HomeMy WebLinkAboutRES-2022-162BOARD OF' COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COUNTY OF KITTITAS
STATE OF WASHINGTON
RESOLUTION NO: rOrr-fklL
APPROVING THE AMENDED 2022 DISTRESSED COUNTY SALES AND USE TAX
INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AGREEMENT WITII THE CITY OF
ROSLYI{
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 The2022 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 2022-1281' and
WHEREAS: Construction bids for the City of Roslyn stormwater improvement project exceeded
combined 2017 and2022 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 Resolution2022-142 for the award and construction of
the original stormwater improvements for a total of $512,500.00 from Fund 108 for the
2022 applicati on 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.
6th day of August 2022
Julie Kjorsvik
LTNTY COMMISSIONERS
ASHINGTON
Vice-Chairman
6"ou*Clerk of the Board- Mandy Buchholz
Brett lssloner
2022 DISTRESSED COUNTY SALES AND USE TAX INFRASTRUCTURE
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AGREEMENT
BETWEEN KITTITAS COUNTY AND CITY OF ROSLYN - AMENDMENT 1
This Contract dated 2022 is made and entered into by and
between KITTITAS 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 capitd 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 $250,000 in Fund
108 funding under Resolution 2022-142.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms and conditions contained herein,
or attached and incorporated and made a part hereof, the County and the Funding
Recipient mutually agree to amend the Ci$ 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 ond Use Tox lnfrastructure Improvement Progrom Funding Aareement' Page I
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 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
iovce.wh ite@co. 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't ending date:. Quarter 2 ending date:. Quarter 3 ending date:. Quarter 4 ending date:
March 31"t
June 30th
September 30th
December 31't
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 fundinq withheld on the fifteenth (15th) dav followinq
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. Performance bv Fundinq 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 lnfrastructure Improvement Progrom Funding Agre"rFE1L
Z
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. ln 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 ngt 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.
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
Distressed County Sales and Use Tax Infrastructure lmprovement Program Funding Aareement' 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.
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. 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 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. 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.
a
a
Distressed County Sales and Use Tox lnfrastructure Improvement Program Funding Agre"TEAr"
A
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.
Section 7. lnsurance and Endorsements
a. The Coun$ 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 fullforce 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. ln the event the County terminates the Funding
Distressed County Sales and Use Tax lnfrastructure Improvement Program Funding Aareement' 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 othenvise) 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.
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 Tox lnfrastructure lmprovement Program Funding Agre"TEAL
O
KITTITAS COUNTY
BOARD
Wright, Vice-
Brett
CITY OF ROSLYN
ONERS
4^r.>a
Representative
ir
!.ot J.t#,ftK//+
Address f-nlflt(M+ 7 fqL/l
5b1 Uqq \/Dt
m , Commissioner Telephone
Email
Dated:el*ln"n-
fnALnlrc,f\ . nsln fl,nr4.ut
Dated
Attest:
-\,.: i'* .'
\llllllll,/
ON
of rd- Julie Kjorsvik
lt=
:)
(-,o
the Board- Mandy Buchholz
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Deputy Prosecuting Attorney
Distressed County Sales and Use Tox lnfrastructure lmprovement Program Funding Agre"TE1;L,
Klttltas Gounty
Department of Public Works
DrSrnnSsED CouurY SALES AND Usn Tax IxTnasTRUCTURE
IMPROVEMENT PNOCNEM APPLICATION
The Distressed County Sales and Use Tax lnfrastructure lmprovement Program supports
improvements to infrastructure systems that foster economic development in Kittitas County. The
goal is to create economic opportunity through lnfrastructure investment.
APPLICANT INFORMATION
Applicant:
Gontact Name:
Address:
City:
Telephone:
E-mailAddrcss:
Office Location:
City of Roslyn
Mayor Brent Hals
PO Box 451
Roslyn
s09-649-3r 0s
may'or(Oc i. ros l)' n. rva.!s
201 S lstSt, Roslyn WA 98941
WAZip:
FAX:
98941
509-649-3t74
Jurlsdictlon:
Funds Request:
City of Roslyn
$262,500
RHCHIVH$
!,,. L
K:I"i II AS CCIUNTY
NFPT OF PIJBI.IC WORK.I
f')'.'t i 'n '1.l (APPLICATION THRESHOLDS
Applicant Requircment:
Check-off:
l. The project is lmprovement to an infrastructure system(s) linked to economic development.
2. A detailed 8 yzX 11" vlclnlty map that clearly shows the proJect is included in the
appllcation package.
3. Distreeeed Gounty funds are not being substituted for other funds that are already secured.
4. The prolect lnvolves tradltlonal improvements, lnstead of "non-tradltlonat" improvements
eligible for "Enhancement" funding
5. Applicant has submitted only one application this round.
6. The local/regional economic development organlzatlon has been informed of the proiect.
PROJECT BUDGETFundingSourcesDistressed County Funds Requested:$ 262 sOOOtherFederal:$0PreliminaryEngineeringPhaseRight ofwayPhaseConstructionPhaseProjectTotalls FundingSecured - Yor N?$o$o$o$o$o$o$o$o$o$o$o$o$o$o$262,500 $262,500N$o$o$1,487,500 $1,487.500YState:$ 1LocalGovernment:Private:$0*Other:$0Project Total:Distressed County Fund Matching Ratio: oloo %O Yo15 6/o15*Please explain other type of Funding: 857o of the project fundine has been secured from a Depaftment of Ecologl' Grant - WOC-2022-CoRosl-O01 I l. Attached is a detailed budset that includes a breakdown of individual tasks-$o$o$o$o$o$o$1,750,000 $1,750,000?
PROJECT NARRATIVE
1. Project Description: Descrlbe the scope of work. lndicate the major work involved, including a brief
comparison of exlstlng 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 l, a funded pipe rehabilitation project
curently at90Vo 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 proiect 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 help me6t the economlc development goals of your community
and/or reglon. lf thia 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 groMh. 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. lndicate if the project is consistent with the following applicable state, regional and local plans andprioritization processee:
trovera|lEconomicDevelopmentPlan-officiallyAdopted-
f Comprehensive Land Use Plan - Officialty Adopted 2019
I Capital Facility Plan - Officialty Adopted 2019
tr Community Action Plan (or other community-based plan) - Officially Adopted_
Six.YearTransportationlmprovementPlan-officiallyAdopted
site-specific development plans; e.9., community Master Plan - officially Adopted
3
tr 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.
5. Define the total number of proJect partnens demonetrating project support,
The Department of Ecology is cumently the only partner and providin g85% of the funding.
6. Explain how construction ready this infrastructure project is relativa to design completeness and the
permitting process.
Design Completeness - The alternatives analysis has been completed and the design is currently fulty
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 Inadveftent 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 Estlmated Number of Short Term and/or Permanent Jobs Created/Retalned 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 professionalso (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. Rubyo Suite #1
Ellensburg, WA 98926
4
Applicant Certification
Certification is hereby given that the information provided is accurate and rhe applicable attachments arccomplete and included as parl of rhe application package.
I ceni$' that application thresholds are nret at the time of apprication.
//,/
Signa ture of Representative Date
Sponsoring Agency
(lf Applicable)
Signatu re of Agency Representative Datc
Typed or Printed Name Date
Associate Economic Development Organization Notification
The organization listed below has received notilication of this project as demonstrated b.y the
signatu re of the orga n iza tion's represen tativc.
*tt tlutm^br f hrntnrru
Name f Organization
CEo lt// g/aoat
of Date
5
.s'
)J *o*
+a^
ua
7 i,a
qo r]
B
,:_ )
l8l4
Number 3
Cdnyon
$+^. ---t^
tt-nF-I
CrIt
a
4o6-o Cedor
Gulchi+t*
16
Rosly'n Number 6
ConyonttoauLno,ao a
r+-,2"4
%
)4@
GF)
JPD sr A*
:\
iz_,t^
?2q,'4!,
TzON R15E ..p?
.d.(
-
---'
co*!40tv4r
\cr,,
loop
19
I
I?a
71
20
-i:?o
'.,-C
I
ROPE RIDEN Dh
"""Cr%
AREA
CITY OF ROSLYN STORMWATER
RETROFI T ALIERNATIVES ANALYSI $
ANO CIP 1 TREATMENT DESIGN
ROSLYN, WASHINGTON
USGS Topographio 7.5 Minuts
Cle Elum and Ronald, \44 (2017) Quedrangle Mapg
USGS Topoview (https://rEmdb.usgs. gov/topovi€w)
@
0
a'
1:24,000 1
Mioretolt poduGt loraar aho{al Fpdnbd witttp.mbtio l6F Miorost CoF.tti6.
Proi€ct Location01Fkm
T2ON, R.I5E;
S€ctbn 17
Wllam€tte Meridian
fl Project Area (1.4 Aues)
FlCur! 1 AG: U16/20211
Figure 1. The City of Roslyn Stormwater Retrofit Alternatives Analysis and CIP 1
Treatment Design project area in Roslyn, Kittitas County, Washington.
3
(
'l}$
t
t 3&
+t\i
$
\
+
CIW OF ROSLYN STORMWATER
RETROFI T ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
AND CIP 1 TREATMENT DESIGN
ROSLYN, WASHINGTON
S€ction 17 0
lMllanpltre Meridian
USGS Topographic 7.5 Minut€
Ch Elum and Ronald, \^/A {2017) Quadrangte Maps
USGS Topoview (https://ngmdb.usgs. gov/topov iew)
I
*@
Tomlom MrE@5oll Fodoct scEn
T2ON. R15E;
O Prclect Localion
O.2Ekm
1:4.500 0.18
& 2021 Mhr6otl Corpodtbn a 202l M.r.tgrcilES {?021} Ollrdhrton Akbu! OS di 2021
[ElProject Area (1.4 Acres)
fJ Uruan Drainage Basin (Ctp 1)
., : Tax Parcels
i,' '. Pivotat Building (Lentz 1977)
I Primary Building (Lentz 1977)
: Conhibuting Building
;\ ruRHn+isted property
@ ua.t'inton state Heritage Barn
Filur. 2 {JAC: 8/172021)
Figure 2. The City of Roslyn Stormwater Retrofit Alternatives Analysis and CIP 1
Treatment Design project area locations showing nearby pivotal, primary, and contributing
buildings to the Roslyn Historic District.
Legend
O Approximate Tesl Pit Locatlon
A Swale lD
l;l Calchbasin
f_J nrea ot Porentiat Eff€ct
ffi oioRtrration swates - ctp 1
-->- Storm Pipe
f! Lots wittr Buildings Contributing to Historic District
llr€tlands
\ bllands Bufier
15
L 1:1
A 5
L2
L1.?
N
A
0 50 100 200 300 400
F€et
Exhibit A - Norlh CIP 1 Goncept Design Map
loslyn CIP 1 Stormwater Treatment Project GeoE
IGN.
Figure 3. The City of Roslyn Stormwater Retrofit Alternatives Analysis and CIP I
Treatrnent Design project area locations showing proposed biofilhation swales and
geotechnical test pits.
1A
Legend
Q ApproximatelestPitLocation
A Swale lD
lil cstchbasin
F '- -f nt"" ot rotentiat Effecr
ffi Biofrttration Swates - clp 1
--F- Slorm Pipe
f totr *ittt Buitdings Contributing to Hisloric Disrrict
l^,etlands
\ rellande Buffet
N
A
200 3000 50 100
Exhibit B - South CIP 1 Concept Design Map
Roslyn CIP 1 Stormwater Treatment Projecl
Figure 4. The City of Roslyn stormwater Retrofit Altematives Analysis and clp l
Treatment Design project area locatiorrs showing proposed biofiltration swales and
geotechnical test pits.
.tDoT*l Trsl f,lircPrctsct Rostn SW R€troitsDate:Tlu 7/22n1ModeDuEUon StartFinishThu lOlSrAt W.d426n3Thuto/15/20 wcd426r23Thu 1A1W0 Wbd i/1781Thu 3/18n1 VYed 4/14/21Wed4l21n1 Wad4t21l21Thu4l22l21 WedS/5r21rhuTngnl Wed4lsmThu 3/1821 Wed12n1t2.Thu 3/'tBl2'l Wed 12n1f22Thu 311812'l Wed 12n1n2Thu 318/21 Wed'12121122Ttv4l6t23 Wed426n3Thu SADI Vtbd12!29t21Thu 5rb21 WedTnElfhu7&l21 Wed8l4l21fhuA5nl Wed1,n7z'l\h!finn1 \Ned11hm1Thu 1 1/18/21 Wed 12t29t21Thu 51612l Wrd 11ll0r21fhu 5En1 Wbd 5rn6/21Thu6rlml WedBI4l21WbdSfllPl WedS/11/21V&dal11t?1 Wad&nlnlfhuel12l21 Wedgllzl'fhugaa1 Wed 1t3!21Thu 1114n1 wad 111'10D1W.d8/t1l21 Wcd12lv21WedAl11E1 WedBhln'lflw 1 1 I'l'l r21 VWd'1218t21fhu11l1li21 Wcd1211,21fhu 1114n1 W411n7n1fhufl11a1 W412nn1Tre7/fin1 Tre7/1312.1Thu 9|2,121 lllcatSnlmThugnPl VlegtznlThu9E321 Wd10/6/21Thu11l4l21 Wed12E,nlThu 128121 V'ted2ED2fhuAlgDz Wbd3l9D2Thu 3,110/22 Wed 5111t22ThuSn2nZ Uhd426/2t"fhuSl12l22 W45n1n2fhusaam W€d6l15l22rhudnam Wed7l27mMonT/1W2 MonS/1W2Mon 5t3O/22 Fn 8/19D2lhuS/18f22 Vled4n6r23Qtra2021 Qr.3.A2t err,k Apr i/ry ,0n rd tug tp ka,vztQ$ 4.2(Qrr 1, 2022 et 2. 2022 er 3. 20zztuc l.n t€b Ma' AF lrry b^ lut &J9 SepOd0!:1J^2EZra;4J-S?_6q7C"8q9A10q11 ?12ql3 r-14 q.15?t6 q.17 r:lEq19a20 q.21 2)tD23 ?.24q25 2-26 '.27228229 C-30 :-31 q32 2":rEqUC.l5 ?*t6 q,J7 C-3aq19240q41 2t2 2-13 e-aFrasffir15E-'rzffi;Ro3lyn Stomw.icr R.lroflti Attemr{E AndyBb rnd Clp I Tratnent D.rbnTssk l: FrorcclEcdqy FVzt cant AreKlP|c,bdCnnlBclingConduct Kickof Me"lingData gathedng and Evi#Q€rlerly Progress ReportsFinmcial TrackingEslogy CffidiBtionOuality AserarePDjecl ClossulT8l 2: Cu[urrl r]d E rylrcnmantel ReytsFPertm archaelogi€l studyPrepars and Submlt 05{5/106 FomPrepare 6nd Submil IDPEcotogy Rqt€v. Cuftur'il FomsPEper€ and Submit SEPA Che€ktistE&togrFoviev. SEPATr3k 3: An mrtls An.lyrb PknUpdate Exisling Condillons lttoddsCorlduct Altematives AmlyslsCondrct Public OulleaafiConduct Site VisilRaline AllernatlE snd PFpare Plan AddendmCity and Emlogy R8vi.vcAddrasE r€vi€w @mmenls and llmlize silc iwesllgationsT.sl 4: Geolrc]mlcel lnyatgr$omCondud Siie RmnmisarcCondud D6ta Colleclion fid AnalyssTsrt 5: Topognphic Smr.yConduct righhf{by res*rcfiPedom topogBphic sutueyEdW FY 22 Grurt Awd |totifrcatonT.!k 6: D6lgn Phm ind SpEific.tlons lor CIP I Trratrcnt SubbrsiffiP€pare ard Submit 30 pffit Design Package (City Review)City ReviwPEpare and Submlt 60 prenl Design Package (City and E@togy Review)Cily and E@logy ReviwPrgpare and Submit 90 pffint Design Padage (City and Eology Reyieffi)City and Ecology R€viercFuture T.3k FlBl Bld Packrg! and CorBtftflonPrepaG and Submit FiEl Bid Pacfage {Clty and Edlogy Revies)City and Emlogy RevisAdvertisement & BiddingConslrucljon Fish Urndow Uufy l&Aug 31)CIP 1 Hping and New Outlall Consirdion (*pante WJect)CIP t conslruclion undet E@logy FY 22 Gant560 &ys680 drys1 10 days2A days0 daysl0 days440 days460 days460 days460 days460 dBys15 days17O dryE,r5 days20 days20 days60 days30 days30 days135 dly330 days35 dayt1 day1 day15 days45 days5 dsys8G drys1 dsy20 deys20.bys10 days15 days0 dayslto d.ys15 days10 days25 days45 days20 days45 days2m dry!10 days15 days30 days21 days60 days180 daysr--_.|:IF-lq 7l7lIT8lspfir"'i Pbid 5udh4lndrcMlsbeM.nulTst trmd tun.onlyOu6lbn,onlv ffi FiniCr-ontiltMl S@n.ry tolls €rr@l Tist shrul Shmrry l-l E{srl shsb?r t rltftsumNryPage 1D@din.
City of Roslyn Grant Budget EstimateProject:Stormwater CIP 1Treatment ConstructionEstimated Staff Hourly Expense (w/o indirects)Estimaled Contractor/Consuftant Hourly ExpensePercent of Projeci Cosls Reimbursed by GrantApplication No.Ecoloqv111$40$r5085%Total costs$3,627$3,600$4,800s3.200s13-211EstimatedStafi HoursStaffCostper HourConlrac{orHoursContsac{otCost per% GrantFunded& Contrrctor72729664$40$40s400000$150$150s15{185oi685o/o85%s3,ReclpientTasksGrant Dellyorabl€s - DescriptlongTask 1 : Project Admlnistretion tanagemont1.1 Quarterly Progress Reports1.2 Coordinate with Finance on Reimbursemenls1.3 Track Expenditures & Reallocate as Needed1.4 Qualitv Assurence$3,600$900$90095.400$2,600$2,700$1,300$2,500$2,500$2,900$3.050$3,200s1.2002466$40$40$401644$150s150$15085%85%85o/o$3,060$765s765ask2 I14.4302222211612$40$40$40$40$40$40$40$40s4016II16161220164s150$150$1 50$150$150$150$150$1s0$15085o/o85o/o85o/o85%85T"85o/o85o/o85o/o85%$2,210$2,295$1,105s2.125$2,125$2,4€5$2,s93$2,72Asl o20Task 3: Construc{lol3.13.23.33.43.53.63.73.820Preconstruclion conference and meeting minutesWeekly Progress meetingsSubmittal ReviewRequest for lnformation (RFl) responsesChange Order review and doqJmentationConstruc'tion ObservationsCompadion testing and Geotechnical coordinationPermit Compliance coordination and doarmentationPunch List$80,050$75,100$s0,100$250,1 00$650,100$450,100$90.100$40,100$1 5.1003t.680.8so122222222$40$40$40$40$40$40$40$40s40,|11111111$80,000$75,000$30,000$250.000$650,000$450,000$90.000$40,000$15,00085%85o/o85%85%85o/o850/685o/o85o/o85o/"$68,043$63.835$25.585$212,585$552,585$382,585$76,585s34,085s12 A35s1.1n.78Task 'l: Water Quallty BtP anduil,1 uonsrucBon4.14.24.34.44.54.64.74.84.9MobilizationSite Preparation including erosion control measuresSite Demolilion, dearing and grubbingExcavation and EanhvorkCIP 1 trealmenl Basin JCIP 1 treatment Basin K, LPavingSite RestorationFinal work oer Punch ListTask 41240126$/+0$40$40142164$150$1 50$15085%85%85o/oSl$15,873$4,400$1.200$1,020$.{.335$22,5871 t26.s73Task 5: Ptoject Close-Out5.1 Prepare as-built drawings5.2 Agency coordination and documentiation for release of retalner5.3 Close-out all permitsDa^6r rcrrhh* D^i-i^-.Close-out Report5.4
l\; .. r i';,irlr tJ i'o4ii.rii :i i' iii lllli:tri. l..lcll l,,{il:;
iilt;ir;:,ri:ilf rrt i-,r'i;tlri-:tf jr"it";sii;i: iri;ttt l,ii,li,titii;tr:
i,iiy t:l lt*:,;ly;:
September 10,2021
oFz
IUFzo
C)
l!o
tuJ
dl
t-
Table of Gontents
lntroduction
1.1, Project Purpose.......
1.3. Design Codes and References......
1.3.1. Department of Ecology
1.2, Report Purpose.......
1
,1
1
1
1
1
a
2
2
2
3
3
3
4
4
4
6
6
6
8
I
I
q
1.3.2. City of Roslyn
2 Basin Description ... ......
2.1. General
2.2. Historic and Existing Conditions
2.3. Proposed Conditions
3. Project Site Descriplion
3. 1. Project Limits...........
4
5.
b.
3.2. Project Site Gonditions.................
3.3. Stormwater Features.
Core Element Analysis .........
Alternatives Considered .......
Design Analysis
6.1. Existing Stormwater Drainage System
6.2. Proposed BMP Design and lmprovements.
7 Water Qualily Benefit.,....
7.1. Runoff Treatment Comparison.
7.2. Equivalent New/Redevelopment Areas
L Capital lmprovement P|an...........
EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1 - Basin and Study Map
APPENDICES
Appendix A - Drainage Parameters
Appendix B - Existing Flow Rates
Appendix G - 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 . 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 stormwaler 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 facility inspection, public
education and outreach, water qualig 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 watenray, 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 reporl 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 lhe 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 Godes and References
1.3.1. Department of Ecology
The analysis will be in accordance with Ecology's Stormwater Management Manualfor Eastern
Washington (SUJN4MEW, 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.
1
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 atlached 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 limiis.
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 boftleneck 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 slormwater treatment in the study area will capture
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 Exhlbit 2. The project site is a
270'acre area of developed lands within the City that discharge to Cryslal 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
Exhlblt 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 ,l
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 L|DAR portal, Kittitas County FEMA Study
conducted in2011(https:/lidarport ).
There are wetlands to the west and southeast of the Treatment Assessment Area. Weflands exist
south of Roslyn Pioneer Park, north of Writohead Road where Crystal Creek crosses the road,
and south of \Mritehead Road. The wetland boundaries and associated layers were obtained
from the Plan.
The soils within the project site are mostly Roslyn ashy sandy Ioam wilh 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 slormwater retrofits, the water quality design storm is based on the 6-month,
3-hour in accordance with the SWMMEW (Ecology, 2019r.
3.3. Stormwater Features
The existing storm sewer mapping was developed with the Plan. lt includes a storm sewer
network of clay and PVC pipe, catch basins, manholes, and a dilch. The majority of the urbanized
developed area within the City drains to a main storm sewer trunk line discharging to a
2O0-foot{ong 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\ /MMEW (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 ol lhe 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 quantiiT the water quality benefit for retrofit projects. A
baseline is determined based on what would be required if the project was to meet
new/redevelopmenl standards. The project does not require Runoff Treatment (Core Element #S)
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 retrofits. Table I
provides a summary of the considered alternatives along with descriptions, benefits, limitations,
and recommendations rega rding preferred a lternatives.
4
Table 1: Altematives Analysis
2 - Vegetated Filter
Strips
2 - Oil Water
I Separators (OWS)
3 - Pervious
Pavement
4 - Detention Basin w/ E
Filter Gartridges
swales adjacent to paved
roadways
Cl Connect underdrains and
overflow bypass from
biofiltration swales to
existing storm sewer
network
tr Gonstruct vegetated filter
strips adjacent to paved
roadways
tr Gonstruct and connect oil
water separators to the
storm sewer
tr Construct new pervious
pavement
tr Connect underdrains to
existing stormwater sewer
system
Use underground
engineered filter systems to
provide water quality
treatment
1 - Biofiltration Swales : tr Construct biofiltration 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 minimalimpact on
the landscape with the appearance of
open roadside ditches
tr Gonsldered the preferred
alternative in areas with storm
Sewer
tr Provides runoff treatment fbi public
right-of-way
tr Provides minimalflow control benefit
tl Design can be used in unsewered
areas
tr Designs can have minimal impact on
the landscape
tr lmpacts roadside parking
r E Considered the prefened
aftemative ln unsewered areas
tr Low watei quality benefit as traffic
usage on roadways does notwarrant
installation of OWS
tr No flow control benelit
tr Not considered the prefened
alternative.
tr Provides runoff treatment and limited
flow control
tr Demolish existing pavement ; E Unable to infiltrate with poor soils
: tr Construction would cause significant
disruption to neighborhood
tr Not considered the preferred
alternative.
tr Provides runoff treatment and flow
control
tr Filter cartridges are a large capital
cost and large annual maintenance
cost
tr Scalable trealment provided at
existing collection points or central
treatment location
tl Not considered the preferred
alternative.
5
,t )t r,:r, i'ri,,tr,,i,i,l. i.lr r I i lili, if il i i,ij"), l:i"; r t,li"irl.r
6. Design Analysis
6.1. Existing Stormwater Drainage System
An existing hydrology and hydraulics XPSVl/tulM model from the Plan was used for the analysis of
this study. Before using this model, various hydrological parameters were reassessed and
updated lo 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\ /tvlMEW (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 to be compatible with the climate and region. These facilities are
depicted in the following figures extracted from the SVVI\4MEW (Ecology 2019):
Olllt^t loEgjl4rtt(t ta'Intr'.IIs,:ora! rr* o:jr !.r $r rt'r t.,t
Ci.i.F! r.t *r.r,"elqEr(qrtrq.y: sr.GDil ,I FG i n' rr:L l l. r.. hrdl'.tt:.r.r0trf.rgrdrs ' ,: I
,i
"t'
P1l' ltttr)
hrtodd fr I(l?-4itt.t)
l.6rilr.rtdrt t!tr(&lI'!trril1
(121t1 lEal
f.r dr! dr..bff
lJ ! lr}ad,
:t
!t ,'..,,?'
;'i,l': "1;;')
ra]trr ti.n.t r!!rr.s ,,.rarx'r!. 4 r t6rl '{0 r3ilrtrl!r.rc ltlG' l.Pli lfr.ll
{alr{rtsdd'D Fa'tilrt,
FrcuRe 1: Brorrlrnattoru Swale
6
Parcnlent 3ufJco
F ow spr(ndcr {gra?cl}f:l!or stnp
t'nrr latsorl
lr,t d Slcpos 15'{,
SeCtiOn A-A corocro'circh {iyrr.)
FICURE 2: VEGETATED FILTER STRIF
Various factors were considered in identifying feasible locations for the biofiltration swales. lt 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. \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 slormwater 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, bioliltration 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 lor
Treatment Subbasins in Exhibit 3.
The various site constraints and locations of the proposed biofiltration swales are shown on
Exhibit 3. Wthin the CIP I 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 willhave 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 not 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, Ecotogy; 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 neWredevelopment 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 benelit 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.
Ratioppt-t =
Design flow rate or volume for proposed retrofit treatment BMp
Design flow rate or vol ume to meet new,/redevelopment criteria
// Ratio6pl-1 ) L,thenset Ratioppr-r = 1
Design flow rates for the water quality storm were output from the XPS\ /l\,tM 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 new/redevelopment runoff treatment
criteria. Design flow rates for the proposed retrofits were back calculated using the availabte
footprint of each proposed swale. The biofiltration swale sizing calculations are included in
Appendix C.
ln some cases, the bioflltration swales will be able to achieve more trealment than needed with a
Ratioenr-r > 1, therefore Ratioenr-t = 't. The ratios for each biofiltration swale are shown in
Appendix D.
I
7.2. EquivalentNeWRedevelopmentAreas
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
nedredeveloped project and ten (10) of the biofiltration swales will achieve partialstormwater
treatment within their respective subbasins.
The overallwater quality benefit to be realized within the study area is 31 percent. This is
quantified by comparing the total calculated Equivalent NeMRedevelopment 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 adminislration
should be included for effective design and construction of each BMp.
The BMPs within the study area are divided into three separale ClPs 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 Clp 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,Bi2, C1A, Dl, and D2. The
estimated construction approximated cost of CIP SW-2 includes Biofiltration 814, 81SA, 8164,
D+, 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.
9
--'.:'i'l
.)
it
AilWDE STUOY BASIN
STORSVYATER RETROF'T
S1UOY AREA
ctF 1 gAsrN
CIP 1 TREAlllENT
ASSESSM€NTAREA
UNO€RSIZED EXISTING
PIPE SYSTE^,4
PLANNED CIPl
OVERFLOW PIPE
STREAI,I SEGMENT
RECEIMNG CIP ,I
OVERFLOW
SIREAM SEGMENT
RECEIVIT.IG MAINTAINEO
SASE FLOII'
I-EGEND
PLANNED CIP 1
OVERFLOWPIPE
STREAM SEGMENT
RECEIVING CIP 1
OVERFLOW
POINT OF
DISCHARGE TO
CRYSTAL CREEK
rr-8'
s
t
$
.4
'l+
'a
CITY OF ROSLYN
STORMWATER TREATMENT
RETROFITS
Mead
lluntBASIN AND STUDY MAP
EXHIBIT 1
4376800-200175.01
o9t09t2021E
F
l'nA
Level of Service Anolysis
levels of service for stormwqter copitol fqcilities usuolly try to meet wofer quoliry sfondords, runoff, ond
erosion control requirements of the opplicoble Stormwoter Monogement Monuql for Eostern Wcshington.
Chopter 13.15 of the Roslyn Municipol Code governs stormwqter requirements for development.
Requirements include o mondote thol ony new development creoting more thon 5,000 squore feet of
impervious surfoces hove o stormwoler droinoge plon.
Plonned Proiects, Costs, ond Revenue
slormwotercopitol proiects included inthe city's 2017-2023 copitol Focilities Plqn ore listed in Exhibit
3-8, ond mqtch the proiects recommended in the City's 2014 Stormwoter Comprehensive plon.
Exh ibil 3-8. Plo n ned Stormwqter Proiects, 20lZ -2029
CIP 1: Pennsylvonis Ploce Bottleneck
CIP 2r South A Street Culvert
CIP 3: North B Street Heodwoll
CIP 4: North I't Street Heodwoll
CIP 5: North C Street Heodwoll
CIP 6r Reroute North 3'd Street
CIP 7Ar Storm Sewer Trunk Line, Sgurh of Monrono
CIP 7Br Storm Sewer Trunk Line, South of Montono -
Porollel Pipe
CIP 8: Storm Trunk Line, Montonq to Pennsylvonio
CIP 9: Hoffmonville Conveyonce
CIP l0; North l,t Street, Woshington to Nevodo
CIP 1 'l : Crystol Creek Restorqtion qnd Wetlqnd
Creqtion Demonstrotion Proiect
Sourcer Ciry of Roslyn 2A17-2023 Copltol Fociliries plcrn
20.17
2017
20t 8
201 I
20r I
20r I
20r 9
20r 9
2020
2020
2020
2021
$230,000
$220,000
$400,000
$270,0OO
$ r 9o,ooo
$930,000
$ 1,720,000
$520,000
$4zo,ooo
$300,000
$430,000
$l95,ooo
The Stormwoter Plon includes o revenue onolysis wih detoiled informotion on funding sources ond is
incorporoted by reference. The Plon recommended the City form q Stormwoter Utility ond levy o monrhly
utility rote to fund stormwoter operotion, mointenonce, ond o shore of copitol improvements,
ln 2016, the Roslyn City Council creoted o Stormwoter Utllity to monoge ond regulote surfoce ond
sformwoter. (City of Roslyn,20l6)A stormwoter utility fund wos credted, ond in 2Ol7 the City begon
ossessing o stormwoter fee on properties in the city, {Roslyn Municipol Code, Chopier l3.l 3 ond 1 3.14)
Proiecl Schedule Cost
3{ll Cnt of Roslyn Comprehensive pton Updce I Copirol Focilirjes plon | 't
Policy CF 1.9
Policy CF L10
Policy CF Ll I
Poticy CF 1.12
Policy CF 1.'13
Policy CF I .l 4
Policy CF Ll5
Policy CF l.l6
Slreelr
Psrks qnd Recreolion
Rorlyn Volunteer Fire
Deportmenl
Municipol Buildingr
Cemeleries
LOS "D" for locol streets
6 ocres/1,000 residents
No level of service
No level of service
No level of servlce
City of Roslyn Conrpreherrsive Plan I (iupital lracilities
Work cooperotively with surrounding municipolities ond Kiftitds County during the
siting ond development of focilities of regionol significonce like such cs o regionol
onimol shelter,
Use genercl revenues only to fund proiecrs thot provide c generol benefit to the
enlire community in the generol government funciions of the Ciiy.
Consider long-term borrowing for qs on oppropriote me?hod of finoncing lorge
copitol focilities thot benefit nrore thon one generotion of users.
Priorltize renovolion of the Old Chy Holl/Librory building for continued public use
qnd enhonced occessibility.
Prepore ond implement o sirotegy to finonce the design, renovotion, ond re-use of
the old City Holl/Librory building os o community center.
Explore the feosibilify ond community benefit of relocoting the City Public Works
Building.
Prepore ond implement o plon to finonce the design, renovotlon, qnd re-use of the
City Adminisrrotive Building.
Exhibit 8-2 City Operated Copitol Fqciliries IOS
Woter filqximum treqtmenf copocity of 1,637 Eorned Resideniiql
Units (ERUs)
Sewer Flow stondord of 267 gollons per copito per doy;
trealment copollty of 3.6 mlllion gollons pe1 9oy
Consistent with City's drainoge slqndqrds. Levels of service
for slormwqter copitol focilities usuolly try to meet water
quolity stondords, runoff, ond erosion control requirements
of the opplicoble Stormwoter Monogemeni Monuql for
Eostern Woshington.
Slormwoler
Explore ihe re-use of surplus property ot the old sewoge treotment plont for light
industry or for other beneficiql community uses.
CAPITAt FACILITIEST
ctTy oWNED/oPERATED TEVEL OF SERVICE
June 2019 8-5