HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-20-2014 PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE AGENDA PACKETcrry or
WASH I NGTONJ
Public Works Committee
October 20, 2014 - 3:30 PM
Annex Conference Room 2
AGENDA
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. Roll Call
B. Announcements
1. Announcements
Public comment will be accepted on Discussion Item E.
C. Agenda Modifications
11. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Approval of Minutes*
Public Works Committee to approve the minutes of the October 6, 2014 Public
Works Committee meeting
111. ACTION
A. Public Works Project No. C512A* (Wickstrom)
Award Contract No. 13 -12, to Gary Harper Construction, Inc. on their Low Bid of
$870,696.00 plus Washington State Sales Tax of $82,716.12 for a Total
Contract Price of $953,412.12 for Project No. C512A, Well 4 Emergency Power
Improvements
B. Resolution No. 5108* (Tobin)
A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Auburn, Washington, Authorizing
the Public Works Committee to Appoint the City of Auburn Representatives to
the King County Metropolitan Water Pollution Abatement Advisory Committee
IV. DISCUSSION ITEMS
A. Ordinance No. 6534* (Chamberlain)
An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Auburn, Washington, amending
Section 18.29.060 of the Auburn City Code related to floor area ratio in the
Downtown Urban Center Zone.
B. Ordinance No. 6537* (Chamberlain)
An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Auburn, Washington, amending
Section 17.09.010 of the Auburn City Code related to short plat thresholds.
C. System Development Charges (Tobin /Fenhaus)
D. Cross Connection Control Program (Fenhaus)
E. Water Use Efficiency Program* (Fenhaus)
Page 1 of 84
F. Capital Project Status Report* (Sweeting)
G. Significant Infrastructure Projects by Others - Public Works Status
Report* (Gaub)
H. Action Tracking Matrix* (Gaub)
V. ADJOURNMENT
Agendas and minutes are available to the public at the City Clerk's Office, on the City
website (http: / /www.auburnwa.gov), and via e -mail. Complete agenda packets are
available for review at the City Clerk's Office.
*Denotes attachments included in the agenda packet.
Page 2 of 84
C=ITY or
AUBURN
\VASH E NGTo
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject: Date:
Approval of Minutes October 15, 2014
Department: Attachments: Budget Impact:
Public Works Draft Minutes $0
Administrative Recommendation:
Public Works Committee to approve the minutes of the October 6, 2014 Public Works
Committee meeting.
Background Summary:
See attached draft minutes.
Reviewed by Council Committees:
Public Works
Councilmember: Osborne Staff:
Meeting Date: October 20, 2014 Item Number: CA.A
CA.A AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED Page 3 of 84
WASHINGTON
Public Works Committee
October 6, 2014 - 3:30 PM
Annex Conference Room 2
MINUTES
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Wayne Osborne called the meeting to order at 3:30 p.m. in
Conference Room #2, located on the second floor of Auburn City Hall,
One East Main Street, Auburn, Washington.
A. Roll Call
Chairman Wayne Osborne, Vice -Chair Bill Peloza, and Member
Claude DaCorsi were present. Also present during the meeting
were: Mayor Nancy Backus, Community Development & Public
Works Director Kevin Snyder, Assistant Director of Engineering /City
Engineer Ingrid Gaub, Assistant Director of Public Works Operations
Randy Bailey, Assistant City Engineer Jacob Sweeting, Utility
Engineering Manager Lisa Tobin, Transportation Manager Pablo
Para, Capital Projects Manager Ryan Vondrak, Project Engineer
Kim Truong, Innovation and Technology Director Ron Tiedeman,
Water Utility Engineer Susan Fenhaus, Planning & Design Services
Manager Elizabeth Chamberlain, Finance Director Shelley Coleman,
Assistant Finance Director Paula Barry, Customer Care Manager
Brenda Goodson -Moore and Public Works Secretary Molly Mendez.
B. Announcements
Assistant Director of Engineering /City Engineer Gaub introduced
Lisa Tobin to the Committee. Lisa has accepted the Utility
Engineering Manager position with the City.
C. Agenda Modifications
There were two agenda modifications. The first agenda modification
replaces the existing packet materials for Action Item D, Public
Works Project No. CP1308. The second agenda modification
removes Discussion Item D, Street Selection for the 2015 Citywide
Pavement Patching, Overlay, and Chip Seal Project from the
agenda.
II. CONSENT AGENDA
CA.A
A. Approval of Minutes
Public Works Committee to approve the minutes of the September
15, 2014 Public Works Committee meeting.
Page 1 of 9
Page 4 of 84
It was moved by Vice -Chair Peloza, seconded by Member DaCorsi,
that the Committee approve the Public Works Committee Meeting
minutes for date, September 15, 2014.
Motion carried 3 -0.
III. ACTION
CA.A
A. Right -of -Way Use Permit No. 14 -39 (Price)
Approve Right -of -Way Use Permit No. 14 -39 for Auburn Parks, Arts
and Recreation Santa Parade
Transportation Manager Para confirmed this permit is the same as
the previous year in response to a question asked by Chairman
Osborne.
It was moved by Vice -Chair Peloza, seconded by Member DaCorsi,
that the Committee approve Right -of -Way Use Permit No. 14 -39 for
Auburn Parks, Arts and Recreation Santa Parade.
Motion carried 3 -0.
B. Right -of -Way Use Permit No. 14 -40 (Price)
Approve Right -of -Way Use Permit No. 14 -40 for Auburn Parks, Arts
and Recreation Halloween Harvest Festival
Planning & Design Services Manager Chamberlain responded to a
question asked by Chairman Osborne stating this is the second year
for the Halloween Harvest Festival.
It was moved by Vice -Chair Peloza, seconded by Member DaCorsi,
that the Committee approve Right -of -Way Use Permit No. 14 -40 for
Auburn Parks, Arts and Recreation Halloween Harvest Festival.
Motion carried 3 -0.
C. Public Works Project No. CP1122 (Truong)
Reject all Bids to Contract No. 14 -08 for Project No. CP1122, 30th
Street NE Area Flooding — Phase 1
Project Engineer Truong explained the lowest responsive bid was
approximately 12% above the Engineers Estimate, which exceeds
the available funds for this project. Therefore, City staff recommends
rejecting all bids in the best interest of the City.
Project Engineer Truong confirmed this project will be re- advertised
in the Spring of 2015 following a question asked by Chairman
Osborne.
Page 2 of 9
Page 5 of 84
It was moved by Vice -Chair Peloza, seconded by Member DaCorsi,
that the Committee reject all bids to Contract No. 14 -08 for Project
No. CP1122, 30th Street NE Area Flooding Phase 1.
Motion carried 3 -0.
D. Public Works Project No. CP1308 (Truong)
Award Contract No. 14 -04 to Pacific Civil & Infrastructure on their
low bid of $1,401,829.61 plus Washington State sales tax of
$109,356.73 fora total contract price of $1,511,186.34 for Project
No. CP1308, BNSF Utility Crossings
Project Engineer Truong advised the Committee of the Agenda
Modification which replaces the existing packet materials for Action
Item D, Public Works Project No. CP1308.
Project Engineer Truong stated staff is asking the Committee to
recommend Award of Contract No. 14 -04 to Pacific Civil &
Infrastructure.
There was a group discussion pertaining to the company Pacific
Civil & Infrastructure and their experience following a question asked
by Chairman Osborne.
There was a brief discussion regarding the street funds and their
use to do additional improvements at the 37th and B Street
intersection with the utility work in response to a question asked by
Vice -Chair Peloza.
It was moved by Vice -Chair Peloza, seconded by Member DaCorsi,
that the Committee award Contract No. 14 -04 to Pacific Civil &
Infrastructure on their low bid of $1,401,829.61 plus Washington
State sales tax of $109,356.73 for a total contract price of
$1,511,186.34 for Project No. CP1308, BNSF Utility Crossings.
Motion carried 3 -0.
E. Public Works Project No. C524A (Sweeting)
Approve Change Order No. 4 in the Amount of $10,369.73 to
Contract No. 14 -05 for Work on Project No. C524A — SCADA
Physical Site Improvements
Assistant City Engineer Sweeting explained this is a change order to
the construction contract related to the SCADA Utility Project.
Following a question asked by Chairman Osborne, Assistant City
Engineer Sweeting explained that two of three change orders were
for authorized side sewer repair work that was needed immediately
and that this change order approval was needed because it would
exceed the authorized contingency.
CA.A
Page 3 of 9
Page 6 of 84
It was moved by Vice -Chair Peloza, seconded by Member DaCorsi,
that the Committee approve Change Order No. 4 in the amount of
$10,369.73 to Contract No. 14 -05 for Work on Project No. C524A,
SCADA Physical Site Improvements.
Motion carried 3 -0.
F. Resolution No. 5102 (Fenhaus)
A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Auburn, Washington,
Authorizing the Mayor to Execute a Wholesale Water Agreement
between the City of Auburn and the City of Tacoma
Water Utility Engineer Fenhaus explained Resolution No. 5102 is an
agreement with City of Tacoma and there are no changes from the
Committee's last review.
There were no questions from the Committee.
It was moved by Vice -Chair Peloza, seconded by Member DaCorsi,
that the Committee adopt Resolution No. 5102.
Motion carried 3 -0.
G. Ordinance No. 6535 (Chamberlain)
An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Auburn, Washington,
amending Chapter 10.36 of the Auburn City Code related to parking
restrictions.
Planning & Design Services Manager Chamberlain provided a brief
overview of Ordinance No. 6535. Chamberlain also advised that the
change Vice -Chair Peloza requested at the last meeting has been
made.
Planning & Design Services Manager Chamberlain explained why
the specific Committee's were chosen for this item in response to a
question asked by Chairman Osborne.
There was a brief group discussion regarding the possibility of
adding 15 minute parking stalls throughout downtown following a
question asked by Vice -Chair Peloza.
Member DaCorsi had a question pertaining to the wording "72 hour
parking" on page 75 of the packet. This was followed by a group
discussion.
It was moved by Vice -Chair Peloza, seconded by Member DaCorsi,
that the Committee approve Ordinance No. 6535.
Motion carried 3 -0.
CA.A
Page 4 of 9
Page 7 of 84
CA.A
H. Leak Adjustment Request - Appeal (Coleman)
Council review an appeal for a water utility adjustment in the amount
of $482.19, to account number 051001 -000. The original Leak
Adjustment Request was denied per policy 100 -52
Chairman Osborne asked if the customer was present. Customer
Care Manager Goodson -Moore advised the customer is not present
and that staff reached out to the customer twice regarding the
meeting.
Customer Care Manager Goodson -Moore provided the Committee
with a background summary of the Wileman Leak Adjustment.
In response to a question asked by Vice -Chair Peloza, Customer
Care Manager Goodson -Moore confirmed the customer's payment
history.
Customer Care Manager Goodson -Moore indicated the customer
did not provide a reason for the delay of the repair following a
question asked by Vice -Chair Peloza.
Following a question asked by Chairman Osborne, Customer Care
Manager Goodson -Moore further explained the Utility Account Leak
Adjustment calculation on page 108 of the packet.
Chairman Osborne voiced his concern regarding the length of time it
took for the customer to repair the water line. Osborne also noted
that the leak was on a secondary line, which is contrary to the City
policy for providing an adjustment.
Vice -Chair Peloza indicated he would prefer the customer receive
50% of the proposed $482.19 leak adjustment based on the
customers account history.
Chairman Osborne stated he would prefer to deny the leak
adjustment.
Member DaCorsi advised he would prefer the customer to receive
50% of the proposed $482.19 leak adjustment.
Finance Director Coleman asked the Committee if the policy needs
to be changed as staff is currently following the policy, which
resulted in the original denial of the leak adjustment. This was
followed by a group discussion regarding the policy.
It was moved by Vice -Chair Peloza, seconded by Member DaCorsi,
that the Committee recommend approval of 50% of the original
water utility adjustment appeal for a total adjustment of $241.10, to
account number 051001 -000.
Page 5 of 9
Page 8 of 84
Motion carried 2 -1.
IV. DISCUSSION ITEMS
CA.A
A. Utility Billing Water Termination Process (Door Tags) (Coleman)
Approve a change to the shut off process and City code to notify
delinquent utility customers by mail and discontinue door tagging
Finance Director Coleman provided the Committee with the history
of the door tagging process.
Community Development & Public Works Director Snyder
emphasized the amount of staff impact the door tagging process
has. Snyder noted he feels the proposal to move away from door
tags and providing mailed notices will still achieve the same
customer service friendliness.
Vice -Chair Peloza commented that he agrees with the proposal to
discontinue door tags and that the door tags can alert others to the
fact that somebody is not at home.
Chairman Osborne also noted that he is in favor of discontinuing the
door tag process.
Member DaCorsi concurred.
B. Resolution No. 5106 (Tiedeman)
A resolution of the City Council of the City of Auburn, Washington,
authorizing the Mayor to execute a 3 year agreement with GATSO
USA, Inc. for photo enforcement solutions.
Innovation & Technology Director Tiedeman explained Resolution
No. 5106 is a three year agreement for photo enforcement with
GATSO USA, Inc.
Chairman Osborne mentioned that this should be presented to an
additional Committee other than Municipal Services and Public
Works as the three Committee members are the same on the two
Committees. Innovation & Technology Director Tiedeman advised
he will route this item to an additional committee as requested.
Innovation & Technology Director Tiedeman provided a brief
summary of Resolution No. 5106. This was followed by a group
discussion.
Responding to a question asked by Vice -Chair Peloza, Innovation &
Technology Director Tiedeman further explained the contract term of
three years.
Page 6 of 9
Page 9 of 84
CA.A
Chairman Osborne noted he would like to see something added in
the Resolution mentioning that the signs stating "photo safe
community" that are on all signals will be removed. There was a
group discussion following this comment.
On page 144 of the packet, section 5.3.3, item b, Innovation &
Technology Director Tiedeman explained the warranty in response
to a question asked by Vice -Chair Peloza.
Innovation & Technology Director Tiedeman replied to a question
asked by Vice -Chair Peloza regarding the wording in section 3.7 and
3.8 of page 139 of the packet.
Transportation Manager Para responded to a question asked by
Chairman Osborne pertaining to City staff moving /re- locating
equipment.
C. Resolution No. 5104 (Chamberlain)
A Resolution of the City of Auburn, Washington, approving and
authorizing execution of an interlocal agreement with Pierce County,
thereby amending the Pierce County Countywide Planning Policies
related to Annexations and Urban Growth Area expansions.
Planning & Design Services Manager Chamberlain provided a
background summary of Resolution No. 5104.
Planning & Design Services Manager Chamberlain responded to a
question asked by Chairman Osborne regarding the Potential
Annexation Area (PAA) in Pierce County. Chamberlain also
referenced a map which she provided.
D. Street Selection for the 2015 Citywide Pavement Patching, Overlay,
and Chip Seal Project (Carter)
Discussion Item D was removed from the agenda.
E. Metropolitan Water Pollution Abatement Advisory Committee
(MWPAAC) Representation (Tobin)
Assistant Director of Engineering /City Engineer Gaub briefed the
Committee on the Metropolitan Water Pollution Abatement Advisory
Committee (MWPAAC) Representation.
The Committee consensus is to modify the Resolution to allow
multiple alternates.
There was a group discussion regarding the committee structure
and the options to allow the Public Works Committee to appoint a
representative and one or more alternate representatives or to allow
the Mayor to appoint a representative and one or more alternate
representatives or to revert to the City Council. Committee Page 7 of 9
Page 10 of 84
consensus was reached to allow the Public Works Committee to
appoint a representative and one or more alternate representatives
at this time and may reconsider this should the committee structure
change.
F. Discuss options for touring Public Works facilities (Gaub)
Assistant Director of Engineering /City Engineer Gaub provided the
Committee with different options for touring Public Works facilities.
Committee consensus is to arrange a special council meeting
insuring that the Public Works Committee members and
Councilmember Trout are able to attend at a minimum.
G. Capital Project Status Report (Sweeting)
Item 5 — CP1104 — 104th Street & 8th Street NE Intersection
Improvements:
Assistant City Engineer Sweeting replied to a question asked by
Chairman Osborne regarding the suspension of this project.
Item 6 — CP1024 — AWS and M Street SE Intersection
Improvements:
Chairman Osborne asked how firm the finish date is. Assistant City
Engineer Sweeting explained there have been some delays with the
project and that the finish date is not firm.
Item 8 — CP1322 — Annual Traffic Signal Improvements:
Assistant City Engineer Sweeting replied to a question asked by
Chairman Osborne regarding the suspension of this project.
Item 9 — CP1410 — 2014 Arterial and Collector Crackseal Project:
Assistant City Engineer Sweeting confirmed the completion date
following a question asked by Member DaCorsi.
Item 14 — CP1320 — M &O Storm Drainage Improvement:
Assistant City Engineer Sweeting responded to a question asked by
Chairman Osborne regarding the geotechnical findings.
Item 27 — CP1406 — West Main Street Traffic Signal Upgrades:
Transportation Manager Para indicated this project will include a
northbound protected left turn signal following a question asked by
Vice -Chair Peloza.
Item 29 — CP1409 — Oravetz Place Flooding Mitigation:
Assistant City Engineer Sweeting confirmed the "N /A" under the
Design Consultant means it is being conducted internally in
response to a question asked by Chairman Osborne.
H. Significant Infrastructure Projects by Others (Gaub)
CA.A
Page 8 of 9
Page 11 of 84
There were no questions from the Committee.
I. Action Tracking Matrix (Gaub)
There was a group discussion regarding the wash boarding area on
105th Place SE at 107th and the potential City actions to complete
improvements in the area.
V. ADJOURNMENT
CA.A
There being no further business to come before the Public Works
Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 4:45 p.m.
Approved this 20th day of October, 2014.
Wayne Osborne Molly Mendez
Chairman Public Works Department Secretary
Page 9of9
Page 12 of 84
AuBuRN ITY Cdr •
wAs - IENGTo
Agenda Subject:
Public Works Project No. C512A
Department:
Public Works
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Attachments:
Budget Status Sheet
Bid Tab Summary
Vidnity Map
Administrative Recommendation:
Date:
October 14, 2014
Budget Impact:
$0
Public Works Committee Recommend City Council Award Contract No. 13 -12, to Gary
Harper Construction, Inc. on their Low Bid of $870,696.00 plus Washington State
Sales Tax of $82,716.12 for a Total Contract Price of $953,412.12 for Project No.
C512A, Well 4 Emergency Power Improvements.
Background Summary:
The purpose of this project is to provide emergency power, upgrade the chlorination
system, and install security fencing at the City's Well 4 water facility. Providing a
diesel generator for emergency power will ensure that one of the City's primary
sources of water will continue to operate in the event electrical power is
lost. Upgrading the chlorination system from the existing gas chlorination system to a
liquid hypochlorite solution will increase operator safety and improve operations by
providing a chlorination system similar to other City water sources. Both the new
chlorination system and the generator will be housed in a new building that will
constructed adjacent to the existing building at the Well 4 site.
A project increase of $31,902 within the 430 (Water) fund will be necessary to fund
this project: however, it will not require a budget adjustment since this money is
available from the budget contingency of Project No. CP0915, Well 1 Improvements —
Phase 11.
Reviewed by Council Committees:
Public Works
Councilmember: Osborne Staff: Wickstrom
Meeting Date: October 20, 2014 Item Number: ACT.A
ACT.A AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED Page 13 of 84
ACT.A AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED Page 14 of 84
BUDGET STATUS SHEET
Project No: C512A
Project Title: Well 4 Emergency Power Improvements
Project Manager: Seth Wickstrom
Initiation Date: Nov 5, 2012
Advertisement Date: Oct 18, 2013
Award Date:
• Initiation /Consultant Agreement
• Permission to Advertise
• Contract Award
• Change Order Approval
• Contract Final Acceptance
Date: October 9, 2014
The "Future Years" column indicates the projected amount to be requested in future budgets.
Funds Budgeted (Funds Available)
Funding
Prior Years
2013
2014
2015
Total
430 Fund - Water
39,448
172,621
1,166,520
0
1,378,589
Total
39,448
172,621
1,166, 520
0
1,378,589
Estimated Cost (Funds Needed)
Activity
Prior Years
2013
2014
2015
Total
Design Engineering - City Costs
6,850
18,917
26,000
0
51,767
Design Engineering - Consultant Costs
32,598
153,705
31,537
855,664
217,839
Construction Contract Bid
0
0
238,353
715,059
953,412
Authorized Contingency (10 %)
0
0
23,835
71,506
95,341
Construction Engineering - City Costs
15,000
45,000
60,000
Construction Engineering - Consultant Costs
8,033
24,099
32,132
Total
39,448
172,622
342,758
855,664
1,410,491
430 Water Budget Status
* ( #) in the Budget Status Sections indicates Money the City has available.
H:\PROJ \C512A -Well 4 Emergency Power \PWCCouncillnfo\Award \Backup (Not Part of Agenda Bill) \Budget 1 of 1
' 8 ScaTu Sheet.xIs 10/15/2E1 g� 4 A 84
Prior Years
2013
2014
2015
Total
*430 Funds Budgeted ()
(39,448)
(172,621)
(1,166,520)
0
(1,378,589)
430 Funds Needed
39,448
172,622
342,758
855,664
1,410,491
*430 Fund Project Contingency ()
0
0
(823,762)
0
0
430 Funds Required
0
0
0
855,664
31,902
* ( #) in the Budget Status Sections indicates Money the City has available.
H:\PROJ \C512A -Well 4 Emergency Power \PWCCouncillnfo\Award \Backup (Not Part of Agenda Bill) \Budget 1 of 1
' 8 ScaTu Sheet.xIs 10/15/2E1 g� 4 A 84
BID TABULATION
BID TOTALS SUMMARY
N
r
M
L
.a+
O
V
In
O
E
N
O
L
0.
E
t)
0)
0
E
w
N
.o
Q
N o
O O
0 0
Basic BID Amount
0 0 0
0 0 0
o c op o
CO
E9 E9 E9
EA. Ef}
W
0 m
m 2
c
O
U
® fa)
M dO' L
M Lt) N-
r r �
N OD
O O O
to ER (r9
a)
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
C N O
EA M �! O
O O E, M M
c O I` et O
gI` r N M
OOC)O
C1
m EA EA - EAE-
O
c
c
• c U O
u O c
c
O 0 0 ) . . .
L o c
a c ° o
o U
O • < I-
>
N
O
a
a)
c
0
Z
H
CG
N
U
N
Page 16 of 84
111L% .11r4lal
_SS
B I I GTON G?
4 -ID
BURLINGTON
z
d
BI
6th SE
6th
7th SE
8th ST SE
9thr :
8th
'rW �]
4414,0 4,z RD
ST
w
ST °
ST
SE
MEI
9th 0)
SE LES
COVE E•
PARK
YMCA -
SE
E-.
10th ST U ul
11th SE
02 12th
13TH SE ")
14th SE U
ST
hriry
WELL 1
19
�M+
y a
Oq
15th SE g
16th SE
E' 17th
C PL
U
21st U
r
24th ST
SE
CITY
31st SE
ST
PROJECT
LOCATION
SCE
SE
F
C7 �
19th S
18th ST
SE
20t
21st
SE
S
t pp
z W
20TH CT t
0
E.
CEDAR DR SE
22nd ST SE
22nd
23rd u)
ST SE
23
ST SE
23rd ST SE
•
D
/ SE
MUCKLESHOOT °o
0 0
1111
T S L4
24th ST SE
25th ST SE
CASINO
2+11
SE
25th ST SE Ni
26th
T SE
225.
y � �
ST SE
27th
ST SE
28th ST
27tn sr SE
F
th ST SE
R PL
4' ROTARY
G F S PARK
?., 3 27th Sr SE
?g�
0 SSE
RIDGE
25TH ST SE
g
R7
DR
RNFRWAIK
U
41st
rn
WELL 3A /3B L
35th ST SE
37th ST SE
D PL SE
�-I
M PL
35TH
CT SE
E.
0
AUBURN
GAME
FARM
ST SE
35th 4 A
E-
3515
STUCK
C512A: WELL 4
c1TYOF EMERGENCY POWER
AUBURN
WASHINGTON IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
ACT.A
VICINITY MAP
NOT TO SCALE
Page 17 of 84
AuBuRN -ITY F
WASH NG` o
Agenda Subject:
Resolution No. 5108
Department:
Public Works
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Attachments:
Resolution No. 5108
Administrative Recommendation:
Date:
October 15, 2014
Budget Impact:
$0
Public Works Committee Recommends that City Council adopts Resolution No. 5108.
Background Summary:
Resolution No. 5108 repeals Resolution No. 4015 (passed in 2006) and provides for
the Public Works Committee to appoint a representative and one or more alternates to
serve as the City of Auburn's representatives at the Metropolitan Water Pollution
Abatement Advisory Committee (MWPAAC). Resolution No. 4015 previously
authorized the Public Works Committee to appoint a representative and an alternate
to MWPAAC and repealed Resolution No. 2971 (passed in 1998), which had
authorized the City's Utility Engineer and the Sanitary Sewer Engineer to serve as the
City of Auburn's MWPAAC representatives.
Currently, Councilmember Bill Peloza is the designated MWPAAC representative and
Sanitary Sewer Engineer Bob Elwell is the alternate.
MWPAAC is a committee of the agencies that deliver wastewater to the King County
sewer system for treatment, and MWPAAC serves as an advisor to King County for
issues relating to wastewater treatment and conveyance. MWPAAC has also formed
subcommittees to provide opportunities for member agencies to evaluate and provide
recommendations on technical, financial, and policy information received from King
County Wastewater Treatment Division that is important to the interests of the
member agencies. The Chair of each Subcommittee is required by MWPAAC's
bylaws to be formally appointed by their agency as a MWPAAC representative or
alternate. The City of Auburn's Utilities Engineering Manager, Lisa Tobin, has served
as the Chair of MWPAAC's Engineering and Planning (E &P) Subcommittee since
January 2013 while with her former employer. MWPAAC's Executive Board has
indicated that they would like for her to continue in this role for the duration of her term
of office (through December 2014) and to be eligible to be elected to the Chair
ACT.B
AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED Page 18 of 84
position at the elections to be held in January 2015. This would be a benefit to the City
of Auburn for her to be able to continue this role.
Reviewed by Council Committees:
Public Works
Councilmember: Osborne Staff: Tobin
Meeting Date: October 20, 2014 Item Number: ACT.B
ACT.B
AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED Page 19 of 84
RESOLUTION NO. 5108
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, AUTHORIZING THE
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE TO APPOINT THE CITY
OF AUBURN REPRESENTATIVES TO THE KING
COUNTY METROPOLITAN WATER POLLUTION
ABATEMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE
WHEREAS, RCW 35.58.210 provides that each metropolitan municipal
corporation authorized to perform water pollution abatement shall establish a
Metropolitan Water Pollution Abatement Advisory Committee (MWPAAC) to be
composed of representatives of each component city and county within such
metropolitan municipal corporation; and
WHEREAS, RCW 35.58.210 further provides that the legislative body of
each component city and county shall appoint its member representative; and
WHEREAS, in 1998 the City Council appointed the City's Utility Engineer
and Sanitary Sewer Engineer as its representatives to MWPAAC by means of
Resolution No. 2971; and
WHEREAS, in 2006 the City Council repealed Resolution No. 2971 and
adopted Resolution No. 4015 authorizing the Public Works Committee to
appoint a representative and an alternate to serve as the City of Auburn's
representatives to MWPAAC; and
Resolution No. 5108
October 15, 2014
Page 1
ACT.B Page 20 of 84
WHEREAS, the Public Works Committee finds it to be in the best interest
of the City to be represented at MWPAAC by means of a representative and
one or more alternate representatives;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN,
WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES as follows:
Section 1. The City Council's Public Works Committee is hereby
authorized to appoint the City of Auburn's representative and one or more
alternate representatives to the King County MWPAAC, and their successors,
repealing Resolution Nos. 2971 and 4015 to the extent that they are
inconsistent with this Resolution.
Section 2. That the Mayor is authorized to implement such
administrative procedures as may be necessary to carry out the directives of
this legislation.
Section 3. That this Resolution shall take effect and be in full force
upon passage and signatures hereon.
Dated and Signed this day of , 2014.
CITY OF AUBURN
NANCY BACKUS
MAYOR
ATTEST:
Resolution No. 5108
October 15, 2014
Page 2
ACT.B Page 21 of 84
Danielle E. Daskam,
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Daniel B. Heid,
City Attorney
Resolution No. 5108
October 15, 2014
Page 3
ACT.B Page 22 of 84
DI.A
CITY , r
AUBURN
wASHINu
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject: Date:
Ordinance No. 6534 October 15, 2014
Department: Attachments: Budget Impact:
Community Development & Ordinance Na 6534 $0
Public Works Staff Report to Planning Commission (wlcut
exhibits)
Administrative Recommendation:
For discussion only.
Background Summary:
The Downtown Urban Center Zone was adopted by the City Council February 2007.
The shift in zoning took an approach of density through floor are ratio (FAR) standards
versus a units per acre density approach. Included in the FAR standard is a different
ratio for various uses depending on if the project is located south of Main Street or
north of Main Street. The proposed code amendment will continue focusing growth
within downtown Auburn and encouraging a mix of uses by not having a different FAR
for residential or commercial but still fostering mixed -use by having that type of
development with the highest FAR opportunity. Let the market decide what is the best
location of residential standalone, mixed -use, and non - residential standalone projects
should be located. Our design standards will govern what the structures look like, the
pedestrian amenities, parking locations, etc. Auburn's regulations should not stand in
the way of market demands. Mixed -use will still have the highest achievable FAR to
promote residential development with commercial but open the market up on the
south side of Main Street to standalone non - residential projects.
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 7, 2014 on the proposed
code amendment that would amend the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) standards within the
Downtown Urban Center zone. There was no public testimony during the public
hearing. Staff recommended approval of the proposed code amendment and the
Planning Commission concurred recommending approval to the full City Council.
At the October 13, 2014 Planning and Community Development Committee meeting,
the Committee reviewed the Planning Commission's recommendation and moved the
code amendment forward to full City Council with a recommendation of approval.
AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED Page 23 of 84
DI.A
Reviewed by Council Committees:
Planning And Community Development, Public Works Other: Legal, Planning
Comm ission
Councilmember: Holman Staff: Chamberlain
Meeting Date: October 20, 2014 Item Number: DI.A
AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED Page 24 of 84
ORDINANCE NO. 6 5 3 4
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
AUBURN, WASHINGTON, AMENDING SECTION 18.29.060
OF THE AUBURN CITY CODE RELATED TO FLOOR AREA
RATIO IN THE DOWNTOWN URBAN CENTER ZONE
WHEREAS, from time to time, amendments to the City of Auburn zoning code
are appropriate, in order to update and better reflect the current use regulations and
development needs of the City; and
WHEREAS, from time to time, amendments to the City of Auburn zoning code
are appropriate, in order to remain consistent with changes in the policy guidance of the
City's Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of this amendment to the code is to better respond to
the market place regarding development within the downtown core; and
WHEREAS, this amendment to the code is a blend of proactive and predictive
approaches to development regulations assuring that basic community values and
aspirations are reflected in the City's planning approach; and
WHEREAS, the code amendment was subject to environmental review process
under the Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). A Determination of Non -
Significance (DNS) was issued September 24, 2014 and the City observed a fourteen -
day public comment period. The City did not receive any comments in response to
notice of the public comment period; and
WHEREAS, the code amendment was considered by the Planning Commission
at a duly noticed public hearing on October 7, 2014 and after the close the public
Ordinance No. 6534
October 14, 2014
Page 1
DI.A Page 25 of 84
hearing the Planning Commission forwarded a recommendation for approval to the City
Council; and
WHEREAS, the code amendment were reviewed by the Planning and
Community Development Committee of the City Council on October 13, 2014 and the
Committee recommended approval to the full City Council of the code change as
recommended by the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, the City Council determined, in light of the recommendations it
received, that the following code changes are in the best interest of the City.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN,
WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN, as follows:
Section 1. Amendment to City Code. That section 18.29.060 of the
Auburn City Code entitled "Development Standards" is hereby amended as follows:
18.29.060 Development standards.
A. Minimum lot area: none.
B. Minimum lot width: none.
C. Minimum lot depth: none.
D. Floor Area Ratio. Floor area ratio is the cumulative amount of floor area within a building as a
multiple of the lot area.
Floor Area Ratio (FAR)
For properties abutting the south side of Main Street and to the south:
Basic Allowable "As of Right"
- - •- -
Nonresidential2
Residential
- - - - - _ -
Nonrecidential2
Residential
Nonresidential
Reesidential4
C 4
3.5
TO
2,0
5
n
Properties abutting the north side of Main Street and to the north:
Basic Allowable "As of Right"
Maximum Allowable with Bonuses
Nonresidential2
Residential
Nonresidential
Residential3
Combined4
3.0
2.0
4.0
3.5
5.0
Ordinance No. 6534
October 14, 2014
Page 2
DI.A
Page 26 of 84
Floor area is measured to the inside face of exterior walls. The following shall be excluded
from floor area calculation:
a. All space below finished grade.
b. Space dedicated to structured parking.
c. Space used for any bonus feature listed in subsection E of this section.
2 Minimum required FAR is 0.75; basic allowable FAR is 1.0.
3 Hotels, nursing homes, assisted living centers, etc. shall be considered residential for the
purpose of calculating FAR.
4 Allowable FAR for nonresidential and residential uses may be added together within a project,
for a combined total.
ItAh *t
FAR /.o
FAR 2.0
FAR 3.0
FAR 5.0
E. Bonus Features Allowing Increased Floor Area Ratio.
Feature
Additional Gross
Floor Area for Each
Feature
Street level retail
100 sf of floor area
for each linear foot
of retail frontage
Restaurant
100 sf of floor area
for each linear foot
of restaurant
frontage
Public plaza
5 sf of floor area for
each sf of plaza
Widening public
sidewalk
4 sf of floor area for
each sf of sidewalk
made available for
public use
Canopy
Daycare
4 sf of floor area for
each sf of canopy
4 sf of floor area for
each sf of daycare
Health club
2 sf of floor area for
each sf of health
club
Ordinance No. 6534
October 14, 2014
Page 3
DI.A
FAR 5,0
Page 27 of 84
Feature
Performing space
Additional Gross
Floor Area for Each
Feature
2 sf of floor area for
each sf of
performing space
Public meeting room
5 sf of floor area for
each sf of meeting
room
Public art (arts
commission approval
required)
10 sf of floor area
for each $100 of
valuation
Water feature
10 sf of floor area
for each $100 of
valuation
Structured parking
0.5 sf of floor area
for each sf of
required parking
above grade
Below grade parking
1 sf of floor area for
each sf of required
parking below
grade (including
half -level plate
below grade)
Green roof
Public restrooms
2 sf of floor area for
each sf of green
roof
10 sf of floor area
for each sf of public
restroom
Contribution to a public
park or cultural facility
such as a library,
museum or theater
within 0.5 miles of the
DUC zone; also, any
project including a
performance or
entertainment venue is
eligible for these
bonuses, based upon
the value of
construction
10 sf of floor area
for each $100 of
contribution
towards acquisition
or development.
This can be used to
exceed both
maximum FAR and
maximum building
height by up to 25%
Ordinance No. 6534
October 14, 2014
Page 4
DI.A
Page 28 of 84
Feature
Development of open
space such as open
roof decks, balconies,
lanais or parts of the
building and improved
for outdoor living;
including rooftop
daycare play areas,
dog walking areas, etc.
Additional Gross
Floor Area for Each
Feature
5 sf of floor area for
each sf of open
space
An applicant may be required to provide a legally binding agreement or easement to ensure any
of the above features is maintained over the life of the project.
F. Maximum Building Height. Maximum building height within the DUC zone shall be 75 feet,
unless bonus height is permitted per subsection E of this section.
1. If retail uses occupy the ground floor, the minimum height for that floor shall be 14 feet.
2. Mechanical penthouses, stair /elevator overruns, and antennas may be excluded from
building height calculation provided they extend no more than 20 feet above the roof deck.
3. Maximum building height may be increased by up to 20 percent if the top is designed as
a nonhabitable, architectural element. This element may extend above the increased
height limit.
G. Minimum Building Height. The minimum height for any new structure within the DUC zone
shall be two stories for the full extent of the building footprint.
H. Parking Ratios. The following parking standards shall apply within the DUC zone in lieu of
any standard noted in ACC 18.52.020 or provision of ACC 18.52.030:
Use Type
Minimum
Required
Maximum
Allowed for
Surface
Parking Lots
Retail
2 stalls /1,000
nsf
4 stalls /1,000
nsf'
Office
2 stalls /1,000
nsf
4 stalls /1,000
nsf
Residential
1 stall per
dwelling unit
2 per dwelling
unit
Restaurant
0.5 stall per 4
seats
1 stall per 4
seats
1 nsf = net square feet
1. Parking requirements for uses not listed shall be determined by a study of parking
demand for that use, as prepared by a qualified professional and as accepted by the
director.
2. Retail and restaurant uses less than 3,000 nsf in area shall be exempt from parking
requirements.
Ordinance No. 6534
October 14, 2014
Page 5
DI.A
Page 29 of 84
3. Uses sharing a common parking facility may reduce the required number of stalls by 25
percent.
4. Required parking may be located off site, so long as it is: (a) located within the DUC
zone, (b) within 1,000 feet of the property, (c) connected to the property by streets
improved with sidewalks or walkways, and (d) tied to the site by a contractual agreement
reviewed and approved by the city attorney that is filed with the city and deed of record at
the county.
5. On- street parking that is located directly adjacent to a development site may be used to
satisfy minimum parking requirements and shall not be included in determining maximum
surface parking allowances.
6. Dedicated off -site parking provided within a parking structure may be used to provide
FAR bonuses for a project on a separate site, provided the parking structure is located
consistent with this chapter.
7. The maximum standards noted in the table above may be exceeded if all stalls above
the maximum limit are provided within a parking structure.
8. Compliance with these standards is not required for a change of use within an existing
building or whenever there is an expansion of an existing building or a new building
replaces an existing building that does not increase the floor area by more than 25
percent.
9. In lieu of providing the minimum parking required by this section, an applicant may
request to pay for each required parking stall into a special fund that will be used to
provide and upgrade municipal parking to serve the DUC zone. The per -stall fee shall be
as specified in the city's fee schedule.
I. Signs. The design of all signs shall be in conformance with the design standards referenced in
ACC 18.29.070. Allowable types, numbers and sizes of signs shall be as follows:
1. Freestanding: not allowed, except for monument signs as described within the
"Downtown Auburn Design Standards "; no more than one per street frontage; maximum
size: 64 square feet, calculated at a rate of one square foot of sign area per lineal foot of
site frontage; minimum entitlement shall be 32 square feet; maximum height: five feet.
2. Wall signs: maximum area of 150 square feet per building facade, calculated at a rate of
one square foot of sign area for every lineal foot of facade; minimum entitlement shall be
16 square feet.
3. Suspended signs attached under a marquee or canopy: one double -faced sign, no
greater than three square feet per face allowed for each building entrance; minimum
clearance above grade: eight feet.
4. Portable Signs. One portable sign may be allowed for each business entrance, not to
exceed one portable sign per building frontage, subject to the following:
a. May be placed within public right -of -way subject to the guidelines provided by the
director in consultation with the city engineer such that sign placement does not
interfere with pedestrian or vehicular traffic and conforms to the requirements of the
Americans with Disabilities Act.
b. May not exceed 36 inches in height and 30 inches in width and be limited to two
faces.
c. May be displayed during business hours only.
d. Must be constructed of either wood or another sturdy material to ensure stability in
the wind.
e. May not move, spin, flash, or otherwise be animated.
J. Landscaping. Landscaping shall be provided as defined in the Downtown Auburn Design
Standards. (Ord. 6419 § 1, 2012; Ord. 6071 § 6 (Exh. A), 2007.)
Ordinance No. 6534
October 14, 2014
Page 6
DI.A Page 30 of 84
Section 2. Implementation. The Mayor is hereby authorized to implement
such administrative procedures as may be necessary to carry out the directions of this
legislation.
Section 3. Severability. The provisions of this ordinance are declared
to be separate and severable. The invalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph,
subdivision, section or portion of this ordinance, or the invalidity of the application
thereof to any person or circumstance shall not affect the validity of the remainder of
this ordinance, or the validity of its application to other persons or circumstances.
Section 4. Effective date. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in
force five days from and after its passage, approval and publication as provided by law.
INTRODUCED:
PASSED:
APPROVED:
ATTEST: NANCY BACKUS, MAYOR
Danielle E. Daskam, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Daniel B. Heid, City Attorney
PUBLISHED:
Ordinance No. 6534
October 14, 2014
Page 7
DI.A Page 31 of 84
Zoning Code Amendment —
Staff Report to Planning Commission
Amendment to Chapter 18.29
ZOA14 -0004
I. GENERAL INFORMATION:
The Downtown Urban Center Zone was adopted by the City Council February 2007. The
shift in zoning took an approach of density through floor are ratio (FAR) standards versus a
units per acre density approach. Included in the FAR standard is a different ratio for various
uses depending on if the project is located south of Main Street or north of Main Street.
This staff report outlines the proposed amendments related to FAR within the Downtown
Urban Center Zone.
II. SEPA STATUS:
Pursuant to WAC 197 -11- 800(6), non - project actions such as code amendments are not
exempt from environmental review. The City issued a Determination of Non - Significance
September 24, 2014. The comment period ends October 8, 2014 and the appeal period
ends on October 26, 2014.
III. FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. In general, the intent of the proposed zoning code amendments is to amend the Floor
Area Ratio thresholds within the Downtown Urban Center zone so there is not a
difference between projects on the north side of Main Street versus the south side of
Main Street.
2. The process for zoning code text amendments is described in ACC Chapter 18.68:
18.68.020 Initiation of amendments.
B. Text.
1. The city council, or planning and development committee of the city council, upon its
own motion may request the planning commission to conduct a public hearing to amend
any portion or all of this title; provided, that text amendments that are purely
administrative or procedural do not require a public hearing, nor do they require
preliminary review or recommendations of the planning commission;
2. The planning commission may upon its own motion call for a public hearing to amend
any portion or all of this title, with the exception of purely administrative or procedural
amendments;
3. Any resident or property owner of the city may petition the city to request an
amendment to the text of this title.
C. For the purposes of this chapter, substantive amendments shall be distinguished
from procedural or administrative amendments in accordance with the following:
"Substantive" matters relate to regulations that define or limit what can be done in terms
of conduct, use or action (e.g., what use may be made of land, what requirements apply
to development, what public infrastructure may be required of certain developments),
and "procedural" or "administrative" matters are those that relate to the process of how
Zoning Code Amendment Chapter 18.29 ZOA14 -0004
Staff Report
October 1, 2014
Page 1
DI.A Page 32 of 84
an application to take such action must be pursued (e.g., time limits for applications and
appeals, what forms must be used, and where or how applications must be submitted.
Essentially, "procedural" or "administrative" matters are the mechanical rules by which
substantive issues may be pursued). (Ord. 6287 § 2, 2010; Ord. 6198 § 3, 2008; Ord.
4840 § 1, 1996; Ord. 4304 § 1(46), 1988; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.)
18.68.030 Public hearing process.
A. Text Amendments. With the exception of purely administrative or procedural
amendments, the planning commission shall conduct at least one public hearing on all
amendments to this title. The planning commission shall make a recommendation to the
city council who may or may not conduct a public hearing.
C. City Council Decision. The city council may affirm, modify or disaffirm any
recommendation of the planning commission or hearing examiner with regard to
amendments of the text or map of this title. (Ord. 6198 § 4, 2008; Ord. 4840 § 1, 1996;
Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.)
18.68.040 Public hearing notice requirements.
A. Text Amendments.
1. Planning Commission. For text amendments that require a public hearing under ACC
18.68.030(A), notice of a public hearing shall be given by publication, in a newspaper of
general circulation in the area, at least 10 days prior to the public hearing and by posting
the notice in three general public locations.
2. City Council. Notice of a public hearing shall be given by publication, in a newspaper
of general circulation in the area, prior to the public hearing and by posting the notice in
three general public locations.
3. The proposed code amendments are supported by the City of Auburn Comprehensive
Plan as identified in the conclusion section of this staff report.
4. Pursuant to WAC 197 -11- 800(6), non - project actions such as code amendments are
not exempt from environmental review. The City issued a Determination of Non -
Significance September 24, 2014. The comment period ends October 8, 2014 and the
appeal period ends on October 26, 2014. As of the writing of this report, no comments
have been received.
5. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106, the proposed code amendments outlined in this staff
report were sent to the Washington State Department of Commerce and other state
agencies as required for the 60 -day state review required for modification of
development regulations. The amendments were sent on October 1, 2014 and
expedited review was requested under RCW 36.70A.106(3)(b). The Department of
Commerce acknowledged receipt on October 1, 2014. Expedited review has not been
granted as of the writing of this staff report. If the expedited review request is denied
then the standard 60 -days applies from the submittal date of October 1, 2014.
6. Planning Commission reviewed the draft code amendments at the regular September
3, 2014 meeting.
7. The public hearing notice was published on September 26, 2014 in the Seattle Times
at least 10 -days prior to the Planning Commission public hearing scheduled for October
7, 2014.
Zoning Code Amendment Chapter 18.29 ZOA14 -0004
Staff Report
October 1, 2014
Page 2
DI.A Page 33 of 84
8. The following conclusions support the proposed amendment to Chapter 18.29,
Downtown Urban Center, scheduled for the Planning Commission's October 7, 2014
public hearing with a staff recommendation
IV. CONCLUSIONS:
1. Pursuant to ACC Section 18.68.020, amendments of Title 18 require a public hearing
before the Planning Commission with a public hearing notice published at least 10 -days
prior to the public hearing date.
Staff Analysis:
The public hearing notice was published in the Seattle Times on September 26, 2014
which is at least 10 -days prior to the Planning Commission public hearing scheduled for
October 7, 2014.
2. These code amendments are supported by the City of Auburn's Comprehensive Plan as
follows:
Objective 6.2. Maintain downtown as an area that uniquely serves both regional and
community needs.
Policies:
LU -6 The downtown urban center shall be the focal point of the Auburn community. It
should include a mix of uses including, but not limited to, government and civic uses,
retail, residential and services that are appropriate to fill that role.
LU -6A Focus growth and development in the Auburn Downtown urban center to support
economic development, complement transit oriented development, direct growth
pressures away from single family residential neighborhoods, and implement regional
growth management strategies.
LU -80 To increase consistency with the Urban Center boundary, the area lying
generally east of "D" Street S.E. to "F" Street S.E. and south of Main Street (not
including the Main Street frontage) to SR 18 shall be designated for mixed residential
and commercial uses.
LU -84 The downtown area shall be comprised of a mixture of uses consistent with the
area's role as the focal point of the community. These uses shall be primarily "people -
oriented" as opposed to "automobile- oriented ", and shall include commercial, medical,
governmental, professional services, cultural and residential uses.
ED -3 The importance of Downtown Auburn as a unique retail environment and
subregional center of commerce should be considered in the City's economic plan.
Staff Analysis:
The proposed code amendment is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan
through focusing growth within downtown Auburn and encouraging a mix of uses by not
having a different FAR for residential or commercial but still fostering mixed -use by
having that type of development with the highest FAR opportunity.
Zoning Code Amendment Chapter 18.29 ZOA14 -0004
Staff Report
October 1, 2014
Page 3
DI.A Page 34 of 84
Let the market decide what is the best location of residential standalone, mixed -use, and
non - residential standalone projects should be located. Our design standards will govern
what the structures look like, the pedestrian amenities, parking locations, etc. Auburn's
regulations should not stand in the way of market demands. Mixed -use will still have the
highest achievable FAR to promote residential development with commercial but open
the market up on the south side of Main Street to standalone non - residential projects.
V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Planning Commission recommend approval of the proposed code amendment to Chapter
18.29.
VI. EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1 Proposed code changes Auburn City Code Chapter 18.29
Exhibit 2 Request to Department of Commerce for Expedited State Review
Exhibit 3 Department of Commerce acknowledgement letter
Exhibit 4 Request to publish combined SEPA Determination and Hearing Notice in
newspaper
Exhibit 5 Environmental Checklist
Exhibit 6 Determination of Non - Significance and Public Hearing Notice
Prepared by (include name and sign): Elizabeth Chamberlain, AICP, Planning and Design
Services Manager
Zoning Code Amendment Chapter 18.29 ZOA14 -0004
Staff Report
October 1, 2014
Page 4
DI.A Page 35 of 84
DI.B
CITY , r
AUBURN
WASH Num
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject: Date:
Ordinance No. 6537 October 15, 2014
Department: Attachments: Budget Impact:
Community Development & Ordinance Na 6537 $0
Public Works Staff Report to Planning Commission (wlcut
exhibits)
Administrative Recommendation:
For discussion only.
Background Summary:
Chapter 58.17 of the Revised Code of Washington establishes the legal foundation
and framework for subdividing land in Washington State. This statute uses the terms
"subdivision" and "short subdivision" to describe the two primary types of land
division. A subdivision is defined as a division or redivision of land into 5 or more lots,
tracts, parcels or sites. A short subdivision is defined as a division or redivision of
land into 4 or fewer lots, tracts, parcels or sites.
RCW 58.17.033 requires that jurisdictions establish land division procedures within
their local city code. The City of Auburn has adopted Title 17 which sets forth the
City's land division procedures. Currently, Title 17 of the Auburn City Code provides a
definition for subdivision and short subdivision that is consistent with that established
in Chapter 58.17 RCW.
The proposed amendment will allow greater flexibility and promotion for infill
development by allowing short subdivisions up to nine lots rather than the current limit
of four lots. Short subdivisions are an administrative process rather than a hearing
examiner decision. Public notice will still be given for short plat applications so
adjacent property owners have the opportunity to comment on a proposal. While
there are a number of procedural and cost differences between subdivisions and short
subdivisions, there are no differences in the development standards that must be
adhered to in order to obtain approval or the manner in which land may be used once
the land division is complete. Both types of land divisions are required to comply with
all of the same requirements for density, provision of public improvements (e.g.
sidewalks, streets, utilities, etc.), land use, building, protection of environmental
features, etc.
AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED Page 36 of 84
DI.B
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 7, 2014 on the proposed
code amendment that would amend the threshold for short subdivisions. There was
no public testimony during the public hearing. Staff recommended approval of the
proposed code amendment and the Planning Commission concurred recommending
approval to the full City Council.
At the October 13, 2014 Planning and Community Development Committee meeting,
the Committee reviewed the Planning Commission's recommendation and moved the
code amendment forward to full City Council with a recommendation of approval.
Reviewed by Council Committees:
Planning And Community Development, Public Works Other: Legal, Planning
Commission
Councilmember: Holman Staff: Chamberlain
Meeting Date: October 20, 2014 Item Number: DI.B
AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED Page 37 of 84
ORDINANCE NO. 6 5 3 7
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
AUBURN, WASHINGTON, AMENDING SECTION 17.09.010
OF THE AUBURN CITY CODE RELATED TO SHORT PLAT
THRESHOLDS
WHEREAS, from time to time, amendments to the City of Auburn subdivision
code are appropriate, in order to update and better reflect the current use regulations
and development needs of the City; and
WHEREAS, from time to time, amendments to the City of Auburn subdivision
code are appropriate, in order to remain consistent with changes in the policy guidance
of the City's Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of this amendment to the code is to better respond to
the market place regarding development within City; and
WHEREAS, Chapter 58.17 of the Revised Code of Washington establishes the
legal foundation and framework for subdividing land in Washington State; and
WHEREAS, RCW 58.17.033 requires that jurisdictions establish land division
procedures within their local city code and the City of Auburn has adopted Title 17
which sets forth the City's land division procedures; and
WHEREAS, RCW 58.17.020 defines a short subdivision as four or fewer lots
However, the legislative authority of any city or town may by local ordinance increase
the number of lots, tracts, or parcels to be regulated as short subdivisions to a
maximum of nine; and
WHEREAS, this code amendment was subject to environmental review process
under the Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). A Determination of Non-
Ordinance No. 6537
October 14, 2014
Page 1
DI.B Page 38 of 84
Significance (DNS) was issued September 24, 2014 and the City observed a fourteen -
day public comment period. The City did not receive any comments in response to
notice of the public comment period; and
WHEREAS, this code amendment was considered by the Planning Commission
at a duly noticed public hearing on October 7, 2014 and after the close the public
hearing the Planning Commission forwarded a recommendation for approval to the City
Council; and
WHEREAS, the code amendment was reviewed by the Planning and Community
Development Committee of the City Council on October 13, 2014 and the Committee
recommended approval to the full City Council of the code change as recommended by
the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, the City Council determined, in light of the recommendations it
received, that the following code changes are in the best interest of the City.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN,
WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN, as follows:
Section 1. Amendment to City Code. That section 17.09.010 of the
Auburn City Code entitled "Development Standards" is hereby amended as follows:
17.09.010 General provisions.
Every short subdivision shall comply with the provisions of this chapter. Land shall be
divided by the short subdivision method according to the provisions of this title, if the
three following criteria are met:
A. The division will not result in the creation of more than four nine lots.
B. The original tract being divided has not been created by a short subdivision within the
previous five years, except that when the short subdivision contains fewer than four nine
Ordinance No. 6537
October 14, 2014
Page 2
DI.B Page 39 of 84
parcels, a revised short subdivision may be filed within the five -year period to create up
to a total of four nine lots within the original short subdivision boundaries.
C. The entire original tract (except adjacent platted or short subdivided land) shall be
included within one short subdivision application; provided, that a pre- existing, unplatted
adjacent parcel may also be excluded if it is 20 acres or greater in size. (Ord. 6239 § 1,
2009; Ord. 6006 § 3, 2006; Ord. 5164 § 1, 1998; Ord. 4840 § 1, 1996; Ord. 4296 § 2,
1988. Formerly 17.14.010).
Section 2. Implementation. The Mayor is hereby authorized to implement
such administrative procedures as may be necessary to carry out the directions of this
legislation.
Section 3. Severability. The provisions of this ordinance are declared
to be separate and severable. The invalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph,
subdivision, section or portion of this ordinance, or the invalidity of the application
thereof to any person or circumstance shall not affect the validity of the remainder of
this ordinance, or the validity of its application to other persons or circumstances.
Section 4. Effective date. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in
force five days from and after its passage, approval and publication as provided by law.
INTRODUCED:
PASSED:
APPROVED:
ATTEST: NANCY BACKUS, MAYOR
Danielle E. Daskam, City Clerk
Ordinance No. 6537
October 14, 2014
Page 3
DI.B Page 40 of 84
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Daniel B. Heid, City Attorney
PUBLISHED:
Ordinance No. 6537
October 14, 2014
Page 4
DI.B Page 41 of 84
Zoning Code Amendment —
Staff Report to Planning Commission
Amendment to Chapter 17.09 Short Subdivisions
ZOA14 -0005
I. GENERAL INFORMATION:
Chapter 58.17 of the Revised Code of Washington establishes the legal foundation and
framework for subdividing land in Washington State. This statute uses the terms
"subdivision" and "short subdivision" to describe the two primary types of land division. A
subdivision is defined as a division or redivision of land into 5 or more lots, tracts, parcels or
sites. A short subdivision is defined as a division or redivision of land into 4 or fewer lots,
tracts, parcels or sites.
RCW 58.17.033 requires that jurisdictions establish land division procedures within their
local city code. The City of Auburn has adopted Title 17 which sets forth the City's land
division procedures. Currently, Title 17 of the Auburn City Code provides a definition for
subdivision and short subdivision that is consistent with that established in Chapter 58.17
RCW.
II. SEPA STATUS:
Pursuant to WAC 197 -11- 800(6), non - project actions such as code amendments are not
exempt from environmental review. The City issued a Determination of Non - Significance
September 24, 2014. The comment period ends October 8, 2014 and the appeal period
ends on October 26, 2014.
III. FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. The intent of the proposed code amendment is to raise the City's short subdivision
threshold from 4 or fewer lots to nine or fewer lots as permitted under RCW 58.17.
2. In 2002 the State Legislature modified the definition of short subdivision to allow City's
planning under the State Growth Management Act to increase the short subdivision
threshold from 4 or fewer lots to 9 or fewer lots.
3. The process for zoning code text amendments is described in ACC Chapter 18.68:
18.68.020 Initiation of amendments.
B. Text.
1. The city council, or planning and development committee of the city council, upon its
own motion may request the planning commission to conduct a public hearing to amend
any portion or all of this title; provided, that text amendments that are purely
administrative or procedural do not require a public hearing, nor do they require
preliminary review or recommendations of the planning commission;
2. The planning commission may upon its own motion call for a public hearing to amend
any portion or all of this title, with the exception of purely administrative or procedural
amendments;
Zoning Code Amendment Chapter 18.29 ZOA14 -0005
Staff Report
October 1, 2014
Page 1
DI.B Page 42 of 84
3. Any resident or property owner of the city may petition the city to request an
amendment to the text of this title.
C. For the purposes of this chapter, substantive amendments shall be distinguished from
procedural or administrative amendments in accordance with the following: "Substantive"
matters relate to regulations that define or limit what can be done in terms of conduct,
use or action (e.g., what use may be made of land, what requirements apply to
development, what public infrastructure may be required of certain developments), and
"procedural" or "administrative" matters are those that relate to the process of how an
application to take such action must be pursued (e.g., time limits for applications and
appeals, what forms must be used, and where or how applications must be submitted.
Essentially, "procedural" or "administrative" matters are the mechanical rules by which
substantive issues may be pursued). (Ord. 6287 § 2, 2010; Ord. 6198 § 3, 2008; Ord.
4840 § 1, 1996; Ord. 4304 § 1(46), 1988; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.)
18.68.030 Public hearing process.
A. Text Amendments. With the exception of purely administrative or procedural
amendments, the planning commission shall conduct at least one public hearing on all
amendments to this title. The planning commission shall make a recommendation to the
city council who may or may not conduct a public hearing.
C. City Council Decision. The city council may affirm, modify or disaffirm any
recommendation of the planning commission or hearing examiner with regard to
amendments of the text or map of this title. (Ord. 6198 § 4, 2008; Ord. 4840 § 1, 1996;
Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.)
18.68.040 Public hearing notice requirements.
A. Text Amendments.
1. Planning Commission. For text amendments that require a public hearing under ACC
18.68.030(A), notice of a public hearing shall be given by publication, in a newspaper of
general circulation in the area, at least 10 days prior to the public hearing and by posting
the notice in three general public locations.
2. City Council. Notice of a public hearing shall be given by publication, in a newspaper
of general circulation in the area, prior to the public hearing and by posting the notice in
three general public locations.
4. The proposed code amendments are supported by the City of Auburn Comprehensive
Plan as identified in the conclusion section of this staff report.
5. Pursuant to WAC 197 -11- 800(6), non - project actions such as code amendments are
not exempt from environmental review. The City issued a Determination of Non -
Significance September 24, 2014. The comment period ends October 8, 2014 and the
appeal period ends on October 26, 2014. As of the writing of this report, no comments
have been received.
6. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106, the proposed code amendments outlined in this staff
report were sent to the Washington State Department of Commerce and other state
agencies as required for the 60 -day state review required for modification of
development regulations. The amendments were sent on October 1, 2014 and
expedited review was requested under RCW 36.70A.106(3)(b). The Department of
Commerce acknowledged receipt on October 1, 2014. Expedited review has not been
Zoning Code Amendment Chapter 18.29 ZOA14 -0005
Staff Report
October 1, 2014
Page 2
DI.B Page 43 of 84
granted as of the writing of this staff report. If the expedited review request is denied
then the standard 60 -days applies from the submittal date of October 1, 2014.
7. Planning Commission reviewed the draft code amendments at the regular September 3,
2014 meeting.
8. The public hearing notice was published on September 26, 2014 in the Seattle Times at
least 10 -days prior to the Planning Commission public hearing scheduled for October 7,
2014.
9. The following conclusions support the proposed amendment to Chapter 17.09, Short
Subdivisions, scheduled for the Planning Commission's October 7, 2014 public hearing
with a staff recommendation
IV. CONCLUSIONS:
1. Pursuant to ACC Section 18.68.020, amendments of Title 18 require a public hearing
before the Planning Commission with a public hearing notice published at least 10 -days
prior to the public hearing date.
Staff Analysis:
The public hearing notice was published in the Seattle Times on September 26, 2014
which is at least 10 -days prior to the Planning Commission public hearing scheduled for
October 7, 2014.
2. These code amendments are supported by the City of Auburn's Comprehensive Plan as
follows:
Objective 6.2. Maintain downtown as an area that uniquely serves both regional and
community needs.
Policies:
LU -23 The development of new neighborhoods should be governed by development
standards which allow some flexibility. Flexibility should be considered to encourage
compact urban development, to provide protection of critical areas and resource lands
(including, but not limited to, agricultural resource lands, cultural resources, forest
resource lands, mineral resource areas (Map 9.4) hillsides or wetlands), and to facilitate
non - motorized transportation. Increased density is achievable through flexible
development standards, if certain criteria are met, as established in city code.
LU -117 Encourage well designed infill and redevelopment projects to fully utilize
previous investment in existing infrastructure in the single family residential, moderate
density residential, and high density residential designated areas of the City.
LU -118 Reduce the consumption of undeveloped land by facilitating the redevelopment
of underutilized land and infill of vacant parcels whenever possible in the single family
residential, moderate density residential, and high density residential designated areas
of the City.
Zoning Code Amendment Chapter 18.29 ZOA14 -0005
Staff Report
October 1, 2014
Page 3
DI.B Page 44 of 84
LU -119 Explore innovative mechanisms to encourage the more efficient use of land
including density bonuses and sale of air rights.
Staff Analysis:
The proposed amendment will allow greater flexibility and promotion for infill
development by allowing short subdivisions up to nine lots rather than the current limit of
four lots. Short subdivisions are an administrative process rather than a hearing
examiner decision. Public notice will still be given for short plat applications so adjacent
property owners have the opportunity to comment on a proposal.
While there are a number of procedural and cost differences between subdivisions and
short subdivisions, there are no differences in the development standards that must be
adhered to in order to obtain approval or the manner in which land may be used once
the land division is complete. Both types of land divisions are required to comply with all
of the same requirements for density, provision of public improvements (e.g. sidewalks,
streets, utilities, etc.), land use, building, protection of environmental features, etc.
The primary differences between a short subdivision and a subdivision are as follows:
1. Short subdivisions are administrative decisions that do not necessitate a public
hearing.
2. Subdivisions are quasi-judicial decisions that are made by the Hearing Examiner
after a public hearing.
3. Subdivisions are substantially more expensive because they incur the cost of the
Hearing Examiner's services, greater permit fees, and costs of public notice. The fee
for a Preliminary Subdivision application is $3,000.00 plus $120.00 per lot while the
Preliminary Short Subdivision application fee is $1,449.00 plus $60.00 per lot. The
fee for a Final Subdivision application is $1,533.00 plus $52.00 per lot while the fee
for a Final Short Subdivision is $750.00 plus $25.00 per lot. In addition to the permit
fees, the applicant is required to pay for the public notification sign and for the
Hearing Examiner's costs to review the file, staff recommendation, conduct a
hearing, and write a decision. The fee for a sign is $130.00 and the Hearing
Examiner's fees are approximately $1,500.00. The following table provides a
comparison of the costs of an 8 lot land division processed under the current rules as
a subdivision and the costs if it were classified as a short subdivision:
Zoning Code Amendment Chapter 18.29 ZOA14 -0005
Staff Report
October 1, 2014
Page 4
DI.B Page 45 of 84
8 Lot Land Division
"Subdivision"
8 Lot Land Division
"Short Subdivision"
Preliminary Application Fee (Base)
$3,000.00
$1,449.00
Preliminary Application Fee (Per Lot)
$ 960.00
$ 480.00
Final Application Fee (Base)
$1,533.00
$ 750.00
Final Application Fee (Per Lot)
$ 416.00
$ 200.00
Public Notice Sign
$ 130.00
N/A
Hearing Examiner Costs
$ 1,500.00
N/A
Total
$7,539.00
$2,879.00
Difference
+4,660.00
-4,660.00
Zoning Code Amendment Chapter 18.29 ZOA14 -0005
Staff Report
October 1, 2014
Page 4
DI.B Page 45 of 84
4. A subdivision adds significant additional time to the project review timeframe.
Specific expanded timeframes are set forth in city code for public notification, public
comment, public hearing, issuance of a decision and appeals. At a minimum, a
subdivision will add approximately 90 days to the processing timeframes.
V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Planning Commission recommend approval of the proposed code amendment to Chapter
17.09 related to Short Subdivisions.
VI. EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1 Proposed code changes Auburn City Code Chapter 17.09
Exhibit 2 Request to Department of Commerce for Expedited State Review
Exhibit 3 Department of Commerce acknowledgement letter (will be provided at hearing)
Exhibit 4 Request to publish combined SEPA Determination and Hearing Notice in
newspaper
Exhibit 5 Environmental Checklist
Exhibit 6 Determination of Non - Significance and Public Hearing Notice
Prepared by (include name and sign): Elizabeth Chamberlain, AICP, Planning and Design
Services Manager
Zoning Code Amendment Chapter 18.29 ZOA14 -0005
Staff Report
October 1, 2014
Page 5
DI.B Page 46 of 84
DI.E
AuBuRN ITY Cdr •
\VASHENG`Or,
Agenda Subject:
Water Use Efficiency Program
Department:
Public Works
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Attachments:
M emorandum
Draft Chapters
Administrative Recommendation:
Date:
October 14, 2014
Budget Impact:
$0
Background Summary:
See attached memorandum.
Reviewed by Council Committees:
Public Works
Councilmember: Osborne Staff: Fenhaus
Meeting Date: October 20, 2014 Item Number: DI.E
AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED Page 47 of 84
WASHINGTON
To: City Council Members
Nancy Backus, Mayor
From: Susan Fenhaus, Water Utilities Engineer
Cc: Kevin Snyder, Director of Community Development and Public Works
Ingrid Gaub, Assistant Director of Engineering /City Engineer
Lisa Tobin, Utilities Engineering Manager
Date: October 14, 2014
Re: Water Use Efficiency Program
Memorandum
Engineering Division
Introduction
The City is in the process of updating the Water System Comprehensive Plan. One aspect of the plan is
the Water Use Efficiency (WUE) Program.
Attached to this memo is the Draft Chapter 8 — Water Use Efficiency, along with tables and figures from
the Draft Chapter 4 — Water Requirements which are used as the basis for some of the calculations within
Chapter 8.
Summary
Historically, the 2007 planning Equivelant Residential Units (ERU) value used in our previous program
was 230 gallons per day (gpd) per ERU. In 2013, theplanning ERU value had reduced to 195 gpd per
ERU. Given the progress over the previous 6 years, the proposed 2015 -2020 WUE Program goal is to
decrease the planning ERU value by 1 percent annually, and revaluate the goal when the planning ERU
value reaches less than 172 gpd /ERU.
The 15 measures presented for the demand -side program are similar to the previous WUE Programs.
The budget for the program measures shown in Table 8.1 are included in the professional services line
item of the proposed water budget (430.00.534.100.41). Program measures are not listed individually in
the water fund budget, but are grouped together as Conservation Public Education, Conservation
Technical Assistance, and Conservation Incentives. The budget for the system required measures
identified in Table 8.2 is reflected in the proposed operations budget of the water fund (430.00.534.800.41
and 430.00.534.800.48).
The City will accept public comments on the Water Use Efficiency Program during the Public Works
Committee meeting.
1
DI.E Page 48 of 84
DI.E
CITY OF AUBURN
COMPREHENSIVE WATER PLAN
WATER USE EFFICIENCY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
Chapter 8 8 -1
8.1 PRIOR CONSERVATION PROGRAMS 8 -1
8.1.1 History 8 -1
8.1.2 Regulatory Requirements 8 -1
8.1.3 Previous Program Goals and Historical Water Usage 8 -2
8.1.4 Historical Distribution System Leakage 8 -3
8.2 2015 -2020 WATER USE EFFICIENCY PROGRAM 8 -3
8.2.1 Program Goals 8 -3
8.2.2 Program Requirements 8 -4
8.2.3 Mandatory Measures 8 -4
8.2.4 Distribution System Leakage 8 -5
8.2.5 2015 -2020 Demand -Side Program Measures 8 -6
8.2.6 Reclaimed Water 8 -8
8.2.7 Budget 8 -9
8.2.8 Public Participation 8 -10
8.2.9 2015 -2020 WUE Program Effectiveness 8 -10
8.2.10 Projected Water Demand 8 -11
8.2.11 Summary of Water Use Efficiency Program 8 -12
Appendix J
Appendix K
LIST OF APPENDICES
King County Reclaimed Water Checklist Evaluation
Public Comments on Water Use Efficiency Program Goals
LIST OF TABLES
Table 8.1 2015 to 2020 Budget for Each Program Measure 8 -9
Table 8.2 2015 to 2020 Budget for System Required WUE Measures 8 -9
Table 8.3 Retail ADD & MDD with and without WUE 8 -13
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 8.1 Demand Savings 8 -14
October 2014 — DRAFT
pw :/ /Carollo/ Documents /ClientNVA /Auburn /7888A00 /Deliverables /Chapter 04/Water Requirements.doc
Page 49 of 84
DI.E
Chapter 8
WATER USE EFFICIENCY
As populations continue to climb, demand for limited water supplies is steadily increasing in
the Pacific Northwest. Efficient water use is critical for water systems to support growth in
their communities and support the environment and recreation. The efficient use of water
helps ensure reliable water supplies are available for the City of Auburn (City) well into the
future. It is important to the City to not only conserve water, which reduces use, but also
promote efficient use, which both conserves water and reduces wasteful uses. The purpose
of this chapter is to provide an analysis of the City's historic water conservation program
and to evaluate the existing and proposed conservation and water use efficiency measures.
This chapter is formatted into two sections. The first section analyzes the previous
conservation programs by examining how it was formed, it's program and goals, and
analyzes the savings. The second section of this chapter presents the City's new 2015
Water Use Efficiency (WUE) Program, and includes the new requirements, measures, and
demand savings anticipated from the program.
8.1 PRIOR CONSERVATION PROGRAMS
8.1.1 History
The first formal water conservation program was developed by the City in 1995, one year
after the Washington Department of Health (DOH) jointly published conservation guidelines,
as described below. The City's program included several conservation activities such as
school outreach, program promotion, leak detection, meter repair /replacement, and
conservation pricing. The City enhanced the program in 2001 and again in 2009. The 2009
program will provide the basis of the historical review in this chapter.
The City's 2015 WUE Program follows DOH's 2011 Water Use Efficiency Guidebook. while
building off previous plans. Therefore, it is worth noting that in preparing previous plans the
City reviewed the 1990 South King County Coordinated Water System Plan (CWSP), and
Washington Department of Ecology's 1994 Conservation Planning Requirements (CPR) -
Guidelines and Requirements for Public Water Systems Regarding Water Use Reporting,
Demand Forecasting Methodology, and Conservation Programs, and the Water
Conservation Bibliography for Public Water Systems by the US Army Corps of Engineers.
8.1.2 Regulatory Requirements
The Washington Water Utilities Council, DOH, and Department of Ecology jointly developed
the CPR. Interim guidelines were first established in 1990, and subsequently finalized and
approved in 1994. The DOH published the CPR in 1994, which was the basis of the City's
1995 and 2001 conservation programs.
October 2014 — DRAFT
pw : / /Carollo/ Documents / Client /WA/Auburn /7888A00 /Deliverables /Chapter 04/Water Requlrements,doc
8 -1
Page 50 of 84
DI.E
In 2003, the Washington State Legislature passed Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill
1338, better known as the Municipal Water Law, to address the increasing demand on our
state's water resources. The law established that all municipal water suppliers must use
water more efficiently in exchange for water rights certainty and flexibility to help water
municipal suppliers meet future demand. The Legislature directed the DOH to adopt an
enforceable WUE Program, which became effective on January 22, 2007. The WUE
Program replaced the CPR. The new WUE requirements emphasize the importance of
measuring water usage and evaluating the effectiveness of the water supplier's WUE
Program.
8.1.3 Previous Program Goals and Historical Water Usage
The City's 2009 -2014 Conservation Program was a continuation of the 2000 -2005
Program, with specific enhancements to the program to comply with WUE regulations and
create an emphasis on efficient water usage rather than only conserving. The program
goals were set per the WAC 246- 290- 830(4)(a) through a public process and posted to the
City's website in July 2009. The goals for the 2009 -2014 Program targeted a 1 percent
reduction per year in Equivalent Residential Unit (ERU) values. The City also wanted to
raise the visibility and performance of the Conservation Program by becoming a community
leader in water conservation through example and public education. As part of that
leadership, the City supported and participated in applicable regional plans in order to
maintain a reliable and adequate supply of water for the region.
In 2007, the planning ERU value was 230 gpd per ERU, based on the 75th percentile of the
previous six years of data. The 2013 (current) planning ERU value was 195 gpd per ERU,
which was also based on the 75th percentile of the previous six years of data. This equates
to a 2.5 percent annual decrease in the planning ERU value, more than double the City's
WUE goal.
The annual water use per account from 2008 through 2013 used to calculate the planning
ERU value is shown in Table 4.3. The table shows the City has also experienced decreases
in water use occurred in all sectors, where Schools and Irrigation had the largest decrease
in per account water use. These decreases were likely due to a combination of factors,
including: increased metering, WUE education, and economic conditions.
Seasonal water use can have a huge impact on the system's ability to deliver water during
peak demands. Figure 4.4 shows the seasonal demand from 2011 to 2013 for each
customer class. The winter months show a generally steady monthly usage, while summer
months typically show an increase, peak, and decrease in water usage. Historically, single -
family residential customer class has produced a large peak in the summer months. This
peaking is quantified in the MDD to ADD peaking factor presented in Table 4.5. The 75th
percentile of the MDD to ADD peaking factor is 1.82, which is marked decrease from the
previous plan of 2.01. The City would like to continue this downward trend in peak use and
has included it as a new goal in the 2015 -2020 WUE Program.
October 2014 — DRAFT
pw:// Carollo/ Documents /CllentNVA /Auburn /7888A00 /Deliverables /Chapter 04/Water Requirements,doc
8 -2
Page 51 of 84
8.1.4 Historical Distribution System Leakage
Distribution system leakage (DSL) is a significant element of the WUE requirements. It is
calculated as the difference between the total amount of water produced and the sum of
water sold and authorized unmetered water usage. It may include inaccurate master and
service connection meters, unaccounted -for non - revenue water use, pipeline leakage, and
unauthorized use. DSL does not include authorized water usage such as water used for fire
protection, flushing, construction, and other maintenance and operations practices.
However, to be credited, this must be accounted for by metering or by estimating water use
with credible means. All water that is not authorized is considered distribution system
leakage. The DOH requires the 3 -year average DSL to be under 10 percent to minimize
water waste. As discussed in Chapter 4, the historical 3 -year rolling average DSL was
between 6.3 percent and 9.7 percent of the total production since 2007.
8.2 2015 -2020 WATER USE EFFICIENCY PROGRAM
The 2015 -2020 WUE Program will be a continuation of the City's successful current WUE
Program. Program measures have been expanded, reflecting the City's increased service
population of over 50,000 people. The program has also been updated to leverage the
City's investments in improved SCADA, leak detection, and Advanced Metering
Infrastructure (AMI). The 2015 Plan complies with regulations as set forth in WAC 246 -290-
830 and DOH's 2011 Water Use Efficiency Guidebook. This section summarizes the
program's goals, demand and supply side measures, reclaimed water, and DSL. The
projected demand with the conservation goals, program budget, and cost savings are also
presented.
8.2.1 Program Goals
Per the WAC 246- 290- 830(4)(a), all water purveyors with 1,000 or more connections were
required to set efficiency goals through a public process. The City has chosen to focus on
implementing voluntary measures to decrease both the average and peak water usage.
The 2015 program has established the following goals:
• Water Use per ERU: Decrease the planning ERU value (gpd /ERU) 1 percent annually
from the current planning ERU value of 195 gpd /ERU, which is the 75th percentile of
6 years of historical data (2008 — 2013). Revaluate goal when the planning ERU
value reaches less than 172 gpd /ERU..
• MDD /ADD Peaking Factor: Decrease the planning peaking factor from the current
1.82, which is equal to the 75th percentile of 6 years of historical data (2008 — 2013),
to a planning peaking factor of less than 1.72.
October 2014 — DRAFT
• D I . E pw :/ /Carollo/ Documents / Client /WANAuburn /7888A00 /Deliverables /Chapter 04/Water Requirements,doc
8 -3
Page 52 of 84
DI.E
• Distribution System Leakage: Maintain 3 -year average DSL under 10 percent to
minimize water waste.
• Customer Support: To provide the service and support necessary to those water
customers expressing a desire to conserve water as a part of their environmental
ethic and as a means of minimizing water bills.
• Regional Support: To support and participate in the South King County CWSP and
other applicable regional plans in order to maintain a reliable and adequate supply of
water for the region.
The WUE Program measures, as summarized below, are designed to help meet these
established goals.
8.2.2 Program Requirements
The WUE requirements emphasize the importance of measuring water usage and
evaluating the effectiveness of the City's program. There are three fundamental
requirements of a WUE Program that the City follows:
• Planning Requirements — Municipal water suppliers are required to:
- Collect data.
— Forecast demand.
— Evaluate WUE measures.
— Calculate DSL.
- Implement a WUE Program to meet their goals.
• Distribution Leakage Standard — Municipal water suppliers are required to meet a
distribution system leakage standard to minimize water loss from their distribution
system.
• Goal setting and performance reporting — Municipal water suppliers are required to
set WUE goals through a public process and report annually to their customers and
DOH
8.2.3 Mandatory Measures
The WUE Program includes supply side measures that the City implements to understand
and control leakage including new meters, leak detection surveys, and water audits. Per the
WUE requirements, the following measures shall be continued for the 2015 -2020 WUE
program:
• Install production (source) meters.
• Install consumption (service) meters.
• Perform meter calibration.
October 2014 — DRAFT
pw :/ /Carollo /Documents /Client/WA/ Auburn /7888A00 /Deliverables /Chapter 04/Water Requirements,doc
8 -4
Page 53 of 84
DI.E
• Implement a water loss control action plan to control leakage if the 3 year rolling
average exceeds 10 percent.
• Educate customers about water use efficiency practices.
Additionally, the following measures that must be evaluated are:
• Rates that encourage water demand efficiency (discussed in Chapter 11);
• Reclamation opportunities (discussed below).
The City in the past has complied with these requirements and will continue to comply with
these regulations.
8.2.4 Distribution System Leakage
DSL is a significant element in the City's WUE Program. In the past, distribution leakage
was referred to as "unaccounted- for - water ". To limit DSL, the City has ongoing leak
detection, meter calibration, and an active repair and replacement program for water
system infrastructure, as detailed in Chapter 12 — Operations and Maintenance. The City
has recently completed a leak detection study of major mains and is determining the best
approach to fix several detected leaks. Additionally, the City has recently increased its
efforts to reduce non - payment of bills and water theft.
Further, the City has recently updated its SCADA and will implement AMI during the 2015-
2020 periods. These investments should significantly increase the City's ability to measure
DSL both temporally and geographically. The resulting information may allow the City to
better target its WUE activities to reduce DSL.
8.2.4.1 Increasing Effectiveness of the WUE Program with AMI
The City is implementing AMI throughout the system during the 2015 -2020 program period.
AMI will provide a new tool to improve the effectiveness of the WUE Program measures.
AMI can provide detailed water use data for each customer that would allow the City to
better understand water use patterns and target WUE Program measures to specific
customers. Data may be sent real -time or stored for several weeks or months. Potential
AMI capabilities vary depending on the chosen hardware and software; however most
systems can aid in the WUE Program. Below is a summary of some of the potential uses of
AMI.
• Using advanced algorithms and advanced metering data, the City may be able to
identify customer leaks.
• Advanced metering is also expected to provide cost savings in the Leak Detection
and Repair and Service Meter Replacements programs.
• Advanced metering may aid in the City's efforts to reduce non - payment of bills and
water theft.
October 2014 — DRAFT
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClIent)WA/Auburn /7888A00 /Deliverables /Chapter 04/Water Requirements,doc
8 -5
Page 54 of 84
DI.E
• Comparing production and customer water use, DSL can be evaluated in greater
temporal and geographic detail. For example, DSL may be calculated by month or for
a given service area.
• Advanced metering data can help the City identify groups of customers to target for
WUE measures. It can also be used to track the effectiveness of the measures for the
same customers.
• Advanced metering data will allow additional reporting options to educate customers,
such as their peak water use.
AMI may provide substantial benefits for the WUE Program. It is recommended that the City
consider the potential water use and cost savings when implementing AMI in the system.
8.2.5 2015 -2020 Demand -Side Program Measures
To encourage WUE and support customers, the City has incorporated program measures
that target demand reductions. Under the WUE requirements, a program measure may
include water efficient devices, actions, business practices, or policies that promote efficient
water use. With 15 measures as part of the 2015 Program, the City exceeds the minimum
DOH requirement of 12 measures. WUE measures can target specific customer classes or
a combination of customer classes. The City's demand -side program measures are
summarized below.
1. School Outreach: School programs will continue to be arranged to educate students
on efficient water usage. The Cities of Kent and Auburn, along with partners
Lakehaven Utility District and Soos Creek Water and Sewer District, have hosted the
annual two day Water Festival for fourth and fifth grade students at Green River
Community College. The Water Festival provides hands -on activities to teach water
conservation, water supply, groundwater and surface water protection, and the water
cycle. The City will conduct alternative or additional outreach if requested by schools.
2. Speakers' Bureau: The City will seek speaking opportunities to discuss water use
efficiency with a wide - audience spectrum. Topics could include water efficient
fixtures and appliances, curbing seasonal peak demands, lawn watering practices,
etc.
3. Program Promotion: The City will seek opportunities for television and /or radio public
service announcements for water use efficiency, and submit news articles to local
papers and Auburn City Magazine on efficient water usage especially during the
spring and summer months.
4. Theme Shows /Fairs: The City hosts an annual Kids Day fair. The fair includes a wide
range of activities for all ages of kids. As part of the fair, the City has fun water
related activities and provides water efficiency brochures and other materials. The
City will conduct outreach at other Theme Shows /Fairs if requested. Water saving
device kits are distributed to interested single - family and multiple - family residential
customers.
October 2014 — DRAFT
pw:l /Carollo/ Documents / Clientl WA /Auburn17888A00 /Deliverables /Chapter 04/Water Requlrements,doc
8 -6
Page 55 of 84
DI.E
5. Water Audits: The City will conduct a water audit upon the request of a customer,
including industrial, commercial, and institutional customers. The audits will review
items such as: recirculation of cooling water, reuse of cooling and process water,
reuse of treated wastewater, efficient landscape irrigation, low water using fixtures,
fixing Teaks, and process modifications.
6. Customer Leak Detection: The City identifies potential leaks through investigation of
the water meter upon request of customers. After implementing AMI, the City will
evaluate the potential for using the advanced meters to help identify leaks.
7. Bills Showing Consumption History: The City will continue to provide customer bills
showing the previous year's water usage. After implementing AMI, the City will
evaluate additional reporting options to educate customers on their water use.
8. Water Saving Device Kits: The City will participate in distribution of water use
efficiency kits through education events such as speakers' bureaus, theme shows,
fairs, and through bill insert request forms.
9. WUE Pricing: The City has an inverted block rate structure for single - family
residential customers to encourage WUE. The City will consider WUE in future cost
of service /rate studies. Studies should determine the most appropriate water
structures and rate levels to achieve the City's WUE goals, while generating
sufficient revenues for utility operations. It is recommended that the studies consider
uniform rates by class, inverted block rates, seasonal rates, and excess use rates.
10. Water Efficient Toilet Rebate Program: The City will continue to provide rebates to
customers that replace old toilets with new high- efficiency toilets through their EPA
WaterSense Toilet Rebate program.
11. Low -Flow Shower Heads Giveaways: The City gives away free low -flow shower
heads at the Utility Billing Counter.
12. School Outdoor Water Use Reduction: The City will target schools in an effort to
reduce their outdoor water consumption. Water audits and education on benefits of
replacing inefficient irrigation systems or landscaping (including turf) will be
conducted.
13. City Water Use Reduction: The City will audit the water use of City accounts in an
effort to identify both indoor and outdoor water saving opportunities. The Water Utility
staff will help educate City account holders on WUE; however, no water budget has
been allocated to implement water saving devices at City facilities.
14. Demonstration Garden: The City maintains a demonstration garden at Well 7. The
site includes informational placards on Xeriscaping and the water supply well.
15. Landscape Workshops: The City hosts Natural Yard Care workshops. Workshops
are open to homeowners and landscaping professionals.
It is important to note that in addition to the water cost savings for the WUE measures,
other benefits result, both to the utility and to its customers, from WUE activities. Such
additional benefits could include:
October 2014 — DRAFT
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /Client/WA/ Auburn /7888A00 /Deliverables /Chapter 04/Water Requirements.doc
8 -7
Page 56 of 84
DI.E
• Significant customer energy savings because water heaters are the second largest
energy users in the home. Hot water use can be reduced almost one -third by cost -
effective WUE measures, such as water efficient fixtures and appliances. Significant
energy savings can also occur for industrial processes requiring water heating and
other power uses.
• Efficient landscaping and irrigation techniques save on maintenance costs.
• Reductions in water production decrease energy required by utilities to treat and
distribute water and to collect and treat wastewater. Chemical costs are also reduced
in water and wastewater operations.
• System measures could provide substantial benefits in addition to water production
cost savings including:
— Identification of non - revenue water could result in recovery of unbilled revenue
(inaccurate meters) and reduced unauthorized water usage (theft).
— Leak detection helps prevent major main breaks, which could result in
significant repair costs to the utility.
— Leak detection reduces a utility's liability due to prevention of potential property
damage.
— Repair and /or replacement of service and source meters allows a utility to
recover unbilled water revenues.
8.2.6 Reclaimed Water
According to WAC 246- 290 -100 and the WUE requirements, water systems with over 1,000
connections must collect and evaluate information on reclaimed water opportunities. The
City is committed to wastewater reuse and rainwater reclamation, as stated in its official
policies summarized in Chapter 3. The City participates in the King County reclaimed water
program; which completed a Reclaimed Water Comprehensive Plan in 2012. Additionally,
the City has completed the King County Water Reclamation Evaluation Checklist; provided
in Appendix J. Currently, there are no reclaimed water users in the City. The City considers
the most likely users of reclaimed water to be the irrigation customer class. Total irrigation
use for 2013 was 0.34 million gallons. The City has also identified that it may be possible
for four large users to use reclaimed water (Boeing, Emerald Downs, Supermall/Walmart,
and Adventist Academy); however, these users have not confirmed an interest in using
reclaimed water and there is not currently a reclaimed water source in the area.
The City will implement reclaimed water as a conservation measure and include this
savings in the demand projections when specific opportunities arise. The City, in
conjunction with King County, may develop projects or consider participation in water reuse
projects and programs developed by adjacent jurisdictions and others as appropriate. The
efforts may include demonstration or pilot projects developed in accordance with applicable
federal, state, and local laws and regulations.
October 2014 — DRAFT
pw: / /Carollo /Documents /ClientJWA/ Auburn /7888A00 /Deliverables /Chapter 04NVater Requirements.doc
8 -8
Page 57 of 84
DI.E
8.2.7 Budget
The City has established a budget for each program measure from 2015 -2020, shown in
Table 8.1. Program Measure budgets increase by two to three percent over the period,
except Program Promotion that increases by up to six percent and large meter
test/repair /replace that is expected to increase by four percent. Upkeep of the
demonstration garden is part of the regular maintenance of Well 7; therefore, no additional
budget was allocated. Natural Yard Care workshops are partially funded through the WUE
Program.
Table 8.2 shows the City's budget for required WUE measures through the planning period.
Leak detection and repair and service meter replacements are not expected to increase
over the program period due to the implementation of AMI.
Table 8.1 2015 to 2020 Budget for Each Program Measure
Comprehensive Water Plan
City of Auburn
Measure
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
SchoolOutreach(1)
$10,540
$10,750
$10,960
$11,170
$11,380
$11,590
Speakers' Bureau (2)
$1,300
$1,340
$1,380
$1,420
$1,460
$1,500
Program Promotion (3)
$7,060
$7,460
$7,860
$8,260
$8,660
$9,060
Theme Shows /Fairs (4),
Demonstration Garden (14) &
Landscape Workshops (15)
$1,300
$1,340
$1,380
$1,420
$1,460
$1,500
Water Audits (5), Customer
Leak Detection (6), School
Outdoor Water Use Reduction
(12), &
City Water Use Reduction (13)
$19,620
$20,270
$20,920
$21,570
$22,220
$22,870
Bills Showing Consumption
History (7)
$2,610
$2,690
$2,770
$2,850
$2,930
$3,010
Water Saving Device Kits (8)
$9,130
$9,410
$9,690
$9,970
$10,250
$10,530
Conservation Pricing (9)
$9,130
$9,410
$9,690
$9,970
$10,250
$10,530
Toilet Rebates (10) &
Low -flow Shower Heads (11)
$5,910
$6,030
$6,150
$6,270
$6,390
$6,510
Totals
$66,600
$68,700
$70,800
$72,900
$75,000
$77,100
Table 8.2 2015 to 2020 Budget for System Required WUE Measures
Comprehensive Water Plan
City of Auburn
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
October 2014 - DRAFT
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /Client/WA /Auburn /7888A00 /Deliverables /Chapter 04/Water Requirements.doc
Page 58 of 84
DI .E
Table 8.2 2015 to 2020 Budget for System Required WUE Measures
Comprehensive Water Plan
City of Auburn
Leak Detection & Repair $33,000 $33,000 $33,000 $33,000 $33,000 $33,000
Large Meter
Test /Repair /Replace
Service Meter
Replacements
$67,000 $69,700 $72,500 $75,400 $78,400 $81,500
$235,000 $235,000 $235,000 $235,000 $235,000 $235,000
Total $335,000 $337,700 $340,500 $343,400 $346,400 $349,500
8.2.8 Public Participation
The City publishes its Water Use Efficiency Annual Performance Report on the Water Utility
webpage and is summarized in the Annual Water Quality Report,. The report, also
submitted to DOH, provides the City's DSL, date of most recent public forum, WUE goals,
description of progress in reaching goals, and additional information on WUE efforts. The
City website provides the last three years of Efficiency Reports allowing customers to
compare performance between several years. The City's website also prominently displays
its Conservation Promotions, including frequently asked questions and rebate forms, that
are also available at the Utility Billing counter.
The City has conducted a public process to establish its 2015 -2020 WUE Program
Effectiveness goals, which are outlined in the next section. A public meeting was held on
October 20, 2014 at 3:30 PM. Public comments were incorporated into the WUE goals, and
are in Appendix K.
8.2.9 2015 -2020 WUE Program Effectiveness
The City's water use, both on average basis and on peak demand days, has declined for
over a decade. An aggressive WUE Program is likely a major reason for this decline;
however, it is difficult to estimate the actual water savings directly resulting from the City's
WUE Program because the measures are not directly quantifiable. Measures such as
rebates for high- efficiency toilets and low -flow showerheads, do have a direct water savings
per device. The impacts on customer water use as a result of public education, which is the
main focus of the City's WUE Program, is challenging to measure, as the response of each
participant varies greatly.
8.2.9.1 Future Methods for Measuring Program Effectiveness
The existing program effectiveness was evaluated using system -wide historical water use
data. Future program effectiveness may measure the effectiveness of the City's WUE
Program based on targeted public education programs to customers in a particular area.
This area could be limited to a particular pressure zone, group of neighborhoods, etc., but
should be an area for which the City can track water use before and after participation in
WUE activities or events. Winter months would provide an estimate on indoor water use,
October 2014 — DRAFT
pw :/ /Carollo/ Documents /ClientNVA/Auburn /7888A00 /Deliverables /Chapter 04/Water Requirements.doc
8 -10
Page 59 of 84
DI.E
since outdoor water use, such as irrigation, are kept to a minimum during the winter.
Summer months could provide an estimate on total indoor and outdoor water use.
The first step would be to establish a baseline from historical information. The second step
is to evaluate the resulting water use after promoting WUE through targeted activities and
events to customers in the defined area. AMI may provide additional capabilities to more
easily perform these studies. It is recommended that water use be tracked for an additional
year to identify seasonal trends. Some consideration would need to be given to variations in
weather and economic conditions. Another method would be to perform the same
before /after water use analysis for WUE Program participants who volunteer and provide
their address. The resulting information would be valuable for the City to correlate its WUE
Program efforts with direct water savings for its customers.
8.2.9.2 Cost Savings
The WUE Program primarily provides cost savings in two ways. Reducing demand may
reduce or delay capital projects for additional supply and expanded distribution
infrastructure. Additionally, reducing DSL can provide additional revenue, as well as
increase the efficiency of supplying existing water uses.
The City has completed a cost analysis of their proposed WUE Program using historical
data and projected annual water savings. The City has exceeded its WUE Program goal of
five percent water use savings from 2008 through 2013; where actual savings were nine
percent. However, significant portions of the water use savings may be attributed to the
factors other than the WUE Program, such as the economy. To calculate cost savings, it
was assumed that the WUE Program only achieved its goal of five percent, rather than the
17 percent reduction; this corresponds to savings of 0.3 mgd of ADD from 2008 to 2013.
The City will budget approximately $401,600.00 for the WUE Program in 2015. This budget
includes both the WUE Program measures ($66,600.00), and the required measures,
($335,000.00). This annual expenditure is budgeted and expended through the City's
operation and maintenance budget. Based on the projected 2015 budget and the estimated
annual water savings of 0.06 mgd, projected unit cost of water from the City's program for
2015 is estimated to be $0.0181 per gallon on average. It is important to consider the
majority of the WUE budget is for service meter replacements, which is a key Utility
business practice to maintain accurate billing and payment. Without these costs, the
estimated cost for each gallon of water saved by the WUE Program is only $0.0045 per
gallon on average. Additionally, WUE plays an important role in reducing the need for new
supplies and delaying costly distribution system upgrades.
8.2.10 Projected Water Demand
The projected water savings from the 2015 -2020 WUE Program goals are represented in
the low demand scenario presented in Chapter 4. The WUE Program is only applicable to
retail customers. The projected water demand for the Retail Water Service Area with and
October 2014 — DRAFT
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /Client/WA/Auburn /7888A00 /Deliverables /Chapter 04/Water Requirements.doc
8 -11
Page 60 of 84
DI.E
without WUE for the ADD and the MDD are presented in Table 8.4. Demands are
presented for the 20 -year planning period, as well as the Ultimate demand. The planning
ERU value of 172 gpd /ERU will be achieved in 2025 based on an annual one percent
decrease. No further reductions in demand are projected beyond 2025. Figure 8.1 is a
graphical representation of the data in Table 8.4.
As shown in the table, WUE measures are projected to result in an average day reduction
in retail demand of 1.08 mgd by 2035, representing a reduction of approximately 12
percent. A reduction of 0.54 mgd (7 percent) is projected by 2020. The MDD to ADD
peaking factor was reduced from of 1.82 to 1.73, per the City's goals. As shown in the table,
WUE measures are projected to result in a reduction in retail MDD of 1.72 mgd (12 percent)
by 2020, and approximately 2.78 mgd (17 percent) by the year 2035. Note, Table 8.4
assumes the reduction in peaking factor occurs in 2015. The last year of historical data is in
2013; therefore, consistent with the current WUE Program, the demand projections assume
one percent reduction in 2014.
8.2.11 Summary of Water Use Efficiency Program
The City with the WUE Program provides for efficient water use and supports continued
growth. This program fulfills all the necessary requirements of DOH. The selected program
measures will allow the City to meet its WUE goals, resulting in decreased water demand.
Measures are inter related and will help the City achieve its goals to both reduce average
water use and peak water use per customer. Public education measures (showing water
use in bills, workshops, school outreach, fairs /trade shows, etc.) will continue to be a main
focus of the WUE Program to increase customer awareness and knowledge of WUE
opportunities. Public education is needed to support the City's other WUE measures and to
support reductions in both average and peak water use. Continued appliance rebates and
shower head give -away help customers implement what is learned in the public education
campaign. With the implementation of AMI, it is expected that the City and customers will
be able to identify substantially more water loss reduction opportunities than previously
possible. Therefore, customer and City leak detection, water audits, and meter repair and
replacement may have a prominent role in the 2015 -2020 WUE Program. The increased
water loss reduction activities are expected to support reducing average water use. The
program will also continue to provide financial disincentives for excessive water use through
metering and WUE pricing. This aspect of the program is likely to help reduce peak water
usage further. These measures will result in the City being able to achieve its WUE goals,
which results in reduced demand.
In conclusion, the City will maintain the target water use efficiency goal of one percent
reduction per year in the planning ERU value from 195 gpd per ERU to 172 gpd per ERU
by 2025. Additionally, it is the City's goal to reduce the MDD /ADD peaking factor from 1.82
to 1.72. The goals will be reached through implementation of the proposed program
measures.
October 2014 — DRAFT
pw :/ /Carollo /Documents /Cllent/WA/ Auburn /7888A00 /Deliverables /Chapter 04/Water Requirements.doc
8 -12
Page 61 of 84
DI.E
Table 8.3
Retail ADD & MDD with and without WUE
Comprehensive Water Plan
City of Auburn
Demand
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2025
2035
Ultimate
ADD w/o
7.12
7.17
7.26
7.36
7.45
7.54
7.63
7.74
8.42
9.15
11.65
WUE
ADD w/
7.05
7.03
7.04
7.06
7.08
7.09
7.09
7.10
7.42
8.07
10.26
WUE
Savings
0.07
0.14
0.22
0.30
0.37
0.45
0.54
0.64
1.00
1.08
1.39
% Savings
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
7%
8%
12%
12%
12%
MDD w/o
12.40
13.06
13.22
13.40
13.56
13.74
13.91
14.09
15.32
16.66
21.20
WUE
MDD w/
11.63
12.09
12.11
12.15
12.15
12.18
12.19
12.23
12.77
13.88
17.67
WUE
Savings
0.77
0.97
1.11
1.25
1.41
1.56
1.72
1.86
2.55
2.78
3.53
Savings
6%
7%
8%
9%
10%
11%
12%
13%
17%
17%
17%
October 2014 - DRAFT
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /Client/WA/ Auburn /7888A00 /Deliverables /Chapter 04/Water Requirements,doc
8 -13
Page 62 of 84
DI.E
pw: //C arol lo/ Documents /C I ien t/W A /Auburn /9466A00 /Deliverables /Fig_08_01
Page 63 of 84
Appendix J
KING COUNTY RECLAIMED WATER
CHECKLIST EVALUATION
DI.E Page 64 of 84
King County
For questions, call Kristina Westbrook,
King County Reclaimed Water Program Manager at (206) 296 -5279
www.kinocountv.aov/reclaimedwater
Water Reclamation Evaluation Checklist
For Systems with 1,000 or more Connections
The County and State recognize that changing conditions could initiate a need to
respond in new ways to future water quality standards, wastewater discharge
requirements, take advantage of advances in treatment technologies and /or allow
our region to be positioned to respond to changes associated with climate change
and population growth.
In 2003, Chapter 90.46 of the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) was amended
to require public water systems serving 1,000 or more connections to evaluate
opportunities for reclaimed water when completing their water system plans.
Please use this checklist to meet King County consistency requirements in
responding to this legislation.
Water System Name: City of Auburn
Date: August 12, 2014
PWS ID# 03350V
Contact: Susan Fenhaus
Please use this checklist, including
the inventory template, to ensure
that your water system plan
includes sufficient information
about opportunities for reclaimed
water and your system's efforts to
develop those opportunities. /fa
question is not applicable or the
information is unavailable, then
answer, "unknown" or "n /q."
King County will consider the
checklist completed if each
answer is filled in with the best
available information, even if the
utility states that it is not aware of
any reclaimed water opportunities
within its service area.
1. Identifying Potential Future Demand for Reclaimed Water: King County maintains a database and map of potential
reclaimed water users for evaluating future projects. Please use the template below, or similar table, to provide
information to assist King County in further researching these potential uses.
• Large Utility Water Users (choose one):
I Attached is an inventory of twenty large (above 20,000 gallons /month on average), non single- family
residential, water users served by our utility that have a potential for reclaimed water use, or
Attached is an inventory of our utility's top twenty water users, or
The information requested is unknown or not available.
Additional Comments:
• Large Self Suppliers (choose one):
Attached is an inventory of large, self - supplied water users within our water utility's service boundaries -
especially those near wastewater treatment plants, mainlines, outfalls, and pump stations or similar
reclaimed water facilities), or
The information requested is unknown or not available.
Additional Comments:
• Other (choose one):
Attached is an inventory of other water users (such as those that are clustered near one another and
could be served by a single system) that may be likely candidates for reclaimed water use, or
The information requested is unknown or not available.
Additional Comments:
Revised 12/12/2011
DI.E
Page 65 of 84
Water Reclamation Evaluation Checklist
Page 2
2. Environmental Commitment: Are you a city /town, or providing water service to a city /town, that has made
commitments within resource management plans, salmon recovery plans, or other environmental initiatives for
which there is a potential opportunity for using reclaimed water to assist in meeting commitments? (choose one)
I Yes, here are plans that have potential for reclaimed water use in our service area to meet the above
commitments:
The information requested is unknown, not available.
Additional Comments:
3. Identifying Areas of Potential Use of Reclaimed Water for Environmental Benefit:
Below are examples of uses of reclaimed water that comply with State, Federal and other reclaimed water
environmental, health and safety standards. All of these uses are currently in effect somewhere in Washington
State. To the best of your knowledge, are any of these potential uses for reclaimed water applicable to your area?
River Augmentation (choose one):
nYes, our water rights are limited by instream flows. For more information, King County may contact:
The information requested is unknown, or not available.
Additional Comments:
Groundwater Recharge (choose one):
nYes, we withdraw water from an aquifer that is in a groundwater management area, or from a declining
aquifer, where water levels may need to be replenished or to maintain aquifer storage. For more
information, King County may contact:
The information requested is unknown, or not available.
Additional Comments:
Water Rights Mitigation (choose one):
Yes, our area is pursuing, or planning to pursue, new or additional water rights, and there may be an
opportunity to use reclaimed water for mitigation of those new water rights. For more information, King
County may contact:
Application G1- 28404. Contact Ingrid Gaub, 253 - 804 -3113
r---1 The information requested is unknown, or not available.
Additional Comments:
Potential Areas of Environmental Need (choose one):
CYes, parts of our service area include potential environmental enhancement locations, such as wetlands
enhancement, aquifer recharge, stream flow augmentation, that might be candidates for reclaimed water
use. For more information, King County may contact:
The information requested is unknown, or not available.
Additional Comments:
DI.E Page 66 of 84
Water Reclamation Evaluation Checklist
Page 3
4. Local Reclaimed Water Legislation: If water reclamation is mandated for this water system through local
government agreement, contract, local regulations, ordinances, or other mechanisms, please provide a copy of the
governing mechanism (choose one).
nYes, local legislation exists in our area in support of reclaimed water use. The following relevant legislation
is attached (please list titles of documents):
No water reclamation legislation exists, or is known to exist, at a local level in our service area.
5. Coordination with Local Wastewater Utility: Include a brief description of your interactions with any wastewater or
reclaimed water utility (King County or other) adjacent to your service area to evaluate any potential opportunities
to develop reclaimed water (choose one).
Describe if applicable:
The City of Auburn's policy is to coordinate with King County to explore potential opportunities for water
reclamation.
CI
nNone. Additional Comments:
Template for
Inventory of Water Users and Identification of Potential Reclaimed Water Users
Site Owner or Site
Name
Site Address
(for general mapping purposes)
Estimated Annual
Water Use
Water uses not
requiring potable
water'
Is this a Potential
Reclaimed Water
Customer?
Boeing
700 15th St SW
277,200,000
?
Yes
Muckleshoot Casino
2402 Auburn Way S
49,000,000
No
Emerald Downs
2828 Emerald Downs Dr
39,600,000
15,974,000
Yes
Supermall /Walmart
1101 Outlet Collection Dr
27,100,000
2,555,000
Yes
Adventist Academy
32rd St SE & Wyman Dr
17,800,000
?
Yes
Safeway
3520 Pacific Ave S
13,300,000
No
Auburn Dairy
702 W Main St
10,100,000
No
MultiCare
202 N Division St
26,000,000
No
Auburn Manor
210 37th St SE
24,400,000
No
Rio Verde
1402 22nd St NE
19,200,000
No
White River Estates
4248 A St SE
16,200,000
No
PIC
4205 Auburn Way S
13,500,000
No
Tall Cedars
401 37th St SE
9,800,000
No
Leisure Manor
2302 R St SE
7,900,000
No
Les Gove Park
10th St & H St SE
6,598,000
6,598,000
Yes
Game Farm Park
3030 R St SE
8,955,000
8,955,000
Yes
West Valley 29 LP
1221 29th St NW
3,421,000
3,421,000
Yes
Westley Homes
32339 109th PI SE
3,382,000
3,382,000
Yes
Autozone Development
1072 Auburn Way N
2,736,000
2,736,000
Yes
Trail Run Homes
1331 51st PI NE
2,521,000
2,521,000
Yes
See Washington State Reclamation and Reuse Standards, September 1997, Section 1, Articles 1 -5 for allowable uses of reclaimed water.
htto: / /www.ecv.wa.00v /PROGRAMS /WQ /reclaim /standards.html
DI.E
Page 67 of 84
King County Water Reclamation Evaluation Checklist - attachments
Large Self Suppliers
Auburn Municipal Golf Course
DI.E Page 68 of 84
Chapter 8 - Water Use Efficiency
REFERENCE DOCUMENTS
• Table 4.3 - Historical Annual Water Use Per Account
• Table 4.5 - Historical Annual ADD, MDD, Peak Day, and Peaking Factor
• Figure 4.4 - Average Consumption By Month For 2011 To 2013
DI.E Page 69 of 84
c
0
C)
0
CZ
0
0
0
a)
a
L a
a) L
c Cq
0 L Q
• o Q O
• E
O
100
co
N
.Q
1--
Wholesale
d
0) CD
J
CO CS) G d0' 00) 0 0) N 10
'mot d' d' CO d' CO et et
co co co co C` co N O
CO 0 0 CO 000 CO et 10
d' �° N t CO d' ti M
GO M 0 CO CO CD 0) N
N N N .— r- T N
CO
et
00) co 0) d0' co ti d'
N. 0) CO d' co , h O ~
00 ti 0) O 0 O CO' 0) 0
— r" r r •- N T T T
C
o N-
4-:, • d0' 0 co CO co N. co
C) 0) N CO N. N. co C))
.L
,+ N- O co O N CO co ti r-
c.i COj N. CO GOO t t u▪ Mi L001 ri
C.)
N
C• O �O M co CO co co ▪ N co
O co- 0 Cr) T T N C) T
N
1
E
o • (I)
E
2 • Cz
co � co CO CO GOO CO • M h
N CO N r- CV M T
N 0 N CD 0 CO 0 0 0
CO CO 0 CO N- CO CO CO • 'Cr
0" 00)) CO N- CO 0) h
d 000
CO N N N N N N N
—
>, 0
B).
E 0 0) O co 00 I` N co • 0)
- N r T r T
O d E.
CO 0) 0 - N C) • t Q. C
Q.)26 L CV C1)
N N N N N N y F— aa)e fx 0
Q aw<
0
Z
ERUs per Account based on 75th percentile of annual water consumption.
An individual demand projection was made for each Large User. Data for comparison purposes only.
August 2014 - DRAFT 4 -8
pw: / /Carollo /Documents /Client/WA /Auburn /9466A00 /Deliverables /Ch04.doc
DI.E Page 70 of 84
Table 4.5
Historical Annual ADD, MDD, Peak Day, and Peaking Factor
Comprehensive Water Plan
City of Auburn
Annual
Average
Day
Maximum
Day
Max Day /Avg
Year
Production
Demand
Demand
Date of Maximum
Day Demand
Day Peaking
(MG /year)
(mgd)
(mgd)
Factor
2000
2,881
7.87
14.50
8/20/2000
1.84
2001
3,239
8.88
13.92
6/24/2001
1.57
2002
3,035
8.32
15.35
7/12/2002
1.85
2003
3,079
8.44
14.22
8/4/2003
1.69
2004
3,082
8.42
15.04
7/30/2004
1.79
2005
2,957
8.10
13.13
8/5/2005
1.62
2006
3,030
8.30
15.17
8/4/2006
1.83
2007
3,134
8.59
14.25
7/11/2007
1.66
2008
3,018
8.25
13.44
8/6/2008
1.63
2009
3,142
8.61
14.36
7/30/2009
1.67
2010
2,773
7.60
13.31
8/5/2010
1.75
2011
2,613
7.16
11.43
8/18/2011
1.60
2012
2,728
7.45
13.13
8/16/2012
1.76
2013
2,694
7.38
13.77
8/21/2013
1.87
Average
2,958
8.10
13.93
1.72
75th
Percentile
3,082
8.43
14.47
1.82
October 2014 - DRAFT
pw: / /Carollo /Documents /Client/WA/ Auburn /9466A00 /Deliverables /Ch04.doc
DI.E
4 -11
Page 71 of 84
DI.E
3.0
2.5
w
w 2.0
y
c 1.5
a
E
c 1.0
0
U
0.5
0
0.0
3,500
0
▪ 3,000
L
0
• 2,500
.c r
o '0 2,000
CL
ya 1,500
c �
1,000
a
500
2
0
Average Consumption per Customer Type (2002 - 2012)
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Month
Average Consumption per Account (2002 - 2012)
Jan Feb Mar
— A—Commercial
—dr— Industrial
--11— Single Family
�— Multi Family
—A—Commercial
—A-- Industrial
— A—Schools
t City Accounts
—N— Irrigation
16,000
14,000
12,000
10,000
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
0
Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Month
—*— Schools -- Single Family— -- Multi Family
City Accounts Irrigation
CC rimay%
pw:l /Carollo /Docu ments /ClientlWA/ Auburn/ 9466A001DeliverablesIFig _04_04.docx
AVERAGE CONSUMPTION BY
MONTH FOR 2011 TO 2013
FIGURE 4.4
CITY OF AUBURN
WATER SYSTEM PLAN UPDATE
Page 72 of 84
DI.F
AuBuRN ITY Cdr •
\VASH E NGTo
Agenda Subject:
Capital Project Status Report
Department:
Public Works
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Attachments:
Capital Project Status Report
Administrative Recommendation:
Background Summary:
Date:
October 15, 2014
Budget Impact:
$0
Reviewed by Council Committees:
Public Works
Councilmember: Osborne Staff: Sweeting
Meeting Date: October 20, 2014 Item Number: DI.F
AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED Page 73 of 84
CAPITAL PROJECT STATUS REPORT
Date: October 15, 2014
ao ;ye;uo3
v no
` r
o O
Z
F
,
K
a
K
w o
) o i
CAPITAL PROJECT STATUS REPORT
Date: October 15, 2014
aopeaw o3
Y
-o
0
a
.
—
'v .t.
E v
a w
v
.o
o
0
�u ell nsuo3
U!StJ
a
z
o 0
o
z o
a o
O 0
a
z
a
z
7
i+
v,
T
3
v
c
c
Y
O
Notice to Proceed scheduled to be
issued on october 22, 2014.
Project is in suspension until
November 2014 for procurement of
signal equipment.
Work is underway.
Project
Manager
c
O
N
E s
V
on
Y
V
Construction
t
c
LL
7
ti
0
ti
g
7
ti
0
7
ti
Z
alaiduao3
0
N
0
0
0
O
0
T
tl7,
C'
5 a/
6 N
Q
1
c
-,
-
e0
J
Q
-
e0
J
Q
-
v
to
a ;aiduao3
0
0
0
',.`g
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Total Estimated
Costs
o
o
v
o
o
c-
a
m
Lo
O
Lo
M
c-
324,267
m
ao
O
m
Project Budget ($)
Total Budget
o
O
V
r-'
o
O
N
7
a)
Lo
O
Lo
M
c-
324,267
o
o
O
O
0
0
Other
o
O [0
r:
`o
V
I-
N
7
N co LL
ry
M M
Street,
Utilities
O a)
O v
V1 `.
7
LO a/
0 3
M
N
O a1
o v
O. `.
Location/Description
c
E.
IL' w
_
w
v,
2
.a
R
v,
Q
N -0
C 9 t L T N
E U U E W N j f0
a) N L O N N i
pN 3 ,- 4-, 0
a c
E o y— o' Q' 0
'v 'Q E E,;, N
v O o v v o
E o y �
4 0 0o_ s o v
3 o s c r c c c
._v<•- a, a
s
v y ro c .-- °-
'O c - N =O p a)
Q 0 L -6 v W
E y> v in o U a)
H io _a .E 3 rco v in
i
This project will repair and modify
existing sanitary sewer pump station
facilities located at: F St SE, R St NE,
22nd St NE, Rainer Ridge, Valley
Meadows, 8th St NE, Area 19, North
taps, Peasley Ridge, Riverside, and
Terrace View to address access,
corrosion resistance, site security and
new generators where needed.
This project includes procuring and
installing traffic signal equipment
upgrades for existing signals.
This project will provide cracksealing
along 9.5 miles of arterial and collector
streets within the City.
L z
VZOTd)
80ZTd3
ZZETd)
OTbtd3
o
z
Lo
n
co
c,
DI.F
Page 75 of 84
CAPITAL PROJECT STATUS REPORT
Date: October 15, 2014
aopea1uo3
0 m
_,
'e, Y
2
a
;u ell nsuop
U�152Q
w
0
,,,
a
z
v
o o
Q
p
of
3
o-
m V
3
i+
tn
Preconstruction conference was held
on October 16th. Updated budget
numbers to reflect most recent cost
information available.
Awara in process. auaget numbers
updated to reflect most recent cost
information.
Project is soliciting for construction
bids. Bid Opening scheduled for
October 23, 2014.
Contract documents being finalized.
Final design underway. BNSF
permitting in process.
Project to re- advertise for
construction bids in the Spring 2015.
Consultant design work underway.
Project
Manager
C
O
`
E
O
Y
U
E
O
Y
U
`
O
-
0
O
C LO
N
N
3
C
O
i
E
2
Y
U_
Construction
N`V
'c (p
LL O
Q
¢
-1
c-1
U
N
o
c-1
p_
U
v1
V1
`�
T
CO
2
C
m
H
,,/1
c-I
h0
J
a;aiduao)
o
o
t
a)
j w
L1 N
a
00
Q
In
00
Q
In
ti
0
00
>
z
00
>
z
p
C0
~
ti
U
0
a ;aldwo3
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
8o
Total Estimated
Costs
o
o
N
N
N
00
00
N
137,000
2,400,000
384,450
01
N
00
0.1.
ti
a
o
`""1
0.1.
Project Budget ($)
Total Budget
O
N
N
L
M
N
137,000
CO
01 Lo
•
N
384,450
Cr)
up
0
Cr)
N
N
7
o
`""1
0.1.
Other
O =
L. 0
v, N
O v
M .__.
O T
O b0 ^
7 O C
01 w 0
01
Street,
Utilities
O
O !a
0^0 G
......
p W p W
y l0 yam, O i
Ln V
1,378,589
(Water)
O
I� O
.--1 `.
00
N
r- io
N `
0 N
v
I� `.
al
up E
n O
O1 to
N
O
O
N
v 8 N u
f0 O v 01
7 `. 00 co
O
`.
Location/Description
of the BNSF right -of -way that will be
affected by the 3rd rail line that
BNSF /Sound Transit plan to building in
2015. The project will also replace a
storm drain pipe adjacent to the railroad
tracks at 37th Street.
This project will construct a new building
to house a standby generator and
disinfection equipment.
This project will mitigate flooding issues
at 307 Oravetz Place SE.
This project will rehabilitate Well 1 so
that it can function at full capacity and
complete modifications to the Howard
Road Corrosion Control Facility.
This project will complete improvements
to the rail crossing at 37th Street NW
and B Street NW to address safety
concerns.
This project will replace the 30 -inch
storm drainage line along 30th Street NE
from the north end of the Airport to the
Brannon Park Storm Pump Station to
address localized flooding issues.
This project will construct a new
detention and treatment system for
drainage at the M &O Facility and expand
and improve the existing decant facility.
zO
0
SOUND
WZTS3
60tIdD
SI6OdD
b0£Td)
ZZTTd3
OZ£Td)
O
z
0
c-1
c-1
c-1
N
c-1
M
c-1
a
c-1
V1
c-1
l0
c-1
DI.F
Page 76 of 84
CAPITAL PROJECT STATUS REPORT
Date: October 15, 2014
aopeawo3
;ue;insuo
OISeo
z
0 "_
2 _a
O
z
N
=
V
to
4-,
�
Design work is underway.
Consultant design work underway.
Coordination with communications
companies underway.
Design is underway.
T
CO
0
L T 5.
c 3
v v
c v
0
0 c
y
v 0
C 6
1 N ■
Project
Manager
Y
o
C
0
2
N
co
on
to
C
v
3
v,
Construction
.4 113 c f6
LL
ti
C
-
ti
U
O
ti
O
z
ti
o
o
apiduaoD
C
7
a)
C'
i 23
Q D
ci
0
ci
0
ci
g
ci
co
a1.a1duao3
o
m
0
rn
0
N
•
m
Total Estimated
Costs
o
o
N
7
c-I
o
M
a
M
M
co
N
In
c-
o
V
M
N
ti
c-I
O
oo
c-I
7
c-
Project Budget ($)
Total Budget
o
o
N
v1
I�
M
lf1
7
M
M
co
N
lf1
c-
o
01
M
c-
M
N-
c-I
lf1
l0
O
N
lf1
c-
Other
o _
O z
n 0
O
co
O = O
_
4-, 0 0 H
U
N O 6 O
Street,
Utilities
0
OM
0
l0
N
----
M U/
to.' N
lf1
c-
O O a)
M E 0 N
rl O p N
N V
N ,--. on ^
N MO N
0, v p io
N N
Location/Description
complete pavement patching and
overlay treatments on arterial, collector
and local roadways for the purpose of
pavement preservation through the City.
This project will provide various
improvements at the reservoir, including
painting, seismic upgrades, and facility
modifications.
This project will construct storm
drainage improvements on Hi -Crest
Drive NW. The City is also designing and
constructing the relocation of a
Lakehaven Utility District (LUD)
Watermain that is in conflict with the
storm improvements, at LUD's expense.
Auburn Wav South Pedestrian
This project will construct new
sidewalks, street lighting system,
landscaped median island, a designated
mid -block crosswalk, relocation of
existing utility poles, and a u -turn at Fir
Street. This project also includes a
public education element for pedestrian
safety. This project is planned to be
constructed concurrent with project
CP1119.
'° z6
L
ZOVIdD
S9LOdD
6011d3
8TTTd7
o
z
N
c-I
co
c-I
m
c-I
0
N
DI.F
Page 77 of 84
CAPITAL PROJECT STATUS REPORT
Date: October 15, 2014
aopeapuo3
�ue�lnsuo3
Osseo
N
=
V
a
v
O o
m
z
v
d
v ro
o 0
7
Q
VI
3
i-,
iS
IA
Final design and right -of -way
acquisition underway.
Design is underway.
Design is underway.
Design is underway. Working on an
agreement with Kent for S 277th St
transfer of right -of -way to Auburn.
Consultant design work is underway.
Project
Manager
h0
C
v
vi
N
E
V
N
E
N
(-)
Y
v
0
vl
3 co
s
1
Construction
t
N
LL 0
c-i
N
0
c-i
N
0
c-i
c
up
c-i
O
Q
0
co
elelduaoD
%
no
a)
C'
i
o m
ti
c
g
1
c
co
ti
n,
L.n
ti
,
Z
a ;aIduao3
o
m
0
ti
0
coo
0
m
0
co
Total Estimated
Costs
M
0
I-
co
7
M
585,000
1,208,722
V1
o0
co
O
00
cI V�1 N
N U) M U)
M N N
M t O t
V1 d d
Project Budget ($)
Total Budget
Ln
O
O
I-1
rI
Ln
M
585,000
1,233,574
Ln
o0
o0
al
0
M
00
0
0
0
O
Ln
I-
c-
Other
0 c-I _
Ln m 0~
(-NI H l0 2
• `--' M
N W
0— 0 v so_ 0
0 4/ 0 0 m
N -6 O U) O H
O Ly M v 0
•--■ ._. N 0 •
Street,
Utilities
U) v1 U) O U)
co cs. v W ro M 3
ON " cM-I Ch `
p
v) O
Ln `.
1,233,574
(Water)
U)
m �/
a, `.
o
O ^
O U)
O
V
Location/Description
This project will widen AWS between Fir
and Hemlock Streets from 3 lanes to 5
lanes and includes new sidewalks, street
lighting system, bus pull -outs, and
improvement of the Hemlock St.
intersection to include u -turns and a
new traffic signal. This project is planned
to be constructed concurrent with
project CP1118.
This project will complete improvements
to the East Ridge Manor storm system in
the Lea Hill area.
This project will repair or replace
asbestos cement water lines along AWN,
49th and B St NW and at the M &O /Parks
Maintenance area.
This project will complete the widening
of S 277th from the intersection of
Auburn Way North to L Street NE,
including the construction of a
pedestrian trail and relocation of the
floodway along S 277th.
This project will be done in phases. The
first phase 1A will complete
investigation of the Fulmer Wellfield
area to determine the required analysis
and drilling program needed to utilize
the full water rights. Phase 1B will
complete a drilling and testing program
as well as an alternatives analysis.
Phase 2 will complete the physical
improvements.
'° z6
L
MUD
9T£TdD
6TZTdD
VZZZJ
LOTTd7
d
z
c-I
N
N
N
M
N
•
N
Ln
N
DI.F
Page 78 of 84
CAPITAL PROJECT STATUS REPORT
Date: October 15, 2014
aopeapuo3
;u ell nsuo3
u8isaa
±
N
0
a a
Y
z
a
z
7
i+
vs
Design is underway.
Design is underway.
Design is underway.
Design is underway.
Project
Manager
C
o
J
E
2
Y
U_
1p
N
E
2
Y
U_
Construction
L
.4 413
LL
L0
a)
0
L-,
U
0
L-,
N
co
L-,
J
Q
apiduaoD
%
a)
C'
i'
-6 N
Ln
ti
"
f0
Ln
ti
"
N
Ls-,
ti
L
0_
Ln
1
T
fV
a ;aiduao3
o
o
N
0
Ln
M
0
o
N
0
0
M
Total Estimated
Costs
N
I-
Lri
00
LO
(Ns.
O
O
M
Lri
0
c0
N
O
O
00
0
333,000
Project Budget ($)
Total Budget
N
I-
Lri
7
L0
(Ns.
0
O
O
c0
al
00
N
0
O
O
ri
l0
333,000
Other
co
0 —
c-I 10
M u
M -a
M LI
N
Street,
Utilities
Lo N O U)
N --
Ln op
o
O E o 0
U1
0 0
.2 o
Ic-
N
v
U1
c
Location/Description
This project will construct improvements
to the intersection of AWS and
Riverwalk Drive and complete minor
widening and add additional capacity
from the MIT Plaza signal to the
Dogwood signal.
This project will construct conveyance
improvements on 17th Street SE from A
Street SE to K Street SE and increase the
capacity of the existing detention pond
located on A Street SE. The project will
This project will reconstruct the existing
signals at C Street SW and Main Street
and at Main Street and Auburn Ave.
This project will replace and /or repair
aging and damaged storm lines
throughout the City.
'° ° z
a
MUD
ZOZTd7
9Ot1d0
Mid)
d
z
00
N
n
N
00
N
m
N
DI.F
Page 79 of 84
CAPITAL PROJECT STATUS REPORT
Date: October 15, 2014
aopea ;uop
1u nsu o�
u8isaa
Construction
ale Luo3
7
-cs ea
Q 0
plaid uao3
Project Budget ($)
L
0
Location/Description
o d
z
0
Z
E
m
O
0
V)
DI.F
v
z
8 U
4
0
U
4
Work is underway.
Design is underway.
For status see CP1402.
U/
V
U/
V
Carter
a
ti
v
0
ti
a
co
a
C
2
-
T
N
2
o
O
o
O
O
V1
a,
a,'
l 0
00
N
O
O
O
O
N
M
176,083
M
M
O
L/1
N
l0
6,251,033
m
co
vi
.
N
Lo c-I
c,
N
N
O
0
O
N
00
176,083
un
N
r
l0
V
Ln
N
N
l0
00
m
3
0^ 0 ^
0 O vU
0 0 N
O
N V
0
0^ O 0^
0 v0 v0 v
0 O P2 O
N
N N O O
N V
This project will complete the
reconstruction of the following local
roadways:
K St NE - East Main to 4th St NE
H St SE & 19th St SE - 21ST St SE to 17th
St SE
24th St SE - M St SE to R St SE
This project will complete the
reconstruction of the following local
roadways:
3rd St NE between AWN and Auburn
Ave, and 200ft east of Auburn Way to D
St NE
7th St SE between A St SE and AWS
D St SE between AWS and 12th St SE
CP1402, 2014 Citywide Pavement
Patching and Overlays.
2014 5O5 Program Totals
2014 & 2015 TOTAL 5O5 PROGRAM
CPS TOTAL
£Z£Td0
btbtd7
O
00
Page 80 of 84
0
no
AuBuRN ITY CAF �
\VASHENG`Or,
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
DI.G
Agenda Subject: Date:
Significant Infrastructure Projects by Others - Public Works October 15, 2014
Status Report
Department: Attachments: Budget Impact:
Public Works Rat $0
Administrative Recommendation:
Background Summary:
Reviewed by Council Committees:
Public Works
Councilmember: Osborne Staff: Gaub
Meeting Date: October 20, 2014 Item Number: DI.G
AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED Page 81 of 84
SIGNIFICANT INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS BY OTHERS - PUBLIC WORKS STATUS REPORT
Date: October 15, 2014
DI
Status
Work on this is nearing completion, the pedestrian pathway is
complete and open for public recreational use.
Phase 2 construction which includes the partial demolition of
the old building, additional utility work, some remodeling, and
improvements on 4th Street NE is underway and on schedule.
Work is underway. Contractor has completed the roadway
widening and utility work. Remaining work includes some
paving to complete re- channelization work, landscaping, and
fence installation. Som eof the remaining work is weather
dependant.
Work is underway but is weather dependant.
Only restoration work remains to be completed but is weather
dependant.
Only restoration work remains to be completed but is weather
dependant. Patching is complete and overlay is planned
for Spring 2015
Work is underway; however, sewer installation is on hold
due to a gas line relocation.
Work is underway. Pavement work will be weather
dependant.
Anticipated
Completion
Date Per
Applicant
Nov. 2014
In
O
N
)
E
E
7
CO
Spring 2015
Spring 2015
Oct. 2014
Spring 2015
Spring 2015
Spring 2015
Permit(s)
Issued
a)
a)
a)
a)
a)
a)
a)
a)
Length
(.»
a)
rn
O
a) C
Q a)
,� E
. oo (7
Q a)
Z 0
3,800 Feet
400 Feet
Unknown
1000 Feet
300 feet
y
a)
n
O
Location /Description
This project will replace the Reddington Levee from approximately
26th St NE to 43rd Street NE.
This project will include roadway and utility improvements to support
the new Auburn High School. Improvements include modifications
to Storm, Water and Sanitary Sewer mainlines and roadway
improvements on Main Street and 4th Street NE.
This project will complete half street roadway improvements on
124th Ave SE from SE 304th St. north to approximately SE 290th
St. for the 3rd phase of the Verdana (Bridges) Plat development
that is in Kent.
This project will complete half street roadway improvements on S
300th Street from 58th Place S. to approximately 62nd Ave. S for
the Westridge Plat development on the west hill.
This project will replace bare steel gas lines found during the
relocation efforts associated with the City's AWS and M Street
Intersection improvements.
This project will replace steel gas lines.
This project will complete half street roadway improvements to
support the Hazel Heights development. Improvements include new
street lighting and widening of 112th to include a turn lane and
This project will complete the installation of a new 6" gas main
to service the residential development of Mountain View
Estates on the west hill.
Sponsor/
Applicant
King County
Flood Control
District
T.)
Y
i N
7 0
7 O
< 0
t
n
c0
Yarrow Bay
Development
PNW Holdings
LLC.
Puget Sound
Energy
Puget Sound
Energy
Alpine View
LLC
Puget Sound
Energy
C
z
c-I
N
cr)
d-
to
to
N
00
p�
0
c
0
to
to
V)
• c
CU
t
a▪ ,
toU
c
>
E
O
toc
c
Vf
c
c
Ca)
E
a)
to
to
0
N
•
c
C
O
c
U_
0- _
a)
t
0
L)
to
Q
E
c
t▪ o
U
c
Ga
N
Vf
v
a)
c
U_
0- _
to
to
0
O
to
ge 8Z-of84
DI.H
AuBuRN ITY Cdr •
\VASH E NGTo
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject: Date:
Action Tracking Matrix October 15, 2014
Department: Attachments: Budget Impact:
Public Works Matrix $0
Administrative Recommendation:
Background Summary:
Reviewed by Council Committees:
Public Works
Councilmember: Osborne Staff: Gaub
Meeting Date: October 20, 2014 Item Number: DI.H
AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED Page 83 of 84
ca
2
al)
U
c6
0
U
a)
a)
E
0
U
N
0
U
d
Status
Ongoing - Quarterly updates
Consultant to complete analysis
Consultant to complete analysis.
Annual Traffic Impact Fee Update will be presented to PWC for review
and approval.
SR -164 Corridor Plan will be presented at a Council Worksession Meeting
in early 2015.
Quotes are being solicited from vendors to complete the shoulder repair
at Lea Hill Road.
Estimated
Completion
Date
Cr
\N
c-1
N
c-1
1
O
N
Cr
0
NI
\Z
cI
N
c-1
LC)
0
NI
%-1
N
0
CO
~
Next PWC
Review Date
10/20/2014
Cr
O
0
NI
O
O
c-1
11/17/2014
c�-1
O
c-1
c�-1
O
N
c�-I
O
NI
O
O
c-1
Staff Lead
Sweeting
Tobin/
Fenhaus
C
La
0
1
(6
L
(6
CL
(6
L
(6
-0
(6
".
Item Description
Track completed project on the Current Year
Active Capital Improvement Projects Map
System Development Charges
Cost of Service Analysis
Transportation Impact Fee Structure
Analyses
Auburn Way South SR -164 Corridor Plan
Review
Lea Hill Road Repair
C
z
a
co
0
0
w
LL
Page 84 of 84
Updated: 10/15/2014 1:49 PM