HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution_City of Roslyn_PF Funding Award AgmtKITTITAS COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
AGENDA STAFF REPORT
AGENDA DATE: August 16, 2022
ACTION REQUESTED: Request to Approve a Resolution for an
amended 2022 Distressed County Sales and
Use Tax Infrastructure Improvement Program
Agreement with the City of Roslyn
BACKGROUND: Kittitas County Conference of Governments
(COG) met on December 15, 2021, to review
submitted 2022 applications. COG
recommended awarding $262,500.00 to the
City of Roslyn.
After opening construction bids for the
stormwater improvements project,
construction bid numbers were significantly
higher than the Engineer's Estimate. In July of
2022, the City of Roslyn requested to combine
2017 funds to the original 2022 fund award of
$262,500.00 under Resolution 2022-128 to cover
overage costs, however, the project requires an
additional amount of $250,000.00 to award and
construct the project.
The Board of County Commissioners elected to
award an additional $250,000.00 to the City of
Roslyn under Resolution 2022-142 for award
and construction of the stormwater
improvements project.
An amended 2022 Distressed County Sales and
Use Tax Infrastructure Improvement Program
Agreement is required to capture the new
funding amount from the Fund 108 (Distressed
County Sales and Use Tax for $512,500) and
has been executed by the City of Roslyn.
INTERACTION: Public Works; City of Roslyn
RECOMMENDATION: Approve & Sign the Resolution and the
amended 2022 Distressed County Sales and
Use Tax Infrastructure Improvement Program
Agreement with the City of Roslyn.
HANDLING: Return one (1) original to Public Works
ATTACHMENTS: Resolution; Amended 2022 Distressed County
Sales and Use Tax Infrastructure Improvement
Program Agreement
LEAD STAFF: Mark Cook
Director of Public Works
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COUNTY OF KITTITAS
STATE OF WASHINGTON
RESOLUTION NO: 2022 -
APPROVING THE AMENDED 2022 DISTRESSED 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 in the amount of $262,500.00 has been executed by
said entity under Resolution 2002-046; and
WHEREAS: The City of Roslyn requested to combine 2017 and 2022 Fund 108 funding for additional
stormwater improvements which was approved with Resolution 2022-128; and
WHEREAS: Construction bids for the City of Roslyn stormwater improvement project exceeded
combined 2017 and 2022 funding by $250,000.00; and
WHEREAS: The Board of County Commissioner's authorized an additional $250,000.00 from Fund
108 to the City of Roslyn under Resolution 2022-142 for the award and construction of
the original stormwater improvements for a total of $512,500.00 from Fund 108 for the
2022 application cycle.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: The Kittitas County Board of County Commissioners
hereby approves the attached Amended 2022 Distressed County Sales and Use Tax Infrastructure
Improvement Program Agreement with the City of Roslyn.
ADOPTED this 16`^ day of August 2022.
Attest:
❑ Clerk of the Board- Julie Kjorsvik
❑ Deputy Clerk of the Board- Mandy Buchholz
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
KITTITAS COUNTY. WASHINGTON
Laura Osiadacz, Chairman
Cory Wright, Vice -Chairman
Brett Wachsmith, Commissioner
2022 DISTRESSED COUNTY SALES AND USE TAX INFRASTRUCTURE
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AGREEMENT
BETWEEN KITTITAS COUNTY AND CITY OF ROSLYN — AMENDMENT 1
This Contract dated Al al j 2 1 2022 is made and entered into by and
between KITTITAS COUNTY ("County"), a subdivision of the State of Washington, and
CITY OF ROSLYN ("Funding Recipient").
WHEREAS the purpose of this Agreement is to provide for public facility
construction and foster economic development opportunities within Kittitas County.
WHEREAS the City of Roslyn was awarded $262,500 (Resolution 2022-046) in
2022 capital facility construction funding for stormwater improvements from Kittitas County
Fund 108 (Distressed County sales and use tax) as recommended by the Council of
Governments; and
WHEREAS stormwater construction improvement bids exceeded project funding by
$250,000; and
WHEREAS the Board of County Commissioners acted securing the City of Roslyn
stormwater improvement construction project by awarding an additional $250,000 in Fund
108 funding under Resolution 2022-142.
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 to amend the City of Roslyn 2022 Fund 108 funding agreement
as follows:
Section 1. Scope 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. The 2022 City of Roslyn
Fund 108 funding agreement is amended adding $250,000 in grant funding
implementing Exhibit A services for a total 2022 award amount of $512,500.00.
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."
Distressed County Sales and Use Tax Infrastructure Improvement Program Funding Agreement
Page 1
Section 2. Payment.
a. As full compensation for satisfactory performance of the Funding Recipient Services,
the County agrees to pay Funding Recipient the sum of five hundred twelve
thousand and five hundred dollars ($512,500.00).
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
0 oyce.wh iteC Dco. kittitas.wa. us
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: March 311
• Quarter 2 ending date: June 301h
• Quarter 3 ending date: September 30`h
• Quarter 4 ending date: December 31s'
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 funding withheld on the fifteenth (15th) day following
the end of the reporting 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. Performance by Funding Recipient.
a. Funding Recipient shall not (by contract, operation of law or otherwise) 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
Distressed County Sales and Use Tax Infrastructure Improvement Program Funding Agreement
Page 2
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. It 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.
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.
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
Internal 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
Distressed County Sales and Use Tax Infrastructure Improvement Program Funding Agreement
Page 3
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.
i. 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
(509) 962-7523.
Section 4. Release. Indemnity, 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 and/or 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.
• 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
• Any breach of or default under this Agreement by Funding Recipient.
Section 5. Compliance with Public Records Law.
a. In 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. In 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.
Distressed County Sales and Use Tax Infrastructure Improvement Program Funding Agreement
Page 4
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. Industrial Insurance Waiver.
With respect to performance of this Agreement and as to any claims against the County, its
Additional Insureds, officers, agents and employees, the Funding Recipient expressly waives
its immunity under Title 51 of the Revised Code of Washington, the Industrial Insurance 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.
Section 7. Insurance 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 Insured 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 otherwise directed by the County, immediately stop performing the Services to
the extent specified in the notice. In the event the County terminates the Funding
Distressed County Sales and Use Tax Infrastructure Improvement Program Funding Agreement
Page 5
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 otherwise) 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
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, 411 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.
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. If 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.
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 Infrastructure Improvement Program Funding Agreement
Page 6
KITTITAS COUNTY CITY OF ROSLYN
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Laura Osiadacz, Chair Representative
firso-
Cory Wright, Vice- Chair Address 01r/ KIP
6m, 40V&7.-311S—
Brett
oy9.3>/S—Brett Wachsmith, Commissioner Telephone
lit � yt'Ur `cif , rns/� � �✓�- UI �
Email
Dated: Dated: F/ 2 v�
Attest:
❑ Clerk of the Board- Julie Kjorsvik
❑ Deputy Clerk of the Board- Mandy Buchholz
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Deputy Prosecuting Attorney
Distressed County Soles and Use Tax Infrastructure Improvement Program Funding Agreement
Page 7
Kittitas County
Department of Public Works
DISTRESSED COUNTY SALES AND USE TAY NFRASTi'RUCTURE
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM APP LE CATEON
The Distressed County Sales and Use Tax Infrastructure Improvement Program supports
improvements to infrastructure systems that foster economic development in Kittitas County. The
goal is to create economic opportunity through Infrastructure investment.
APPLICANT INFORMATION
Applicant:
City of Roslyn
Contact Flame:
Mayor Brent Hals
Address:
PO Box 451
City:
Roslyn
WA Zip: 98941
Telephone:
509-649-3105
FAX: 509-649-3174
E-mail Address:
M. _i
Office Location:
201 S P, St, Roslyn WA 98941
DECEIVED
Jurisdiction:
City of Roslyn
Funds Request:
$262,500
K:TTIIAS COUNTY
DEPT OF PUBLIC WOR`
APPLICATION THRESHOLDS
l
Applicant Requirement:
Check -off:
1.
The project is improvement to an infrastructure system(s) linked to economic development.
c. 2.
A detailed 8 % X 11" vicinity map that clearly shows the project is included in the
application package.
y 3. Distressed County funds are not being substituted for other funds that are already secured.
4. The project involves traditional improvements, instead of "non-traditional' improvements
eligible for "Enhancement" funding
5. Applicant has submitted only one application this round.
6. The local/regional economic development organization has been informed of the project.
m
Z
" z
LL v O
N d
N
D j0 O
5'o O
IL H a
to
fV
C
O
V d
t O
O
CL N
O O
U w
w
L m
°1 a
0
rA
Z c
c M
a
c o
a w
w w w 40 w � 0
e
�
eoa 4a w w � 0
e
O
C
pl
E
E
f6
EA
O
N
N
O
..
�6
O LL
O
J 0
_c
s
w
O
9
0
V
c
o
r
O
O
r
O
O
O
V
iq
/A
IA
fq
fR
60
0
�
U
c
V}
w
o
p
a
N
ta
Mn
o
y
A.
a
O
p
O
r
O
O
O
r
ua
ra
4a
w
w
w
e
w w w 40 w � 0
e
�
eoa 4a w w � 0
e
�l
��
C
pl
E
E
f6
EA
d O
N
N
v�
�
..
�6
O LL
U1
J 0
�l
o
w,
rn
v�
�
_c
s
w
�0
9
0
V
c
o
7
LL
Z
a
�
c
a
O
o
�
U
c
V}
w
o
p
a
N
ta
Mn
o
y
A.
a
�l
PROJECT NARRATIVE
1. Project Description: Describe the scope of work. Indicate the major work involved, including a brief
comparison of existing and proposed conditions.
The City of Roslyn drains to Crystal Creek, an impaired waterbody. The Stormwater Retrofit and CIP
Construction will include a city-wide installation of low impact development (LID) best management
practices (BMP) to improve water quality as part of the CIPI Project and in line with implementation 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 I, a funded pipe rehabilitation project
currently at 90% 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.
Overal I 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 will helpmeet the economic development goals of your community
and/or region. If this project is not done, will the anticipated private development still take place?
The City currently experiences 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 community 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. If the infrastructure project is not done the economic
development goals for the City will continue to be limited.
3. Indicate if the project is consistent with the following applicable state, regional and local plans and
prioritization processes:
❑ Overall Economic Development Plan — Officially Adopted
® Comprehensive Land Use Plan — Officially Adopted 2019
r Capital Facility Plan — Officially Adopted 2019
❑ Community Action Plan (or other community-based plan) — Officially Adopted
❑ Six -Year Transportation Improvement Plan — Officially
❑ Site-specific development plans; e.g., Community Master Plan — Officially Adopted
❑ 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, wildlife and human tissue.
6. Define the total number of project partners demonstrating project support.
The Department of Ecology is currently the only partner and providing 85% of the funding.
6. Explain how construction ready this 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. Indicate the Estimated 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 15-20 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:
Khthas County Department of Public Works
411 Na Ruby, Suite #1
IE e nsbuurg, WA 98926
Applicant Certification
Certification is hereby given that the information provided is accurate and the applicable attachments are
complete and included as part of the application package.
1 certify that application thresholds are met at the time of application.
Signature of OfficiM Representative
Sponsoring Agency
(If Applicable)
Signature of Agency Representative
Typed or Printed Name
Date
nate
Date
Associate Economic (Development Organization Notification
The organization listed below has received notification of this project as demonstrated by the
signature of the organization's representative.
Y,f nr�o
Name of Organization
Signature of Represe t tive Date
P 004 COAL M,wr WAY m
S
Numb
r
I \ Cany
20
i 20
;
R�
9`P
�P
C
5� — ROP( RIDER pR
C7
Oq h
1
CITY OF ROSLYN STORMINATER
RETROFIT ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
AND CIP 1 TREATMENT DESIGN ® Project Area (1.4 Acres)
ROSLYN, WASHINGTON -.
0
Project Location
1
T20N, R15E; Mm
mi
Section 17 0 1:24.000 1
USGS SGSWIlarrMeridian Topographic
ographic 7.5 Minute Me -mon omauaacroan eneen nse++ea.nn
Cie Elum and Ronald, 004 (2017) Quadrangle Maps a,es.w nom v :ewyce,wnw..
USGS Topooew (haps:1 ngmdb.usgs.gov topovww)
rgore+ue ensrzur
Figure 1. The City of Roslyn Stormwater Retrofit Alternatives Analysis and CIP 1
Treatment Design project area in Roslyn, Kittitas County, Washington.
vti
%ac
Fy
t
6
O
i
i
Number 3 j
Canyon I
$ j
oG
71
i
P
x
PROJECTAREA
n
x
c
M I
Cer/aI
Gulch
903
/:'7ebr6
s
r.�i
Canyon
o
Hpw�A�wO
J
'AM
4
I
)RO "Al
j
�1p\
f9p
I
f j4
.O_
NQ
XA
1.Iq-
P 004 COAL M,wr WAY m
S
Numb
r
I \ Cany
20
i 20
;
R�
9`P
�P
C
5� — ROP( RIDER pR
C7
Oq h
1
CITY OF ROSLYN STORMINATER
RETROFIT ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
AND CIP 1 TREATMENT DESIGN ® Project Area (1.4 Acres)
ROSLYN, WASHINGTON -.
0
Project Location
1
T20N, R15E; Mm
mi
Section 17 0 1:24.000 1
USGS SGSWIlarrMeridian Topographic
ographic 7.5 Minute Me -mon omauaacroan eneen nse++ea.nn
Cie Elum and Ronald, 004 (2017) Quadrangle Maps a,es.w nom v :ewyce,wnw..
USGS Topooew (haps:1 ngmdb.usgs.gov topovww)
rgore+ue ensrzur
Figure 1. The City of Roslyn Stormwater Retrofit Alternatives Analysis and CIP 1
Treatment Design project area in Roslyn, Kittitas County, Washington.
I
CITY OF ROSLYN STORMWATER
RETROFIT ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
- - -
Q Project Area (1.4 Acres)
AND CIP 1 TREATMENT DESIGN
,
Q Urban Drainage Basin (CIP 1)
ROSLYN, WASHINGTON
Tex Parcels
Pmiect Location
_ _ Pivotal Building (Lentz 1977)
0
0.2
Ym
Primary Building (Lentz 1977)
T20N, RISE;
Section 17 0
mi
1.q 500 0.1E
Contributing Building
etts Meridian
USGS Topographic 7.5 Minute
am, waom co„"Mmo czn+M.n,
NRHP-Listed Property
Cie Elum and Ronald. VA (2017) Quadrangle Maps
USGS Topoview (haps1ingmdb.usgs.govItopwiew)
.anrmMgmzo�omeun wvT""�.n;rVrtc^�aa
Mq MTI,YM� M1"m Mlcmn^COg00Yc^.
g
O Washinton State Heritage Barn
Figure 2. The City of Roslyn Stormwater Retrofit Alternatives Analysis and CII' 7
Treatment Design project area locations showing nearby pivotal, primary, and contributing
buildings to the Roslyn Historic District.
Legend
O Appmxariste Test Pit LOCBLon
Swale ID
!•; Catchbssa
Area of Potential Effect
O afofdtralion Sales - CIP t
—0— storm Rpe
Lots with Buildings Contributing to Historic District
Wetlands
WMIaws Butter
JE
O
N
A 0 50 100 200 300 400
Feet
Exhibit A- North CIP 1 Concept Design Map
CIP 1 Stormwater Treatment Project
Figure 3. The City of Roslyn Stormwater Retrofit Altematives Analysis and CIP 1
Treatment Design project area locations showing proposed biofiltration swales and
geotechnical test pits.
Figure 4. The City of Roslyn Stormwater Retrofit Alternatives Analysis and CIP 1
Treatment Design project area locations showing proposed biofiltration swales and
geotechnical test pits.
1•
Legend
l' Q Approximate Test Pit Location
-P� I Swale ID
11
X, Cafchbasin
Area of Potential Effect
a O Biofiltration $wales -CIP 1
_ -A>— Storm Pipe
. Lots mM Buildings Contributing to Historic District
Watlanos
i \ Mtlands Buffer
E
AVO 14'
.N
41,
J�
JPS\PP
i
N
0 50 100 200 300 400 /
Feet j
A
Exhibit B -South CIP 1 Concept Design Map / WHITEHEAD RD
/ P
p
Roslyn CIP 1 Stormwater Treatment Project % P°
e: GeoEye Eenhstai epNcs ONES Antos D5 i5c.
!GN Arlo the GI ser Commonly -
Figure 4. The City of Roslyn Stormwater Retrofit Alternatives Analysis and CIP 1
Treatment Design project area locations showing proposed biofiltration swales and
geotechnical test pits.
e ,
ffz �j� I
i
s
pp c p
�u��5"Sm5�S5gc&c "� CC"cS'cS9cC55"fi &�5 ��ry �� lIIL &
'a 'a5 �::�3aaS�ee�=W�a'aa'aa �a?zaaa" ns
s
�aaaneeoabaarooaaaaaeaaama4naeasanoo$serosas
''o mffi�Ro�S3eF�� rvmm�- ..n���ane�,.
i E i Y
€ n rc e
e F F• d D $ � ����9yy11 p' i E
C3
F �3zcrcE 0 !? f§°��nj' in yROoB. �n'zin o-y�u m' e
+ w u o o¢ w m o n• n° a` a w a w+� a v u ¢` v a+ v u: u n$ w a u n u i b pi u
�C
xi1'1`1'1 \{'11'{'1
O IL7�rl �] sufflijej
o--------++_..______�aaN�asNsrrvrv.,.,.,ms�xm�m.ee:so�: e=
n [7 N N N O) P
w w N (p P w N
N w w
1A N w N In 1n N 1A
OJ DJ Rl O W Ol W OJ
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O O O O0O O O
01000000p
w N N N t0 P w Pw
www
00000000
j w w w w w w w
- N N N N N N N
E
O
ANN Pin �onm
a 6 e e P P v a
�n o oOw
b
O
W
YJ P N�
O
N P h
b
O
�
0^
NN19NN
N
w
N
�
w
N
n
P N M
P n o m�
�
a
w in w
n
w
w
m
w
?
M
o
P
h N N N
w
m
f
m
f
O O O O
N w N N
�O P
o cNi
0 0 o O
w rPn � w
N O ^ 1p
P
O YO1 e
V r IO
w w m
Table of Contents
I
Introductto,
1.1. Project Purpose...................................................................................................................1
1.2. Report Purpose...................................................................................................................
t
1.3. Design Codes and References...........................................................................................1
1.3.1. Department of Ecology.........................................................................................1
1.3.2. City of Roslyn.......................................................................................................1
2.1. General...............................................................................................................................2
2.2. Historic and Existing Conditions.........................................................................................2
2.3. Proposed Conditions...........................................................................................................2
3
Project Site Description _.
3
3.1. Project Limits.......................................................................................................................
3
3.2. Project Site Conditions........................................................................................................3
3.3. Stormwater Features...........................................................................................................4
4.
Core Elemei _
4
5.
Alternatives Considered.......__...... _.... ..._.._
.. 4
6
Design in clysis
6.1. Existing Stormwater Drainage System ..... .... ........ ..—................. ......
............. ....... .............. 6
6.2. Proposed BMP Design and Improvements.........................................................................6
7
Water Quality Be-
7.1. Runoff Treatment Comparison............................................................................................
8
7.2. Equivalent New/Redevelopment Areas..............................................................................
9
8
Capital Improvement Plan ._.__
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 Biofiltration Swales Calculations Sheet
Appendix E — CIP 1 Cost Estimate
Appendix F — Operations and Maintenance Tables
1. Introduction
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 Improvement Plan (CIP) contained within the
Plan identifies various structural solutions to address conveyance issues by replacing pipes and
culverts. Nonstructural solutions such as stormwater management facility 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 identify ways to improve water quality within the local waterway, 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:
1. 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 City 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 (SWMMEW), 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 Inventory
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 1,170 -acres draining to Crystal Creek as shown in
the attached Exhibit 1 (Mead & Hunt, October 2019). This study basin area is composed of
50% -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 limits.
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 -80s.
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 Crystal Creek.
2.3. Proposed Conditions
The citywide study does not propose any changes to the land use, basin delineations, soils or
water bodies. The proposed retrofits for stormwater treatment in the study area will capture
stormwater flow from existing topography before flowing through underdrains and into the existing
storm drain system.
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 1 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 forward for this analysis.
The potential locations identified for stormwater retrofits 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
Exhibit 2.
The CIP 1 Treatment Assessment Area is shown in the attached Exhibit 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 the 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 industrial, 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 Kittitas County COMPAS database. The topographic
contours were obtained from the Washington State UDAR portal, Kittitas County FEMA Study
conducted in 2011 (https:/ilidarportal.dnr.wa.gov/#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 Whitehead Road where Crystal Creek crosses the road,
and south of Whitehead 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 SWMMEW (Ecology, 2019).
3.3. Stormwater Features
The existing storm sewer mapping was developed with the Plan. It includes a storm sewer
network 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 SWMMEW (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 the SWMMEW (Ecology, 2019), the Core Elements #2 and #3 apply to the land
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
new/redevelopment standards. The project does not require Runoff Treatment (Core Element #5)
or Flow Control (Core Element 46) 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 Impact Development (LID) BMPs that accomplish both
flow control and runoff treatment, although runoff treatment is the focus of the retrofits. Table 1
provides a summary of the considered alternatives along with descriptions, benefits, limitations,
and recommendations regarding preferred alternatives.
Table 1: Alternatives Analysis
Alternative
Description
Discussion / Recommendation
1 — Biofiltration Swales
❑ Construct biofiltration
❑
Provides runoff treatment for public
swales adjacent to paved
right-of-way
roadways
❑
Provides minimal flow control benefit
❑ Connect underdrains and
❑
Designs require consideration of cold
overflow bypass from
climate
biofiltration swalesto
existing stormrm sewer
sew
❑
Impacts roadside parking
network
❑
Designs can have minimal impact on
the landscape with the appearance of
open roadside ditches
❑
Considered the preferred
alternative in areas with storm
sewer
2 — Vegetated Filter
❑ Construct vegetated filter
❑
Provides runoff treatment for public
Strips
strips adjacent to paved
right-of-way
roadways
❑
Provides minimal flow control benefit
❑
Design can be used in unsewered
areas
❑
Designs can have minimal impact on
the landscape
❑
Impacts roadside parking
❑
Considered the preferred
alternative in unsewered areas
2 — Oil Water
❑ Construct and connect oil
❑
Low water quality benefit as traffic
Separators (OWS)
water separators to the
usage on roadways does not warrant
storm sewer
installation of OWS
❑
No flow control benefit
❑
Not considered the preferred
alternative.
3 — Pervious
❑ Construct new pervious
❑
Provides runoff treatment and limited
Pavement
pavement
flow control
❑ Demolish existing pavement
❑
Unable to infiltrate with poor soils
❑ Connect underdrains to
❑
Construction would cause significant
existing stormwater sewer
disruption to neighborhood
system
❑
Not considered the preferred
alternative.
4 — Detention Basin w/
❑ Use underground
❑
Provides runoff treatment and flow
Filter Cartridges
engineered filter systems to
control
provide water quality
❑
Filter cartridges are a large capital
treatment
cost and large annual maintenance
cost
❑
Scalable treatment provided at
existing collection points or central
treatment location
❑
Not considered the preferred
afternative.
5
6. Design Analysis
6.1. Existing Stormwater Drainage System
An existing hydrology and hydraulics XPSWMM 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. In 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 SWMMEW (Ecology, 2019). The resultant flow rates for each basin
can be found in Appendix B.
6.2. Proposed BMP Design and Improvements
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 to be compatible with the climate and region. These facilities are
depicted in the following figures extracted from the SWMMEW (Ecology 2019):
[M[,aLL %0iE6'
u,ararnerl r✓ary '
] � r-aa.na �ar.a♦.vas l
�%✓ Ar.aa♦f avprvN ✓f J `N9e�nr a'ry aefee rry Nra,
M'rM IJ Gripin`iypa�y ybn,vrtra•a•
IfirygCMpYrr,fr
FIGURE is 810FILTRATION SWALE
ta'•rY�r[✓�rrp tryr
-
� Oae%ri
Ruy.0
yyarrl NX 9µrY �.•
Y,lu ifttt
�%✓ Ar.aa♦f avprvN ✓f J `N9e�nr a'ry aefee rry Nra,
M'rM IJ Gripin`iypa�y ybn,vrtra•a•
IfirygCMpYrr,fr
FIGURE is 810FILTRATION SWALE
Cmpnunt rur'acr
F o'x sV'Su^.c, t5,e'•e I! .- F1:M cine
,`, - SICK, 15".
Section A -A cdcw cna, ft",
Fi GURE 2: %/EGETATFD FILTER S1 RIP
Various factors were considered in identifying feasible locations for the biofiltration swales. It is
preferred to locate biofiltration swales adjacent 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. Where 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
feel 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. Within the CIP 1 Treatment Assessment Area, biofiltration swales are proposed along
North First Street, North A Street, East Washington Avenue, and East Pennsylvania Avenue.
Within 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 network.
For the unsewered areas of the City south of California 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. Water Quality Benefit
The proposed improvements do not require Runoff Treatment (Core Element #5) or Flow Control
(Core Element #6) in accordance with the SWMMEW (Ecology, 2019). In addition, this retrofit
project is not required to meet the new/redevelopment 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 New/Redevelopment 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
treatment 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.
RatiOERT-t =
n flow rate or volume for proposed retrofit treatment BMP
Design flow rate or volume to meet new/ redevelopment criteria
if Ratior•RT_1 > 1, then set RatiOERT_, = 1
Design flow rates for the water quality storm were output from the XPSWMM model. Biofiltration
swales were sized using this design flow rate and the design parameters from the SWMMEW
(Ecology, 2019). These calculations are performed with the aid of an Excel spreadsheet. The
resultant calculation is a swale length required to meet new/redevelopment 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.
In some cases, the biofiltration swales will be able to achieve more treatment than needed with a
RatioeaT-1 > 1, therefore RatiOERT.1 = 1. The ratios for each biofiltration $wale are shown in
Appendix D.
7.2. Equivalent New/Redevelopment Areas
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 CIP.
8. Capital Improvement 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 CIPs for project planning
purposes: CIP 1, CIP SW -1, and CIP SW -2. CIP 1 includes the biofiltration swales identified
within the CIP 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 CIP
SW -2 are grouped to include a similar quantity of biofiltration Swale area as compared to the CIP
1 treatment project.
The estimated construction cost of CIP SW -1 includes Biofiltration B1, B2, C1A, D1, and D2. The
estimated construction approximated cost of CIP SW -2 includes Biofiltration B14, B15A, B16A,
D4, G2, H4, and H5. CIP SW -1 and CIP 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.
-
LEGEND 5
GTYIMDE STWY WIN _
STOWINATER RETROFIT
-%STODY AREA _
j GP i BASIN
GPI TREAT w
ASSESSMENT AREA
LNDERWED EMSTING
PIPE SYSTEM
PLANNED CI%
WERROW PIPE iS...
IFF
STRENASEGMENT
GPI c •:a �b MIM ry:.\
.. ••• •••• •RECEIVING - F Y!•!`
OVERF[DW •">1 1
STREM/SEGMENT
-- RECEIVIAG MAINTAINED
ME FLOW
1
2"
n
- PLANNED CIP 1 '
OVERFLOW PIPE "
STREAM SEGMENT
RECEIVING CIP 1
OVERFLOW
rr POINT OF
DISCHARGE TO
CRYSTAL CREEK
I.—v-2m�
CITY OF ROSLYN Mead
STORMWRETROFITS ER TREATMENT BASIN AND STUDY MAP I lunt
4376BW-200175.01
091OM21 EXHIBIT 1
Level of Service Analysis
Levels of service for stormwater capital facilities usually try to meet water quality standards, runoff, and
erosion control requirements of the applicable Stormwater Management Manual for Eastern Washington.
Chapter 13.15 of the Roslyn Municipal Code governs stormwater requirements for development.
Requirements include a mandate that any new development creating more than 5,000 square feet of
impervious surfaces have a stormwater drainage plan.
Planned Projects, Costs, and Revenue
Stormwater capital projects included in the City's 2017-2023 Capital Facilities Plan are listed in Exhibit
3-8, and match the projects recommended in the City's 2014 stormwater Comprehensive Plan,
Exhibit 3-8. Planned Stormwater Projects, 2017-2023
CIP 1: Pennsylvania Place Bottleneck
2017
$230,000
CIP 2: South A Street Culvert
2017
$220,000
CIP 3: North B Street Headwall
2018
$400,000
CIP 4: North 1" Street Headwall
2018
$270,000
CIP 5: North C Sheet Headwall
2018
$190,000
CIP 6: Reroute North 3m Street
2018
$930,000
CIP 7A: Storm Sewer Trunk Line, South of Montana
2019
$1,720,000
CIP 78: Storm Sewer Trunk Line, South of Montana —
2019
$520,000
Parallel Pipe
CIP 8: Storm Trunk Line, Montana to Pennsylvania
2020
$470,000
CIP 9: Hoffmonville Conveyance
2020
$300,000
CIP 10: North 151 Sheet, Washington to Nevada
2020
$430,000
CIP 11: Crystal Creek Restoration and Wetland
2021
$195,000
Creation Demonstration Project
Source: City of Roslyn 2017-2023 Capital Facilities Plan
The Stormwater Plan includes a revenue analysis with detailed information on funding sources and is
incorporated by reference. The Plan recommended the City form a Stormwater Utility and levy a monthly
utility rate to fund stormwater operation, maintenance, and a share of capital improvements.
In 2016, the Roslyn City Council created a Stormwater Utility to manage and regulate surface and
stormwater. (City of Roslyn, 2016) A stormwater utility fund was created, and in 2017 the City began
assessing a stormwater fee on properties in the city. (Roslyn Municipal Code, Chapter 13.13 and 13.14)
:„I City of Roslyn Comprehensive Plan Update I Capitol Facilities Plan 15
Policy CF 1.9
Policy CF 1.10
Policy CF 1.11
Policy CF 1.12
Policy CF 1.13
Policy CF 1.14
Policy CF 1,15
Policy CF 1.16
June 2019
Cite of Roslyn Comprehensive Plan I <'npi(ul ]iiri li lirn
Work cooperatively with surrounding municipalities and Kittitas County during the
siting and development of facilities of regional significance like such as a regional
animal shelter.
Use general revenues only to fund projects that provide a general benefit to the
entire community in the general government functions of the City.
Consider long-term borrowing for as an appropriate method of financing large
capital facilities that benefit more than one generation of users.
Prioritize renovation of the Old City Hall/Library building for continued public use
and enhanced accessibility.
Prepare and implement a strategy to finance the design, renovation, and re -use of
the old City Hall/Library building as a community center.
Explore the feasibility and community benefit of relocating the City Public Works
Building.
Prepare and implement a plan to finance the design, renovation, and re -use of the
City Administrative Building.
Exhibit B-2 City Operated Capital Facilities LOS
Water Maximum treatment capacity of 1,637 Earned Residential
Units (ERUs)
Sewer
Flow standard of 267 gallons per capita per day;
treatment capacity of 3.6 million gallons per day
Stormwater
Consistent with City's drainage standards. Levels of service
for stormwater capital facilities usually try to meet water
quality standards, runoff, and erosion control requirements
of the applicable Stormwater Management Manual for
Eastern Washington.
Streets
LOS "D" for local streets
Parks and Recreation
6 acres/1,000 residents
Roslyn Volunteer Fire
No level of service
Department
Municipal Buildings
No level of service
Cemeteries
No level of service
Explore the re -use of surplus property at the old sewage treatment plant for light
industry or for other beneficial community uses.
8-5