land use, and zoning. 1.2 Timing One (1) week. The project coordination task will begin with the notice to proceed. 1.3 Product A memorandum will be submitted to the Manager documenting the Consultant's understanding of the results of the coordination. Meeting minutes will also be submitted. The mitigation goals and objectives, analysis, mitigation plan, and monitoring and maintenance plan should include narrative text, matrices, maps, charts, graphs, tables and illustrations as appropriate. The final plan should include a title page, executive summary, table of contents, list of figures, and a glossary of terms. All products should be submitted both as camera ready hard copy, and on 3-1/2" computer disk, using software that is compatible with the City's system. The City uses the following software on a DOS system: Microsoft Word for Windows, AutoCAD and Geo-Sequel, Excel, Others software? 1.4 Budget $3,000 TASK 2.- CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT 2.1 Description Analyze physical conditions of the mitigation site to determine the most suitable location and type (i.e. emergent, scrub-shrub, forested) of wetlands to be created. Analyze the financial feasibility for potential users of using the mitigation site (i.e. will the cost of pursuing off-site mitigation be more or less than the increase in property value from the increased development potential of the site?) 2.la Physical Conditions Analyze the mitigation bank sites and adjacent City properties identifying all physical factors pertinent to wetland restoration/creation. This should include analysis of soils, hazardous materials, topography, water source and hydrologic conditions, relationship within the watershed and to existing bodies of water, wetland and upland vegetation, fish and wildlife populations, existing upland and wetland habitat, adjacent existing and proposed land use, and future basin-wide drainage and water quality projects. Provide an opportunities and constraints analysis to address the potential of the site to meet the goals and objectives. This should include analysis of the buffer potential on the site. 2.1b Financial Conditions Identify vacant and partially vacant parcels in the drainage basin on which class II or III wetlands exist and determine their potential increase in value should off-site mitigation be utilized. Potential benefits (increase in land value for restricted sites) should be weighed against the costs of establishing the mitigation program. Determination of the costs of using the mitigation site is addressed in the Mitigation Plan Task. This preliminary analysis will be used to determine the most appropriate mitigation program and fee structure. Since the mitigation site will serve as an amenity, increases in value for parcels adjacent to the site should also be considered. As part of the RFP... "what limits will be set on analysis?" Limits need to be set on the extent of information to be gathered on each of these factors. Any methods or ideas on how to limit this in the contract? One (1) meeting will be required to discuss results of the physical and financial assessments and to determine the type of mitigation program to be pursued. This meeting will involve participation from the Focus Group and regulatory agencies. 2.2 Timing Six (6) to ten (10) weeks. 2.3 Product Chapter in the mitigation plan. Meeting minutes. 2.4 Budpet $10,000 TASK 3.- MITIGATION GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 3.1 Description Define requirements of the mitigation bank for future needs. Assess both quantity and quality of wetlands likely to be impacted within the Black River drainage basin, determine functional values to achieve in the wetlands created, and determine what replacement ratios will be required based on the City's wetland ordinance. Project the extent of mitigation which the mitigation site might entertain and ensure that, in a mitigation banking scenario, any created credit will eventually be used. Establish a protocol, or checklist, for conditions under which projects needing mitigation could use the mitigation site. One (1) meeting will be required to discuss and finalize the goals and objectives for the project. Further coordination and agreement with regulatory agencies, Focus Group, and Design Team will occur during this meeting. 3.2 Timine Two (2) weeks. 3.3 Product The consultant will submit meeting minutes and a draft of the goals and objectives for the Design Team to review. The goals and objectives will be included as a chapter in the mitigation plan. 3.4 Budget $2000 TASK 4.- MITIGATION PLAN 4.1 Description The mitigation plan will consist of a programmatic and a physical component. The mitigation plan will be established based on the site analysis, input from the Design Team and the Focus Group, and financial considerations including cost to participants and comparison of off-site costs to on-site costs. The plan will demonstrate how to achieve the goals and objectives for the mitigation bank. The first component of the mitigation plan should foremost define the mitigation program protocol and should include a monitoring and goal assessment plan, a contingency plan, and a maintenance plan. In a banking scenario, the mitigation plan should also include a credit-debit accounting procedure, and a credit evaluation methodology. The second component should illustrate the physical layout and phasing of the mitigation site. These tasks are outlined as follows: 4.1a. Determine the mitigation program to be implemented (banking vs. off-site) and develop guidelines for its use. This should include a detailed mitigation protocol based on financial analysis and input from City staff, the Focus Group, and regulatory agencies. It should document the obligations of the City, the developer, and permitting agencies in the mitigation agreement. The City needs to set the economic/financial parameters which will define the type of mitigation process used. An application and a contract for mitigation projects should be drafted. 4.1b. Wetland Type Determine the type of wetlands to be created including wetland and upland plant communities (buffers). Target wetland types and plant communities should seek to emulate as much as possible historic wetlands which may have existed in the vicinity of the mitigation site. 4.1c. Project Goals Establish specific goals for mitigation projects upon which the success of the projects will be based as well as rough estimations for how long projects might take to meet certain criteria. These criteria might include certain plant species densities, both biotic and chemical water quality indicators, the presence of certain species of fish and wildlife, and public satisfaction and frequency of use. 4.1d. Master Plan Create a master plan for the mitigation sites showing the location of an initial mitigation project and subsequent mitigation projects. The master plan should illustrate open water, emergent, and upland zones, as well as access trails and interpretive signs/centers. The master plan should illustrate a vision for the site and, as much as possible without knowing the extent of each mitigation project, should show the phasing of mitigation efforts. 4.1e. Fee Structure In order to create an accurate fee structure, establish "build-out" estimates for three alternative master plans ranging in expense from high to low. The cost of build-out for the entire mitigation site should include consultant fees, City staff hours, excavation, planting, maintenance, monitoring, and operating costs. The yearly cost of operating the bank should be estimated as well. Task 4 will require three (3) meetings. The meetings will be used to discuss the mitigation program protocol, project level goals, and to review the master plan and phasing. 4.2 Timing Six (6) to eight (8) weeks. 4.3 Products Chapter(s) in the mitigation plan. Conceptual planting and grading plans. Illustrations for site master plan and phasing. Meeting minutes. 4.4 Bud2et $15,000 5.- MONITORING AND MAINTENANCE PLAN 5.1 Description Set up a program to monitor construction and development of mitigation projects and to evaluate the level of success for completed mitigation projects based on the goals for these projects. Establish a plan to address expected maintenance of the mitigation site. 5.la. The degree of success should be determined by a monitoring program that evaluates wetland functions such as the following: plant species composition and density; presence of certain fish and wildlife species; water quality to determine pollutant loading and changes; water quantity for base and peak flows; and sedimentation rates. The monitoring program should also address economic development facilitated by the mitigation program, and public use of and satisfaction with the mitigation site. The monitoring plan should explain these measurements, state when they should be performed and the frequency with which they should be performed. It should include base measurements or standards from which subsequent measurements can be evaluated. 5.lb. The maintenance plan should identify expected maintenance issues such as control of invasive non-native species, irrigation, pruning, dredging to removed sediment, and mosquito abatement. 5.lc Establish a contingency plan for resolving conflicts and revising elements of the mitigation plan in the event that the goals of the plan are not being met. 5.2 Timing Include in task 4. 5.3 Products Chapter in the mitigation plan. 5.4 Budget $5000 4. WORK PLAN Project Schedule: Staff Schedule and Work Program: Communication Structure: Final Wetland Mitigation Plan Budget: Consultant: $35,000 Contingency: $10,000 Not to Exceed: $45,000 Other Possible Funding Sources: Bullitt Foundation Northwest Areas Foundation Weyerhauser Department of Ecology - Stormwater Management Assistance, CZM Pilot Program for Mitigation Banking (?) Department of Wildlife (Urban Wildlife Habitat Demonstration Project) Metro - West Point Mitigation $? Centennial Clean Water Grant 5. COMMUNICATION PLAN The City's Project Manager will be responsible for coordinating with the consultant's project manager, the Design Team, the City Manager, regulatory agencies, the Focus Group, and the press. Information will be dispersed to the press only after its approval by the Project Manager. Correspondence related to establishment of the mitigation program between the Design Team, Parks, Storm Water, Development Services, and Long Range should be routed through the project manager. 6. DOCUMENTATION PLAN The lead division for each phase of the project will be responsible for filing correspondence and documentation. Copies of all documentation will be filed in a single project file with development services. Copies of important items will be distributed to each member of the Design Team. Upon start-up of the mitigation program, all correspondence with users of the program, including contracts, application fees, and invoices for mitigation projects, will be filed and maintained by Development Services. 7. SCOPE CHANGES Should the need for changes in the consultant's scope of work or the City's organizational structure arise, the Design Team will be responsible for amending the existing protocol. 8. SUBCONSULTANTS All subconsultants will be required to operate in accordance with the goals and objectives for the mitigation program as well as in accordance with any applicable City policies. Subconsultants for the project might include the following: ■ Water quality specialists (Horner/Center for Urb Water Resources) ■ Nurseries (for wetland and upland plants) ■ Construction/Excavation Companies (for wetland excavation) ■ Habitat biologists/wetland ecologists (for habitat consideration) ■ Engineers for hydrological analysis 9. PROJECT COST ESTIMATES The fee structure for use of the mitigation site will be based on the cost of the mitigation plan, construction, maintenance, monitoring, subconsultants, staffing, etc. If the cost of any element of the overall effort to establish the mitigation program appears to be excessive, the Design Team should evaluate that element and seek ways to reduce the cost. Elements of the plan should be prioritized based on their importance in achieving the goals for the project. The costs of establishing the plan, including consultant fees, staffing hours, and other extraneous fees, should be carefully recorded so that these costs can be included in the fee structure. All costs related to construction should be carefully documented as well. The City Manager should be involved in all cost decision and revisions. 10. CHANGE REQUIREMENTS A contingency plan will be included in the mitigation plan. Should changes be needed in any aspect of the mitigation program or plan, the Design Team will be responsible for reviewing the problem and agreeing upon a solution. Certain changes might require input from the Consultant or regulatory agencies. Changes must be approved by the City Manager. 11. MONITORING The Design Team will be responsible for monitoring the progress and success of the mitigation plan both during and after completion of the plan. During the planning process this monitoring will generally occur through meetings with the Consultant. Additional meetings will be scheduled should they be needed for updating the Design Team or reviewing sections of the plan. 12. ACTION PLANS ■ Advertise program to and begin coordinating potential users of the mitigation site. ■ Research potential funding sources ■ Engage other stakeholders: DNR demonstration projects Educational/interpretive programs Implement trails and recreation facilities construction 1^1,5)1III ri 4 -L ti 1 h d 1y I 3 cl I S ,L i7 p fi+0L Nn o � AGENDA WETLAND MITIGATION BANK MEETING OCTOBER 9, 1992 1. Select Interdepartmental Team 2. Potential Customers 3. Review of Mitigation Bank Concept 4. Organizational Structure 5. Implementation ■ Funding ■ Consultants ■ Other Bank Sites (Black River, Alcan Site, Boeing?) 6. To Do: ■ Glacier Park Mitigation (and others?) ■ Refine MOA ■ Implement Work Program Funding Consultant Selection Other Interested Users? Plan Review and Adoption WETLAND MITIGATION BANK DEFINITIONS Fee-in-lieu mitigation: Mitigation where the developer is assessed an impact fee, which is then used by an agency to create compensation projects. Fee-in-lieu programs, like most individual compensation projects, typically do not compensate for wetland impact in advance. Mitigation banking: Wetland restoration, creation or enhancement undertaken expressly for the purpose of providing compensation credits for wetland losses from future development activities. Off-site mitigation: Mitigation occurring at a site different in location than the site of the impacted wetland, but almost always within the same drainage basin. The mitigation occurs prior to, or at the same time as the impacts. Credits are not established for unknown future impacts on wetlands. Off-site mitigation differs from mitigation banking in that the off-site mitigation is exclusive to a specific project or projects. Wetland Mitigation Bank Proposed Concept and Establishment of Credit The City will implement the mitigation banking concept in the following manner. The City will utilize its bank site to mitigate development impacts associated with the acquisition of the mitigation bank site itself from the Glacier Park Company. This mitigation effort will be undertaken as a wetland restoration/creation pilot project on the bank site. Unless more funds become available to create a wetland of greater area than the Glacier Park mitigation requires by law, the project will not result in a gain of "credit" for the bank and thus will be considered "off-site mitigation". If other developers express an interest in using the mitigation site at the outset, every effort should be made to coordinate mitigation proposals. At the outset, the mitigation process will be considered an "off-site mitigation" program in which the developer pays the City to conduct the wetland creation on its mitigation site in advance of development impacts. In conjunction with these mitigation projects, the City intends to provide funds of its own to create a wetland area greater than that required by the mitigation, thus incrementally establishing a "surplus" of wetland acreage. Upon reasonable maturity, this surplus of wetland acreage will be used as credit for the mitigation banking process and will be made available for interested developers with projects that meet the City's criteria for off-site mitigation. In a sense then, the developer is paying for a certain extent of the excavation, plantings, monitoring and maintenance, and a previously prepared masterplan. The City then pays for any additional excavation and planting which it can afford at the time. The rationale for the mitigation process to evolve from an off-site mitigation program to a banking program is that the availability of credit in a mitigation bank greatly reduces permitting time for the developer. It also ensures a greater degree of success for mitigation in advance of development impacts than does an off-site mitigation program. In construction of mitigation projects for the establishment of bank credits, it is, logically, more economical to construct one large wetland than many small wetlands. However, since it is unrealistic for the City to finance a large scale project, an incremental but coordinated approach makes sense. Critical elements in "incrementally" developing mitigation bank credits might include the .following: ■ Some mechanism to make a clear separation between what the developer is paying for (i.e. the extent of excavation) and what the City is paying for, so that the developer does not get the perception that he or she is paying for more mitigation than is required. ■ A strategy for recording, mapping, and differentiating "mitigation" wetland acreage and "credit" wetland acreage. In other words, it must be clear how many acres, or credits, are being established in addition to the required off-site mitigation project acreage. ■ A mechanism to evaluate the success and determine the availability of created bank credits which will be "maturing" incrementally. At what point does the site cease functioning as an off-site mitigation site and start functioning as a mitigation bank? What guaranty is there that all the created credits will be used? I have encountered in the literature no mitigation banks that have been developed in this way, but it does seem possible. I wonder whether the rationale of developing a "mitigation bank" is valid enough to warrant pursuing it, or whether simply developing a well-coordinated "off-site mitigation" program will meet the City's goals. Will the City ever put forth enough funds to establish a "surplus" of wetland acreage? In any case, the first task should be the site analysis, masterplan, and implementation/construction for the Glacier Park mitigation. The masterplan would still illustrate possible phasing of subsequent projects based on hydrology and other conditions for success. If any other land owners or developers are interested in off-site mitigation, the projects should be coordinated. Once this pilot phase is implemented, subsequent mitigation strategies should be evaluated based on the availability of City funds and the demand for the mitigation site. \ 1 MIT7 LAM p,� yc� �-,. �Wt'rlO�l.skl. G(T( f'vGR-�•��E CCe£DIT'> rsT►NV P,5 it n to ;VIJV r Miri�►tto� i cv -- �C�,or 1f°Jecr M111041na Am>trinmm- crr y Monlfy ,4c�E�lo t MlTlbA lOp4%*. ♦ '�2 1 M�c�ftTto�l� �G 1 I� I. -SITE MIT1L-O^,not-4 ( MinUATt N.1 1 3* 1 � F-u Ti,-4l9 MCI l Mmr�mo,J '� l #Z �3 1 I 9/92 1/93 4/93 8/93 1/94 4/94 8/94 1/95 LONG RANGE PLANNAPRE- ConceptPLANNING development Banking protocol Organizational structur Operating Procedures Interdepartmental team Work program Inter-agency coordination/agreement (MOA) Consultant selection I.D.other bank sites&propose L.U. plan amendments Other stakeholders? STORM WATER-MITIGATION PLAN Consultant selection Project management (interdepartmental design team for project management) Plan review and adoption PARKS-CONSTRUCTION& IMPLEMENTATION Project management (interdepartmental design team for project management) Plan review DEVELOPMENT SERVICES- PROGRAM OPERATION Accounting Crediting Permitting Monitoring/review �--- I.D.other bank sites&propose L.U. amendments Project management --� (interdepartmental design team for project management) PARKS/STORM WATER- MAINTENANCE&MONITORING Parks: Vegetation Trails Educational/interpretive programs Recreation facilities Storm Water: Water channels Culverts Insect control Water quality Hydroperiod Flood control City of Renton Wetland Mitigation Bank Draft Operating Agreement between The City of Renton Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Protection Agency, Washington Department of Ecology, Washington Department of Natural Resources, U.S. Fish and Wildlife, Washington Department of Fisheries, and Washington Department of Wildlife I. Introduction A. Purpose The purpose of this wetland mitigation banking agreement (Agreement) is to establish a wetland banking system to provide effective compensatory mitigation for unavoidable impacts to wetlands resulting from public or private development. It is intended to represent a commitment by signatory agencies to seek and develop problem resolution. The wetland mitigation site is intended for use only when it has been demonstrated that there is no practicable alternative to construction in a wetland and all practicable measures to minimize impacts have been incorporated in the project. B. Goals and Objectives Under the Growth Management Act of 1990, the City of Renton (the City) was required to inventory all of its wetlands and look for preservation strategies that would both preserve environmental functions and the economic potential of the city (Wetland Mitigation Bank Goals and Policies). Mitigation banking is an appropriate mechanism for achieving the City's goals of no net loss of wetlands and the creation and preservation of an extensive system of connected wildlife corridors. The goal of the wetland mitigation program put forth in this Agreement is to replace the function and value of wetlands which are lost or altered as a result of unavoidable impacts from development. All mitigation projects should be designed to ensure maintenance and restoration of the physical, chemical, and biological integrity of waters of the United States. The City's wetland mitigation bank is available for projects that have been approved in the state and federal permitting process and found to be consistent with the City's wetland ordinance. The mitigation site will be available to offset impacts to fresh water wetlands from development as specified below. Each eligible project will have been reviewed to eliminate all but unavoidable and necessary losses and all measures will have been taken to minimize or eliminate impacts prior to consideration of mitigation site use. Prior to use of the mitigation site, mitigation at the site of the impact shall be explored to the fullest extent practicable. The bank area will be retained by the City of Renton in perpetuity for natural resource protection, passive recreation, and flood control purposes. C. Background It is generally recognized that wetlands perform beneficial functions, including the following: 1. Groundwater recharge and discharge. 2. Flood flow attenuation and alteration. 3. Sediment stabilization, shoreline anchoring. 4. Water quality improvement. 5. Food chain support. 6. Fish and wildlife habitat. 7. Uniqueness, heritage, aesthetic value. 8. Recreation. It is often not practicable to mitigate unavoidable wetland impacts effectively on-site. Mitigation of small and scattered wetlands to be impacted may be more feasible and successful off-site. Benefits of a wetland mitigation banking program include, but are not limited to: 1. Effective and adequate compensatory mitigation accomplished before project approval. 2. Comprehensive rather than fragmented compensatory mitigation. 3. Larger, more easily managed mitigation sites rather than numerous small sites. 4. Improved agency coordination. 5. Expedited mitigation review and approval process. D. Definitions: 1. Bank site: City property designated expressly for wetland restoration and creation for the purpose of providing compensation for wetland losses from development related activities in advance of, or at the same time as, the impacts. The bank site becomes an "operating" bank when credits become available for withdrawal. 2. Basin: Corresponds to the Black River drainage basin. 3. Creation: The conversion of a non-wetland area into a persistent wetland through some human activity. This definition presumes the site has not been a wetland within recent times (100 - 200 years) and, thus, restoration is not occurring. 4. Credit: Value given for wetland restoration or creation made as part of a bank. 5. Debit: Value given for wetland impacts associated with a project accepted for compensatory mitigation in accordance with this agreement. 6. Enhancement: The increase in one or more values of all or a portion of an existing wetland by human activities. 7. Fee-in-lieu mitigation: Mitigation where the developer is assessed an impact fee, which is then used by an agency to create compensation projects. Fee-in-lieu programs, like most individual compensation projects, typically do not compensate for wetland impact in advance. 8. In-kind mitigation: The replacement of a specific wetland class with the same class. The class is defined in the City's wetland ordinance (4-32-3.D.). 9. Ledger: An accounting of credits and debits kept by the City. 10. Mitigation: (a) avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action; (b) minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation; (c) rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment; (d) reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action; and (e) compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments. 11. Mitigation Banking: Wetland restoration, creation or enhancement undertaken expressly for the purpose of providing compensation credits for wetland losses from future development activities. 12. Monitoring: Periodic evaluation of a mitigation site to determine success in attaining goals. Typical monitoring periods for wetland mitigation sites are three to five years. 13. Of-site mitigation: Mitigation occurring at a site different in location than the site of the impacted wetland, but almost always within the same drainage basin. The mitigation occurs prior to, or at the same time as the impacts. Credits are not established for unknown future impacts on wetlands. Off-site mitigation differs from mitigation banking in that the off-site mitigation is exclusive to a specific project or projects. The City's mitigation site can accommodate many off-site mitigation projects depending on the size of each project. 14. Out-of-kind mitigation : The replacement of a specific wetland class with a different class. 15. Restoration: Wetlands returned from a disturbed or totally altered condition to a previously existing natural or altered condition by some human action. Restoration refers to the return of pre-existing condition. It is not necessary to have complete knowledge of what those pre-existing conditions were; it is enough to know a wetland of any type was there and have as a goal the return of that same wetland type. 16. Restored Wetland: A wetland returned from a disturbed or altered condition to a previously existing natural or altered condition by some action of man (i.e. fill removal). 17. Success: Achieving established goals, preferably measurable as quantitative values that are determined prior to the establishment of a mitigation bank. Inherent in the concept of "success" is the incorporation of a properly funded management plan for the mitigation bank site. 18. Upland: Any area that does not qualify as wetland because the associated hydrologic regime is not sufficiently wet to elicit development of vegetation, soils, and/or hydrologic characteristics associated with wetlands. Such areas occurring within floodplains are more appropriately termed "non-wetlands". 19. Wetlands: Those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil. Section H. Mitigation Bank Establishment Plan A. Mitigation Concept The City's proposed mitigation bank will be established incrementally on property owned by the City. The mitigation bank will initially function as an off-site mitigation program. Interested developers will apply to the City to use the mitigation site and then work in conjunction with the City on the off-site mitigation project. All mitigation projects will be initiated in advance or concurrently with, but never after the impacts. When feasible, in conjunction with off-site developer initiated mitigation projects, the City will finance the construction of additional wetland acreage creating a "surplus" of wetland acreage to be used for unknown future impacts due to development. In this manner, with each off-site mitigation project, the mitigation bank will incrementally develop credit. Upon reasonable success of the surplus wetland acreage, credits will be made available for purchase by developers interested in using the mitigation bank. Success will be determined by the degree to which mitigation projects meet their projected goals. B. Pilot Project As a pilot project, approximately seven and one-half(7.5) acres of wetland will be created adjacent to existing wetlands on the site. This pilot project will satisfy mitigation which the City is obligated to perform as part of the mitigation site acquisition agreement with the Glacier Park Company. This first mitigation project is not intended to establish credit, but rather to compensate for wetlands impacted by the Glacier Park Company. Section III. Bank Operation Criteria A. Bank Ownership, Management, and Maintenance The mitigation site shall be owned and operated by the City in perpetuity for natural resource protection, flood control purposes, and passive recreation. The City shall manage the mitigation bank and operate a review process for all mitigation bank proposals and/or transactions. The mitigation site, including completed mitigation projects, will be maintained by the City's Storm Water Division and its Parks Department. Participation from interested stakeholders, such as the Department of Wildlife and the Audubon Society, is also expected. The bank site will be designed to be easily managed and to function with little or no human intervention. B. Geographical Area The bank shall be available to all projects requiring mitigation within the Black River drainage basin. This includes areas in the City of Renton, the City of Kent, and unincorporated King County. C. Project Applicability Criteria The bank shall be available for projects that require mitigation, are approveable under the City's wetland ordinance (Ordinance #4346) and the Army Corps of Engineers permit requirements under the authority of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 and/or Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (Public Law 95-217). The Bank shall be available for projects only where on-site mitigation is unavailable or where on-site mitigation only partially mitigates for project impacts. Use of the bank will require the applicant to demonstrate that 1) the activity causing a wetland impact is unavoidable; 2) all other restoration and compensation methods have been examined and found to be impracticable; 3) a functioning wetland has been created according to a previously prepared plan, and its usefulness documented by an evaluation plan. Conceptual review and concurrence in the proposed use of the wetland bank will be sought from regulatory and resource agencies as part of the early coordination phase of the environmental review process. Normally, this will occur after project alternatives and their impacts have been identified. Conceptual review and concurrence will require the City to demonstrate the wetland bank site is likely to function according to a previously prepared plan. Final concurrence from regulatory and resource agencies for use of the bank will normally be sought during the 404 permit review process. Significant new information not available at the time of conceptual review and concurrence will be provided at this time. As a general rule, wetland bank sites offered as mitigation will be the same system, subsystem, and class as those impacted by development unless it is agreed that functional value in an out-of-kind compensation is increased. Every effort shall be made to coordinate the timing of initial off-site mitigation projects. D. Evaluation Methodology and Procedure The cost of credits will be determined by the cumulative unit cost for the City for consultant fees (site analysis, mitigation plan, design, construction and planting plans), excavation, plantings, expected maintenance and monitoring, and City staffing. Valuation of credits in the bank shall be based on the area and class of wetlands created. Wetland class shall be based on definitions provided in the City of Renton's wetland ordinance (4-32-3.D.). The impacted wetlands and banks may be evaluated by the Wetland Evaluation Technique (WET), Habitat Evaluation Procedures (HEP), best professional judgement of a qualified wetland ecologist using the best available techniques, or other methods determined appropriate by the involved agencies. Full documentation will be required, regardless of the method of assessment. The appropriate assessment method will be agreed to by representatives from each of the involved agencies. Mitigation proposals for impacts shall be based on an areal replacement at the replacement ratios for respective wetland classes as defined in the City's wetland ordinance (4-32-6.C.). E. Bank Debit and Credit Procedures Debits and credits will be quantified and exchanged based on the established criteria agreed upon by the involved agencies. F. Accounting Procedures The City will establish and maintain a ledger which documents the activity of the wetland bank account. The involved agencies will be sent periodic statements documenting the status of the account. Statements will be generated biannually. G. Life of the Bank The mitigation bank will be considered closed when all potential restoration sites and all established credits have been used. The bank will continue to be monitored and maintained by the City in perpetuity. Section IV. Monitoring and Evaluation Activities A. Monitoring Report The City will prepare an annual monitoring report and provide copies to all agencies executing this Agreement. Publication and distribution of this report shall extend no less than (5) five years after the closure of the mitigation bank program and off-site mitigation. Section V. Modification and Termination of This Agreement This Agreement may be modified with the approval of all signatories. Modifications may be proposed by one or more signatories. Proposals will be submitted to the Corps to be circulated to all signatories for a sixty day period of review. Approval of the proposals will be indicated by written acceptance. A signatory may terminate their participation in this Agreement upon written notice to all other signatories. Section VI. Endorsements Nothing in this Agreement is intended to diminish, modify, or otherwise affect the statutory or regulatory authorities of the agencies involved. City of Renton Planning/Building/Public Works Date Lynn Guttmann, Administrator U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Date U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Date Washington Department of Wildlife Date Washington State Department of Ecology Date U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Date Washington Department of Natural Resources Date Approved as to form: Lawrence Warren, City Attorney Date SOME CONCERNS FOR "BANKING" CONCEPT: 1. Need more in-depth analysis of wetlands, property ownership, development capacity in Black River basin to be certain "credits" will be used. 2. Need a clear distinction of who is paying for what between the City and the Developer, when joint projects are pursued. 3. Also, a clear distinction between mitigation acres and credit acres. 4. Need Corps of Engineers to buy off on concept. SOME CONCERNS FOR "OFF-SITE" MITIGATION CONCEPT: 1 . Slower permitting time. 2. Little to no time for wetland establishment before impacts. 3. Less incentive for developer to mitigate off-site. Interview Wetland Mitigation Program V�Y U� Parametrix, Inc. Consultants in Engineering and Environmental Sciences V MODELS FOR COMPENSATION OF WETLAND IMPACTS TIME PROJECT IMPACT Mitigation Wetland Functions and i Project Evaluation s Priorities Creation Monitoring *lo Values Assessment ; Extent of Impact a • Functions and Values Assessment • Mitigation Options Avoidance/Compensation On-site/Off-site • Determine Compensation Mitigation Wetland Functions and Requirements Priorities :`�: Creation Values Assessment Monitoring i i CONCURRENT COMPENSATION ADVANCE COMPENSATION �I G1�Y O� � + i �� o� Parametrix, Inc. POLICY ISSUES • Feasibility of advance vs. concurrent compensation programs • Compatibility of City's mitigation program with other programs • Resource agency and public consensus • Mitigation program user eligibility G1�Y AR �� o� Pararnetrix, Inc. TECHNICAL ISSUES • Type and extent of wetlands potentially impacted • Type and quantity of wetlands necessary to offset impacts • Accommodating flood storage, water quality, and fish and wildlife functions • Establishment of hydrology • Functional assessment (credit evaluation) • Mitigation credit and debit G1�Y O� ii ��NTo� Parametrix, Inc. ANTICIPATED CONCERNS IMPORTANT TO PROJECT'S SUCCESS • Confirmation by Corps of isolated/adjacency status of mitigation sites • Adequacy of data to evaluate mitigation acreage needs • Agency/public consensus on mitigation program **", Y ?oN araretrix, Inc. PROJECT APPROACH Conditions Assessment • Physical and biological inventory Mitigation needs and priorities 0 Mitigation feasibility Conditions maps Goals and Objectives C v Program Advanced vs concurrent --��---- ..- n. � compensation Physical Plan v Replacement ratios User/site eligibility • Master Plan alternatives Permitting requirements • Grading/hydrology Q '.v Planting a Funding structure g r Interpretive signage 1�y o Construction documents G Monitoring/assurancies P� 0 � arametrix, Inc. EXPERIENCE AND SUCCESS WITH SIMILAR PROJECTS City of Camas Wetland Mitigation Bank • Integrated wetland and storm water management program • Includes advance compensation (mitigation banking) • Public/private partnership • Funding status • Future ♦ i ii tl N-4o J�, Parametrix, Inc. EXPERIENCE AND SUCCESS WITH SIMILAR PROJECTS Snohomish County Regional Lat-Afill Wetland Mitigation • On-site wetland mitigation • Plan development and approval • Construction/implementation • Monitoring `C Y i � o� Parametrix, Inc. EXPERIENCE AND SUCCESS WITH SIMILAR PROJECTS Biringer Strawberry Farm Mitigation Bank • Type of mitigation bank • Technical/regulatory experience • Status • Future Port of Everett Union Slough Marsh • Type of mitigation program • Habitat assessment and functional evaluation • Technical/regulatory experience G1�Y o� • Status + A � • Future �, -ro Parametrix, Inc. TEAM STRENGTHS • Experience with mitigation banking • Technical competence • Proven management abilities • Cost-efficient approach • Mediation and concensus-building Y ii '� o� Paramet x, Inc. 1 1 Proposal 1 1 Wetland Mitigation Program 1 City of Renton 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Parametrix, Inc. Consultants in Engineering and Environmental Sciences 1 L� 1 Parametrix, Inc. 5808 Lake Washington Blvd. N.E. Kirkland,WA 98033 206-822-8880•Fax:206-889-8808 0 Tracey P. McKenzie Consultants in Engineering and Environmental Sciences tParametrix, Inc. Consultants in Engineering and Environmental Sciences 5808 Lake Washington Blvd.N.E. Kirkland,WA 98033 206-822-8880•Fax:206-889-8808 Mr. David Saxen April 5, 1993 City of Renton 85-1779-05 E1 ' Planning, Building, and Public Works Department Renton, Washington 98055 Dear Mr. Saxen: Parametrix appreciates the opportunity to submit our qualifications for developing a ' mitigation program for the City of Renton. We have assembled a project team of highly experienced professionals with the training and skills necessary to successfully complete this project according to your schedule. Our project team includes key staff from our wetlands, fisheries, wildlife, water resource, and engineering disciplines for project management, technical analysis, regulatory coordination, planning, master plan development, and mitigation program development. In preparing our submittal we have followed the outline in our Request for Qualifications P P g � Y q (RFQ). Based on our telephone conversations with you, it is our understanding that the resumes do not have page restrictions, and that the page limits mentioned in the RFQ are meant as guidelines, and are not mandatory. We have endeavored to keep our submittal ' concise to facilitate your review. Successful projects often depend on the commitment and dedication of the staff who work on the project. The key staff that will work on your project were selected based on their understanding and knowledge of the policy, technical, and regulatory issues, and availability. This project represents an important opportunity for the City and for Parametrix. We will ensure that appropriate resources are available to accomplish this work in an expeditious and efficient manner, while achieving superior results. We look forward to further discussions regarding the mitigation program. If you have any questions, please call me at (206) 822-8880. Sincerely, PARAMETRIX, INC. &Uj� � WkM'5— ' Tracey P. McKenzie Project Manager 1 �D Printed on Recycled Paper TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1 PROPOSAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 ' A. GENERAL INFORMATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Qualifications and Expertise of Parametrix, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 History of Firm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Financial Capability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Project Workload and Experience 1 Ability to meet Schedules and Deadlines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Qualifications and Expertise of Talasaea Consultants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 History of Firm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Financial Capability . 3 Project Workload and Experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Ability to meet Schedules and Deadlines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Approach to the Project 4 Project Management and Product Delivery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Methods for Establishing Scopes of Work, Cost Estimates, and Schedules . . . . . . 4 1 Technical Approach to Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 B. PROJECT SPECIFIC INFORMATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 ' In-house Team Qualifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Project Team 6 Project Manager . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 ' Project Team Resumes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Organization Chart 7 Project Experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Representative Project Experience of Parametrix, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Representative Project Experience of Talasaea Consultants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 C. AFFIRMATIVE ACTION AND MINORITY BUSINESS USAGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 D. MULTI-CONSULTANT TEAM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Consultant Team Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Principle Consultant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Section 2 PERSONNEL RESUMES ' PARAMETRIX, INC. Tracey Perrier McKenzie Kittie Ellen Ford James C. Kelley, Ph.D. Paul S. Fendt, P.E. Fred Fortine 1 Norman Brones Michael Bowen, P.L.S. Rick V. Hermes, P.E. ' TALASAEA CONSULTANTS William E. Shiels Clifford Willwerth John J. Altmann Section 1 CITY OF RENTON WETLAND MITIGATION PROGRAM Proposal SA. GENERAL INFORMATION 1 A.1 Qualifications and Expertise of PARAMETRIX, INC. A1A History of Firm Parametrix, Inc. is an environmental science and engineering consulting firm providing innovative, interdisciplinary approaches to meet the challenges associated with complicated environmental issues. Our staff of planners, engineers, and scientists are particularly experienced at analyzing the trade-offs associated with 1 implementing projects that involve environmental resources. Parametrix is a certified minority-owned business enterprise and was established in 1969 with offices located in Sumner, Kirkland, and Bremerton, Washington; Portland, Oregon; and Honolulu, Hawaii. Our staff of 270 employees is organized into the following seven technical divisions: Biological Resources: wetlands, fish and wildlife, and marine investigations Water Resources: habitat restoration, storm water quantity and quality control/treatment systems, erosion control, hydrologic analysis, and NPDES permitting Civil/Municipal Engineering: construction management,dredge and fill projects,water distribution and storage,park/recreation,trail facility development,surveying and mapping Environmental Planning: environmental impact statements,permitting and regulatory support,siting studies, and land-use management plans 1 Hazardous Waste: site investigations/audits, geologic and hydrogeologic studies, CERCLA/SARA compliance Solid Waste: recycling and composting, waste management planning, permitting Environmental Toxicology risk assessments, effluent bioassays, air quality and Chemistry. A.1.B Financial Capability ' Parametrix has been in business for over 24 years and has insurance coverage meeting the City's requirements. Certificates of Insurance will be furnished upon request. A.1.0 Proiect Workload and Experience Parametrix staff are committed to completing the project work on schedule and within budget. Our Project Manager, Tracey McKenzie, is 50 percent or more available. Our other senior-level Wetland Ecologists, Jim 1 Kelley, Ph.D., and Kittie Ford, are 40 to 60 percent available to assist with task management and project completion. Other Parametrix staff identified in Figure 1 (on page 8) are 30 to 60 percent available for the next several months. Based on our analysis of staff availability and current workloads,we are confident Parametrix has the resources to provide you with quality on-time products. 1 1 The following project descriptions are representative of current j roect workloads at Parame P u* Inc. Wetland Mitigation, Colville Municipal Airport—Colville,Washington Parametrix is preparing special site studies and a mitigation plan for a Section 404 Individual Permit for fill of 9.5 acres of farmed wetland in the Colville River valley. Extensive coordination has occurred with the ' US Army Corps of Engineers to negotiate mitigation requirements for waterfowl using the proposed airport site. Parametrix is assisting with acquisition of a 120-acre mitigation site and developing final mitigation and 10-year monitoring plans. Estimated engineering costs are M,00O and estimated construction costs are 1 $1,000,000. Actual costs are not currently available. Fifty-Acre Wetland Mitigation—Burlington,Washington Parametrix is developing a final wetland mitigation plan for impacts to freshwater wetlands. The scope includes coordination with technical specialists (geotechnical/soils, hydrology, storm water quality and quantity control, engineering and surveying, wetlands, fisheries, and wildlife); administrative management; field studies; document preparation; and interagency coordination. The final plan will include bid specifications for construction of the mitigation sites. Engineering estimates range from$100,000 to$250,000 and estimated construction costs are $2,500,000. Actual cost estimates are not currently available. Seven-Acre Wetland Mitigation—Burlington,Washington The scope of work includes development of a final mitigation plan to replace wetlands inadvertently filled in the 1980's. Tasks include project management; field identification of appropriate restoration sites with the US Army Corps of Engineers;coordination with surveyors and engineer to produce a topographic survey, ' grading, and planting plan for the mitigation site. Engineering estimates and actual costs are not currently available for this project. Wetland Maintenance Monitoring—Tacoma,Washington The scope of work includes field investigations to evaluate habitat types,vegetation community distributions, and to collect water level data in a created wetland adjacent to the Puyallup River. Tasks include coordination with surveyors,engineers,and the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers;and collecting and analyzing water level, surface elevation, vegetation and habitat type data. The analysis is focused on correlating the depth of water available at specific elevation to evaluate the areal and temporal extent of habitat available for juvenile salmonids. Estimated engineering costs are $10,000. Actual costs are not currently available. ' Wetland Restoration and Mitigation Bank—Everett,Washington The project involves restoring 360 acres of agricultural land to a tidally influenced wetland mitigation bank in the lower Snohomish River estuary. The scope of work included project management; field investigation 1 to delineate and evaluate on-site wetlands;an evaluation of river flow and sedimentation data; coordination with surveyors and engineers to develop alternative and final site designs;and regulatory support. Estimated and actual engineering costs to develop the final plans submitted in a Section 404 Individual Permit were about $30,000. Wetland Mitigation Bank—Camas,Washington 1 Parametrix is currently assisting the City of Camas to obtain state and federal funding for development of a comprehensive wetland and storm water management plan. The planning area encompasses approximately 1,5W acres of undeveloped light industrial land in the Lacamas Lake watershed. Significant concerns for water quality and the City's desire to maintain the open space character of the area and enhance wetland 1 values will be addressed as the comprehensive mitigation program is developed. Parametrix staff conducted a preliminary inventory of wetlands and wildlife habitat in the area. As part of the first phase, a conceptual mitigation strategy was presented to state and federal agencies for discussion. Subsequent phases include detailed mitigation design and implementation strategy, negotiating permit conditions with reviewing agencies, and mitigation construction. Estimated engineering costs are$120,000 and estimated construction costs are $1,000,000 to 1,500,000. 2 AA.D. Ability to meet Schedules and Deadlines Parametrix has a proven record of meeting project schedules and deadlines. The project manager is responsible for team coordination to ensure that tasks are completed efficiently and on time. Each team member is provided with a copy of the schedule and deadlines agreed to by the City and Parametric, Inc. Parametrix uses computerized project management tools to allocate personnel, develop and monitor task budgets and ' expenditures, and ensure that deadline are being met. A.1 Qualifications and Expertise of TALASAEA CONSULTANTS AAA History of Firm 1 Talasaea Consultants was founded in 1981 to provide resource and environmental planning services to a broad client base,including both governmental agencies and the private sector. Talasaea has a well-rounded staff with expertise in wetland ecology, environmental planning, fisheries and wildlife biology, landscape design, and site ' planning. Our firm specializes in wetland delineation, mitigation, restoration and design, and site planning. A.1.13 Financial Capability ' Talasaea Consultants carries liability insurance in the following amounts: general aggregate ($1,000,000), personal and advanced injury ($1,000,000), each occurrence ($1,000,000), fire damage ($50,000), and medical expense ($5,000 per person). Automobile liability insurance coverage is: bodily injury ($500,000 for each accident,$250,000 for each person),and property damage($250,000 for each accident). Certificates of Insurance will be furnished upon request. A.1.0 Project Workload and Experience Light Industrial/Warehouse Development, City of Renton—Renton,Washington ' Project involved a wetland delineation and conceptual wetland mitigation design for a proposed light industrial/warehouse development on a 13-acre site adjacent to Springbrook Creek, near Longacres Race Track. Design included integration of a wetpond and biofiltration Swale into an existing, adjacent storm water treatment facility, and restoration and enhancement of the wetland and stream buffers. Objectives I of the landscaped buffer areas along Springbrook Creek included a pedestrian trail and a dense vegetative barrier. Monitoring, maintenance and contingency plans are part of this project. Commercial Development, City of Everett--Everett,Washington Project involved wetland design and construction as part of a proposed commercial development on an 8-acre site near SR-99, City of Everett. The wetland design included creation of an approximate 1-acre, wetland and buffer area. The wetland was created through excavation and grading of soils, use of a liner to prevent loss of water through percolation, and the utilization of on-site treated storm water to help maintain water levels during dry periods. Wetland plantings included strictly native emergent and shrub species. Nine large cedar stumps and large granite boulders were incorporated into the design as habitat ' features. The project has been recognized by the City of Everett as a model wetland mitigation project. Talasaea is currently developing the wetland monitoring and maintenance plan for this project. Wetland Mitigation Area Planning, City of Kirkland—Kirkland,Washington Project involves survey and analysis of potential off-site wetland mitigation areas to compensate for a proposed OS-acre wetland fill on a commercial development site in the City of Kirkland. For each potential site an analysis of soils, topography, hydrology, adjacent land use,wetland and upland vegetation and other ' natural features was conducted. Once a suitable mitigation area is approved, the area would be restored/enhanced. Long-term monitoring would ensure mitigation goals are met. A permanent conservation easement, or similar legal device, would be created to ensure protection in perpetuity. ' 3 t ' Wetland Mitigation for Hylebos Industrial Site, City of Tacoma—Tacoma,Washington Site development will require filling of approximately one-quarter acre of highly disturbed emergent wetlands on this site. Design features include creation of new wetlands, enhancement of existing wetlands, and enhanced buffer and perimeter landscaping with native plant species. Hydrological support for the created wetland area will be ensured by site grading, use of impermeable liners, and routing of treated storm water into the mitigation area. The mitigation plan and design has been approved by the City. Raging River Project involved creation of restoration plan for degraded/filled wetlands and stream on site adjacent to and ' contiguous with the Raging River. Detailed landscape included notes,plans,and specifications for treatment of unstable steep-slope areas, buffer averaging and landscape treatment of man-made ponds. Project included preparation of monitoring and maintenance plans and construction supervision. AA.D. Ability to meet Schedules and Deadlines Talasaea's work load is prioritized and scheduled based on client needs. Our firm is committed to providing timely service and fulfilling scheduling agreements. Talasaea frequently works with sudden, and complex work loads. All of our projects receive the same professional commitment and attention with respect to quality and service. Talasaea will always try to accommodate client requests for additional services. A2 Approach to the Project PP J ' A2.A Proiect Management and Product Delivery Tracey P. McKenzie will serve as Project Manager, with responsibility for allocating personnel, monitoring expenditures,and ensuring that products are completed on-time and within budget. She will maintain day-to-day contact with the City's Project Manager and the project team to ensure that our work effort meets the project objectives. Parametrix will provide an agreed number of copies of each final product as well as an electronic 1 version compatible with the City's software (i.e., Microsoft Word for Windows,Auto CAD). A2.B Methods for Establishing Scones of Work. Cost Estimates and Schedules Early on, Parametrix will meet with City staff to clarify the City's project needs, goals, and objectives for input into a detailed scope of work. Our detailed scope will provide an overview of project expectations and a discussion of each task including task purpose, detailed task description, task products, limitations and assumptions. Cost estimates for each task will be prepared using Microsoft EXCEL and will reflect labor costs, subcontractor costs, and direct expenses. The project schedule will be prepared using Microsoft Project, identifying start-up and completion times for each task and their interrelationships. The schedule spreadsheet 1 will identify critical paths, non-critical items, and milestones,and can be readily modified to reflect any changes in project schedule. A2.0 Technical Approach to Project Our technical approach to the City of Renton's mitigation project corresponds to the tentative scope of work provided by the City. 1 Task 1 - Project Coordination As stated above in Section A.2.13 we will meet with City staff in the first week to finalize the scope of work, schedule, and budget. At the first coordination meeting, we will request copies of pertinent previous environmental investigations(e.g.,aerial photographs,adjacent existing and proposed land use,future basin- wide drainage and water quality projects), and to confirm the Section 404 "isolated" status of the wetlands of immediate concern. Parametrix will submit a detailed final scope of work, schedule, and budget based on this meeting and a memorandum describing the results of the first coordination meeting. ' 4 r ' Task 2 - Conditions Assessment The conditions assessment will achieve two objectives: 1) determine how much and what type of mitigation is feasible on the mitigation site; and 2) determine how much wetland acreage is potentially eligible for drawing credits against a mitigation bank on the site. All existing information related to wetland creation on the mitigation site will be reviewed. Important physical and biological factors include: topography; hydrologic conditions on-site and in the watershed,including water quality,water quantity, and future basin- wide storm water projects; and position of the site in the landscape relative to other bodies of water,upland and wetland habitats, existing fish and wildlife populations, and existing and proposed land uses adjacent to the mitigation site. Previous wetland delineations and inventories for the surrounding area will be integrated onto a topographic base map. An on-site analysis will verify existing information and will provide additional data on soils and the general character, function, value, and buffering potential of on-site and off-site wetlands and upland habitats. ' We will assess the capacity of the mitigation site for off-setting future impacts to wetland functions and values by evaluating current opportunities and constraints and anticipated future conditions. We will evaluate the extent of wetlands in the drainage basin potentially eligible to use an off-site mitigation opportunity, based on the current wetland acreage in the watershed and different wetland classifications (consistent with the City's ordinance, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service classification scheme, and the Section 404 regulatory status of these wetlands). Using current information on mitigation costs and the feasibility of program implementation, we will evaluate several financial scenarios for implementing a mitigation banking program (e.g., credit brokering, cost recovery mechanisms) or an off-site mitigation program. ' Our analysis of physical, biological, regulatory, and economic factors will be used to select an appropriate mitigation program meeting the City's and Focus Group's goals and objectives. ' Task 3 -Mitigation Goals and Objectives Preliminary goals,objectives,and strategies for establishing a mitigation site will be submitted for City review after our initial meeting with City staff and our preliminary conditions assessment. In particular,the project team will identify differences between mitigation banking and off-site mitigation programs. Following City review, we will meet with the City's Project Manager and Interdepartmental Design Team, regulatory agencies, and the Focus Group to reach consensus on the goals, objectives, and strategies of the plan. Information on potential future impacts to wetland functions and values developed in Task 2 will be used to determine replacement ratios for compliance with the City's ordinance. A matrix will be prepared showing criteria for use of the site as either a mitigation bank or an off-site mitigation site. The criteria will, ' at a minimum, be based on the wetland type and size,functions and values, quality of the habitat, required replacement ratios, compliance with sequencing (i.e., avoidance, minimization, compensation); off-site replacement feasibility; and location within the basin's landscape. ' We will meet with the City and all participating organizations and agencies to finalize the goals and objectives, and to seek input on an appropriate mitigation program for the City. ' Task 4 -Mitigation Plan The programmatic component of the mitigation plan will include the goals, objectives, and strategies for implementing the preferred mitigation program (based on meeting in Task 3);the criteria used to determine ' when projects could use the mitigation site; the financial, technical, management, and administrative obligations of the City, developers, and permitting agencies; the wetland types and upland buffers to be created (based on historic losses of wetlands within the watershed, opportunities and constraints of the mitigation sites, and the wetland types that may be impacted in the watershed in the future); an assessment of the functions that can be created; and specific success criteria for the types of mitigation projects envisioned for the site, including an estimate of the time needed to establish the targeted vegetation communities and functions. r ' 5 ' A master plan will be prepared that shows the location of the mitigation acreage of immediate concern to the City and the location and type of future mitigation projects. The types of wetland communities (e.g., open water, shrub community), access trails, and interpretive opportunities will be defined on the master 1 plan. The vision of the master plan should reflect the elements of the programmatic plan. Alternative conceptual site designs will be prepared to show a range of implementation costs, including: 1) minimum acreage to compensate for wetlands of immediate concern; 2) 10 to 15 acres of additional phased acreage; ' and 3) maximum utilization of the mitigation site. Financial responsibilities(e.g.,orders of magnitude costs for excavation, planting, monitoring, maintenance, and site administration) will be identified for each alternative concept. In coordination with the City, one alternative will be selected and a preliminary fee structure for using the mitigation site will be developed. Grading and planting plans will be developed to ' show required cuts and fill to establish site hydrology, the locations of each plant community, quantities of each species, and planting details (e.g., soil amendments, plant size, plant condition, planting densities). ' Task S - Monitoring and Maintenance Plan A construction monitoring program will be developed,identifying public and private financial responsibilities for overseeing project construction. This element is critical to the success of any wetland creation project. ' Monitoring and maintenance guidelines will be developed to provide long-term guidance for measuring the success of wetland creation and identify remedial measures. Because wetland mitigation strives to replace affected wetland functions and values, a baseline monitoring program should be conducted prior to construction-related wetland impacts. Additional long-term monitoring of the mitigation site should be conducted to determine the effectiveness of mitigation for achieving project objectives. The monitoring program will identify specific physical and biological monitoring parameters and methods for data collection and analysis, including spatial and temporal parameters, monitoring frequency, and methods for assessing societal values, public use and satisfaction, and resulting economic development. B. PROJECT SPECIFIC INFORMATION B.1 In-house Team Qualifications B.1.A Project Team ' The proposed project team is comprised of specialists from Parametrix, Inc. and Talasaea Consultants. The project team members, their area of expertise applicable to the project, and each members proposed role is shown in the organization chart (Figure 1). 11.1.13 Proieect Manager The project manager for this project is Ms. Tracey P. McKenzie. She is a Senior Ecologist in the Biological Resources Division at Parametrix,Inc. She has more than ten years of technical and regulatory experience with issues concerning wetlands,coastal habitat alteration,regulatory compliance,marine and estuarine resources,and threatened and endangered species. She has worked with residential,commercial, and industrial developments, ' shoreline developments, port related development, roadway expansions and improvements, and local, state and federal resource agencies. She interacts regularly with clients, project team members, and resource and regulatory agencies. Her responsibilities have included conducting site investigations and studies,preparing data ' and technical reports for clients and resource and regulatory agencies, and working with the client and project engineers in developing design plans that avoid or minimize environmental impacts. Ms.McKenzie has an M.S. in ecology from the University of Rhode Island (Narragansett Rhode Island) and a B.S. in biological sciences ' from the Clarement Colleges (Claremont, California). B.1.0 Proiect Team Resumes Resumes of the project team members are included in Section 2. 6 ■r r w� sir � � w � � � � � � � ii r � � fi CITY OF RENTON PROJECT MANAGER >' ASSIGNED PRINCIPAL Don Weitkamp,Ph.D. (PMX) ...................................................... :.......... PROJECT MANAGER Tracey McKenzie(PMX) GRAPHICS WORD PROCESSING EDITING Parametrix, Inc. Support Services WETLAND ANALYSIS WETLAND CREATION SOIL SURVEY,MAPPING, Tracey McKenzie(PMX) RESTORATION ENGINEERING and MASTER PLAN Jim Kelley, Ph.D. (PMX) Tracey McKenzie(PMX) Rick Hermes, P.E. (PMX) Mike Bowen(PMX) Kittie Ford PMX Kittie Ford(PMX) Clifford Willwerth(TAL) Norm Brones (PMX) William Shiels(TAL) .' Jim Kelley, Ph.D.(PMX) Clifford Willwerth (TAL) .......................•� Willia m m Shiels(TAL John Altmann (TAL) Clifford Willwerth(TAL) William Shiels (TAL) WETLAND MITIGATION/ FISH &WILDLIFE MITIGATION BANKING HABITAT HYDROLOGY COMMUNITY/ Tracey McKenzie(PMX) Trace McKenzie PMX Paul Fendt, P.E. (PMX) [< REGULATORY Kittie Ford PMX y ( ) AGENCY INVOLVEMENT >'• (PMX) Tom Strong, Ph.D. (PMX) Trace McKenzie PMX Jim Kelley, Ph.D. (PMX) Bob Sullivan (PMX) y ( ) :. William Shiels(TAL) Kittie Ford (PMX) Clifford Willwerth(TAL) """ "'"'""'" "''"'`'" Fred Fortino (PMX) William Shiels (TAL) PMX-Parametrix, Inc. Figure 1. TAL-Talasaea Consultants Team Organization ' B2 Project Experience ' B2A Representative Project Experience of Pammetrix. Inc. Project experience that is representative of the areas of expertise that the City of Renton is requesting is provided below: ' Wetland Restoration In the Lower Snohomish River Estuary Location: Snohomish County, Washington Scope: A Parametrix staff member was asked to participate in a one-day field effort with a federal, state, and local interagency committee to identify sites that would be suitable for wetland 1 restoration in the lower Snohomish River Estuary. This effort resulted in the interagency committee selecting one site in the lower estuary that was scheduled for restoration and enhancement activities under a joint federal and state funding program for restoration. Project Size: Pro Bono ' Reference: Mike Rylko, EPA Ecologist, (206) 553-4141 Wetland Restoration and Mitigation Banking at Biringer Strawberry Farm—Biringer and Ebert Location: Snohomish County, Washington ' Scope: A Parametrix staff member was the manager of a restoration project that was to convert 360 acres of agricultural land to a tidally influenced wetland in the lower Snohomish River estuary. The primary responsibilities associated with this project were coordinating with local,state,and ' federal resource agencies; coordinating site visits with resource agencies; performing on-site evaluations for resources and habitats of concern; delineating wetlands; coordinating with the project engineer and planner to develop the conceptual design;assisting in preparing the SEPA, shoreline, and Corps Section 404 permits; participating in Hearings Examiner meetings; responding to agency comments on the permit applications; and preparing the documentation that described the historical landscape and the anticipated ecological benefits to the lower ' Snohomish River estuary from restoring the site. Project Size: $15,000 ' Reference: CJ. Ebert, Owner Harbour Mountain Development, (206) 258-9366 ' Union Slough Wetland Restoration and Permitting Assistance--Port of Everett Location: Everett, Washington ' Scope: A Parametrix staff member was responsible for conducting a wetland delineation and for evaluating the feasibility of restoring a 36-acre converted agricultural area to a brackish intertidal marsh. She worked with engineers and a planner to develop the conceptual design 1 and documentation to demonstrate the ecological advantage of the project, and she prepared the SEPA checklist. Restoration of the site was proposed to partially mitigate for aquatic habitat losses associated with a terminal expansion project. Restoration of the site was expected to benefit juvenile salmonids, other estuarian fishery resources, and shorebirds. 8 ' Project Size: $30,000 Reference: Dennis Gregoire, Director of Planning, (206) 259-3164 Wetland Delineations and Verifications—City of Mukilteo Location: Mukilteo, Washington Scope: A Parametrix staff member served as an extension of the City of Mukilteo Planning staff; conducted and/or verified wetland delineations completed by other consultants;reviewed SEPA checklists for completeness and accuracy;and coordinated with project proponents and the City staff to identify wetland issues, reporting requirements, mitigation planning, and the need for ' bonds. She was also responsible for reviewing and assessing the completeness and technical accuracy of wetland delineation reports,functional assessments,and proposed mitigation plans. She managed as many as 12 projects simultaneously that required close coordination with the ' City and property developer and timely responses in order to meet the deadlines established by the City and SEPA process. Project Size: $10,000 to $W'000 ' Reference: Hiller West, Senior Planner, (206) 355-4141 City of Renton CBD Sewer Replacement Location: Renton, Washington ' Scope: The City of Renton,Washington, retained Parametrix to replace 3000 feet of t inch �g eight concrete sewer pipe and perform the associated service connections in downtown Renton. The ' replacement was accomplished through open trench construction. Our staff also performed utility data collection surveys, geoterhnical investigations, plans, specifications, estimates, and construction management assistance. Project Size: $85,591 Reference: David Christensen, Project Manager, (206) 235-2500 Petrovitsky Park Field Mapping ' Location: Bellevue, Washington ' Scope: Parametrix provided surveying services for the design of Petrovitsky Park in Washington state. Phase I planning included initial topographic mapping, which was used by the architect to design the park, and the preparation of as-built drawings of the 40-acre park site which is bounded on the North side by the Cedar River wetlands. Other Phase I also involved site ' ground preparation for baseball and soccer fields, parking facilities, grading, drainage, underground utilities, trails, walkways and picnic areas. After construction of the park, our crews assembled an as-built topographic map. ' Project Size: $4,400 Reference: Dick Jongejan, Principal, (206) 454-5723 9 ' Preston-Snoqualmie Multi-Use Trail Development Location: King County, Washington ' Scope: The King County Division of Parks and Recreation selected our team to develop approximately three miles of a multi-use trail system between the town of Preston, Washington and Lake ' Alice Road. This trail is a link in the County-wide Seattle-to-Cascades Trail System. Parametrix'preliminary responsibilities included surveying and base mapping, developing trail alternatives, applying for and receiving a shoreline permit, and producing plans, specifications and estimates. We also provided construction assistance which encompassed plan interpretation, change orders, and limited inspection. As a continuation of Phase I,Parametrix developed construction documents for Phase II of the ' trail system, which runs from Lake Alice Road to Snoqualmie, Washington. The project elements included trail alignment, design of asphalt concrete and gravel-surfaced facilities, drainage, slope treatment,rest areas, trestle reconstruction, and fencing. Parametrix was also ' selected for Phase III. Parametrix designed improvements to culverts along the trail. The improvements included extending existing culverts away from adjacent banks, as well as providing emergency overflow inlets. Our staff designed maintenance roads to provide access to these structures. We provided all survey, hydraulic analysis, conveyance facility and road ' design. Project Size: $108,000 Reference: Steve Massey, Project Manager, (206) 296-4254 134th Avenue N.E. Multi-Purpose Trail Location: Bellevue,Washington Scope: Parametrix assisted the City of Bellevue, Washington in developing a multi-purpose, non- motorized vehicle trail along the 134th Avenue N.E. corridor adjacent to Bridle Trails State Park. The project included conceptual design; the development of engineering plans, specifications and estimates for the trail; field surveying and base map preparation; storm drainage improvements; landscaping, retaining walls; and intersection and roadway alignment modifications. The trail, developed along a 60-foot wide corridor in conjunction with a 24-foot wide roadway, accommodates bicycles, horses and pedestrians, yet much of the natural vegetation and visual atmosphere was preserved. A major project element was the formation of a Citizen's Advisory Committee to provide coordination among the City,the design team and the community. This included meeting with over 60 adjacent property owners to discuss their concerns. Hall and Associates assisted Parametrix with the development of community ' relations issues associated with the project. Project Size: 550,000 Reference: The contact person is no longer with the City 10 Lake Sammamish Trail Improvements Location: Bellevue, Washington Scope: Parametrix developed safety improvements along a section of the Lake Sammamish Trail near Bothell,Washington. There had been several accidents on the trail due to limited sight distance ' at a ninety degree corner. We corrected this by designing a retaining wall to eliminate a fill slope, increasing the sight distance. One of the major facets of this project involved assisting the contractor in construction phasing to avoid damaging a major water line near the top of the fill area. ' Project Size: $3,500 Reference: Dave McNeal, Principal, (206) 454-5723 ' Nearshore Sediment Remediation Tacoma Kraft Mill Location: Tacoma, Washington ' Scope: The Commencement Bay Superfund studies identified the sediments adjacent to the Tacoma Kraft Mill as an area of sufficient chemical contamination to constitute a problem area. Parametrix was hired by Champion International and Simpson Paper Company to investigate ' the nature and extent of the marine sediment contamination,to develop remedial action for the contamination, and to develop habitat enhancement measures for the contaminated sediment area. Parametrix conducted sediment sampling to define the nature and extent of chemical contaminants as well as organic contamination (wood chips, etc.). Our staff designed a new outfall and assisted Simpson with source control action to prevent reoccurrence of the contamination problems. We developed a dredge and disposal plan for nearshore capping of the contaminated sediments using native sediments from the Puyallup River Delta. This plan included measures that economically provided enhanced estuarine habitat. Parametrix prepared ' the environmental documents required to evaluate impacts on the natural environment. This included a monitoring plan for water quality,sediment quality and marine biota that is currently being implemented. We also provided environmental support in the Corps of Engineers' Section 10/404 permit process and Department of Ecology water quality certification. ' The studies, plans, and implementation measures designed by Parametrix were done to meet the objectives of the National Contingency Plan. The permitting and regulation of the project ' is being conducted under authority of the Washington State Department of Ecology. The contaminated sediments were successfully capped with clean native sediment. The area now provides significantly improved intertidal habitat for migrating salmonids and other nearshore dependent fauna. As a result of the expedience and quality of work,this project was presented with the Governor's Environmental Excellence Award. ' Project Size: $1,200,000 Reference: Dave McEntee, Manager of Environmental Services, (206) 572-2150 it North Creek Regional Storm Water Detention Facility Location: Snohomish County, Washington ' Scope: Parametrix biologists are assisting Snohomish County, Washington, staff in the evaluation of environmental impacts of a regional storm water detention facility on wetlands,fish and wildlife. ' We have conducted wetland delineations, wildlife surveys, and fisheries evaluations. We are also examining how the proposed hydrologic changes will alter wetland function and change wildlife habitat. A conceptual mitigation plan will be designed to mitigate any adverse impacts ' to wetland functions. Project Size: 528,000 Reference: Mohammed Kashani, (206) 388-3488 City of Sumner Wetland Inventory Location: Sumner, Washington Scope: Parametrix has completed an inventory of wetlands within the 15 square mile Sumner Comprehensive Planning area. Wetlands were identified according to 1989 federal wetland methodologies and mapped on a geographic information system (GIS). Color infrared aerial photos, soil survey maps, NWI maps, and flood data were used to identify potential wetland sites. Field verification occurred on 100% of the sites. The inventory was designed to allow planning staff and development proponents to identify environmental issues in early planning ' stages, and to minimize project impacts to wetlands. The inventory was funded by the Washington Department of ecology through Coastal Zone Management Funds and our staff coordinated with Department of Ecology wetland scientists to design and complete the inventory. ' Project Size: $13,000 Reference: Alan Nygaard, City Administrator, (206) 863-8300 ' Bald Eagle and Peregrine Falcon Biological Assessment for Everett Homeport Location: Everett, Washington ' Scope: Parametrix was selected by the U.S. Navy in 1989 to prepare a biological assessment on bald eagles and peregrine falcons in the area of the proposed Everett homeport. Our staff performed field evaluations at the project site to document habitat characteristics and potential ' use of the area by eagles and falcons. The assessment described current use of the project area by nesting,migration,and wintering bald eagles and peregrine falcons,and evaluated the effects of project construction and operation on both species. Potential impacts on food supplies and foraging areas were specifically addressed, including the effects of accidental oil spills and i dredging activity. Possible effects of noise and other disturbances to bald eagle and peregrine falcons were also discussed. ' Project Size: 5300,000 Reference: Don Morris, Environmental Planner, (206) 396-5976 12 ' Cedar River Watershed Secondary Use Analysis Location: King County, Washington Scope: Parametrix served as prime contractor for the Seattle Water Department to evaluate the existing and potential secondary uses of the Cedar River Watershed. As its primary use, the ' 90,000-acre watershed supplies high-quality drinking water without filtration to more than one million customers in the greater Seattle area. Our staff evaluated various secondary uses including timber harvest, wildlife habitat protection and enhancement, fisheries, recreation, ' education, research, and cultural resources. Each type of secondary use was evaluated for potential water quality impacts,opportunity for development in the watershed,and compatibility with other potential secondary uses. Parametrix worked with the Water Department, a Watershed Advisory Committee and with members from government agencies, industry, and ' environmental interest groups. Five secondary use alternatives were developed ranging from minimum human presence and activity in the watershed to high utilization of available resources. We prepared an EIS that considered the potential impacts of alternatives working with the Water Department and Watershed Advisory Committee to develop a preferred alternative. This required building a consensus among the various interests represented on the Watershed Advisory Committee concerning the trade-offs between use of the natural resources in the watershed and preservation of its unique environmental qualities. Project Size: $185,000 Reference: Rosemary Menard, (206) 684-5931 Sockeye Salmon Spawning Project Terrestrial Habitat Evaluation Location: King County, Washington Scope: Parametrix was contracted to evaluate existing wildlife habitat values and assess project impacts on a 70-acre riparian forest community adjacent to the Cedar River in Washington State. The purpose of the study was to determine impacts of constructing and operating a sockeye salmon production facility needed to replace natural spawning habitat removed by municipal water diversion. Quantitative data on vegetative structure/composition and breeding bird use were collected and utilized to determine habitat suitability and predict project effects. The basis of the analysis was the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Habitat Evaluation Procedures (HEP). Project Size: $4000 ' Reference: Nancy Davidson, (206) 6844608 ' City of Kirkland On-Call Wetland Services Location: Kirkland, Washington ' Scope: Since May 1990,Parametrix has served as an on-call wetland consultant to the City of Kirkland. We delineate wetlands and evaluate impacts of proposed City and private development projects on wetlands and stream resources. We provide these services as needed, and have identified ' wetlands and impacts to wetland function associated with sewer line construction, park development, housing and commercial developments. As consultant to the City, we routinely review wetland reports and mitigation proposals prepared by other consultants in support of t private development. We are currently assisting the City in developing a wetland rating system to serve as an interim update to the City's zoning code protecting wetlands. 13 ' As on-call wetland consultant to the City of Kirkland, Parametrix has delineated wetlands, conducted wetland/stream functional assessments, performed impact analysis, and suggested environmentally sensitive designs for various park features. These studies have included analysis ' for construction of trails, boardwalks, overlooks, interpretative signage, and restoration. Project Size: On-call contract, size of projects will vary Reference: Paul Stewart, Principal Planner, (206) 828-W7 Environmental Impact Statement for Water Supply Pipeline Location: Tacoma, Washington Scope: Parametrix prepared an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the construction impacts and environmental permits for the City of Tacoma, Washington's Pipeline No.5 project. The pipeline was proposed to divert an additional 100 cfs of water from the Green River to the Tacoma domestic water supply service area. The EIS addressed existing conditions, impacts, and mitigation for fisheries and wildlife along the 33-mile pipeline route, including 17 stream and river crossing and 2 wetland crossings. Work included documentation of fish species use; mapping of stream and wetland crossings;identification of endangered,threatened,and sensitive plants and animals;recommendations for route changes to reduce environmental impacts; and development of a revegetation plan for environmentally-sensitive areas. Permit applications ' were prepared for Shoreline Management Substantial Development actions,U.S.Army Corps of Engineers Section 10 and 404 compliance, and Washington State Hydraulics Project Approval. To maintain engineering and construction schedules, this project was developed to meet a strict completion date. tProject Size: 585,000 Reference: Ken Olson, Water Superintendent, (206) 593-8206 B.2.A. Representative Proiect Experience of Talasaea Consultants Wetland Assessment along Tibbetts Creek Location: Issaquah, Washington ' Scope: A wetland and stream reconnaissance study was made on the subject property to assess potential site development constraints and flood storage areas and areas which could serve as part of a regional trail system linking Issaquah to Lake Sammamish. Concepts for stream enhancement included removal of invasive plant species,streambank and streambed stabilization by structural and biological methods, and selected revegetation to protect the streambanks and enhance riparian habitat for terrestrial and aquatic species. Talasaea is currently a consultant to the landowner on the proposed stream restoration project proposed by the City of Issaquah. ' Reference: Rowley Agency, (206) 392-6407 14 Wetland and Stream Restoration Location: Bellevue, Washington Scope: Project involved assessment of impacts resulting from a grading violation within a stream corridor and an associated wetland. The restoration plan involved development of an improved drainage ' system, bank stabilization and erosion control, construction of a small on-site retention/detention pond with associated biofiltration, and enhanced riparian and wetland vegetation. Reference: Pierre Goral, (206) 746-6310 Meadowdale Apartments Project Location: Lynnwood, Washington 1 Scope: Multi-family residential development on a 2.5-acre site containing approximately 1 acre of wetland and a stream. Project required wetland delineation, site planning, and mitigation for impacts to stream and wetlands. Mitigation involved wetland enhancement and construction, design of a trail ' system through the site, and wetland and stream buffer enhancement. Plan involves construction of emergent and open water wetlands along east bank of Scriber Creek. Reference: Terra Management Corporation, (206) Ml-56M Stream and Wetland Restoration Location: Preston, Washington Scope: Project involved restoration of a stream and its associated wetlands following excessive site grading ' and a 100-year storm event. The area affected is about 1,000 feet of stream channel and approximately two acres of adjacent wetlands. The restoration plan includes removal of eroded materials from the stream channel by both mechanical and manual means,stabilization of the banks and bed using both structural and biological approaches,using native plant species with high value to wildlife, and constructing high-flow bypass areas along the stream to protect its banks. Reference: Reynolds & Koch, (206) 222-7220 Wetland/Stream Study at Proposed Commercial Building Site Location: Auburn, Washington Scope: Project involved delineation of wetlands and description of wetland and stream functions and values. A mitigation plan was developed to enhance and protect the stream and wetlands on this site. The plan includes removal of debris and garbage from the sensitive areas, minor grading and revegetation of disturbed areas, wetland and stream enhancement, restoration of the natural ' drainage system across the site, and a landscape plan for the biofiltration swales that provides enhanced wildlife habitat diversity. Reference: Myers Construction, (206) 833-4126 1 Preston Industrial Park Location: Preston, Washington Scope: Project involves environmental analysis of water quality, fisheries, wetlands, plant and animal communities. Three streams enter a 4-acre, Class 2, scrub/shrub wetland. Mitigation of project ' impacts would involve developing a levee to expand saimonid spawning and rearing area in the lower reach of the main tributary to the wetland; construction of two wetlands along a second tributary which will require both structural and biological design components;and re-routing a small tributary to the wetland in order to facilitate construction of a half-acre emergent wetland. Reference: Preston Industrial Associates, (206) 624-2669 Stream Corridor Restoration/Enhancement ' Location: Preston, Washington Scope: Commercial/industrial development of tributary to East Fork of Issaquah Creek. Project required landscape plan to protect streambank, protect water quality, and enhance riparian vegetating for visual screening and wildlife habitat. Stream supports both resident and anadromous salmonid species. ' Reference: Stonefelt, (206) 872-7216 C. AFFIRMATIVE ACTION AND MINORITY BUSINESS USAGE Parametrix, Inc. ' By policy and preference, Parametrix, Inc. (the Company) affirms its continuing commitment to afford all individuals who have the necessary qualifications, an equal opportunity to compete for employment and advancement in the Company. The Company is committed to the philosophy and principle of equal employment opportunity for all present and prospective employees. To assure equal employment opportunity,there shall be no discrimination and/or preferred treatment concerning ' any individual or group because of race, religion, color, national origin, sex or age. Equal employment opportunity is also extended to handicapped, the Vietnam Era veteran, and disabled veterans. This philosophy is reaffirmed in the Company's Employee Handbook. This Affirmative Action Program was developed to assure the effective application of the Company's Nondiscrimination and Equal Employment Opportunity Policy; to ensure compliance with applicable state and federal regulations and laws,and to serve as a guide for the development,revision,and meaningful administration of the affirmative action programs. When forming teaming arrangements for projects,Parametrix makes it a policy to have minority-owned,woman- owned, and disadvantaged businesses in significant roles, when possible. We are dedicated to fulfilling the minority contractor requirements set forth by our clients. Talasaea Consultants Tahmea Consultants has a strong Affirmative Action policy. Our firm regularly employs minorities and works with minority owned businesses. Fifty percent of Talasaea's staff our women. 16 ' D. MULTI-CONSULTANT TEAM ' DA Consultant Team Requirements Parametrix is teaming with Talasaea Consultants for this project. Talasaea has provided specific information ' relating to the requirements of Section A, B, and C and Parametrix has integrated this information into this submittal. D2 Principle Consultant Parametrix, Inc. is the principle firm and Talasaea Consultants is a subcontractor to Parametrix. 17 � � � �■ i>• i � iii� iiiii� it �w i>• ii>• iiii� � � iiii� ii>• �■ Section 2 c K .` E ti L r rr r� r� rrr err �r r� �r rr r■r rr rr rr rr r� rr rr rr Tracey Perrier McKenzie Master of Science, Zoology Bachelor of Science, Biology Tracey McKenzie has conducted numerous federal and local jurisdictional wetland determinations, functional assessments, and impact assessments in coastal and inland areas. She identifies specific regulations and compliance requirements pertinent to a project and works with the client to ensure that investigations are focused on the definition of impacts and regulatory compliance. Ms.McKenzie is skilled in assisting clients determine planning, project, and mitigation opportunities for both development activities and environmental conservation. She is also skilled in assisting clients with development programs and resource protection programs within the context of the regional landscape or watershed. This expertise allows her to evaluate project and development needs and balance them with conservation of critical resources and habitats. She has developed strategies and models that can be used to plan for consolidated mitigation planning and comprehensive mitigation banking. Proiect Experience Miscellaneous Environmental Services—US.Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District Ms.McKenzie prepared the winning proposal to provide environmental services to the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers, and managed the overall contract and individual work projects. While project manager, she oversaw four work orders which included assisting the Corps with completing an analysis of WET and DOE wetland rating data, an environmental assessment, an alternatives analysis, and wetland management plan. Aquatic Habitat Mitigation Planning and Design—Port of Tacoma Ms. McKenzie is providing assistance to the principal investigator and to the Port on development of a detailed mitigation plan to compensate for losses associated with a remedial action for the disposal of contaminated sediments onsite. She also assisted with the development of habitat assessment methods consistent with existing habitat assessment methodologies. She is assisting the Port in identifying additional off-site alternatives for additional mitigation needs. Wetland Restoration in the Lower Snohomish River Estuary Ms.McKenzie was asked to participate in a one-day field effort with a federal, state, and local interagency committee to identify sites that would be suitable for wetland restoration in the lower Snohomish River Estuary. This effort resulted in the interagency committee selecting one site in the lower estuary that was scheduled for restoration and enhancement activities under a joint federal and state funding program for restoration. Wetland Restoration and Mitigation Banking at Biringer Strawberry Farm--Biringer and Ebert Ms.McKenzie was the manager of a restoration project that was to convert 360 acres of agricultural land to a tidally influenced wetland in the lower Snohomish River estuary. The primary responsibilities associated with this project were coordinating with local, state, and federal resource agencies; coordinating site visits with resource agencies; performing on-site evaluations for resources and habitats of concern; delineating wetlands; coordinating with the project engineer and planner to develop the conceptual design; assisting in preparing the SEPA,shoreline,and Corps Section 404 permits;participating in Hearings Examiner meetings; responding to agency comments on the permit applications;and preparing the documentation that described the historical landscape and the anticipated ecological benefits to the lower Snohomish River estuary from restoring the site. Union Slough Wetland Restoration and Permitting Assistance—Port of Everett i Ms. McKenzie was responsible for conducting a wetland delineation and for evaluating the feasibility of restoring a 36-acre converted agricultural area to a brackish intertidal marsh. She worked with engineers and a planner to develop the conceptual design and documentation to demonstrate the ecological advantage of the project, and she prepared the SEPA checklist. Restoration of the site was proposed to partially i 1 Tracey Perrier McKenzie imitigate for aquatic habitat losses associated with a terminal expansion project. Restoration of the site was expected to benefit juvenile salmonids, other estuarian fishery resources, and shorebirds. Salt Marsh Establishment, Jetty Island, Everett, Port of Everett Ms. McKenzie was the project manager of the study and design of a saltmarsh creation project to demonstrate beneficial use of dredged materials. Dredge sediment from the lower Snohomish River Estuary was used to create a berm, protective embayment, and salt marsh to benefit juvenile salmonids and other estuarine dependent species. Major responsibilities included implementing the wetland vegetation plan, coordinating planting crews, monitoring vegetation establishment on the berm and within the embayment, preparing the report, and coordinating the interagency committee. Shallow Draft Barge Pier and Storage Facility—Port of Everett Ms. McKenzie conducted a wetland delineation to determine the extent and type of wetlands on a parcel being considered for storage and for a barge pier. The project is adjacent to Steamboat Slough and contains degraded and ditch wetlands that would be affected. The wetland delineation information was used by the Port and the engineers to develop a conceptual site development plan complete with on-site wetland 1 mitigation. The information was also used to prepare the SEPA checklist. Wetland Delineation, Port of Skagit County ' Ms.McKenzie was the project manager for delineating approximately 300 acres of land within the 1800-acre Bayview Business and Industrial Park. Delineation of the area involved aerial photograph interpretation, on-site evaluation of vegetation, soils, and hydrology, data collection, quality control of data, and report preparation. The report and maps prepared by Leonard, Boudinot, and Skojie were used to evaluate the likelihood of developing and receiving a federal 404 permit for a rail served industrial park. Wetland Inventory and Ordinance Review Ms.McKenzie was the project manager and provided technical assistance to Island County in the review and evaluation of their wetland ordinance. This project was funded in part by the Department of Ecology and included. aerial photograph interpretation,creating overlays that compared the soil conservation service soil ' survey information, National Wetland Inventory Maps, and Department of Natural Resource water type maps;field verification of potential estuarine and freshwater wetlands; testing the Department of Ecology's proposed field rating form for rating the resource value of wetlands; final map preparation; and ordinance review for Island County and unincorporated and incorporated jurisdictions. Wetland Delineation and Reconnaissance—Port of Skagit County Ms. McKenzie was the project manager for conducting a field survey of approximately 600 acres of the Bayview Business and Industrial Park to identify and delineate wetlands. A field reconnaissance was also completed for wetlands and uplands on a portion of the 600 acres. Survey maps and data collected regarding the wetlands and uplands will be used by the Port to evaluate their development potential. Wetland Mitigation Banking,Workgroup Facilitator, Restoration Workshop--Corps of Engineers Ms. McKenzie participated in a wetland restoration workshop sponsored by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Ms. McKenzie, along with an Environmental Protection Agency employee, facilitated a work group on mitigation banking. Work group attendees included federal, state, local resource agencies representative,consultants,port districts,lawyers,and representatives of private industry. The results of the work group were synthesized and included in a report that will be part of the workshop proceedings. The report will also be used to encourage interested parties to initiate a mitigation bank that can be used as a t, test case within the State of Washington. Kittie Ellen Ford Master of Urban Planning, Urban Design and Planning Bachelor of Arts, Science Education Bachelor of Science, Zoology Kittie Ford is a Wetland Ecologist at Parametrix. She has ten years of experience as an environmental consultant, specializing in wetland biology and policy analysis. She has performed numerous wetland and vegetation studies,and inventoried sensitive areas. Ms.Ford has analyzed and developed local regulatory policy for several Puget Sound jurisdictions including Kitsap, Pierce, and Snohomish Counties and the Cities of Mukilteo,Camas,Redmond, and Puyallup. She has conducted wetland delineations and functional assessments, designed and prepared specifications, and supervised construction of wetland mitigation plans. Ms. Ford has assessed potential development impacts to a wide range of natural and built features and has managed large multidisciplinary environmental assessment projects. As head of the Wetlands Group at Parametrix, she manages project staff and coordinates with other discipline groups on complex, multidisciplinary projects. Ms. Ford is responsible for designing and implementing data collection and analysis for the firm's wetlands and natural resource policy-related work, as well as coordinating with federal, state, and local resource agencies, and providing expert testimony on wetland issues. Ms.Ford recently completed her master's thesis on Washington's wetland regulatory and policy framework and the potential for establishing wetland mitigation banks as part of a regional resource planning strategy. She has also completed additional graduate-level studies in physiological ecology and environmental systems modelling. In addition to her involvement with biological resource issues, she has extensive experience assessing land use planning concerns associated with both public and private projects and programmatic actions. She is thoroughly familiar with the federal delineation methodology, and is closely following current shifts in regulatory policy, delineation methodologies, and mitigation and monitoring requirements. Most recently, she helped organize a mitigation monitoring workshop sponsored by the Professional Consultants of Snohomish County. Proiect Experience City of Camas Wetland Mitigation Bank Ms.Ford is currently assisting the City of Camas to obtain state and federal funding for development of a comprehensive wetland and storm water management plan. The planning area encompasses approximately 1,%0 acres of undeveloped light industrial land in the Lacamas Lake watershed. Significant concerns for water quality, and the City's desire to maintain the open space character of the area and enhance wetland values, will be addressed as the comprehensive mitigation program is developed. Ms. Ford conducted a preliminary inventory of wetlands and wildlife habitat in the area. As part of the first phase, a conceptual mitigation strategy will be presented to state and federal agencies for discussion. Subsequent phases include detailed mitigation design,negotiating permit conditions with reviewing agencies,and mitigation construction. PSWQA Wetlands Protection Guidebook This is one of approximately 30 projects selected statewide by the Puget Sound Water Quality Authority for funding in Round 4 of the Public Involvement and Education(PIE)program. Ms.Ford is working with state and federal agencies to develop a guidebook, slide show, and series of workshops on non-regulatory mechanisms for protecting wetlands and administrative approaches to mitigation planning. The guidebook will review transfer of development rights, on-site density transfers, purchase of development rights and mitigation banking, and will provide model agreements for the establishment of these programs. 1 Washington Wetlands Policy Forum Ms.Ford provided technical support to staff of the Washington Wetlands Policy Forum established by the Governor to negotiate policy direction and draft state wetlands legislation for the 1990 Legislative Session. ' Kittie Ellen Ford She provided technical ecological and policy input to the work group on a wide range of issues including wetland ranking and mitigation standards. ' CIty of Everett Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion EIS—Wetland Mitigation Plan Ms.Ford developed a wetland creation plan for a 13-acre site adjacent to the Everett Treatment Plant. The former wetland area had been filled with river dredge spoils. The plan included documentation of wetland loss and characterization of adjacent undisturbed wetlands through false color infrared aerial photographs. Ms. Ford's project responsibilities included identification of design criteria for the created wetland, preparation of grading construction and planting plans and construction specifications, providing a cost- estimate for the bid package, and agency coordination. City of Redmond Sensitive Areas Ordinance and Resource Lands Inventory As Project Manager, Ms. Ford guided a comprehensive sensitive lands inventory and development of a sensitive lands protection ordinance for the City. Issues included wetlands, streams, geotechnical hazards, ' floodplains, and fish and wildlife habitat. Inventories for each resource were completed by subconsultant specialists using available resources, such as aerial photos, topography and soils maps, and field reconnaissance. Final maps were produced for both color and diazo reproduction. Ms.Ford worked closely with City staff and a citizen advisory board to develop draft and final ordinance language for a critical areas protection program and assisted with public involvement. Project tasks included a comparison of the wetlands mitigation programs and standards of jurisdictions across the United States and analysis of state and local regulations and wetlands protection programs in western Washington. The project is partially funded by the Department of Ecology Wetlands Grant Program. Sensitive Areas Ordinances and Natural Resources Inventories Ms. Ford was the Project Manager of Sensitive Areas Ordinances and Natural Resources Inventories for the City of Redmond and for Pierce, Kitsap, and Snohomish Counties. The work budgets ranged from SM,000 to $105,000. She also managed the subconsultants for the resource inventories and technical ordinance review. Soos Creek, Northshore and Snoqualmie Community Plan Update EISs As part of the King County land use planning process,Ms.Ford co-managed preparation of programmatic EISs for updates of the Soos Creek, Northshore and Snoqualmie community planning areas. The basis for these analyses was an evaluation of land capacity under several different zoning scenarios. Ms. Ford developed methodologies for land capacity analysis and coordinated data collection and analysis with King County transportation planners to provide input to the traffic modeling effort. She prepared impact analyses for elements of the natural and built environment,including wetlands,wildlife,fisheries,land use and public services and utilities, and coordinated the input of subconsultants. ' Port of Seattle--nSouth Aviation Support Area Ms. Ford conducted technical studies evaluating wetland and stream environments in support of an EIS evaluating a proposed aircraft maintenance base. Ms. Ford also assisted with mitigation design and coordinated with the Corps of Engineers and other state and federal agencies to obtain permit approval. The project will result in the fill of about 1.5 acres of wetland and in relocation of about 3,000 feet of natural creek. An integrated approach to mitigation was taken where spill control facilities, stormwater detention ponds, wetlands, and stream enhancements were designed to provide an increase in ecosystem function. Pierce County Wetland Mitigation Standards Ms. Ford prepared a research analysis and draft ordinance for Pierce County to implement wetland mitigation standards. Project tasks included a comparison of the wetlands mitigation programs and standards of jurisdictions across the United States; drafting of a comprehensive program for wetland regulation and mitigation; research of potential incentive programs, including transfer of development rights, and drafting i of an on-site density transfer program; and conducting a workshop and field training session for Pierce County planners on wetland identification. James C. Kelley, Ph.D. I Ph.D.,Aquatic Ecology Master of Science, Plant Ecology and Taxonomy Bachelor of Science, Botany Certified Ecologist—Ecological Society of America Jim Kelley,Ph.D., is Manager of the Biological Resources Division at Parametrix which includes the terrestrial ecology, marine biology, fisheries, and wetland discipline groups. He assists clients with regulatory issues, I conducts field surveys to identify and delineate wetlands, assesses development impacts, and prepares wetland mitigation/restoration plans. Dr.Kelley coordinates with federal,state,and local resource agencies,and presents expert testimony on wetland and ecological issues. His broad background in ecology and natural history enables ' him to provide senior-level technical support to a broad range of environmental studies throughout the northwestern states. Dr.Kelley has conducted large-scale natural resource and wetland inventory projects. These studies have utilized I false color infrared photography,field ground truthing,GIS data analysis,and project management. His graduate and post-graduate studies also included wetland resource inventories and GIS analysis. Project Experience Shoreline Habitat Enhancement Plan,West Point Sewage Treatment Plant Upgrade —Seattle Metro ' As a member of a consultant team designing an 18-acre shoreline park and beach habitat, Dr. Kelley conducted studies of natural and artificial shorelines to identify plant communities and habitat features to be incorporated into the design of a park system around and over the West Point Treatment Plant. In I addition, a detailed planting schedule of native plants and long-term monitoring programs were developed for the entire project. These features included conceptual and detailed wetland mitigation plans were developed to meet the conditions of a the Corps of Engineers Section 404 permit. ' Miller Creek Regional Detention Facility—King County Dr. Kelley assisted Parametrix engineering staff with permitting issues associated with the development of a regional storm water detention pond which would periodically flood wetlands. Activities directed by Dr. ' Kelley included wetland delineation,wetland impact analysis, report preparation,wetland mitigation design and coordination with Corps of Engineers staff, for Section 404 permit approval. The studies showed that storm water detention would have minor impacts to existing wetland vegetation. A mitigation plan,including ' wetland creation, was designed to mitigate for fill of wetlands associated with construction of the control structure. North Creek Regional Detention Facility—Snohomish County ' Project Manager for environmental studies and permitting on the site of a proposed regional storm water detention facility. The studies were conducted in support of SEPA analysis of project impacts, and to support Section 404 Individual Permit and HPA Permit applications. Specific studies included analysis of I wetlands,fisheries and wildlife habitat,and the impact of storm water detention on these wetland functions. An important permitting strategy was to emphasize the degraded nature of the wetland and opportunities to enhance wetland function through implementation of mitigation designed to improve wildlife habitat. ' These studies were coordinated with the engineering design team and County staff. Wetland Inventory—City of Puyallup Dr. Kelley served as project manager for completing an inventory of wetlands within the City of Puyallup I and the City's comprehensive planning area. This inventory was partially funded by the Department of Ecology through a CZM grant. Project management and methodologies were required to meet Department of Ecology Standards. Inventory of the 28 sq.mile planning area utilized aerial photo interpretation,ground ' James C. Kelley, Ph.D. ttruthing, soil survey maps, and NWI maps. The inventory will be used by the planning department to evaluate the impact of proposed wetland regulations on land development and to assist with site planning. Pipeline Expansion Wetland Studies—Pacific Gas Transmission As Project Manager,Dr.Kelley planned and supervised studies to identify,delineate,and document wetlands along a 400-mile natural gas pipeline through central Oregon and Washington. The study was conducted ' to support permit applications for the construction of a new parallel pipeline through an existing right-of- way. This study utilized false color infrared photography, true color aerial video of the pipeline corridor, and NWI maps to screen wetland from non-wetland areas for further detailed studies. In addition to the field studies, he assisted with permitting the project through the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers offices in Washington and Oregon, and State resource agencies. ' Wetland Creation and Restoration—Simpson-Tacoma Kraft Mill Dr. Kelley developed a wetland restoration plan for a 2.8-acre intertidal and estuarine wetland adjacent to the Puyallup River. This plan included documentation of wetland fill through aerial photographs, identification of design criteria for the restored wetland, preparation of a construction and planting plan, providing a cost estimate for the project,and agency coordination. The restoration emphasized development of a tidal wetland providing waterfowl and fish habitat. Dr. Kelley monitored construction and planting of the saltmarsh wetland and has begun the third year of monitoring. Wetland Restoration and Enhancement Plan--City of Bothell Dr.Kelley prepared a wetland restoration and enhancement plan as part of the Bothell Station EIS for the City of Bothell. The study addressed development impacts on wildlife,wetlands, and water quality, and the ' plan identified grading and planting options to improve the habitat value of on-site wetlands for waterfowl. Swamp Creek Regional Detention Facility--,Snohomish County ' As a task assignment for on-call drainage design services, Parametrix completed environmental analysis on the site of a proposed regional detention facility. This analysis included an inventory of forest, bog, and emergent wetlands on 70 acres. A technical report included as an appendix to the County's environmental ' impact statement was prepared. Wetland Reports---City of Bellevue Responsible for the preparation of several wetland reports for private developments and City Departments ' (Parks, Public Utilities) for projects within the City of Bellevue. The reports were developed to identify wetlands subject to the Bellevue Sensitive Areas Ordinance, and identified setbacks, impacts and buildable sites. tWhatcom County Wetlands Inventory As head of the Wetlands Ecology Section,Dr.Kelley oversaw the completion of a wetland inventory, on 5,000 acres of industrially-zoned property in Whatcom County. Wetlands were mapped using aerial photo interpretation and field studies. Field maps were transferred to a geographic information system, (GIS) to evaluate methodology and potential errors. Comparisons between field delineation maps and air photo inventory maps were made. The report summarizing these findings and the GIS database will assist the County in making land use decisions regarding wetland protection and future land use development. Chief Joseph State Park Wetland Report Parametrix conducted an analysis of a 298-acre proposed state park in eastern Washington to evaluate plant communities,wildlife and wildlife habitat,and identify wetlands on the site. The study was designed so park development could occur while meeting Corps of Engineers, county, and state permit requirements. Paul S. Fendt, P.E. Bachelor of Science, Geological Engineering Registered Professional Engineer in Washington and Florida Paul Fendt is a Project Manager and Storm Water Engineer for Parametrix. Mr. Fendt's Parametrix project 1 experience includes a broad range of storm water and surface water projects,including hydrologic and hydraulic modeling (HEC-1, SWMM, Water Works, HEC-2, SEDIMOT II), erosion control on creeks and lake shores, comprehensive storm and surface water plans,and preparation of drainage ordinances and environmental impact statements. Prior to joining Parametrix,Mr.Fendt was the Manager of the Polk County,Florida,Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP). The SWMP was a countywide drainage plan that integrated GIS, automated mapping, and hydrologic and hydraulic models into a dynamic basin planning tool. As program manager, Mr. Fendt was trained in the development and use of the plan and was responsible for integrating the plan into daily county operations. His previous job responsibilities included the preparation of applications for environmental permits related to wetlands and surface water protection, public drainage project design, storm water detention facility design, and reports on county projects related to storm water, wetlands, permitting and flooding. ' Proiect Experience East Texas Hydrologic Study, Confidential Client Task Manager for hydrologic analysis and modeling of an interconnected lake system in eastern Texas. The project includes the interpretation of rainfall data, development of a continuous hydrologic model for the water shed using SWMM, and the use of GIS for determining hydrologic parameters for the model. The results will be used to determine annual pollutant loading in the system. Waiawa Stream, Oahu, Hawaii Project Engineer for a hydrologic study and conceptual engineering design of a wetland enhancement and sediment removal project in Hawaii. The project includes a detailed study of rainfall and stream flow ' conditions,sediment loads,and wetland hydrology. A conceptual design of the proposed wetland will include removal of large bed load in a settling basin, removal of suspended sediments in constructed wetlands, and enhancement of existing wetland habitat and function. ' Lake Paris Condominiums Drainage Plan Review—City of Kirkland Mr. Fendt was Project Manager for drainage plan review of a condominium development proposed in ' Kirkland. The project included review for hydrologic impacts to wetlands,flooding impacts,and flood stages on Lake Kirkland (Forbes Lake). Storm water mitigation measures were proposed for basin build-out on Lake Kirkland. The Forbes Lake drainage basin was also modeled for existing and basin build-out to determine 100-year flood stages. Aberdeen Sawmill Storm Water Plan Task leader for hydrologic analysis of sawmill site. Analyzed rainfall records from the rainfall reporting stations and determined return frequencies for different storm durations; estimated runoff volumes and contaminant concentrations; and evaluated storm water control and treatment alternatives. City of Kirkland On-Call Wetland Consulting Services Project manager reviewing drainage plans for a variety of development proposals. Projects included review for hydrologic impacts to wetlands, flooding impacts, and flood stages on Lake Kirkland (Forbes Lake). Measures to mitigate storm water impacts are determined for each site. Paul S. Fendt, P.E. Sitsap County Storm Water Management Ordinance Project Manager for the preparation and approval of a storm water management ordinance for the County. The Ordinance has heavy emphasis on inspection, maintenance, and enforcement of storm water systems and construction. The ordinance approval process includes a multidisciplinary technical advisory committee review. The ordinance was written to comply with the PSWQA manual for storm water management. Canaan Apartments Flood Study Project Manager for the determination of the 100-year flood plain of Lyon Creek for an apartment complex in Lake Forest Park(North Seattle area). Mitigation for proposed flood plain encroachments were included in the final project report Derby Ditch--Lake Jessie Developed the conceptual design for a storm water detention facility in a 400-acre urbanized drainage basin ' to provide water quality enhancement of runoff to a recreational lake chain. The system will provide treatment of approximately 1/3 of the contributory drainage basin to the lake. Fred Fortin ' Master of Urban Planning Master of Arts, International Studies Bachelor of Arts, Philosophy and Humanities Fred Fortine is a Public Involvement Specialist at Parametrix,Inc. For ten years he was the Community Affairs Coordinator for the University of Washington. In this capacity, he was responsible for involving local communities in the University of Washington's planning process. Besides meeting regularly with community ' groups,he also worked with a community advisory committee composed of representatives of various community councils,business organizations, faculty and students. A major part of this effort was involving communities in the University's EIS process,under SEPA,for everything from the stadium expansion to the campus Master Plan. ' Proiect Experience Public Involvement/Community Relations Ten years experience as Community Affairs Coordinator for the University of Washington where he represented a large, complex organization in its dealings with city government, diverse community and business groups, and the general public. Experienced in speaking before groups, making public ' presentations, and preparing written community relations materials. Author of papers, reports, and two handbooks on citizen participation. Experienced both as a leader and a team member on projects. ' Planning Worked briefly as a Senior Planner, managing a large annexation study for the City of Renton. Served as a lecturer in the Department of Urban Planning at the University of Washington. Taught community planning courses. Assisted communities throughout the state in needs assessment and project planning. ' Coordinated community involvement in the University of Washington's planning process. Directed a population census for the City of Bothell for their six square mile Canyon Park annexation. ' Consulting As a private consultant,working with the University of Washington's Division of Community Development, and working as a Housing Specialist, provided technical assistance to a wide variety of nonprofit ' organizations. Helped communities to organize, assess needs, and solve local problems. Work Experience • Public Involvement Specialist with Parametrix, Inc. t Community Affairs Coordinator with the University of Washington Housing Specialist with Rural Community Assistance Corporation, a nonprofit technical assistance organization Senior Planner with the City of Renton, Washington Private Consultant working with health planning agencies in a four-state region • Training Coordinator with the Puget Sound Health Systems Agency, a health planning organization Consultant with the Division of Community and Organization Development at the University of Washington Census Director with the City of Bothell, Washington Norman Brones ' Bachelor of Science, Political Science Norm Brones is a Party Chief for the Parametrix,Inc.survey crew. He has extensive experience with boundary, ' topographic, and construction surveying, precision leveling, photogrammetric control, base drawing and utility location,and field crew management. Prior to joining Parametrix,Inc.,Mr.Brones surveyed heavy construction, including large diameter pressure piping, piling placement, concrete structures and buildings, structural steel ' alignment, high-voltage underground electrical lines, in-field design and technical changes. Proiect Ex1perience ' City of Seattle Midway Landfill Conducted extensive on- and off-site aerial and ground mapping; mapped on-site extraction well system; mapped and generated a data base for on-and off-site monitoring wells,gas probes, seeps and peat probes for hazardous waste investigation. Snohomish County Cathcart Landfill Mapped on-site wells and access roads. Olalla Transfer Station Mapped and staked for construction. ' Bitsap County Olympic View Sanitary Landfill Performed mapping, cross-sections,boundary layout, construction staking and as-built drawings. ' Newcastle Sanitary Landfill, Rabanco Company Performed construction staking, mapping, aerial control and road staking. liitsap Mall Site Development Performed topographic surveys and boundary surveys; provided horizontal control for aerial mapping; prepared REA and ALTA surveys; prepared legal descriptions and easements. ' Petrovitsky Park Field Mapping Mapped topography and prepared as-built drawings for 40-acre park site bordering a sensitive wetland area. Michael Bowen, P.L.S. ' Bachelor of Science, Mining Engineering Professional Land Surveyor in Washington, Oregon, and California Engineer In Training ' Certified for Hazardous Waste Site Operations Mike Bowen is a licensed land surveyor for Parametrix, Inc. with over eight years experience including the preparation of topographic and subdivision maps,easements,plats,property descriptions,right-of-way drawings, field crew coordination, electronic field data collection and processing,management of AutoCAD operations in the preparation of maps and plats. He is proficient in the use of computer systems for survey data analysis. Project Experience Clarks Creek, Puyallup,Washington ' Directed surveying activities for storm water basin modeling of Clarks Creek and Meeker Ditch. The project involved cross-sectioning and gathering outfall pipe inverts and bridge dimension information. SR 18, I-90 to Vicinity of Auburn ' Chief of Parties directing the survey crews on this project. The project involved cross sectioning every 100 feet for 20 miles of Highway 500 feet each side of centerline, together with performing topographic surveys for areas not shown by the aerial photogrammetrist. Information will be used for the Design Reports to ' determine how the Highway would be designed to accommodate four lanes and will include a series of interchanges. Subbase Bangor,Washington Surveyor responsible for directing field survey crews and office technicians in production of topographic maps for 50 acres of land and 7 miles of roadways. Coordinated electronic data collection procedures of field crews, data processing and CADD operations. ' Sabre Springs, San Diego, California Responsible for preparing subdivision maps for Creekview South,Brookview Square,North Creek and other subdivisions within this 1,500 acre planned community. Mr. Bowen's other functions included preparing property descriptions, right-of-way drawings, condominium plans, calculating lot configurations and utility locations and providing computer data to field crews for construction layout and for setting lot comers. ' Torey Pines Science Center, San Diego, California Prepared a map and associated easement descriptions and rights-of-way, calculated utility and building locations and provided field crews with information needed for setting lot comers and for construction tstaking. SR 500,Vancouver,Washington ' Prepared base map for proposed widening from Ward Road to 162nd Avenue. Also responsible for computations for right-of-way acquisition and right-of-way map preparation. Madsen Creek, King County,Washington ' Responsible for directing surveying activities in topographic mapping and construction staking for the stabilization of a ravine that is prone to landslides. Mr.Bowen produced base maps for engineering design and prepared legal descriptions for access easements. ' Rick V. Hermes, P.E. Bachelor of Science, Civil Engineering Registered Professional Engineer in Washington and Oregon Rick Hermes is a Senior Engineer and Senior Project Manager for Parametrix, Inc. With more than 26 years of professional experience throughout Washington and Oregon,he has been responsible for the planning,design, and construction of engineering projects involving multidisciplinary teams. While these projects typically include ' water and wastewater systems, surface water, street and arterial improvements, solid waste and environmental remediation, they frequently include engineering design of environmental mitigation elements such as stream restoration and wetland creation. Because of this experience,he is familiar with Corps of Engineers Section 404 permit requirements and HPA conditions. ' Proiect Experience Alkl Wastewater Treatment Plant Outfall—Seattle Metro Project Manager for the Alki Outfall Improvement predesign and design for Seattle Metro. The engineering and environmental analysis of alternative outfall locations included hydrodynamic modeling and hydrological ' studies of the Alki system, sediment characterization, point source identification of chemical and biological pollutants and water quality assessments. Final design included modifications of the 64th Avenue Pumping Station and extension of the existing 42 inch diameter outfall with the addition of a diffuser section. ' Mill Creek Earthworks Park/Erosion Control—City of Kent Project Engineer responsible for technical analysis and design of stream bank stabilization and surface water control. Silver Lake Storm Water Control Pond--Everett,Washington Project Engineer responsible for design of plans and specifications for development of surface water treatment facilities for removal of phosphorous and sedimentation to enhance the water quality of Silver Lake. Harborview Subdivision Surface and Groundwater Assessment—Simpson Properties, Inc. ' Provided an engineering assessment of surface water conditions and testimony regarding development impacts of a subdivision on adjacent properties. t Comprehensive Plans—Storm Water Project Engineer for the preparation of comprehensive storm water plans for the cities of Anacortes, Ferndale, Point Roberts, and Othello, Washington; two basin plans for Clackamas County, Oregon, Maplewood Creek Basin for the City of Renton; and the Deldridge Basin for the City of Seattle. ' Miller Creek Regional Storm Water Detention Facilities—Bing County,Washington Directed planning and design of stream channel modifications and development of two in-stream regional storm water detention facilities. These facilities were located in wetlands,and Mr.Hermes prepared design modifications to meet Corps of Engineers Section 404 permit requirements,HPA criteria and King County SAO Standards. Swamp Creek Regional Storm Water Control Facility—Snohomish County,Washington Responsible for planning and development of a 100 acre-feet in-stream regional storm water detention facility located in wetlands. The project was designed to meet Section 404 permit requirements, including ' minimizing impacts to certain areas of the wetlands. Rick V. Hermes, P.E. tClackamas Industrial Area Drainage Plan Project Manager for the planning and development of two comprehensive storm water basin plans for Clackamas County. The basin plans evaluated e3dsting and proposed drainage facilities for the development of capital improvement needs,and conducted preliminary engineering designs, including cost estimates,on the proposed improvements. ' City of Renton Comprehensive Storm Water Plan Project Manager for the planning and development of the Maplewood Creek Basin Comprehensive Storm water Plan. Conducted hydrologic/hydraulic drainage basin analysis to determine eadsting and future ' drainage needs for mitigating the impacts of storm water problems throughout the study area. Responsible for the development of storm water control strategies and capital improvement needs for the comprehensive plan- ' Glacier Park Industrial Site Responsible for the Master planning and development of a 600-acre commercial/industrial site for the Glacier Park Company. Unique features of the project include the development of a 3 million cubic yard ' borrow pit, and the placement on-site of this material,stream channel relocation and associated roadways and utilities systems. r t Subconsultants RESUMES WILLIAM E. SHIELS ' Resource/Environmental Planner Wetland Studies/Mitigation*Environmental Analysis/Planning*Regulatory Analysis/Permitting*Environmental Impact Assessment*Fisheries Enhancement*Water Quality Investigations ' EXPERIENCE Mr. Shiel:3 has over 20 years of experience working in the fields of resource and environmental planning, project management, and field and laboratory analysis. His main area of concentration has been aquatic resources and his experience ' includes environmental assessments, impact statements and public involvement; wetland studies and mitigation plans, water quality studies of potable supplies, ' domestic and industrial waste, sewage treatment plant and fish hatchery effluent, dredging and disposal sites, and marine and estuarine environments; natural resources inventories and sensitivity analyses; site planning and facilities designs for industrial, residential, and recreational development; permitting for oil pipeline, surface coal mining, fish processing, and harbor development projects; coastal zone management planning in Puget sound and western and south-central Alaska; marine and estuarine food chain studies; fisheries habitat, enhancement, and resource management studies in Washington, Oregon, Alaska, Kansas, and Massachusetts. REPRESENTATIVE PROJECTS ' o Directly responsible for over 100 wetland studies conducted in past three years, with most of these projects occurring in King, Snohomish, Skagit, Whatcom, Pierce, Kitsap, and Kittitas counties in Washington State. All of ' these projects involved analysis of wetlands conditions in relation to some proposed construction activity that could potentially affect their functions and values. Some of the studies involved wetland delineation only, whereas ' others required determination of wetland functions and values and wetland impact mitigation planning and design. Project sizes ranged from ' approximately 1 to 640 acres, with the wetlands on these properties ranging from well under an acre to more than 35 acres. Some of the projects representative of this experience are listed below: Site Restoration and Wetland Impact Mitigation Design for 10-acre Wetland near Bow in Skagit County for Bow Hill Lakes Associates Wetland Mitigation Plan for Apartment Project in Everett for Kussman ' Associates Wetland Mitigation Plan and Implementation for Apartment Project in ' Everett for G&M Investments Point Roberts Country Club Wetlands and Natural Features Study for an EIS in Whatcom County for The Ferris Company ' Preston Industrial Site Environmental Studies and Wetland Delineation for an EIS in King County for Preston Industrial Associates ' King County Sportsman's Park Wetlands and Habitat Assessment in King County for Seattle Skeet and Trap Club Wetlands Assessment for a potential commercial evelopment near Bellis Fair in Whatcom County for General Growth Development Corporation Wetland Delineation on Auburn 400 Properties in King County for ' Quadrant Corporation Wetland and Stream Restoration Plan for Property on Raging River for Private Developer ' Wetland Assessment on 450 acre site near Sumner in Pierce County for Trillium Corporation ' OTHER PROJECT EXPERIENCE o Project Manager for water quality, fish and wildlife studies, and ' development of environmental impact assessment for a proposed marina and waterfront development project on the Willamette River in Portland, Oregon. The project involved development and testing of a scale model ' to evaluate circulation and flushing; to aid in development of design criteria for the breakwater and marina complex. o Project Manager for the Bellingham Coastal Zone Management Study in northern Puget Sound. The project involved refinement, enhancement, and modification of the State's Shoreline Management Act to accommodate the needs of industry and allow public access and use of the waterfront. o Prepared and delivered expert testimony at the State Shorelines Hearings Board in Olympia, Washington, regarding a proposed offshore magnetite ' mining project near Illwaco, Washington. Testified as to expected project impacts on water quality, biological resources, commercial fisheries, recreation, and coastal processes. Client's permit rejection was successfully appealed. o Project Manager for Chena River Flood Control Project Land Use Plan Fairbanks, Alaska. This project involved development of year-round, multi-purpose facilities in a 16,000-acre flood plain area containing lakes, ponds, streams, and associated wetlands. The work included ' archaeological investigations, flora and fauna inventories, an analysis of recreation demands and opportunities, and conceptual designs which ' would minimize conflicts between recreational uses and the natural environment. ' EDUCATION M.S., Biological Oceanography, University of Alaska B.A., Biology, Central Washington University PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIPS ' American Fisheries Society Pacific Coast Estuarine Society Society of Wetland Scientists American Littoral Society ' CLIFFORD WILLWERTH Registered Landscape Architect ' Landscape Architecture*Site Planning Environmental Design*Wetlands Restora tic n/Mitigation*Sensitive Areas Restoration*Environmental Impact Assessments EXPERIENCE ' Mr. Wellwerth has over 15 years of professional experience in landscape architecture and environmental design. He has acted as a project manager and project landscape architect for a number of public works, private development, ' and parks and recreation projects throughout Washington, Alaska and California. Cliff has worked with a number of environmental and planning agencies such as the Corps of engineers, Washington state Department of fisheries, Department of natural resources, and King County Building and Land Development, as well as California and Alaska environmental agencies. REPRESENTATIVE PROJECTS Responsible for over 25 wetlands, sensitive areas and shorelines in the past five years, primarily in the greater Puget Sound region. Projects ranged in scope from small wetland edge treatments to the mitigation of substantial commercial ' shoreline developments. Some of the projects representative of this experience are listed below. ' Shoreline restoration and Enhancement, Valley Creek Intertidal Project, for the Port of Port Angeles, WA Juanita Creek restoration & Enhancement, Diamond Creek Residential ' Development, for CamWest Development, Inc., Kirkland WA Lake Union shoreline Access Improvement, METRO University Regulator, CSO Control Project, Seattle, WA ' Estuarine Plant and Wildlife study & Signage, Padilla Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve, Mount Vernon, WA Duwamish River Recreation Trail, METRO Renton Effluent Transfer System Pipeline Project, Seattle, King county, WA Coastal Restoration and Public Access, Moss Landing Marina Village, for Western Salt Company, Moss Landing, CA ' Wetland and Stream Restoration Plan for property on Raging River for Private Developer, Preston, WA 1 Meadowdale Apartments Site Planning and Wetlands Enhancement, Lynnwood, WA Preston Industrial Park EIS/Wetlands Enhancement/Visual Impact Analysis for Preston Industrial Associates, Preston, WA Seattle Tennis Club Shoreline Improvements and Enhancements, ' Seattle WA Site Planning and Sensitive Areas Protection and Restoration, Lake View park P.U.D. for CamWest Development, Inc., Kirkland. OTHER PROJECT EXPERIENCE ' Project Landscape Architect for cemetery expansion and renovation projects including Kirkland Municipal Cemetery, Kirkland WA; Woodbine Cemetery, Puyallup, WA, Gethsemane Cemetery, Federal Way, WA, Holyrood ' Cemetery, Seattle, WA. • Project Landscape Architect for roadway/highway landscape projects ' including West Valley Highway, Kent, WA; East Valley Highway, Kent WA; Pacific Highway (SR 99), Fife, WA; Bellevue Way Northeast and Southeast, Bellevue, WA ' • Project Landscape Architect for corporate landscape projects including site • J P P p P J 9 ' entry improvements to the Boeing Company, Aerospace Division; R&B Realty Group, Washington and California; Columbia Bank, Bellevue, WA; Ivar's Salmon House, Seattle WA. ' EDUCATION Bachelor of Science, Landscape Architecture 1979 ' California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, CA PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIPS ' American Society of Landscape Architects, Washington State Chapter Council of Landscape Architectural Registration Boards ' JOHN J. ALTMANN Ecologist ' Wetland Delineations/Functional Analysis/Mitigation*Environmental Impact Assessments/Planning*Regulatory Analysis/Permitting*Wildlife Studies* EXPERIENCE Mr. Altmann has over 5 years of experience working in resource and environmental planning, project management, and field analysis. His main area ' of concentration has been wetlands and his experience includes: wetland delineations, environmental assessments, impact statements; mitigation plans and other wetland studies, natural resource inventories and sensitivity analyses, ' site planning, and wildlife habitat management studies in Washington, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania. ' REPRESENTATIVE PROJECTS o Responsible for hundreds wetland and wildlife studies conducted in past 5 years, with many of these projects occurring in King, Snohomish, Skagit, Whatcom, Pierce, Kitsap, and Mason counties in Washington State. Most of ' these projects involved analysis of wetland conditions in relation to some proposed construction activity that could potentially affect their functions and values. Many of the studies involved wetland delineation only, whereas others required determination of wetland functions and values and wetland impact mitigation planning and other sensitive areas analyses. Project sizes ranged from under 1 acre to over 600 acres, with the wetlands on these ' properties being nearly as variable as their size. Wildlife studies include flora and fauna inventories, habitat impact assessments, and threatened and endangered species studies. Some of the projects representative of this experience are listed below. Wetland Delineation and Study for Beacon Studios at Semiahmoo in ' Whatcom County, WA for the Trillium Corporation Wetland Delineation and Study for Data 1/0 Corporation in Redmond, King County, WA for the Quadrant Corporation ' Wetland Assessment, Delineation, and Mitigation Plan for a Warehouse Project in Auburn, King County, WA Sensitive Areas Assessment for 74-acre Church site in Redmond, King County, WA for CNA Architects Wetland Delineation on 47-acre Proposed Marine Industrial Site ' Location in Snohomish River Estuary, Everett, Snohomish County, WA for Private Developer ' Wetland Delineation and Study for a 645-acre Planned Development near Bellingham, Whatcom County, for Trillium Corporation ' Wetland Study and Mitigation Plan for 37-acre Office Park Site in Redmond, King County, WA for Private Developer International Crossroads Hotel, Office and Retail Complex, Wetlands and Natural Features Study for EIS, Mahwah, Bergen County, NJ Wetland Delineation and Study for a Cogeneration/Power Facility in Sayreville, Middlesex County, NJ NJ Division of Fish, Game and Wildlife, Wetland Delineation and Assessment for a Public Access Road and Boat Ramp Wysox Shopping Center Project, Wetland Delineation and Assessment, ' Wysox, PA Wetland Enforcement Action Rectification Project, Dana Transport Corporation, Woodbridge, Middlesex County, NJ Westinghouse Elevator Company, Aquatic Ecosystem Study and Contamination Impact Assessment, Randolph, Morris County, NJ Natural Resource Inventory and Wetland Assessment, for all Lands ' Owned by the Borough of Haworth, Bergen County, NJ Wetland Maintenance and Monitoring Plan for Property on Raging River in King County, WA for Private Developer Trans Mountain Oil Pipeline, Wetland and Wildlife Inventory, Skagit County, WA Wildlife Inventory and Habitat Impact Assessment, ARCO AM/PM Mini- Market Facility, Bainbridge, Kitsap County, WA Wildlife Study, Highlands at Ross Creek, Port Orchard, Kitsap County, ' WA Wildlife and Vegetation Study, Lakeland Village EIS, Allyn, Mason County, WA ' OTHER PROJECT EXPERIENCE ' o Wetland Biologist for the King County Parks, Planning and Resource Department, Environmental Division, Resource Planning Section. Mapped, classified, inventoried and rated the wetlands in the cities of ' Kirkland, Bothell, Normandy Park, Duvall, and Lake Forest Park for inclusion in the King County Sensitive Areas Folio. o Research Assistant for the NJ Division of Fish, Game and Wildlife's Endangered and Nongame Species Program. Responsible for the research, feeding, and monitoring of osprey fledglings for 3 seasons of ' the NJ osprey hacking program. Responsible for the collection and analysis of information pertaining to population size and migration along with species density and behavior of shorebirds along the Delaware Bay. r r o Research Assistant for the NJ Division of Fish, Game and Wildlife. ' Responsible for the collection, processing and analysis of biological information pertaining to the whitetail deer population in NJ. ' EDUCATION B.S., Natural Resource Management, Wildlife Science Option, Rutgers University, Cook College, New Brunswick, NJ. PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIPS ' Wildlife Society Society of Wetland Scientists Society of Ecological Restoration 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1