HomeMy WebLinkAboutContract CAG-01-172
AGREEMENT
This Agreement is made and entered into between the City of Renton(Renton)and
Southport LLC,a Washington limited liability company(Southport)-
Whereas,as part of Southport's project mitigation under the State Environmental
Protection Act, Southport must satisfy Renton Traffic Mitigation Fee Policy(Resolution No.3100)
with respect to the project in part by paying a fee of$75.00 per daily vehicle trip generated(the
"Traffic Mitigation Fee'D;and
Whereas,the Mitigation Document has established that since the traffic/road improvements
will also address traffic growth unrelated to the development of the subject site,Renton will use all
or a portion of the traffic impact mitigation fees to fund the portion of the traffic/road
improvements required that Renton determines will provide benefit to the public(page 24);
Whereas,Southport has requested that Renton allow it to construct certain transportation
improvements of equal value of and in lieu of its payment of the Traffic Mitigation Fee;and
Whereas,the Traffic Mitigation Fee would be determined by the scope of the project
should Southport have chosen to pay the fee instead of performing certain improvements of equal
value;
Whereas,Southport, Benton,and the interest of the public would be benefited by joint
planning and execution of Southport's and Renton's respective items of work herein;and
Whereas,it is advisable and necessary to document the terms and conditions under which
Southport and Renton will carry out their respective responsibilities and construction activities,
Now,therefore, Southport and Renton do agree as follows:
The TrafiSc Mitigation Fee will be credited towards the cost of the off-site road improvements .
based on the following:
1. It is agreed that the required transportation improvements involve 50%public benefit and
50%private benefit
2. Renton agrees to pay 50°lo of the public improvement costs exclusive of the grant-funded
portion of the public railroad crossing up to a limit of Renton's participation of 100%of the
Southport project traffic mitigation fee. If 100%of the Southport project traffic mitigation
fee exceeds 50%of the project costs,then the balance would be paid into the transportation
mitigation fund. If 100%of the Southport project traffic mitigation fee falls below 50%of
the project costs,Renton's contribution would be capped at the amount of the fee.
3. Renton agrees to contribute above and beyond the 50%agreement the TEA-21 Railroad
Crossing Program.(Section 130)grant amount of$180,000 toward the shoulder mounted
cantilevers,signal and gates on Lake Washington Boulevard only,provided that Southport-,.
a. Provides the necessary information required for the City to prepare grant forms for
finding obligation,billing,and reimbursement.
b_ Abides by all Federal regulations required to meet grant guidelines.
M
4_ Payment by Southport of the Traffic Mitigation Fee shall be accomplished by Southport's
performance of the work described on Exhibit A attached hereto. As previously noted is
Section 2,the exact amount will be based on 50%of the actual construction cost,capped at
the Traffic Mitigation Fee level. In addition,the cost of all of the railroad work will be.
assessed at six percent(6%)above costs to be paid to the City for the City's administrative
costs associated with the railroad and grant agreements.
5. Any Traffic Mitigation Fee not expended by offset for Southport's work under Section 4,
above,will be paid to Renton and placed in the Transportation Mitigation fund-
6 .During its work within the City right-of-way,Southport shall maintain open safe public
access. Southport will hire and maintain traffic control equipment and flaggers and file a
traffic control plan with the City of Renton_
7. All improvements will be constructed in accordance with the site plan and SEPA approvals
for the Southport project-
Executed this day of �
_-.._.._..__ ._. —------------ By SEGO DEVELOPMENT,INC.,a
Washington corporation
By- else Tanner. y: %chael P. -h ist
Its Mayor Its President
Attest
Marilyn P
City Clerk
-Lawrence J_'Warren
City Attorney
` EXHIBIT A
LIST OF TRAFFIC MITIGATION FEE WORK
I. At the Park Drive/Garden Avenueff'*e Washington Boulevard intersection,the existing
channelization on the Park Avenue approach will be restriped to accommodate one shared
through/right lane,one through lane,and two left-tum lanes.
2 On the Lake Washington Boulevard approach,the approach will be restriped to
accommodate one right-tam lane and two left-turn lanes.
3. The westbound free right-tum lane from Park Drive to Lake Washington Boulevard will .
yield to the eastbound left-turning vehicles from Park Avenue to Lake Washington
Boulevard.
4. A signal will be provided at the Lake Washington Bouievard/Houser Way/Site Access/Park
Access.intersection.
i
5. The Subject Site/Gene Conlon Park shared access approach will be widened to four lanes
(one left-turn,one right-turn.and_two entering Ianes).
5. The section of Lake Washington Boulevard between Park Drive and the joint Site/Gene
Coulon Park shared access will be widened by approximately 12 feet to accommodate two
southbound lanes,one northbound left turn lane,and one northbound shared through/left
turn lane.
7. Left turns in and out of the Boeing parking lot will need to be restricted in order to
M ninuze the safety hazard. One solution could be placement of c-curb along the
centerline of Lake Washington Boulevard just north of Park Drive to reshicf`1eft turns into
and out of the Boeing parking lot_ Alternate parking lot access may be available from
North 1 O`h Street. Prior to final design,coordination with Boeing shall occur to determine
specific mitigation_ Renton shall assist with coordination efforts as needed_
8. The two railroad crossings, the Burlington Northern and Santa Fe mainline on Lake
Washington Boulevard and the spur line on the joint Site/Gene Coulon Park shared access .
road, will be improved to include shoulder mounted cantilevers, signal and gates at both .
crossings.
I
i
Rich Perteet,Deputy Public Works Director-Transportation
Page 5 of 5
March 24,2011
Exhibit C
TRAFFIC MITIGATION FINANCIALS
Table C.1 Traffic Mitigation Fees(Revenues)as 12/10/2010
Date Funds received under the mitigation account I Amount
04/03/2002 i Deposit for Railroad Crossings Improvements ! $ 209,937.24
06/28/2006 ` Traffic Mitigation for Bristol 11 $ 113,926.90
- Total $ 323,86414
Table C.2 SECO Expenses as of 12/31/2010
SECO share of Railroad Crossings . $ 115,984.43
Table C. 3 Southport Traffic Mitigation Summary as of 12/31/2010
50%Railroad Crossings-City mit credit $ 115,984.43
501 Railroad Crossings-SECO portion $ 115,984.43
_ ,-�{��� p�ro�£ e•���t '���.^-�`7 r�..,.�:{L aa�R2£'�''s^ -'`u-� c ���5�, �_
` Total — - $ 323,864.14
h:\division.s\transpor.tat\planning\juliana\southport\memo.doc
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT city-�f
Da
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: March 24, 2011
TO: Rich Perteet, Deputy Public Works Administrator-Transportation
FROM: Juliana Fries,.Program Development Coordinator
SUBJECT: Southport Development
The Southport development(SECO) submitted a Conceptual Master Plan under scenarios
A (Plan A), scenario B (Plan B)and scenario C(Plan C).The intensity of development would
depend on which scenario SECO would eventually build.A summary of the development
proposal under each scenario is shown in Exhibit A.
The Mitigation Document for the Southport Planned Action was approved by the City of
Renton on September 17, 1999. Section 10c established the mitigation measures of the
Transportation Element..The document notes traffic mitigation fees shall be determined
' prior to approval of individual more detailed site plans.
In 2001 the City executed an agreement with SECO (CAG-01-172) crediting traff ic
mitigation fees towards the costs of certain improvements, up to 50 percent of the costs
of the listed improvements and capped at the amount of the mitigation fee. The
agreement with SECO is attached as Exhibit B. The estimated traffic mitigation fee under
scenario C was determined to be $708,225.
As art of the Southport Project railroad crossing improvements at Southport and a take
P P 1 g P t
P
Washington gton Blvd were required. The improvements consisted of installation of concrete
crossings,signal and gates. BNSF only negotiates crossing improvement agreements with,
local jurisdictions_
To accomplish the railroad crossing improvements the City executed three agreements
with BNSF.Table 1 refers to the agreement with BNSF that is grant funded. Table 2 refers
to the two agreements that have costs shared between traffic mitigation and SECO.
Table 1—BNSF agreement funded by a Federal grant
BNSF Agreements BNSF Cost Paid to BNSF Funding City share
Estimates (12/31/2010)
Lake Washington Signal $170;000 $103,090 Federal grant 50%of expenses -
and Gates-(CAG-02-009) exceeding grant
amount
Rich Perteet,Deputy Public Works Director-Transportation
Page 2 of 5
March 24,2011
Table 2: BNSF agreement with cost sharing between traffic mitigation and SECO
BNSF Agreements BNSF Cost Paid to BNSF City share SECO share
Estimates 2010 12 31
f / /
Southport Blvd Signals, $2 07,1 7 $120,305 $60 153 $60,153
153
Gates and Grade
Crossing (CAG-02-186)
Lake WA Blvd Grade $108,313 $56,388 $28,194 $28,194
Crossing (CAG-02-136)
6%Admin Fee . $22,110
Total $337,610 $ 176,693 $88,347 $88,347
The total BNSF cost of the railroad crossing improvements to be split between SECO and
mitigation credit was determined to be$337,610(BNSF costs+ 6%City administrative fee).
The breakdown consists of$209,937.24 for materials and other and $127,672.76 for BNSF
labor. City staff costs are in addition to the BNSF costs.
In April 2002 SECO made a deposit in the amount of$209,937.24 under the traffic
mitigation account for the railroad crossing signal equipment. BNSF labor charges were
going to be incurred at the time of the equipment installation.
As noted on Table 3, the total costs attributable to SECO plus traffic mitigation is
$231,968.86, which include BNSF invoices (excluding the Federal grant that funded Lake
WA Signals and Gates), city staff, other costs (traffic control, mail notices, etc) and a 6%
administrative fee per agreement.
Table 3: Railroad Crossing's Costs already incurred attributable to traffic mitigation and
SECO
- 1 .
Description i Amount
BNSF -- $ 176,692.54
City staff $ 13,028.10
Other(traffic control, mail notices, etc) 1 $ 29,117.91
6 percent Administration Fee (per agreement) ! $ 13,160.31
p mitigation I $ 231
Total SECO !us credit costs as of 12/31/2010 ,968.86
Summary:
1) SECO paid $209,937.24 in the mitigation account as an initial deposit for materials for
the railroad crossings improvements (includes concrete grade crossings).
2) Materials and concrete grade crossings totaled $231,968.86. 1 do not know if all
materials have been purchased.
� |
�
�
'
Rich pertect Deputy Public Works Director-Transportation �
Page yurs
manh24,2011
`
3) Of the expenses incurred for the materials and concrete grade crossings, $115,984'43
'
isSECO responsibility(50%)and the remaining 50% isacredit forSECO's traffic
mitigation fees. {
� ` |
`
!n2DO1,SECO received permits for Bristol | and a traffic mitigation fee of$91,227 was due .
for this phase, but never paid. �
�|n June 2DO6,SECO received permits for the Bristol U project andpaid $113,g26.gOin
traffic mitigation fees' for 195 apartment units*1[,OZ9sq'ft. ofretail.
Asof12/3l/2O1(lSECO developed Bristol |-4muhdfannibresidentja|tovvers(A8, Cand |
D) with 188 units, and Bristol.||—i multifamily residential towers(E, F and G)with 195.
units. Built retail space is approximately 20,000 sq.ft.within Bristol I and.11.
Summary:
I. A separate reserve account of$91,O9S.25 from the Transportation Mitigation funds
should be created to fulfill the agreement with SEC[\ . hichestab|ishedshared
improvements costs up to the trafOcnnitigation fee amount. See Exhibit C for details [
on arriving at the mitigation credit. |n other vvords, asof the end of20IDSEC(] has a /
— ' m�f�� r
�i��'� editof$qT ��
Og� ----------- ---------- ---
2. On 2006SE[O constructed Bristol 11 and paid $113'926.90 in traffic mitigation fees.
!
�
�
' |
|cc Bob
Jim.Seitz,Transportation Planning Supervisor '
James vvUhoit,Project Manager
Juliana Fries,Transportationpmuram Development Coordinator
'
'
�
1
'
.
.
h: »o\i« '
......... ........
Rich Perteet,Deputy Public Works director-Transportation
Page 4 of 5
March 24,2011
Exhibit A
Table A.1:Southport Proposed Action, Plans A, B and C analyzed in the Environmental
review:
Use/Height I Plan A I Plan B Plan C
Multifamily Residential Units 543
581 a 377
Retail Area in sq.ft. 1 38,000 38,000 30,000
Commercial Area in sq.ft. j 500,000
750,000 500,000
Hotel,Area in sq.ft. (rooms) i N/A N/A 1 115,800(220)
Residential Building Heights in Stories (feet) 5 (50 ft) 5 (50 ft) 5 (50 ft)
Hotel Building Height in Stories (feet) N/A N/A 8 (75
Office Building Height in Stories(feet) 8-10(105-1251 10(125 ft) 8-10 (105-125
h:\d'rvision,s\transpoT-:tat\plannin'R\iuliana\southoort\meino.doc