HomeMy WebLinkAboutRes-2022-046BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COUNTY OF KITTITAS
STATE OF WASHINGTON
RESOLUTION NO:zozz- oIb
APPROVING THE 2O22DTSTRESSED COUNTY SALES AND USE TAX
INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF
ROSLYN
WHEREAS: The 1999 Legislature did pass RCW 82.14.370 Sales and Use Tax for Public
Facilities in rural counties; and
WHEREAS: These funds may only be used to finance public facilities serving economic
development purposes in rural counties and finance personnel in economic
development offices in the State of Washington; and
WHEREAS: The 2022 Distressed County Sales and Use Tax Infrastructure Improvement Program
Agreement with the City of Roslyn has been executed by said entity with funding
available January l, 2022; and
NOW' THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: The Kittitas County Board of County Commissioners
hereby approves the attached 2022Distressed County Sales and Use Tax Infrastru"tu.. Improvement
Program Agreement with the City of Roslyn.
ADOPTED this 15th day of February 2022.
BOARD OF COTINTY COMMISSIONERS
S , WASHINGTON
Chairman
oard- Julie Kjorsvik
Cory Wright,
n Deputy Clerk of the Board- Mandy Buchholz
Brett W Commissioner
tllllll
2022 DISTRESSED COUNTY SALES AND USE TAX INFRASTRUCTURE
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AGREEMENT
BETWEEN KITTITAS COUNTY AND CITY OF ROSLYN
This Contract dated 2 is made and entered into by and
between KITTITAS COUNTY ("County"),
CITY OF ROSLYN ("Funding Recipient").
subdivision of the State of Washington, and
WHEREAS the purpose of this Agreement is to provide for public facility
construction and foster economic development opportunities within Kittitas County;
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms and conditions contained herein,
or attached and incorporated and made a part hereof, the County and the Funding
Recipient mutually agree as follows:
Section 1-Scooe of Work.
a. Funding Recipient shall provide the services and staff described in its Application
for Funds submitted to the Council of Governments, as Exhibit "A" which is
attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
b. Except as otherwise specifically provided in this Agreement, Funding Recipient shall
furnish the following as required to perform the services, described in Paragraph (a)
above, in accordance with this Agreement: Personnel, labor and supervision;
technical, professional and other services. All such services, property and other
items furnished or required to be furnished, together with all other obligations
performed, or required to be performed, by Funding Recipient under this Agreement
are collectively referred to herein as "Services."
Section 2. Pavment.
a. As full compensation for satisfactory performance of the Funding Recipient Services,
the County agrees to pay Funding Recipient the sum of two hundred sixty-two
thousand five hundred dollars ($262,500.00).
b. Additional payment terms: The County will make payment to the Funding Recipient
only on a reimbursement basis, as receipts for any items including marketing and/or
advertising are submitted to the County.
c. Requests for reimbursements must be submitted to:
Kittitas County Public Works
Attn: Joyce White
411 North Ruby, - Suite 1
Ellensburg, WA 98926
iovce.white@co. kittitas.wa. us
Distressed County Sales and Use Tax Inlrostructure Improvement Program Funding Agr""nFEEL t
d. Timely and accurate financial reporting is required for fund management by Kittitas
County Department of Public Works. Financial reporting requirements for all grant
awards are listed below:
1. Using Kittitas County Department of Public Works reporting forms, applicants
will submit project status reporting forms within fourteen (14) calendar days
from the end of the reporting quarter as specified below:
. Quarter 1 ending date:. Quarter 2 ending date:o Quarter 3 ending date:. Quarter 4 ending date:
March 31't
June 30th
September 30th
December 31st
Recipients may submit reimbursement requests on a monthly basis on Kittitas
County Department of Public Works reporting forms.
2. Grant recipients who fail in meeting required reporting requirements are
subject to having fundins withheld on the fifteenth (1Sth) dav followins
the end of the reportinq quarter. Failure in submitting the required project
status reports (two consecutive reporting cycles) may result in award
cancellation upon COG review.
3. Financial reporting forms shall be signed by the identified grant official or
designee.
Section 3. Performanc bv Fundinq Recipient.
a. Funding Recipient shall not (by contract, operation of law or othenrvise) delegate or
subcontract performance of any Services to any other person or entity without the
prior written consent of the County. Any such delegation or subcontracting without
the County's prior written consent shall be voidable at the County's option.
b. Funding Recipient shall at all times be an independent Funding Recipient and not an
agent or representative of the County with regard to performing the Services.
Funding Recipient shall not represent that it is, or hold itself out as, an agent or
representative of the County. In no event shall Funding Recipient be authorized to
enter into any Agreement or undertaking for or on behalf of the County. lt is
understood that the Funding Recipient and the Funding Recipient's staff and
employees are not employees of the County and are not, therefore, entitled to any
benefits provided employees of the County.
c. Funding Recipient shall comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, rules,
regulations, orders, licenses, permits, and other requirements, now or hereafter in
effect, of any governmental authority (including, but not limited to, such requirements
as may be imposed upon the County and applicable to Services). Funding Recipient
shall furnish such documents as may be required to effect or evidence such
compliance. All laws, ordinances, rules, and orders required to be incorporated into
agreements of this character are incorporated into this Agreement by this reference.
Funding Recipient agrees to obtain all required licenses and permits, and further
agrees to keep them in full force and effect during the term of this Agreement.
Distressed County Soles ond Use Tox lnlrastructure Improvement Progrom Funding Onr""rFEEL ,
d. The County and the Funding Recipient agree that in fulfilling the terms and
conditions of this Agreement neither shall discriminate on the basis of race, creed,
color, national origin, age, sex, marital status, or the presence of a physical, sensory,
or mental handicap.
e. The Services shall at all times be subject to inspection by and approval of the
County, but the County's making (or failure or delay in making) such inspection or
approval shall not relieve Funding Recipient of its responsibility to perform the
Services in accord with this Agreement, notwithstanding the County's knowledge of
defective or non-complying performance, or the substantiality or ease of discovering
the same. Funding Recipient shall provide the County with sufficient, safe, and
proper facilities and equipment for such inspection and free access to such facilities.
f. This contract is subject to review by any Federal or State auditor. Funding Recipient
shall promptly furnish the County or its designee, or such Federal or State auditor
with such information related to the Services as may be requested by the applicable
governmental entity. Funding Recipient shall preserve and maintain all financial
records and records relating to performance of Services under this Agreement for six
(6) years after contract termination. For such duration after the County makes final
payment of compensation due hereunder, Funding Recipient shall provide the
County access to (and the County shall have the right to examine, audit and copy,
with or without notice) all of Funding Recipient's books, documents, papers and
records related to the Services or this Agreement.
g. Funding Recipient understands and acknowledges that Funding Recipient is solely
responsible for its own reporting and accounting of all state, federal, social security, and
local taxes, of every nature, arising from Funding Recipient's performance of this
Agreement. All compensation received by the Funding Recipient will be reported to the
lnternal Revenue Service at the end of the calendar year in accord with the applicable
IRS regulations.
h. The grantee shall obligate funding towards construction of the project no later than
six months from the time of grant execution (providing the grantee has not submitted
the project as being "banked" - COG Policy 2018-05). Obligation is expected to take
two forms: consultant contracting or contractor award. Presuming the COG
recommends a design only phase of a proposed Public Facility grant, obligation
requirements are met on the date of grantee signature on consultant design
contract(s). COG recommended construction awards will complete obligation
requirements on the date of grantee signature on construction contracts. Failure in
obligating grant awards within the prescribed timeframe results in the grant award
being remanded back to COG for recommended re-purposing by the Board of
County Commissioners.
The grantee is obligated to follow Public Facility Fund COG policies in effect at the
time of grant award as reflected in the Resolution signature date authorizing recipient
contracting. COG policies may be obtained from the Department of Public Works
(50e) 962-7523.
Distressed County Sales dnd Use Tox lnfrastructure Improvement Program Funding O7r""TEEL ,
Section 4. Release. lndemnitv. and Hold Harmless.
The County assumes no liability for the Funding Recipient's actions under this Agreement.
Funding Recipient releases and shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the County, its
officers and employees, agents, representatives, attorneys andior volunteers, from and
against all claims, costs, liabilities, damages, and expenses, (including, but not limited to,
reasonable attorney fees) which arise or may arise or be alleged to arise out of or by
reason of this Agreement including:
Any fault, negligence, strict liability or product liability of Funding Recipient in
connection with the Services for this Agreement;
Any lien asserted upon any property of the County in connection with the Services
for this Agreement;
a Any failure of Funding Recipient, or of the Services, to comply with any applicable
law, ordinance, rule, regulation, order, license, permit and other requirement, now or
hereafter in effect, of any governmental authority; or
a Any breach of or default under this Agreement by Funding Recipient.
Section 5- Comoliance Public Records Law.
a. ln compliance with Washington's public records law, the County will retain copies of
any documents associated with this Agreement, which may be required by law
unless legally exempt from such retention, for any applicable legally required
retention period.
b. ln the event a public records request is made to the County for documents created in
relation to this Agreement, should legal uncertainty arise regarding the disclosability
of any documents under federal or state public records laws, the County shall
provide notice to Funding Recipient pursuant to Washington's public records act,
chapter 42.56 RCW, to allow Funding Recipient to seek a court injunction.
c. The County specifically shall not be liable to Funding Recipient for the County's
release under public records laws of any documents not protected by trademark,
copyright or other law.
Section 6. lndustrial lnsurance Waiver.
With respect to performance of this Agreement and as to any claims against the County, its
Additional lnsureds, officers, agents and employees, the Funding Recipient expressly waives
its immunity under Title 51 of the Revised Code of Washington, the lndustrial lnsurance Act,
for injuries to Funding Recipient's employees and agrees that the obligations to indemnify,
defend and hold harmless provided in this Agreement extend to any claim brought by or on
behalf of any employee of the Funding Recipient. This waiver is mutually negotiated by the
parties to this Agreement.
a
a
Distressed County Sales ond Use Tax Inlrastructure lmprovement Program Funding Aareement- Pdge 4
Section 7. lnsurance and Endorsements.
a. The County may require through a request in writing that the Funding Recipient
provide the County with a certificate, binder, or policy of liability insurance,
acceptable to the County in an amount specified by the County.
b. Such liability insurance shall be such as will protect Funding Recipient, its
employees, agents and representatives, from all claims, losses, harm, costs,
liabilities, damages and expenses arising out of personal injury (including death) or
property damage that may result from performance of the Services or this
Agreement, whether such performance is by Funding Recipient or any of its
employees, agents or representatives.
c. Should the County require such liability insurance, the Funding Recipient agrees to
provide proof of insurance prior to commencing performance of this Agreement.
d. Copies of the County's written request and the insurance documents provided by
Funding Recipient shall be attached to this Agreement and by this reference will be
made part hereof.
e. Where insurance is requested by the County, all liability insurance policies shall be
endorsed to include the County as an Additional lnsured and shall stipulate that the
insurance afforded by the policies shall be primary insurance, and that any
insurance, self-insured retention, deductibles, or risk retention trusts maintained or
participated in by the Parties shall be excess and not contributory to any other
insurance maintained by the County. Funding Recipient shall furnish the County a
certificate of insurance with Endorsement as evidence that the required policies are
in full force and effect.
Section 8. Termination.
The County may, by written notice thereof to Funding Recipient, terminate this Agreement
as to all or any portion of the Services not yet performed, whether or not Funding Recipient
is in breach or default. Upon receiving such notice of termination, Funding Recipient shall,
except as otheruvise directed by the County, immediately stop performing the Services to
the extent specified in the notice. ln the event the County terminates the Funding
Recipient's Services, the Funding Recipient is obligated and hereby agrees to refund to the
County all monies paid for Services not yet rendered by the Funding Recipient, if any, as of
the date of the notice of termination.
Section 9. Miscellaneous.
a. Funding Recipient shall not (by contract, operation of law or otheruvise) assign this
Agreement or any right or interest in this Agreement without the County's prior
written consent.
b. This Agreement embodies the entire Agreement between the County and Funding
Recipient, and supersedes any and all prior oral or written communications, proposals,
conditions, promises, representations, or understandings regarding the Services. No
change, amendment or modification of any provision of this Agreement shall be valid
Distressed County Soles and Use Tax lnfrastructure lmprovement Program Funding Aareement- Page 5
unless set forth in a written amendment to the Agreement signed by both parties.
c. Notice for any purpose under this Agreement, except service of process, shall be
given by the Funding Recipient to the Kittitas County Commissioners and the Kittitas
County Public Works Director, 41 1 North Ruby, Suite 1, Ellensburg, WA 98926. For all
purposes under this Agreement, any notice by the County to the Funding Recipient
shall be given to the Funding Recipient's address provided on the signature page.
Notice may be given by delivery or by depositing in the U.S. Mail, first class, postage
prepaid, certified mail, return receipt requested.
d. The section and paragraph headings of this Agreement are for reference
convenience only and are not intended to restrict, affect or be of any weight in
interpreting or construing the provisions of such sections or paragraphs.
e. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts and by facsimile,
each of which will be deemed an original, but all of which together will constitute one
and the same instrument.
f. Funding Recipient warrants to the County that the individual signing on Funding
Recipient's behalf has the requisite power and authority to enter into and to perform
Funding Recipient's obligations under this Agreement. Funding Recipient further
warrants to the County that Funding Recipient has made no misrepresentation or
misleading statement in connection with this Agreement, and is not in violation of any
applicable law, ordinance, or regulation the consequence of which will or may
materially affect Funding Recipient's ability to perform its obligations under this
Agreement.
g. lf any term or condition of this Agreement or the application thereof to any person(s) or
circumstances is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other terms, conditions
or applications which can be given effect without the invalid term, condition or
application. To this end, the terms and conditions of this Agreement are declared
severable.
h. The exclusive venue for any action brought to enforce this Agreement or any of its
terms shall be in Kittitas County, State of Washington.
Distressed County Sales and Use Tax Infrostructure Improvement Program Funding OIr""TEEL ,
KITTITAS COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
cory ht, Vice- C
Brett , Commissioner
affi'u+q'btoo
CITY OF ROSLYN
Representative
?o 161
Address
oKq q
1
a
Telephone
Email
r
Dated: Fefu' un'rn I b, I 0A2-,Dated | 26 ' ,72\U
Board- Julie Kjorsvik
K-
tr Deputy Clerk of the Board- Mandy Buchholz
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Deputy Prosecuting Attorney
Distressed County Sales and Use Tox Infrastructure lmprovement Program Funding Onr""rFE,L ,
Kittitas County
Department of Public Works
DTSTRTSSED CouNrY SALES AND Usr Tax InrnasTRUcTURE
IMPROVEMENT PNOCNAM APPLICATION
The Distressed County Sales and Use Tax lnfrastructure lmprovement Program supports
improvements to infrastructure systems that foster economic developmeni in Xittiias Gounty. Thegoal is to create economic opportunity through lnfrastructure investment.
APPLICANT INFORMATION
Applicant:
Contact Name:
Address:
City:
Telephone:
E-mailAddress:
Office Locatlon:
City of Roslyn
Mayor Brent Hals
PO Box 451
Roslyn
s09-649-3 I 05
nl a)'or(Sr i. ros I ),n. rva. u s
201 S l*t St, Roslyn WA 98941
WA Zip:
FAX:
9894 l
509-649-3174
ffiffitffif\dFr]
Jurisdiction:
Funds Request:
11.
fz.
13.
t4.
lo.
I6.
City of Roslyn
$262,500
K;l illr\li {;{}UN't'Y
nf-_pT nF FilRr-tc w{}R
{1,,1 i r
k'r'..
tr \APPLICATION THRESHOLDS
Applicant Requirement:
Check-off:
The proiect is improvement to an infrastructure system(s) linked to economic development.
A dstailed 8y,x11" vlclnlty map that clearly shows the project is included in the
appllcation package.
Distreseed County funds are not belng eubstituted for other funds that are already secured.
The proJect Involvee traditional improvements, instead of "non-traditlonal" improvements
eligible for "Enhancgmont" funding
Applicant has eubmitted only one application this round.
The local/reglonal economlc development organization has been informed of the proJect.
PROJECT BUDGETFundingSourcesDistressed County Funds Requested:$ 262.s00OtherFederal:$0PreliminaryEngineeringPhaseRight ofwayPhaseConstructionPhaseProjectTotalls FundingSecured - Yor N?$o$o$o$o$o$o$oo/oo$o$o$o$o$o$o$oolo0$262,500 $262,500$oN$o$1,487,500 $1,,187.500YState:$ 1.487.500LocalGovernment:$0Priv*Other:Project Total:Distrcssed County Fund Matching Ratio:o/o15alo15*Please explain other type of Funding: 8504 of the nroject funding has been secured from a Department of Ecoloqy Grant * WOC-2022-$o$o$o$o$0$o$1,750,000 $1,750,0002CoRosl-00] I 1" Aftacherl is a detailed hrrdoef thnt innhrdes a breakdown of individual taqks
PROJECT NARRATIVE
1. Project Description; Describe the scope of work. lndicate the major work involved, including a brief
comparison of existing and proposed conditione,
The City of Roslyn drains to Crystal Creek, arr impaired watertrody. The Stormwater Retrofit and CIP
Construction will include a city-wide installation of low irnpact development (LlD) best management
practices (BMP) to improve water quality as part of the CIPI Project and in line with implernentation of
the City's planned capital improvement projects (CIP). The project will include stormwater retrofits for
improved water quality in conjunction with the on-going CIP 1, a funded pipe rehabilitation project
currently at 90Yo design. The goals are to construct BMPs that will improve flow control and reduce
flooding and pollutant discharges to the impaired waterway within the City of Roslyn, Crystal Creek.
Overall the City is requesting $262,500 for construction to complete a project where the total costs will
be approximately $3-million dollars. The attached Figures include the project area. The attached
Schedule and Budget include detailed Tasks for the Scope of Work. The attached Stormwater
Comprehensive Plan addendum includes detailed project information.
2. Explain how the infrastructure project wlll help meet the economic development goals of your community
and/or region. lf this project is not done, will the anticipated private development still take place?
The City currently expedences flooding in the downtown core due to undersized stormwater drains, and
adverse environmental impacts from the lack of water quality treatment within the same drainage basin.
The infrastructure project will help meet the economic development goals of the comnrunity by
providing an adequate stormwater system that will allow growth. Private commercial development is not
currently planned within the drainage basin as any new commercial development or redevelopment is
limited by the capacity of the stormwater system. Ifthe infrastructure project is not done the economic
development goals for the City will continue to be limited.
3. lndicate lf the proJect ls consistent with the following applicable state, regional and local plans and
prioritization processes:
tr Overall Economic Development Plan - Officiatty Adopted_
Comprehensive Land Use Plan - Officially Adopted 2019
I Capital Facility Plan - Officially Adopted 2019
CommunityActionPlan(orothercommunity.basedplan)_offlclally,Adopted-
trSix.YearTransportatlonlmprovementPlan-official|yAdopted
Site-specific development plans; e.9., Community Master Plan - Officially Adopted_
J
Other
4. Public Benefit:
Please describe the public benefit derived from project completion
The public benefits not only from the economic development opportunities, but also from the protection
of surface water bodies as road runoff from the urban area is treated through bioretention before
discharging into Crystal Creek. In addition, there is recognition that treating road runoff does prevent
contaminants from reaching surface water bodies, protecting both human and wildlife from exposure to
toxins that can be lethal to aquatic life or accumulate in fish, wildlifb and human tissue.
5. Define the total number of project partners demonstrating proiect support.
The Department of Ecology is curently the only paftner and providingS5% of the funding.
6. Explain how construction ready thie infrastructure project is relative to design completeness and the
permitting process.
Design Completeness - The alternatives analysis has been completed and the design is currently fully
funded with the Consultant (Mead&Hunt) preparing to submit the 30% level Plans and Specifications to
the City and Ecology for review.
Permitting Process - The project is in the review process for the Inadvertent Discovery Plan and
preparation of the SEPA Checklist. Survey work has already been completed and the geotechnical
investigation work is planned for December 2021.
7. lndicate the Estlmated Number of Short Term and/or Permanent Jobs Created/Retained by the Project.
Estimated Short Term Jobs created by the project would include jobs for consultants and contractors.
Consultant teams include at least (2) archaeologists, (2) geotechnical/soils professionals, (3) surveyors,
(3) design engineers. Contractor jobs are anticipated to be in the l5-20 range for tradespeople including
subcontractors.
The infrastructure project allows for the creation of development and/or redevelopment within the
drainage basin. Permanent jobs are anticipated as part of any development after the infrastructure project
is completed. Per Chapter 5 (Economic Development) of the City's Comprehensive Plan the employment
capacity is an additional 202 jobs.
Submit the original application to:
Kittitas County Department of Public Works
411 N. Ruby, Suite #1
Ellensburgo WA 98926
4
Applicant Certifi cation
Certification.is hereby given that the information provided is accurate and the appticable attachments arccomplete and included as pan of rhe application package.
I certify that application thresholds are met ar the time of application.
// l? zaz/
Signatu re of Representative Date
Sponsoring Agency
(lf Applicable)
Signatu re of Agcncy Representative Ilatc
Typed or Printed Name Date
A.ssociate Economic Development Organization Notification
The organization listed belou' has receivcd notification of this project as demonstrated b.1,1t1s
signatu re of the olga n iza tion's rep resentative.
Name Organization
re of
CEo tt/r t/aoat
Date
5
.d
2r/+
or4
ea (l
4o7?,
'7J
I
'i^ rL
28t4
Number 3
Canyon
.:f
4^Y*^
t'n !FE
I
o
aF
d6
I
i,+rl0
Cedar
Gutch
'q^'o+
+us,
,Qo
%^z"4
i6
o t
Roslyn Number 6
Conyon
t
t.1d)
GOtio st aly "trO,4o J
'4.
c)
?2t*,'Y!,
TZON R1 5E . ooc
-"'f"
{.--"
coAru,e(wAr
\q+
(ooF
19 g
?<
I
21
2i)|{)
{$v
t--"-ROPE RIOEN DR
t2"rr".
PROJECT AREA
GITY OF ROSLYN STORMWATER
RETROFI T ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
AND CIP 1 TREATIIIENT DESIGN
ROSLYN, WASHINGTON
USGS Topographic 7.5 Minute
Cle Elum and Ronald, l^lq (20.l7) Ouadrangle Maps
USGS Topovi€w (https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/topoview)
@
0 1:24,000 1
firbrctoll ptlds!tldaan !ho(3) rcprinld wlh
Fmbid tam Mi.rorot Copr.lid.
Proiect Lomtion01Fkm
T2ON, R15E;
Section 17
Wlhmelte Merldlan
E ProjectArea (1.4 Acres)
Flglro I IAG: g/16/20e1,
Figure 1. The City of Roslyn Stormwater Retrofit Alternatives Analysis and CIP 1
Treatment Design project area in Roslyn, Kittitas County, Washington.
oo
r${}
t i'&
I?t\
$
\
CITY OF ROSLYN STORMWATER
RETROFI T ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
AND GIP 1 TREATMENT DESIGN
ROSLYN, WASHINGTON
USGS Topographic 7.5 Minute
Cl€ Elum and 6on"16, trtA (2017) Quadrangls Maps
USGS Topoview (hfl psJingmdb.u6gs. gov/topdiew)
l-@
0
0
T@rTon Mrcrorot prcducl3cruo !ho(r) r.p,lnbd
wilh prmF$on hfr Miarotot Qorpotrtjo[.
0.2
*
T20N, RlSEl
Ssction 17
lMllamolte MerUian
1:4,500 0.18
O 2021 Mtrroron corpdrh i; ?0?l Mar.r
GnilES (20?1) ollidhrtor Alrbus DS fr 2021
Project Looation
lEl ProjectArea (1.4 Acres)
f]l UOan Drainage Basin (ClP 1)
, , Tax Parcels
_"- _ Pivolal Building (Lontz 1977)
f Primary Building (Lentz 1977)'' ' Conkibuting Building
3\ tnue-usted Property
@ Uhrttinton State Heritage Barn
Fttutc 2 IJAC. $117 Q021 |
Figure 2. The City of Roslyn Stormwater Retrofit Alternatives Analysis and CIP 1
Treatnent Design project area locatiorrs showing nearby pivotal, primarv, and corrtributing
buildings to the Roslyn Historic District.
Legend
Q Approximate Test Plt Location
A swale lD
l; I Catchbasin
f*"'J nrea or Rotentiat Effect
ffi Biofittralion swates - ctp 1
--)- Storm Pipe
lf, tots wifr Buildings Contributing to Historic Districl
\Abtlands
\ btlands Butfer
L2A.1
t_24
A1 5A1t
14
L1:1
L2
L1.2
N
A
200 300 4000 50 100
Feet
Exhibit A - North CIP 1 Concept Design Map
loslyn CIP I Stormwater Treatment Project
IGN
F{g
Figure 3. The City of Roslyn Stormwater Retrofit Alternatives Analysis and CIP t
Treatment Design project area locations showing proposed biofiltration swales and
geotechnical test pits.
N
A
0 50 100 200 300
Exhibit B - South CIP 1 Concept Design Map
Roslyn CIP 1 Stormwater Treatment Project
Legend
Q Approximate Test Pit Location
A swale lD
til catchbasin
f 'l'J nt"" ot eotential Effect
m Biotiltration swalos - clp 1
--)- Slorm Pip€
I Lots wittr Buildings Contributing lo Historic District
l^iellands
\ bllonds Buffer
*
A
'+%--_h--
tt^
IGN,lhe
Figure 4. The City of Roslyn stormwater Retrofit Altematives Analysis and clp 1
Treatment Design project area locations showing proposed biofiltration swales and
geotechnical test pits.
'o o i,:1.oq.1?2EqtEI t4e^5t6?-718l9410f1r ?.12 J-1J?,14Q15 ?,16E17 e-1E?19220 2.21 -,zz 2,8e.24 q.25 ?.26q27 e-28 a-29 C-30q3l?32 J-:rEq34 J,35235 :-37 J-38q39 r_40 r:11 -.12 C,43241 €qasffir+eEqrzffirTr* NrftRclyn Slomrter Rrtrotrts Altcmtis Analy$3 tnd Clp t lrc{m"nt Do3ignTrst 1: Prercct Arlnlnishilon U.ntgementEcology F\21 GBnt AwtdPaje(' ContretingCondud Kickofi MeetingData gaheinE 3nd reviewQsrledy Prcgrcss ReportsFinancial T.djngEcology CffidimtionSchedLde Project ActivitiesOuality As$rarceProjec{ ClosoutTa3k 2: CulhrEl rnd Envircnmental RevlcEPartm anhadogi€t studyPrepare ard Submit 054t106 FomPrepare and Submit IOPEcotory Rqiew. Cuntmi tunsP€pEre and Submit SEPA Check[sfEcotogy Rsiw - SEPAT$k 3: Altemltl$ An.lFls phnUpdaie Existing ConditioN ModdsCondud AllemtiEs AndysisConduct Publb OutreachCon{tuc1 5(6 VisilR€line Allernatiws and Prepsre Plm Add€rdmCity end E@logy R6viMAddress Biew mments ard fiBliz€ site iMtigationsTasl 4: Gcotrchnlcel hEtlg.dorsConduct Site Re@misneCondud Data Colledion ild A€ty$sTast 5: Topognphlc S[EyConduct rightol*y tesearctrPerlorm topogEphic sweyE@logy FY 22 GBnt AMtd l'JotificationTGk 6: DFign Pl,rnr rnd SprcificatloE foi Ctp I tnetncnt SubbastFPEpare and Submit 30 pecnt Design pad€g€ (City Review)City ReviwP€pare and Submit 60 peent D6sign Packagg (City and E@togy Reviw)City and E6logy ReviilPrepere md Submit g0 pe@nt Dedgn peckage (City arxt Eologry Revi*)City and E@bgy RfliMFuture Ta3k Fiml Bld PilkaEc rnd CoFtrucfionPrepaE end Submit Flml Bid Paclage (City trd E6lo9y Revies)City End Ecology RevieffiAdveftisement & BiddingConslruciion FEh Wtndow (July 16AW 31)CIP 1 Pidng aN NewOutfail Construclion (*paidte pmjed)CIP 1 Construction under E6loW FY 22 G6nIDuEtion StatFinishlhu t0ttt20 Weal426n3lhu l0tl5r20 W.il 42ttt3Thu lUlV2A t|k,<13/17D1Thu 3/1W1 Wed 4/1#21Wed4l21n1 vted421t21fhu422E1 Wed5/5/21'Ihu 7/2921 Wed4lst'23Thu3/18P1 WedQnlWThu 311821 Wed 12n1n2Thu 3/16/21 Wed 12t21t22Thu 3/1821 Wed 12121f22Thu 4/5/23 Wed4l26n3Thu 98/21 VtH12l29r2lThu 56121 Wed7fln1fhu78t21 Wedgt4:,zlfhu7l81i2't Wedgl4lz1Thu USf21 Wed 10127121Thu tofAl Wed11117121ThuttilSt2l Wed12P9n1ThuSrcr2l Wed'l'l/lot2'lThu 5/821 Wbd 6/16,21Thu6,/17t21 Wd1tq2lWedBl11l21 WbdS/11/21Wed 8/11121 WadBh'1121ThuEl12l21 Wedgi1l2lThugnn'l Wed118't21Thu 1114n1 Wed l l/10f21WcdAnlnl Wed 12/8/21Wed8t11l21 Weds/1lDlthu11/11121 Wedl?AnlIfu ltrltl2l Wed12l1l21Tlv 1 1 11t21 V'ted 11n7n1Thu 11i1'U21 Wed12nnlTue 7/13n1 fue 7/13t21Ihu912/21 v,ia,dg11n2Thu 9/2121 Wedgn2n'lThu 92321 Wbd 10/6/21Thu 11/4f21 Wed12Bl21Thu 1219/21 Wad2Er22Thuzhinz W€d 3/9,122Thu 3/10/22 UlsdSll't122flust1uz2 $rad42€r23fhu'h2lz2 Wedsr2$Ez-fhu5,26n2 Wed6t15t22Thu 6r'16122 Wed 7 t27 122Mon 7/1W2 Mon UlV2W|SBW2 Fngngn2Thu&t1A22 Wd42W3ftra2oz1 er.j,?02t e$4.:0e1 enl,nLzMil Apr 14ry lln tri Ao9 *p fh h &. Irn FcbQk2.202? Qtr r.2022 ([r4.Ma' Apr Mry tun M Aug Srp ft2lrlI660 dry!661! rhys110 days2A dayE0 days10 days440 days460 days460 days450 days/t60 drys1 5 clays170 days45 days20 days20 days60 days30 days30 days136 days30 days35 deys'l dayI dey15 days45 days5 daystG dlys1 day20 daysm &ys10 days15 days0 dalas'lto days15 days10 days25 days45 days20 days45 d6ys260 d.yrl0 days15 days30 days21 days60 dayst 80 daysA qzt{)q U1l:4T6kspliM.nElTsk lS!ffiEH sbfr{ntDunlbn-a^ly @l@g Enirh-ontt anmlsummnryRolk4r EridD.lTa*skro.lssEry l-l EisEtMites@Projed; Roslyn 5W Rctrofits: Dale:Thu7f22/21iSumrory+PagE 1DedliE
Gity of Roslyn Grant Budget EstimateProject:Stormwater CIP 1 TreatmentConstructionEstimated Staff Hourly Expense (w/o indirects)Estimated Contractor/Consultant Hourty ExpensePercent of Project Costs Reimbursed by GrantApplication No.: lEcotoqv11s40$1s085%Tdal CostsEstimatedStafi HoursStafi Costper Houro/o GrantFunded& ContractorContrador Cost per72729664$40$40s40000s150t150$15085o/o850k85o/o50RecipicntTasksGrant Dellverablcs - Descdpfions1.11.21-31.4Quarterly Progress ReportsCoordinate with Finance on ReimbursementsTrack Expenditures & Reallocate as Needed$3,600$900sgoot5,'100$2,600$2,700$1,300$2,500$2,500$2,900$3.050$3,200s1,2002466s40$40$40't644$150s15085Vo85o/o85%$3,060$765$765sl50Sir.5904302222211612$40s40s40$40$40$40$40E40$4016E81616l220164$150$150$150$150$150$150s150$150s15085o/o85o/o85%85o/o85o/o85o/o85o/o85068504$2,210$2,295$1,10582.125$2,125$2.465$2.593$2,720s't 020s18.658Task 2: Bid Review and Contracting2.12.22.3Advertisement and Bid ReviewRecommendation for AwardNotice to ProceedTask 3: Constructlon Admlnistration3.13.23.33.43.53.63.73.83.9Preconstruciion @nferen@ and meeting minutesWeekly Progress meetingsSubmittal ReviewRequest for lnformation (RFl) responsesChange Order review and documentationConslruction ObservationsCompadion testing and Geotechnical coordinationPermit Compliance coordination and doclmentationPunci List$80,050$75.100$30.100$250,1 00$650,100$450,100$90,100$40,100$1 5.10012222222s40$40$40$40$40$40$40s40$80,000$75,000$30,000$250.000$650,000$450.000$90.000$40,00085%85o/o85o/o85%85o/o85%85o/o85o/o$63,835$25,585$212,585$552,585Task.l: Water Quallty BilP and CIP I4.14.24.34.44.54.64.74.84.9MobilizalionSite Preparation including erosion control measuresSite Demolition, dearing and grubbingExcayation and EarthwortCIP 1 lreatment Basin JCIP 1 treatment Basin K, LPavingSite RestorationFinal work oer Punch ListTask.l$1 5,873$4,.l(}0$1,200$5.100s26.5731240126$40s40$40(rn10216432$150$1 50s15t)$1 5085%85%85o/o85Yo$13,492s3,740$1,020s4_335822.#lTask 5: Projoct Close-Out5.15.25.35.1Prepare as-built drawingsAgency coordination and documentation for release of retainerClose-out all permilsptanara/C' 'ha* D-^i^i-^r nl^^^ ^,..Report$l
i,ii;i ;i'ivv;.:li'i j t-rl. iit i"r{r:lnil i.lr;1r l.'{iili
l"il'rlri:,.rv l!r;t '..:,i:i1tt,-:lli':i-i...iilrt ijl,iit;1r,i'i ,ii::Jrill;;r:
r\lill, .li rr {.ri I -;i;::;i!; i
September 10,2021
al-z
IUl-zo(J
ILo
uJJ
m
F
Table of Contents
1. lntroduction
1. L Project Purpose.....,.
1.2. Report Purpose
1.3. Design Codes and References...
1.3.1. Department of Ecology...
1.3.2. City of Roslyn
2 Basin Descrrption...............
2.1. General
2.2. Historic and Existing Conditions
2.3. Proposed Conditions
3. Pro.iect Site Description..... ....... .
3. 1. Project Limits.........,.
3.2. Project Site Conditions.........,.....,..
3.3. Stormwater Features.
1
,1
1
1
,|
1
c
2
2
2
2
3
3
4
4
4
6
6
6
I
8
I
I
4.
A
6.
Core Element Analysis ......
Alternatives Considered ....
Design Analysis
6.1. Existing Stormwater Drainage System
6.2. Proposed BMP Design and lmprovements.....
7 Water Quality Benefit......
7. 1. Runoff Treatment Comparison.....
7.2. Equivalent NedRedevelopment Areas
8. CapilallmprovementPlan
EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1 - Basin and Study Map
APPENDICES
Appendix A - Drainage Parameters
Appendix B - Existing Flow Rates
Appendix C - Swale Calculations
Appendix D - Equivalent New Redevelopment Areas for Bioliltration Swales Calculaiions Sheet
Appendix E - CIP 1 Cost Estimate
Appendix F - Operations and Maintenance Tables
1 . lntroduction
1.1. Project Purpose
The City of Roslyn (City) completed a Stormwater Comprehensive Plan (Plan) in July 2014. The
Plan contains structural and non-structural solutions to address stormwater conveyance and
water quality problems within the City. The Capital lmprovement Plan (ClP) contained within the
Plan identifies various structural solutions to address conveyance issues by replacing pipes and
culverts. Nonstructural solutions such as stormwater management facilig inspection, public
education and outreach, water quality monitoring and encouraging infiltration and low impact
development are aimed at improving water quality within the region.
The City received a Water Quality Grant from the Washington State Department of Ecology
(Ecology) to identifo ways to improve water quality within the localwatenrvay, Crystal Creek. The
goal is to identify Best Management Practices (BMPs) to provide stormwater runoff treatment for
Total Suspended Solids (TSS) and provide for reduction in other pollutants within the urbanized
areas of the City.
The grant has two objectives:
Evaluate the possible implementation of stormwater retrofits to provide water quality
treatment and determine the most suitable locations, methods, estimated costs, available
funding, and phased approach for such retrofits in a citywide study.
2. Advance design of stormwater treatment retrofit improvements for the CIP 1 project
which is a pipe rehabilitation project currently under design.
1.2. Report Purpose
This report documents the citywide study to be adopted as an addendum to Cig of Roslyn
Stormwater Comprehensive Plan. The CIP 1 treatment project will be advanced in detail design
after study completion, This addendum describes the drainage basin, details of the project site,
an analysis of the core elements, the alternatives considered, the design analysis, a quantification
of the water quality benefit, CIP summaries, financial review of potential funding, and operation
and maintenance considerations.
1.3.Design Codes and References
1.3.1. Department of Ecology
The analysis will be in accordance with Ecology's Stormwater Management Manual for Eastern
Washington (S\ /[,lMEW, 2019, and Ecology's Design Deliverables for Stormwater Projects with
Ecology Funding, June 2018.
'1.3.2. City of Roslyn
This analysis will be in accordance with the City's Stormwater Regulations listed in Chapter 3 of
the Plan.
2. Basin Description
2.1, General
The study area lies within the Upper Yakima River watershed, Ecology Water Resource lnventory
Area (WRIA) 39, where it drains into Crystal Creek and ultimately reaches the Yakima River in
central Washington, near Cle Elum. The creek serves as a recreational stream, and is protected
for salmonid spawning, rearing, and migration. Crystal Creek is a 303(d) listed stream and has
Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) limits for fecal coliform, temperature, and sediment.
2.2. Historic and Existing Conditions
The citywide study basin area encompasses 1,17O-acres draining to Crystal Creek as shown in
the attached Exhibit 1 (Mead & Hunt, October 2019). This study basin area is composed of
S0%-forested hills to the north of the City limits, and a mixed land use of low density residential,
medium density residential, commercial, light industrial, and historic zones within City limils.
The existing stormwater conveyance system was built as the City developed, and includes a
combination of open ditches, pipes, catch basins, and culverts, The system was originally built as
a combined sewer system but was later converted into dedicated storm sewers by the mid-8Os,
Major trunk lines were constructed as bypass systems to contain three creeks that historically
flowed through the City. The City's Plan includes an inventory of the City's drainage infrastructure
and proposed capital improvement projects primarily intended to address capacity issues within
the City. The City generally lacks any stormwater runoff treatment, Since development of the
Plan, CIP 2 project (a box culvert crossing South A Street) was completed in 2017 . CIP 1 project
(a bypass pipe to alleviate a bottleneck on a main storm trunk line) is currently under design
development and scheduled for bidding and construction in 2022.
The CIP 1 basin, a subbasin of the citywide study basin, is an 804'acre area that currently
discharges to Crystal Creek via one outfall south of East California Avenue. The CIP 1 basin is
mostly forested hills with some urbanized development, including commercial, residential, light
industrial, and historic uses from the City. The coal mine within the project area is no longer in
use. The CIP 1 basin drains southward in a piped storm drain system along North First Street
before it discharges into CrystalCreek.
2.3. Proposed Conditions
The citywide study does noi propose any changes to the land use, basin delineations, soils or
water bodies. The proposed retrofits for stormwater treatment in the study area willcapture
stormwater flow from existing topography before flowing through underdrains and into the existing
storm drain system.
2
3. Project Site Description
3.1. Project Limits
The project site for the stormwater retrofit study area is intended to capture the urbanized areas
within the Stormwater Retrofit Study Area shown in Exhibit I and Exhibit 2. The project site is a
270'acre area of developed lands within the City that discharge to Crystal Creek, and consists of
commercial, residential, light industrial, public facilities and historic uses. The drainage subbasins
delineated in the Plan were carried fonrvard for this analysis.
The potential locations identified for stormwater retrofiis were reduced to exclude the restricted
buffer area per Policy H2.5 of the City of Roslyn, which specifies that "all lots within 300 feet of
wetlands shall be 50 acres or larger. No building or development is permitted within 300 feet of
wetlands." This area was further reduced to remove the unsewered areas of the City. The
resultant Treatment Assessment Area measures approximately 152 acres and is shown in
Exhlblt 2.
The CIP 1 Treatment Assessment Area is shown in the attached Exhlblt 2 as the urbanized
tributary area for the CIP 1 treatment project and measures approximately 45 acres. The CIP 1
treatment project will advance design of the treatment facilities within the CIP 1 Treatment
Assessment Area. Final design and construction will be done under separate grant funding, The
CIP 1 Treatment Assessment Area drainage subbasins were subdivided into smaller subbasins to
aid in a more detailed analysis for design advancement and quantification of lhe water quality
benefit.
The drainage areas and existing impervious areas are listed in Appendix A for each subbasin
shown in Exhibit 2.
3.2. Project Site Conditions
The land use is predominantly urbanized, including commercial, residential, light indushial, and
historic uses from the City. The site generally slopes from northwest to southeast towards Crystal
Creek. There are significant elevation differences throughout the City. The tax parcels (and public
right-of-way) were obtained from the Kiftiias County COMPAS database. The topographic
contours were obtained from the Washington State L|DAR portal, Kittilas County FEMA Study
conducted in 2011 (https://lidaroortal.dnr.wa.qov/#47.23423:-120.99578:15).
There are wetlands to the west and southeast of the Treatment Assessment Area. Wetlands exist
south of Roslyn Pioneer Park, north of Writehead Road where Crystal Creek crosses the road,
and south of Writehead Road. The wetland boundaries and associated layers were obtained
from the Plan.
The soils within the project site are mostly Roslyn ashy sandy loam with a Hydrologic Soil Group
of B, and Teanaway ashy loam with a Hydrologic Soil Group of C. There are also some dumps
and mine sediment with a Hydrologic Soil Group of D according to the Gridded Soil Survey
(gSSURGO) Database.
The climate is heavily influenced by the adjacent mountain ranges and elevation, Precipitation is
higher in the winter than the summer. The Plan provides more details regarding average monthly
3
climate data, For the stormwater retrofits, the water quality design storm is based on the 6-month,
3-hour in accordance with the S\ /MMEW (Ecology, 2019r.
3.3. Stormwater Features
The existing storm sewer mapping was developed with the Plan. lt includes a storm sewer
nefwork of clay and PVC pipe, catch basins, manholes, and a ditch. The majority of the urbanized
developed area within the City drains to a main storm sewer trunk line discharging to a
200-foot-long ditch south of East California Avenue. This ditch flows into Crystal Creek east of
East Hoffmanville Avenue. The area south of California Avenue lacks storm sewer infrastructure.
4. Core Element Analysis
Ecology expects a Core Element analysis for all projects, even if the project is a retrofit. Ecology
uses this analysis to determine project eligibility for funding, This site is considered
redevelopment in accordance with Section 2,6 of the S\ AIMEW (Ecology, 2019). The project
does not include any changes to land use or additional impervious areas. Furthermore, the
project does not propose replaced impervious surfaces. Therefore, according to the flow chart in
Figure 2.2 of lhe SWMMEW (Ecology, 2019), the Core Elements #2 and#3 apply to the tand
disturbed. The project does not require Preparation of a Stormwater Site Plan (Core Element #1),
Preservation of Natural Drainage Systems (Core Element #4), Runoff Treatment (Core Element
#5), or Flow Control (Core Element #6).
Ecology has established a procedure to quantify the water quality benefit for retrofit projects. A
baseline is determined based on what would be required if the project was to meet
nedredevelopment standards. The project does not require Runoff Treatment (Core Element #5)
or Flow Control (Core Element #6) being this a retrofit project. The water quality benefit expected
under this retrofit project is described later under Section 7.
5. Alternatives Considered
The study identifies Best Management Practices (BMPs) to provide stormwater runoff treatment
for Total Suspended Solids (TSS) and provide for reduction in other pollutants within the
urbanized areas of the City. The alternatives considered for this study are intended to meet these
design objectives. Priority is given to Low lmpact Development (LlD) BMPs that accomplish both
flow control and runoff treatment, although runoff treatment is the focus of the retrofils. Table I
provides a summary of the considered alternatives along with descriptions, benefits, limitations,
and recommendations regarding preferred alternatives.
4
,'.rIq t ii.r']i'r.
1 - Biofiltration Swales
2 - Vegetated Filter
Strips
2 - OilWater
Separators (OWS)
3 - Pervious
Pavement
4 - Detention Basin wl '
Filter Cartridges
Table l: Alternatives Analysis
Construct biofiltration
swales adjacent to paved
roadways
tr Connect underdrains and
overflow bypass from
biofiltration swales to
existing storm sewer
network
tr Construct vegetated filter
strips adjacent to paved
roadways
tr Construct and connect oil
water separators to the
storm sewer
tl Conslruct new pervious
pavement
EI Demolish existing pavement
tr Connect underdrains to
existing stormwater sewer
system
tl Use underground
engineered filter systems to
provide water quality
treatment
tr Provides runofftreatment for public
right-of-way
, tr Provides minimalflow control benefit
tr Designs require consideration of cold
climate
tr lmpacts roadside parking
tr Designs can have minimal impact on
the landscape with the appearance of
open roadside ditches
tr Consldered the preferred
alternative in areas with storm
Sewer
tr Providesrunoff treatment for public
right-of-way
tr Provides minimalflow control benefit
tr Design can be used in unsewered
areas
tr Designs can have minimal impact on
the landscape
tr lmpacts roadside parking
tr Considared the prefened
altemative ln unsewered areas
tr Low waier quality benefii as traffic
usage on roadways does not warrant
installation of OWS
tr No flow control benefit
tr Not considered the preferred
alternative.
tr Provides runoff treatment and limited
flow control
tr Unable to infiltrate with poor soils
' E Construction would cause significant
disruption to neighborhood
tr Not considered lhe preferred
alternative.
tr Provides runoff treatment and flow
control
tr Filter cartridges are a large capital
cost and large annual maintenance
cost
tr Scalable treatment provided at
existing collection points or central
treatment location
tr Not considered the preferred
alternative.
5
6. Design Analysis
6.1. Existing Stormwater Drainage System
An existing hydrology and hydraulics XPS\MI|M model from the Plan was used for the analysis of
this study. Before using this model, various hydrological parameters were reassessed and
updated to model the existing conditions of the drainage basins associated with this study,
Subbasins within the project site were modified to follow the topography of the City rather than
grouped tax parcels, ln reassessing the subbasins, new flow paths were created for each
subbasin. Land uses within each subbasin were updated and used to calculate new Curve
Number (CN) values and new times of concentration (Tc). The resulting subbasin parameters can
be found in Appendix A
For the stormwater retrofits, the water quality design storm is based on the 6-month, 3-hour storm
event in accordance with the S\ AdMEW (Ecology, 2019). The resultant flow rates for each basin
can be found in Appendix B.
6.2. Proposed BMP Design and lmprovements
The preferred alternative includes the implementation of biofiltration swales and vegetated filter
strips for stormwater treatment in the Treatment Assessment Area. This option allows the
stormwater treatment facilities to be dispersed around the City, treating runoff as close to the
source as possible. Additionally, the preferred alternative provides the least amount of
disturbance to the historical integrity of the City by adhering to the historical preservation
guidelines of preserving sidewalks, fences, and trees when at all possible. These vegetated
facilities will be designed lo be compatible with the climate and region. These facilities are
depicted in the following figures extracted from the S\A/lVlMEW (Ecology 2019):
6ttltar ro?13:. lr.rIr(qndlxn rrat$Fu:cr.t * iliE.r'.ir'3.1.r( rt'r d rt
' Cici..irirr*.c].-qicrlaran!(rrrta': nrraaftar. ! 'r'.d r n' rr:! ll.: - r t6..1l'odl?r(.citlparartn,.t)
tl-1',:i')-:..
.:t-'!.rtdlr tddt a.rrr(61|f lrlrnl
(l2rll |rFrdl
0 r ln(d,
rtt,inl *tlrrb
tuft(l:J'ttr*s)
lll niltrcr)
n
!
l1
(10'*tlhqr(.,
raYtr/tr,rrr$!trrs $,rtarF.rla aa rFrl , t0 l,ata.!t{rrJ. 016 r.Ch lr{.1,
aggrtil.1r0 e!1.4 n! bFr
talrralda'dn !o',tr!rr
FrcuRE 1: BtoprLtRslor'r SwAl-r:
b
Povcnlcnt sufacc
F ow sprotdcr (qralcll F:llcr slnp
6'illr loitsorl
1",i .: Slcpca 15ri,
Seclig! A-A canccro'drtrrr(rll)
FTGURE 2: VEGETATED Frulen SrRrp
Various factors were considered in identifying feasible locations for the biofiltration swales. lt is
preferred to locate biofiltration swales adjacenl to paved roads and within the public right-of-way.
To be considerate of the historical context of the City, buildings contributing to the historical
district were added to the inventory of data. Biofiltration facilities were located away from these
buildings to the maximum extent feasible, \Mere a location is ideal due to site topography,
proximity to existing storm sewer and estimated runoff from the water quality storm, biofiltration
facilities may be located adjacent to those historical buildings to maximize stormwater treatment
benefit (such as on East Washington Avenue). Biofiltration facilities were also located at least 300
feet from wetlands according to City Policy H2.5. Lastly, biofiltration swales were prioritized in
subbasins that were 1.5 acres or larger and produced at least 0.1 cubic feet per second of runoff
during the water quality storm event, These subbasins are presented as High Priority for
Treatment Subbasins in Exhibit 3.
The various site constraints and locations of the proposed biofiltration swales are shown on
Exhibit 3. \Mthin the CIP '1 Treatment Assessment Area, biofiltration swales are proposed along
North First Street, North A Street, East Washington Avenue, and East Pennsylvania Avenue.
\Mthin the remainder of the Treatment Assessment Area, biofiltration swales are proposed along
North Sixth Street, West Third Street, Second Street, South First Street, and portions of West
Nevada Avenue, West Utah Avenue, West Arizona Avenue, Dakota Avenue, and West Montana
Avenue. These biofiltration swales will be shallow and will have overflow risers as well as
underdrains that will connect into the existing storm sewer netwo*.
For the unsewered areas of the City south of Califomia Avenue, vegetated filter strips may be
located adjacent to roadways where compatible with street slopes and adjacent land uses, These
would provide runoff treatment benefits that have not yet been quantified or mapped with this
study. This is a general recommendation for this area of town or other parts of the City where
biofiltration is deemed not viable,
7
7. Water Quality Benefit
The proposed improvements do not require Runoff Treatment (Core Element #5) or Flow Control
(Core Element #6) in accordance with the S!ryMMEW (Ecology, 2019). ln addition, this retrofit
project is nol required to meet the nedredevelopment standards. Ecology has established a
procedure to quantify the water quality benefit realized through retrofit projects such as this one
(Design Deliverables for Stormwater Projects with Ecology Funding, Ecology; Revised June
2018).
Because the size and environmental constraints within the project site could control the size and
capacity of a BMP, a baseline is quantified by comparing a ratio of the size of the proposed
retrofit BMP to the size of a BMP design to meet new/redevelopment criteria. Once this is
determined, the Equivalent NedRedevelopmenl Area for the retrofit project is determined by
multiplying the ratios by the contributing area.
As the project objective is to provide stormwater runoff treatment for Total Suspended Solids
(TSS) and provide for reduction in other pollutants within the urbanized areas of the City, the
selected BMPs provide high runoff treatment and low flow control. Therefore, only the runoff
treatmenl water quality benefit is calculated.
The following analysis is an assessment of the Water Quality Benefit proposed by the project.
This analysis will be refined with future design efforts.
7.1. Runoff Treatment Comparison
The Flow Control Ratio was developed following procedure ERT-1: Analysis of Size of traditional
Flow Rate or volume-based Runoff Treatment BMP.
Ratiopp.l.-r =
Design flow rate or volume for proposed retrofit treatment BMp
Design flow rate or vol ume to meet new/redevelopment criteria
// Ratiospl-1 ) T,thensef RatioBpr-r = 1
Design flow rates for the water quality storm were output from the XPSVVI\,IM model. Biofiltration
swales were sized using this design flow rate and the design parameters from the S\ /MMEW
(Ecology, 2019). These calculations are performed with the aid of an Excel spreadsheet. The
resultant calculation is a swale length required to meet neMredevelopmenl runoff treatment
criteria. Design flow rates for the proposed retrofits were back calculated using the available
footprint of each proposed swale. The biofiltration swale sizing calculations are included in
Appendix C.
ln some cases, the biofiltration swales will be able to achieve more treatment than needed with a
Ratioenr-r > 1, therefore RatioEnr-r = 1. The ratios for each biofiltration swale are shown in
Appendix D.
I
7.2. EquivalentNeMRedevelopmentAreas
The Equivalent New/Redevelopment Areas for the project are summarized in Appendix D. Ten
(10) of the biofiltration swales will achieve full stormwater treatment equivalent to a
new/redeveloped project and ten (10) of the biofiltration swales will achieve partial stormwater
treatment within their respective subbasins.
The overall water quality benefit to be realized within the study area is 31 percent. This is
quantified by comparing the total calculated Equivalent New/Redevelopment Areas, 46.6 acres,
to the Treatment Assessment Area, 152.0 acres. The water quality benefit can be further refined
with the advancement of each ClP.
8. Capital lmprovement Plan
The BMPs are based on the preliminary design calculations. Multiple considerations should be
made for design implementation. Site investigations including topographic survey and
geotechnical evaluations should be conducted for effective design of each BMP. Public outreach
should be organized to gather input and support for project improvements. Final design should
include the consideration of sizing for snow storage, selection of site appropriate plantings for the
region, and access for operations and maintenance. Engineering and construction administration
should be included for effective design and construction of each BMp.
The BMPs within the study area are divided into three separate ClPs for project planning
purposes: CIP 1, CIP SW-l, and CIP SW-2, CIP 1 includes the biofiltration swales identified
within the GIP 1 Treatment Assessment Area. The CIP 1 treatment project will be advanced in
detail design after study completion. CIP SW-1 and CIP SW-2 include the remaining biofiltration
swales identified in the Treatment Assessment Area, Biofiltration swales in CIP SW-1 and Clp
SW-2 are grouped to include a similar quantity of biofiltration swale area as compared to the Clp
1 treatment project.
The estimated construction cost of CIP SW-1 includes Biofiltration 81, 82, C1A, Dl, and D2. The
estimated construction approximated cost of CIP SW-2 includes Biofiltration 814, 81SA, 816A,
D4, c2, H4, and H5. clP sw-1 and clP sw-2 may be implemented through individual
biofiltration swale design and construction, or in clusters as specific stormwater treatment funding
is available and/or incorporated with roadway improvement projects.
I
/,,
. CIWWD€ sTIJDY BASIN
STOR'UWATER RETROFIT
STUOY AREA
.- __. -. - oP I TREAIrIIENT
ASSESSMENT AREA
UNOERSIZEO EXISTING
PIPE SYSTEM
PIINNED CIPI
OVERFLOW PIPE
STREAT' SEGM€NT.r......r..r RECEIV|NC 0P I
OVERFLOW
STREAi' SEGMENT
-
RECEIVII{G MAINTAINED
SASE FLOW
LEGENO
CIP 1 BASIN
PLANNED CIP 1
OVERFLOW PIPE
STREAM SEGMENT
RECEIVING CIP 1
OVERFLOW
POINT OF
DISCHARGE TO
CRYSTAL CREEK
s
3
:
n
.
it
9.
e-1r:r+,A.:'ti*-l.f r*q':i.
. ;rt
CITY OF ROSLYN
STORMWATER TREATMENT
RETROFITS
4376800-200175.01
09n9t2021
Mead
lluntBASIN AND STUDY MAP
EXHIBIT 1
Level of Service Anolysis
Levels of service for stormwoter copilol focilities usuolly lry to meet woter quality stondords, runoff, ond
erosion control requirements of the opplicoble Stormwoter Monogement Monuol for Eostern Woshington.
Chopter 13.'l 5 of ihe Roslyn Municipol Code governs stormwqter requirements for development.
Requirements include o mondote thot ony new development creoting more thon 5,000 squore feet of
impervious surfoces hqve o stormwqter droinoge plon.
Plonned Projects, Costs, ond Revenue
Stormwoter copitol proiects included in the City's 2017-2023 CopitolFocilities Plon ore listed in Exhibit
3r8, ond mstch the proiects recommended in the City's 2014 Stormwqter Comprehensive Plon.
Exhibit 3-8. Plonned Slormwqler Proiech, 2Ol7-ZOZ}
CIP lr Pennsylvoniq Ploce Bottleneck
CIP 2: South A Street Culvert
CIP 3r North B Street Heodwoll
CIP 4' North l,t Street Heodwoll
CIP 5: North C Sffeet Heodwoll
CIP 6r Reroute North 3'd Street
CIP 7A: Storm Sewer Trunk Llne, South of Montqno
CIP 7Br Storm Sewer Trunk Line, South of Montono -
Porollel Pipe
CIP 8: Siorm Trunk Line, Monfonq to Pennsylvonio
CIP 9: Hoffmonville Conveyonce
CIP l0; North I't Street, Woshirrgfon to Nevodo
CIP I |: Crystol Creek Restorotion ond Wetlqnd
Creqtion Demonstrotion Proiect
Source: City of Roslyn 2017-2023 Copliol Fociliries plon
2017
2017
20r I
20r 8
2A18
20r I
20r 9
2019
2020
2020
2020
2021
$230,000
$220,000
$400,000
$270,000
$ t 90,000
$930,000
$ 1.720,000
$i20,ooo
$4zo,ooo
$300,000
$430,000
$195,000
The Stormwqter Plon includes o revenue onolysis with detqiled informotion on funding sources ond is
incorporoted by reference. The Plon recommended the City form o Slormwoier Utility ond levy o monrhly
utilify rote to fund stormwoter operotion, mqinienonce, ond q shore of copitol improvements,
ln 2016, the Roslyn City Councilcrested o Stormwoter Utllity to monoge ond regulote surfoce ond
stormwoter. (City of Roslyn, 20'16)A stormwoter utility fund wos creoted. ond in 2Ol7 the City begon
ossessing o siormwoler fee on properties in the city. (Roslyn Municipol Code, Chopter 13.13 ond 13.14)
Proiecl 5chedule Cost
;.lll City of Roslyn Comprehensive Plon Updore I Copitol Focilitjes plon | 't
Policy CF 1.9
Policy CF I .l 0
Policy CF l.l I
Policy CF I .l 2
Policy CF I .l 3
Policy CF I .1 4
Policy CF 1 .l 5
Policy CF L16
Streelr
Parks ond Recreolion
Roslyn Volunleer Fire
Deporlment
Municipal Buildingr
€emeteries
6 acres/ 1,000 residenrs
No level of service
No level of service
No level of service
City of Roslyn Cornprehensive Plan | (tupitol Fucili.ties
Work cooperotively with surrounding municipolities dnd Kittitos County during the
siting ond development of focilities of regionol significonce like such os o regionol
onimol shelter.
Use genercl revenues only to fund proiects thot provide o generol benefit to the
entire community in the generol government functions of the City.
Consider long-term borrowing for os on oppropriote meihod of finoncing lorge
copitol focilities fhot benefit more thon one generotion of users,
Prioritize renovotion of the Old City Holl/Librory building for conrinued public use
qnd enhonced occessibility.
Prepore ond implement d stroiegy to finonce the design, renovotion, ond re-use of
the old City Hqll/Librory building cs rl community center.
Explore the feqsibility ond community benefit of relocoting the City Public Works
Building.
Prepore ond implement o plqn to finonce the design, renovotlon, ond re-use of the
City Administrotive Building.
Exhibit 8-2 City Operoled Copitol Facilities l"OS
Wqler Moximum treqlment copocity of 1,637 Eorned Residentiol
Unifs {ERUs)
Sewer Flow stondcrd oI 267 gollons per copito per doy;
lreofment copocity of 3.6 million gollons per doy
Consisfent with City's drolnoge stqndords. Levels of servlce
for stormwoter copitol fqcilities usuolly try lo m6et woier
qoolity stondords, runoff, ond erosion control requirements
of the opplicoble Stormwoter Monogement Monuql for
Eqstern Woshington.
LOS "D" for locol streets
Slormwoler
Explore the re-use of surplus property ot the old sewoge treotment plont for light
industry or for other beneficiol community uses.
CAPITAI FACIIITIE5:
clTy owNED/opERATED IEVEt OF SERVTCE
June 2019 8-5