HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda
AGENDA
Utilities Committee Regular Meeting
4:00 PM - Monday, October 3, 2016
Council Conference Room, 7th Floor, City Hall – 1055 S. Grady Way
1. Cedar River 205 Project Levee Certification Contract Addendum
a) AB - 1756
2. 2017 and 2018 Utility Revenue Requirements and CIP
a) AB - 1754
b) PowerPoint Presentation
AB - 1756
City Council Regular Meeting - 26 Sep 2016
SUBJECT/TITLE: Addendum No. 2 to CAG-15-224 for the Cedar River 205 Project Levee
Certification with Tetra Tech, Inc.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Refer to Utilities Committee
DEPARTMENT: Utility Systems Division
STAFF CONTACT: Joseph Farah, Surface Water Civil Engineer III
EXT.: 7205
FISCAL IMPACT SUMMARY:
Addendum No. 2 to cover Phase 2 of the Cedar River 205 Project Levee Certification is for $431,754. Phase 1
of CAG-15-224 was $98,908 and Addendum No. 1 was $7,633. The project is funded through the approved
2016 Surface Water Utility Capital Improvement Program (427.475501). The 2016 approved adjusted budget
for this project is $683,927, which includes a King County Flood Control District Opportunity Grant in the
amount of $343,343. There are sufficient funds in the project budget to fund this addendum.
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
The Cedar River 205 Project levee system certification to FEMA levee standards allows for FEMA accreditation
of the levee system as providing 100-year level of flood protection. Certification of the Cedar River 205
Project levee system will verify the areas that are protected by the levee/floodwall system on the lower 1.25
miles of the Cedar River and would not have to comply with floodplain insurance and development
regulations.
Tetra Tech Inc. is the consultant selected to certify the levee system and prepare all FEMA required
documents. Phase 1 of the work needed to certify the levee system was completed in July 2016 and Phase 2
scope and budget were defined based on the Phase 1 findings and conclusions. Phase 1 consisted of data
collection, survey, inspections, site reconnaissance and preliminary analyses to define Phase 2 work. Phase 2
includes all of the technical analyses required to demonstrate that the levees and floodwalls meet all FEMA
structural stability, seismic behavior and hydraulic freeboard requirements. If these analyses demonstrate
that the levee system is certifiable then the report produced in Phase 2 will be submitted to FEMA.
EXHIBITS:
A. Issue Paper
B. Addendum No. 2
C. USACE Letters
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Addendum No. 2 to CAG-15-224 for the Cedar River Section 205 Project Levee Certification Phase 2
with Tetra Tech, Inc. in the amount of $431,754.
AGENDA ITEM #1. a)
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE:September 14, 2016
TO:Randy Corman, Council President
Members of Renton City Council
VIA:Denis Law, Mayor
FROM:Gregg Zimmerman, Administrator
STAFF CONTACT:Joseph Farah, Surface Water Utility Engineer, x7205
SUBJECT:Addendum No. 2 to CAG-15-224 for the Cedar River 205 Project
Levee Certification with Tetra Tech, Inc.
ISSUE:
Should Council approve Addendum No. 2 to CAG-15-224 for the Cedar River Section 205
Project Levee Certification project for Phase 2 work, with Tetra Tech, Inc., in the amount
of $431,754?
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Addendum No. 2 to CAG-15-224 for the Cedar River Section 205 Project Levee
Certification project for Phase 2 work, with Tetra Tech, Inc., in the amount of $431,754?
BACKGROUND:
The Cedar River levees are part of the Cedar River Section 205 Flood Damage Reduction
Project (Cedar River 205 Project) constructed in 1998 in cooperation with the United
States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The levees are located on the lower 1.25 miles
of the Cedar River and extend from Williams Avenue North to the mouth of the Cedar
River at Lake Washington. The Cedar River 205 Project protects portions of downtown
Renton, The Landing, The Boeing 737 plant, and the Renton airport from the 100-year
flood. On September 30, 2004, the USACE issued a letter certifying the levees as
containing the 100-year base flood. On July 10, 2012, United States Army Corps of
Engineers sent a letter to the City indicating that the levee certification letter would
expire on August 31, 2013 (i.e. it would no longer be valid) because they would no
longer be certifying levees and their 2004 levee certification letter would no longer be
valid. The USACE letter also stated that a new Levee certification with FEMA would be
the responsibility of the City of Renton.
The Cedar River 205 Project levee system certification to FEMA levee standards allows
for FEMA accreditation of the levee system as providing 100-year level of flood
AGENDA ITEM #1. a)
Mr. Corman, Council President
Page 2 of 3
September 14, 2016
H:\File Sys\SWP - Surface Water Projects\SWP-27 - Surface Water Projects (CIP)\27-3708 Cedar River Levee
Recertification\1003 Phase 2 Scope and Contract\JFtp
protection. Unless a levee system is certified and accredited by FEMA, floodplain
mapping of areas behind the levee assumes the levee does not exist or does not provide
any flood protection. Accreditation enables the properties protected by the levee
system in Renton to be mapped as protected areas (designated as Zone X) instead of
being mapped in the FEMA 100-year floodplain (designated Zone A). In FEMA Zone A,
property owners and businesses would have to purchase flood insurance for their
homes and buildings, and new development in the floodplain would have to meet
construction requirements for building finished floor elevation and filling in the
floodplain. Certification of the Cedar River 205 Project levee system will ensure that the
areas protected would not have to comply with such floodplain insurance and
development regulations. Currently, the area protected by the Cedar River levees is still
mapped as Zone X even though the levee certification has expired because FEMA has
not updated their maps. We expect to maintain this designation while the certification
efforts are underway. FEMA has also offered to designate the Cedar River Section 205
levees as “Provisionally Accredited” while the City prepares the certification package.
In accordance with the City’s Purchasing, Bidding and Contracting Requirements Policy
#250-02, Tetra Tech, Inc. was selected to perform this work and services required to
achieve the recertification and reaccreditation of the levee system. Tetra Tech’s
approach, which was approved by the City, includes multiple phases of work:
Phase 1: This phase mainly consists of data collection, survey, inspections, site
reconnaissance, and preliminary analyses to define extent of work needed in
Phase 2 and what detailed analyses should be performed.
Phase 2: This phase includes all the technical analyses required to demonstrate
that the levees and floodwalls meets all FEMA structural stability, seismic
behavior, and hydraulic freeboard requirements. If these analyses demonstrate
that the levee system is certifiable, then the report produced in this phase would
be submitted to FEMA.
Phase 3: If it were determined in Phase 2 that capital improvements are required
to the levee system to meet certification standards, then the City would need to
design and construct those improvements under a separate phase.
On December 7, 2015, the Mayor signed Engineering Consultant Agreement CAG-15-224
with Tetra Tech, Inc. for the Phase 1 work in the amount of $98,908, in accordance with
City Policy #250-02. Then on March 1, 2016, the Public Works Administrator signed
Addendum No. 1 in the amount of $7,633 to cover a task requesting Tetra Tech, Inc. to
provide peer review of the plans and specifications of the Cedar River Maintenance
Dredge project, whose successful completion is necessary for levee certification.
AGENDA ITEM #1. a)
Mr. Corman, Council President
Page 3 of 3
September 14, 2016
H:\File Sys\SWP - Surface Water Projects\SWP-27 - Surface Water Projects (CIP)\27-3708 Cedar River Levee
Recertification\1003 Phase 2 Scope and Contract\JFtp
Phase 1 was completed in July 2016 and the Phase 2 work plan was submitted by Tetra
Tech, Inc. Based on this work plan, the Phase 2 scope and budget were defined.
The Cedar River Section 205 Project Levee Certification project is funded through the
approved 2016 Surface Water Utility Capital Improvement Program (427.475501). The
approved 2016 adjusted budget for this project is $683,927, which includes a King
County Flood Control District Opportunity Grant, in the amount of $343,343. There are
sufficient funds in the project budget to fund this addendum.
CONCLUSION:
It is recommended that Council approve Addendum No. 2 to CAG-15-224, in the amount
of $431,754, for the Phase 2 work of the Cedar River Section 205 Project Levee
Certification with Tetra Tech, Inc.
cc:Lys Hornsby, P.E., Utility Systems Director
Ron Straka, Surface Water Utility Engineering Manager
Hai Nguyen, ASD Senior Financial Analyst
AGENDA ITEM #1. a)
FORM:ADD-2015(E1-2015)ADDENDUMNO.2ENGINEERINGCONSULTANTAGREEMENTFORPROFESSIONALSERVICESforCedarRiver205ProjectLeveeCertification,CAG-15-224ThisAddendumismadeandenteredintothis_
_
__
,dayof,2016,byandbetweentheCityofRenton,hereinaftercalledthe“City”,andTetraTech,Inc.,whoseaddressis1420FifthAvenue,Suite550,Seattle,WA98101,hereinaftercalledthe“Consultant”.WITNESSETHTHAT:WHEREAS,theCityengagedtheservicesoftheconsultantunderEngineeringConsultantAgreementCAG-15-224,datedDecember7,2015,toprovideengineeringservicesnecessaryfortheCedarRiver205ProjectLeveeCertification;andWHEREAS,theCitydesirestocompletetheworkassociatedwiththeCedarRiver205ProjectLeveeCertification,andtheCitydoesnothavesufficientqualifiedengineeringemployeestoperformtheworkwithinareasonabletime;andWHEREAS,theCityandconsultanthavedeterminedthatadditionalservicesarerequiredtocompletePhaseIIofthecertificationprocess;NOW,THEREFORE,inaccordancewithSectionVIIIExtraWorkoftheMasterAgreementCAG-15-224,datedDecember7,2015,itismutuallyagreeduponthatEngineeringConsultantAgreementCAG-15-224,isamendedtoincludetheworkandassociatedbudgetasfollows:1.TheScopeofWork(SectionIoftheMasterAgreementCAG-15-224)ismodifiedtoincludetheadditionalservicesontheattachedAttachmentA.2.ThePayment(SectionVIoftheMasterAgreementCAG-15-224)ismodifiedtoincludepaymentfortheadditionalworkitemsdefinedinAttachmentA.Therevisedcontracttotalpayableforworkonthiscontractaddendumisincreasedfrom$106,541,aspreviouslymodifiedbyAddendumNo.1,to$538,295,makingadifferenceof$431,754.ThemaximumamountpayablefortheadditionalworkitemsdefinedinAttachmentAofthiscontractaddendumis$431,754,withoutpriorauthorizationfromtheCity.3.TheTimeofCompletion(SectionVoftheMasterAgreementCAG-15-224)fortheabovereferencedcontractisextendeduntilNovember1,2018.AllotherprovisionsofConsultantAgreementCAG-15-224datedDecember7,2015,shallapplytothisaddendum.AGENDA ITEM #1. a)
H:\File Sys\SWP - Surface Water Projects\SWP-27 - Surface Water Projects (CIP)\27-3708 Cedar River Levee
Recertification\1003 Phase 2 Scope and Contract\JLtp Page 2 of 2
EXECUTION
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Addendum No. 2 to ENGINEERING
CONSULTANT AGREEMENT CAG-15-224 as of the day and year first above written.
CONSULTANT CITY OF RENTON
Signature Date Mayor Date
ATTEST:
Type or Print Name
Title Jason A. Seth, CMC, City Clerk
AGENDA ITEM #1. a)
CEDARRIVER205PROJECTLEVEESCERTIFICATIONScopeofWork,Schedule&FeeEstimate—Phase2ATTACHMENTACEDARRIVER205PROJECTLEVEECERTIFICATIONPHASEII-ENGINEERINGANALYSISANDCERTIFICATIONSCOPEOfWORKOVERVIEWThefollowingscopeofworkistoprovideprofessionalengineeringconsultingservicestoevaluateandcertifytheCedarRiver205LeveeinaccordancewithFEMArequirementsascodifiedin44CERSection65.10.TheleveesystemislocatedbetweenLakeWashingtonandapproximatelytheWilliamsAvenueSouthBridge,andisapproximately2.5milesinlength(1.25milesoneachsideoftheriver).Thecertificationprojectisamulti-phaseeffort.PhaseI,theNeedsAssessmenteffort,hasbeencompleted.PhaseII(EngineeringAnalysisandCertification)representsthebulkoftheworkeffortandincludesallofthetechnicalanalysesnecessarytocertifythelevee.ThefinalproductofPhaseIIwillbethecompleteLeveeCertificationReport.PhasesIll(EngineeringDesign)andIV(ConstructionEngineeringSupport),areoptionalphasesthatwillonlybenecessaryifstructuralimprovementsarerequiredoftheleveesystemtomeetFEMAcertificationstandards.PHASEII—EngineeringAnalysisandCertificationPhaseIIincludesthetechnicalengineeringanalysisrequiredforcertifyingtheleveesandincludesthecompilationofthecertificationreport.PhaseIIisacontinuationofPhaseIandwillexpanduponthepreliminaryanalysesthatwereconductedforPhaseI.ThefinalproductistheLeveeCertificationReportandpreparationofCLOMRapplicationdocuments.Ifneededtomeetcertificationrequirements,potentialrepairsorimprovementswillbeidentifiedandatechnicalmemorandumdevelopedthatdescribestheseimprovements.ThedesignofimprovementswouldbefallunderPhaseIlloftheleveecertificationeffort.Task1-ProjectManagementandMeet3ngsFourcoordinationmeetingswiththeclientwillbeheldduringPhaseII.Eachwillbea2-hourmeetingattheCityofRenton.Thefirstwillbeakickoffmeeting.ThesecondandthirdmeetingswilloccurduringtheexecutionoftheeffortandwillbeusedtodiscusskeyissuesasPhaseIIisexecuted.ThefourthmeetingwilloccurafterthedraftcertificationreporthasbeensubmittedtotheCityandwillconsistofreviewinganddiscussingthefindingsofthecertificationreportaswellasanysystemupgradesidentified.Fourstafffromtheconsultantteamwillattendeachmeeting[theTetraTechPM,theleadGeotechnicalEngineer,theleadHydraulicEngineer(InteriorDrainage)andtheleadHydraulicEngineer(Floodplain)].Bi-weekly30-minutecallstodiscussprojectprogresswillbeheldbetweentheRentonPMandtheTetraTechPM.Twelve(12)meetingsareassumedforthedurationofPhaseII.Taskleaderswillattendthosemeetingswheretherearespecificissuesthatneedtobediscussedindetailfortheirtask.Priortothesemeetings,internalstaffprogressandcoordinationmeetingswillbeconducted.FEMAcoordinationisalsoincludedinthistask.ItwillinvolvediscussionswithFEMAonkeytechnicalissuesincludingthefloodfrequencyvalues(100-yearpeak)tobeadopted,applicationofRiskandUncertaintyAnalysistopossiblyreducefreeboardto2feet,interiordrainagemodelingandconcurrentfloodingapproaches,highgroundtie-insandconsiderationofleveestabilityduringseismicloading.JTETRATECH1September2,2016AGENDA ITEM #1. a)
CEDARRIVER205PROJECTLEVEESCERTIFICATIONScopeofWork,Schedule&FeeEstimate—Phase2Assumptions:•Coordinationmeetingsare2hourduration•Bi-weeklyprogressmeetingsare30minuteduration•Primaryprojectexecutionperiodisapproximately6months(excludingFEMAreviewperiod)Deliverables•FourcoordinationmeetingsatCityofRenton•Memo(s)summarizingdiscussionswithFEMATask2—JointSealingRepairTheSeattleDistrictUSACEhadnotedinthe2015annualinspectionreportthatthesealantinthefloodwalljointshaddeteriorated.ThisdeteriorationofthesealantinthejointswasalsoobservedandnotedbythecertificationprojectteamduringtheMarch2016leveereconnaissance.TheCityneedstoprepareapackageforbidfortherepairofthesejointseals.Forthistask,theconsultantwillprovideonedrawingdetailingtypicaljointsealantrepairworkwithconstructionnotesforthisrepair.Theconsultantwillprovidefieldserviceswhentheconstructionstarts,anothervisitearlyinconstructiontocheckonimplementationofthejointrepairwork,andathirdtimetodevelopapunchlist.Assumptions:•Allfloodwalljointswillberepaired.•Consultant’srolewillbetoprovideonesheetofconstructiondetailsandnotes,withnoseparatespecifications.•Citywilltakecareofotheraspectsofthebidpackage.•Thefirsttwositevisitsare2hourseach.Thethird(punchlist)sitevisitis4hours.•TheCitywillprovideaccesscoordinationwiththeRentonAirportasneeded.Deliverables•Onedrawingconsistingoftypicaljointsealantrepairdetailsandconstructionnotes.•Threesitevisits(oneatthestartofconstruction,oneduringconstruction,onetodevelopapunchlist).•Shorte-mailwithobservationsofjointrepairworkperformedduringtheconstructionphase.•Punchlistofadditionalworkrequiredtocompletethejointsealantrepairs.Task3—FreeboardAnalysisandFloodplainMappingBasedonthePhaseINeedsAssessmentReport,thereareanumberoflocationsalongtherightandleftbankleveeswithdeficientfreeboardforthestandard3-footfreeboardrequirements(increasedto4feetatbridgesand3.5feetattheupstreamtie-in).However,thePhaseIeffortalsodeterminedthatreductioninfreeboardrequirementby1-footusingRiskandUncertaintyAnalysiscouldpotentiallyincreasetheareaswithsufficientfreeboard.Furtherimprovementinthefreeboardsituationcouldbeachievedbyloweringthe100-year(baseflood)dischargefromthe12,000cfsusedbyFEMAtoontheorderof10,800cfsthatamorerecentanalysisindicatesisthe100-yearfloodpeak.Anotherpotentialmeansofcomplyingwiththefreeboardrequirementistodecreasetheaverageallowablebedelevationsidentifiedforinitiationofthenextdredgingcycle.ThislatteroptionwillonlybeconsideredafterallotheroptionsareexhaustedandtheCityindicatesitwouldliketoexploreselectivechangesintheaverageallowablebedelevation.Thereishesitationtodecreasetheaverageallowablebedelevationbecauseitwouldincreasethefrequencyofdredging.TETRATECH2September2,2016AGENDA ITEM #1. a)
CEDARRIVER205PROJECTLEVEESCERTIFICATIONScopeofWork,Schedule&FeeEstimate—Phase2Aspartofthiseffort,theHEC-RAShydraulicmodelwillbeupdatedandtiedtotheFEMAeffectivemodelsasnecessary.Thisisparticularlyimportantifthe100-yeardischargeismodifiedfromthe12,000cfs.CoordinationwiththeCityonotherstrategiestoaddressfreeboarddeficienciesincludingsandbaggingareincluded.Thoughthesubtasksbelowareinasequence,theremaybesomeiterationbetweenthemasvariousoptionstoaddressfreeboardareanalyzedanddiscussedwiththeCity.Inadditiontothefreeboardrelatedwork,thistaskincludestaskstomapthefloodplainresultingfromthehydraulicanalysisandconditionsidentifiedforthecertificationsubmittal.Subtask3.1-FloodFrequencyAnalysisForthefloodfrequencyanalysis,TetraTechwilluseHEC-SSP(HEC,2010)tofittherecordofpeakflowdatafrom1946-2015toaLog-PiersonTypeIlldistributiontodeterminethe100-yeardischarge.TheuncertaintyassociatedwiththeanalysiswillalsobedeterminedforuseintheRiskandUncertaintyAnalysisasdiscussedinSubtask3.3.TheacceptabilityofthiseffortwillbecoordinatedwithFEMAaspartofPhaseII,Task1.Subtask3.2-DevelopmentofInitialEffectiveHydraulicModelForthefreeboardassessment,TetraTechwillfirsttiethePhaseIprojectaverageallowablebedelevationHEC-RASmodel(HEC,2016)totheFEMAeffectivebasefloodelevations(BEE)attheupstreamanddownstreamendsofthemodel.Theprojectmodelmustbetied-intotheeffectiveBFE5within+1-0.5feet.Usingthismodel,the100-yrwatersurfaceelevationwillbecomparedtothetopofleveeprofiletodeterminetheexistingfreeboard.Theallowableaveragebedelevationmodelwilldefinethehighestwatersurfaceelevationconditionsexpectedwithinthesystem.ThemodelbasedonallowableaveragebedelevationtiedintotheBFEwillbetheinitialeffectivehydraulicmodel,andwillserveasthebasisforsubsequentanalyses.FurtherrefinementoftheeffectivehydraulicmodelmaybenecessaryaspotentialchangesareidentifiedtoachieverequiredfreeboardasdiscussedinSubtask3.4.ThedredgedHEC-RASmodelusedinPhaseIwillalsobeusedtodefinethelowestwatersurfaceelevationconditionsinthesystem,whichwillbenecessaryintheR&Uandembankmentprotectionanalyses.Subtask3.3-RiskandUncertaintyAnalysisTheConsultantwillconducttheR&Uanalysisaspartofthissubtask.TheR&UanalysiswillquantifytheuncertaintyintheestimatedBFEprofilebyassessingtheconfidencelimitsofthe100-yrdischargeandbyaccountingforchangesinthestagedischargerelationshipduetoscouroraggradation.IfcoordinationwithFEMAindicatestheacceptabilityofanupdated100-yearbaseflood(seesubtask3.1),theupdated100-yeardischargewillbeusedinthisanalysis.TheanalysiswillusetheallowableaveragebedelevationHEC-RASmodel,thedredgedHEC-RASmodel,severalHEC-RASmodelsrepresentingtheprogressionofsedimentationbetweenthedredgedandallowablecondition,andtheUSACEFloodDamageReductionAnalysissoftwareHEC-FDA(HEC,2008).TheminimumfreeboardrequiredbyFEMArequiresatleasta90%conditionalnon-exceedanceprobability(CNP)forthe1percentannualchanceofexceedanceflood.ForaCNPofgreaterthe95%,theminimumfreeboardrequiredmaybereducedtolessthanthreefeet,butnotbelow2feet.TheresultsoftheR&Uanalysiswillprovideconditionalnonexceedanceprobabilitiesforarangeofreducedfreeboardtargetvalue(i.e.2.50feet,2.00feet)atrepresentativeindexcrosssectionsalongtheleveesystem.ThehistoricalinformationonsedimentationwithintheCedarRiverSection205LeveeProject(NHC,2014)willbeusedtodeveloptwoorthreeintermediatebedelevationprofilesforhydraulicmodelsthatTETRATECH3September2,2016AGENDA ITEM #1. a)
CEDARRIVER205PROJECTLEVEESCERTIFICATIONScopeofWork,Schedule&FeeEstimate—Phase2fallbetweenthedredgedconditionmodelandtheaverageallowablebedelevationmodel.Thesemodelswillrepresentpotentialintermediatestatesofthesystemthatwilleachbeassignedaprobability,alongwithprobabilitiesforthetwoenvelopemodelsinordertoallowtheR&Uanalysistobeperformed.UncertaintyassociatedwithstagewillbedeterminedusingtheuncertaintydeterminedfromtheFloodFrequencyAnalysis.WatersurfaceelevationprofilesfromtheRASgeometrieswillthenbeenteredintoHEC-FDAalongwiththesurveyedtopofleveeelevationstoobtainCNPvaluesforthe1percentannualchanceofexceedanceflood.Subtask3.4—FinalizationofFreeboardDeterminationAfteradjustmentoffreeboardrequirementsformodificationtothe100-yearflooddischargeandtheR&Uanalysis,atlocationsintheleveesystemwithoutadequatefreeboard,theConsultantwilldeterminethemagnitudeandspatialextentofproposedreductionintheallowableaveragebedelevationtoachievefreeboardrequirements.Priortofinalizingtheseareasforallowablefreeboardreduction,theConsultantwillcoordinatewiththeCityontheareasproposedforallowableaveragebedelevationreduction.SandbagsorotherfloodfightingmeasuresmaybeusedtomakeupfreeboarddeficienciesinareasthatareacceptabletotheCity.Inconductingthisanalysis,theaveragebedelevationatcrosssectionsnearfreeboarddeficiencieswillbeloweredinanattempttomeetrequiredfreeboardatthedesiredlocationsthroughoutthesystem.ThelocationandmagnitudeofthemodificationsoftheallowableaveragebedelevationswillbecoordinatedwiththeCityofRentonasthereisatradeoffbetweendecreasingtheallowabledredgeelevationandfrequencyofdredging.ThedecisionsonchanginganyoftheallowableaveragebedelevationswillbemadebytheCityofRenton.AfteraccountingforpotentialreducedfreeboardrequirementsresultingfromtheR&Uanalysisandmodifyingtheallowableaveragebedelevation,allsegmentsoftheleveesystemwhichstilldonotmeettheFEMAfreeboardrequirementswillbeidentifiedanddescribedasdeficienciesthatmaybetargetedforacapitalprojectimprovementinPhaseIll.ItisexpectedthatthedeterminationofthebestcombinationofreductioninallowableaveragebedelevationandstructuralimprovementstoleveesandfloodwallwillbeaniterativeprocessinwhichtheCityandtheConsultantworktogethertodevelopacombinationofpotentialchangesinaverageallowablebedelevation,structuralchangestothelevees/floodwalls(raises)andpossiblyfloodfightingpracticessuchasadditionalsandbagging.Otherpossibilitiesincludemovingthehighgroundtie-inandonlycertifyingpartofthelevee.Subtask3.5-WithandWithoutLeveeAnalysisandMappingThefinalizedhydraulicmodel,includingtheadopted100-yeardischargeandfreeboardrequirementsfromtheR&Uanalysisalongwithanychangesincrosssectiongeometrytorepresentsandbaggingorchangesintheaverageallowablebedelevationwillbeusedtoperform“withlevees”and“withoutlevees”mappingofthebasefloodextents.The“withoutlevees”extentsdefinetheareaprotectedbytheleveeandarebasedonignoringtheleveesandfloodwalls.Mappingofboththe“withlevees”and“without“levees”extentswillbeperformedinArcGlSperFEMAstandards.Assumptions:•Theeffectivehydraulicmodelgeometrywillbebasedonthemostrecent(2015)surveyedcrosssectionsmodifiedtoreflecttheallowableaveragebedelevation.TETRATECH4September2,2016AGENDA ITEM #1. a)
CEDARRIVER205PROJECTLEVEESCERTIFICATIONScopeofWork,Schedule&FeeEstimate—Phase2•SedimentdepositionfortheR&Uanalysiswillbebasedonthehistoricalratesfromthecrosssectiondataandnosedimenttransportmodelingwillbeperformed.Deliverables:•Updated100-yeardischarge•Effective,dredged,andintermediateHEC-RAShydraulicmodels•Mapsof“withlevees”and“withoutlevees”floodextents•Technicalappendicesdescribingthefloodfrequency,R&U,andhydraulicanalysisincludingdiscussionofthevariousfreeboardresultsandissues.DocumentationofinteractionwithFEMAonvariousissuespreparedinTask1willbeincluded.Task4—EmbankmentProtectionAssessmentTheembankmentprotectionanalysismustbeconductedtodemonstratenoappreciableerosionoftheleveecanbeexpectedduringthebasefloodevent.Thisrequirementiscodifiedin44CER65.lOfb)(3).UnderPhaseI,TetraTechperformedaninitialassessmentoftheembankmentprotectionrepairs,maintenanceandnewinstallationsproposedintheCedarRiverdredgingprojectplananddeterminedthatitappearedthatallareasofdeficientprotectionhadbeenaddressed(SeeAppendixCoftheNeedsAssessmentReport).Intheinformationreviewed,itwasindicatedthatthebasisofdesignfollowedUSACEmethodologies,butnoactualcalculationsforriprapsizingorscourdepthwereprovided.Therefore,thistaskinvolvesTetraTechperformingthedesigncalculationstosubmitaspartofthecertificationreport.ToperformthesecalculationsTetraTechwilldeterminehydraulicconditionsfromthetwo“envelope”models(dredgedconditionandallowableaveragebedelevationcondition).ThesehydraulicconditionswillbeusedtodetermineriprapsizingandembankmentscourpotentialbasedonUSACEmethodologies.Afieldreconnaissancewillverifytheinstallationoftheembankmentprotectionandtheconditionoftheembankmentprotection.Thefieldsurveywilloccurafterthebankprotectionimprovementsassociatedwiththedredgingprojectarecompletedandwhenthedischargeislowenoughtoallowforobservationoftheembankmentprotection.Aspartofthisfieldsurvey,TetraTechwillconfirmthatthegradationofthebankprotectionconformtothedesignplans.Thoughnotanticipatedbasedonreviewoftheinformationprovidedonembankmentprotectionassociatedwiththe2016dredgingproject,iftherearereachesofthesystemthathaveunsuitableembankmentprotectiontheywillbeidentifiedanddescribedasdeficienciesthatmaybetargetedforacapitalprojectimprovementinPhaselii.Assumptions:•ThehydraulicmodelsdevelopedinTask3willtosupportthisanalysis.•Riverlevelswillbesufficientlylowtoobservethenewlyplacedriprap.Deliverables:•Shortmemoprovidingresultsofthefieldreconnaissanceandthebankprotectionstabilitycalculations(scourandsizing).TETRATECH5September2,2016AGENDA ITEM #1. a)
CEDARRIVER205PROJECTLEVEESCERTIFICATIONScopeofWork,Schedule&FeeEstimate—Phase2Task5—InteriorDrainageAnalysisTheinteriordrainageanalysis(IDA)isnecessarytoidentifyfloodingsourcesandthepotentialforpondingonthelandwardsideoftheleveesystem.ThisrequirementiscodifiedinCFR65.10.b.6,whichrequiresthattheIDAbebasedonthejointprobabilityofinteriorandexteriorflooding.TheinteriordrainageanalysiswillneedtobeperformedfortwodiscretepondingareaslandwardoftheCedarRiverlevees.ThesestudyareasarelocatedattheRentonMunicipalAirportontheleftbankoftheCedarRiver(RentonAirportEast/LoganAvenueSStudyArea)andatN6thStreetontherightbanklevee(LoganAvenueNStudyArea).TheLoganAvenueEstudyareaalsoincorporatestheBoeingPlantdrainagebasininordertoanalyzethecapacityoftheconveyanceduringapotentialoverflowcondition.Figure1showstheinteriordrainagestudyareas,outfallsandprimaryconveyancepipelines.AsdeterminedinPhaseI,thecontinuousrecordanalysismethodwillbeusedtoconducttheinteriordrainageanalysis.Inordertousethismethodology,thehydrologicandhydraulicmodelingapproachwillrelyonlong-termcontinuoussimulationstormwaterrunoffandroutingmodelscoupledwithlong-termobservedflowdatafromtheCedarRivertodirectlycomputestagefrequencyatpondinglocations.Becausethismethodusesthelong-termriverflowconditionasaboundarycondition,thejointprobabilityofinteriorstageandrunoffconditionsisimplicitintheanalysis.Subtask5.1-HydrologicModelAsthefirststepinthehydrologicanalysis,theConsultantwilldelineatetheareastributarytoeachoutfallusingavailableLiDARdata.TheConsultantwillalsoidentifythemajorcomponentsofthepipenetworkupstreamofeachoutfallthatwillbeincludedintheanalysis.ThiswillbedeterminedfromtheCity’sGISdatabase.AcontinuoussimulationHSPFmodelwillbedevelopedtoestimatethelong-termrunoffconditionsforthetwointeriordrainageareas.RainfallinputsforthemodelwillbedevelopedfromthehistoricalhourlyrainfallrecordatSeaTacAirportwhererainfallhasbeenrecordedcontinuouslysince1949,providinga66-yearsimulationperiod(Note:CedarRiverflowrecordscoverasimilarperioddatingbackto1946).Hourlyrainfallistypicallyusedforthesetypesofanalysesthatfocusonthevolumeofrunoffratherthanthemagnitudeofpeakrunoffrate.TheHSPFmodelwillusetheregionalrunoffparametersdevelopedbyDinacola(1990)forthePugetSoundareaandadoptedbyWashingtonStateDepartmentofEcologyintheWesternWashingtonHydrologyModel(ClearCreekSolutions,2006).Imperviousareawillbemeasuredfromcurrentaerialphotographyforroads,commercialareasandindustrialareas.Forresidentialareas,imperviousareawillbesampledatwoorthreelocationstoestimatearepresentativeimperviousfractiontoapplytothelargerresidentialarea.Thelong-termrunofftime-seriesfromHSPFwillbeexportedtodatafilesfortothehydraulicsmodel.TETRATECH6September2,2016AGENDA ITEM #1. a)
C.,’a)0CuC)CuSCl)UC)C)UC)a)C.)CoI0‘I0a)00Coz0IC-)UIUUCoUU>U—II0U-,0U,0U>U00-000U,000,0000,U..Cocici)SC)a)U)F.-.UU.)I—UAGENDA ITEM #1. a)
CEDARRIVER205PROJECTLEVEESCERTIFICATIONScopeofWork,Schedule&FeeEstimate—Phase2Subtask5.2-PreliminaryHydraulicModelApreliminaryEPA-SWMMmodelofthedrainagesystemwillbedevelopedforthetwointeriordrainagestudyareas.Theprimarypurposeofthismodelistoprovidearepresentativedrainagepathwaytothepondinglocationssothemodelnetworkwillbelimitedprimarilytothecentraltrunkofthestormdrainsystem.Themodelnetworkwillincludethehydraulicstructuresthatcontrolflowconditionsattheoutfalls.OnedayofRIKGPSsurveyworkisincludedinthissubtasktocollectmoreaccurateelevationsoncriticalflowcontrolareas.Thissurveywillhelpidentifyareasthatmaybeexcludedfromfurthermodeling.Subtask5.3-Exploratory2-DHydraulicModelThepreliminaryEPA-SWMMmodelwillbeexpandedtoinclude2-dimensionaloverlandflowrouting.Theinterconnectionsbetweenthestormdrainsystemandtheoverlandflowpathwaysforbothinteriordrainagestudyareasarerelativelycomplexandnotintuitivelyobviousfromareviewofthetopography.Toaddressthisuncertainty,asimplified2-dimentionalhydraulicmodelwillbedevelopedthatclearlyshowstheoverlandflowpathsbetweennetworks.AflowmeshofthegroundsurfacewillbecreatedfromtheLiDARsurfaceusingthepre-processingcapabilitiesofthePC-SWMMsoftware(CHI,2016)andmergedwiththeEPA-SWMMnetworkofthestormdrainsystem.Alongduration,largevolumerunoffhydrographwillberoutedthroughthemodelassumingahightailwaterconditionattheoutfallstoforceanoverflow.Theresultsofthisanalysiswillclearlyshowtheoverflowpathsbetweenthediscretestormdrainsystems.The2-DmodelwillbeusedtoevaluateinundationattheairportandthepotentialforoverflowtoLakeWashingtonbeforepondingdepthexceedsonefootintheleftbankwithlessthanonefootofpondingintheRentonAirportEast/LoganAvenueSouthStudyArea.Similarly,the2-DmodelwillalsobeusedtoevaluateinundationintheLoganAvenueNorthStudyAreatodeterminewhethertheBoeingStormtrunkstormdrainhassufficientcapacitytoconveylargeeventvolumetoLakeWashingtonwhilemaintainingflooddepthstobelessthanonefoot.Shouldthe2-Danalysisshowthatflooddepthsarelessthanonefootunderextremeeventconditions,nolong-termcoincidentpeakanalysiswillbeperformedandthereasonwillbedocumentedinthereport.Subtask5.4-ComputeCedarRiverStageTheCedarRiverHEC-RASmodelwillbeusedtoestimatetheboundaryconditionsattheoutfalls.Aseriesofwatersurfaceprofileswouldbecomputedforvaryingflowratestodevelopelevation-dischargeratingcurvesateachoftheoutfalllocations.HourlydatahavebeencollectedattheUSGSgage12119000,CedarRiveratRentonsince1946.Theratingcurvesareappliedtothelong-termCedarRiverflowrecordtocreatealong-termstagetime-seriesuniquetoeachoutfall.Subtask5.5-Long-TermHydraulicModelSimplifiedchannelelementswillbedevelopedtorepresenttheoverflowpathwaysidentifiedwiththe2-DmodelandincorporatedintotheinitialEPA-SWMMmodeltocreatethelong-termEPA-SWMMhydraulicmodel.PondingareaswillbemodeledasstoragenodesrepresentedbyLiDARderiveddepthvolumecharacteristics.Thelong-termrunofftime-seriescomputedbyHSPFwillbeconnectedasinflowtothemodelatdiscretenodesandroutedthoughthenetwork.Dischargeattheoutfallswouldbecontrolledbythelong-termCedarRiverstagetime-seriesdatasetassignedastheboundaryconditionateachoutfall.TETRATECH8September2,2016AGENDA ITEM #1. a)
CEDARRIVER205PROJECTLEVEESCERTIFICATIONScopeofWork,Schedule&FeeEstimate—Phase2Subtask5.6-Stage-FrequencyAnalysisThelong-termhydraulicmodelwillberunfortheentire66-yearsimulationperiod.Foreachofthepondingareas,peakannualflooddepthswillbeextractedfromthelong-termdepthdatasetandastage-frequencyanalysisperformedontheextracteddatatodetermineinundationdepthforthe1%annual-chanceevent.The1%annual-chancepondingelevationsonthelandwardsideoftheleveewillbemappedinArcGlS.Assumptions:•LandcoverwillberepresentedusingtheregionalrunoffparametersexportedfromtheWWHMmodel.Nocalibrationwillbeperformed.•Modelnetworkwillincludestormdrains,catchbasins,andoutfallsfortheconduitnetworkshowninFigure1.•Minimumdiameterpipeanalyzedwillbe12inches,howevernotall12inchdiameterpipeswillbeincludedinthemodel.•The2-DmodelwillbedevelopedusingPCSWMMandLiDAR.The2-Dmodelwillberunforasingleeventwiththepurposeofidentifyingoverflowpathwaysbetweenstormdrainnetworksduringafloodcondition.•MissinginvertdataconduitsandnodesinthemodelednetworkwillbeprovidedbytheCity.•Topographyusedtodevelopthestage-storageratingforthestoragenodeswillbeobtainedfromLidar.•Stage-dischargeratingcurvesateachoutfalllocation.•TheCityofRentoncanprovidealetterverifyingthatallrepairsidentifiedintheinteriordrainageinspectionvideosarecompleteorwillbecompletebythecompletionoftheprojectDeliverables:•HSPFmodeloftheinteriordrainagestudyareas.•Findingsofthepreliminaryandexploratoryhydraulicmodels.•Long-termhydraulicmodel.•2-Dmodelshowingoverflowbetweenstormdrainnetworks.•Pondingelevationsmappedat10locations.•Appendicesdocumentingtheresultsofthehydrologic,hydraulicandcoincidentfloodinganalyses.Task6—EmbankmentandFoundationStabilityAnalysisTheEmbankmentandFoundationStabilityAnalysisincludesanevaluationofseepageandseismicforcesontheleveeandfloodwalls.Specifictasksthatwillberequiredaspartofthisanalysisinclude:•CoordinatingandexecutingthesubsurfaceinvestigationplandevelopedinPhaseI.Theproposedsubsurfaceexplorationprogramincludesfivesoilborings,nineconepenetrometertests,andlaboratoryanalyses.Laboratoryanalyseswillincludeindextestssuchassoilgradation,moisturecontentdeterminations,andAtterberglimittests.•Tier1Analysis.Asubsurfacedesignprofilebasedonexistingdataandtheresultsofthesubsurfaceexplorationprogramwillbedeveloped.FoundationstabilityandseepageanalysesforearthenleveeandglobalstabilityanalysesforstructuralfloodwallsusingtheSeep/WandSlope/WfGeo-SlopeInternational,2012)computerprogramswillbeperformed.CrosssectionsundertheconditionsoutlinedinUSACEEngineeringManualEM1110-2-1913“DesignandConstructionofLevees”andUSACEEngineeringCircularEC1110-2-6067“USACEProcessfortheJTETRATECH9September2,2016AGENDA ITEM #1. a)
CEDARRIVER205PROJECTLEVEESCERTIFICATIONScopeofWork,Schedule&FeeEstimate—Phase2NationalFloodInsuranceProgram(NFIP)LeveeSystemEvaluation”willbeevaluated.ThedesigncasesthatwillbeevaluatedincludeEndofConstruction,SteadyStateSeepageduringFullFloodStage,SuddenDrawdown,andSeismic.Stabilityandseepageanalysiswillincludeanevaluationof14to16cross-sectionsdependingontheresultsofthesubsurfaceinvestigations.•Tier2Analysis.Aseismicdeformationanalysisoftheleveesystemwillbeperformed.Asitespecificseismicanalysiswillbeperformedtobetterdefineseismicloadingforthe100yeardesignseismicevent.Evaluatepotentialseismicdeformationsoftheleveeandfloodwallsystembasedontheresultsofthestabilityanalysis,sitespecificseismicanalysis,andusingasimplifiedNewmarkdisplacementanalysis.•Tier3Analysis(OptionalFutureSubtask).Provideadetailedanalysisofslopedeformationsduringseismicloadingusingadynamicnumericalfinitedifferencemodel.ThemodelwillbedevelopedinFLAC2Dfltasca,2016).Onedesigncrosssectionwithtwoearthquaketimehistorieswillbeanalyzed,representingthetwomajorearthquakesourcesfora100-yearreturnperiodevent.ThisTier3analysisrequirespriorauthorizationfromtheCitybeforeproceedingwiththeworkandisnotincludedinthePhaseIIcosts.Assumptions:•ThedrillingplanwillbereviewedandapprovedbythelocalUSACESeattledistrictofficeandwillnotbesubjecttorevieworcommentsbytheUSACERiskManagementCenter(RMC).•CityofRentonwillhelpcoordinateaccesstotheRentonairportandprovideCityright-of-waypermitsasrequiredforexplorations.•Trafficcontrolwillnotberequiredforexplorations.Deliverables:•Documentationoftheboringandlaboratoryanalysis•Appendicespresentingtheresultsoftheanalysisperformed(Tier;andTier2,andTier3ifthisoptionaleffortisperformed)Task7—SettlementAnalysisAsettlementanalysiswillbeconductedoftheleveeembankmentthatassessesthepotentialforsettlementoftheleveetoreducefreeboardovertime.ThesettlementanalysiswillbebasedonmethodsfromtheUSACEEngineeringManual1110-1-1904“SettlementAnalysis”andstandardengineeringpractice.Assumptions:•NoneDeliverables:•SettlementAnalysiswillbeincorporatedintoGeotechnicalLeveeAnalysisandCertificationReport.Noseparatedeliverablewillbeprovided.TETRATECH10September2,2016AGENDA ITEM #1. a)
CEDARRIVER205PROJECTLEVEESCERTIFICATIONScopeofWork,Schedule&FeeEstimate—Phase2Task2—StructuralEvaluationAstructuralanalysisandevaluationwillbeperformedforthefloodwallsectionsinaccordancewithFEMAandUSACErequirementsforfloodwalldesign,usingtheUSACEcomputerprogram“CWALSHT”(oracceptableequivalent)toanalyzethedifferentI-wallsectionsforstability(USACE,2007)inaccordancewithUSACEETL1110-2-575“EvaluationofIWalls.”TheclosuregatesattheSouthBoeingBridgewillbeevaluatedbasedonUSACEEM1110-2-2705StructuralDesignofclosureStructuresforLocalFloodProtectionprojects.ThestructuralstrengthofthereinforcedconcretegatepocketwallelementswillalsobecheckedforadequacyinaccordancewithUSACEEM1110-2-2104,StrengthDesignforReinforcedconcreteHydraulicStructures.EarthquakeanalyseswillbebasedonguidanceinAScE-7andapplicableSAErequirements.Assumptions:•NoneDeliverables:•TechnicalappendicesdocumentingtheresultsoftheStructuralEvaluationTask9—OperationsandMaintenanceManualReviewTheexistingOperationsandMaintenanceManual,datedJanuary6,2003,wasreviewedinPhaseItoensurethatitmeetsFEMArequirementsascodifiedin44CFR65.10(c)and44CFR65.10(d).TetraTechwilledittheexistingmanualasnecessarytocomplywiththeserequirements.Theeditedmanualwillbesubmittedtothecityforinternalreviewfollowedbyameetingtodiscussthesuggestededits.TetraTechwillthenproduceafinalOperationsandMaintenanceManualforsubmittaltoFEMA.Ingeneral,alloperationsandmaintenanceactivitiesoutlinedintheO&MmanualmustbeunderthejurisdictionofaFederalorStateagency,anagencycreatedbyFederalorStateLaw,oranagencyofacommunityparticipatingintheNationalFloodInsuranceProgramthatmustassumeultimateresponsibilityforO&M.ThecurrentOperationsandMaintenancemanualusedforthecedarRiverSection205leveesystemisthoroughandwillonlyrequireupdatingtoaccountforsedimentationandotheridentifieddeficiencies.TheO&MmanualisnotclearonwhatresponsibilitiesareassignedtoBoeingnorwhatmaintenancescheduleisusedregardingoperationandmaintenanceoftheSouthBoeingBridge,andwillbeclarified.ThiswillincludelanguagedefininganeedtoensurethatthetruckusedtooperatetheliftmechanismattheSouthBoeingBridgeisfueledandhasadditionalfueltocompletetheliftoperationasneededThecurrentfloodwarningsystemusedbytheO&MmanualinitiatesfloodprotectionmeasuresbaseduponfixeddischargesattheUSGScedarRivergageatLandsburgandisnotupdatedatanyintervaltoaccountforreducedchannelcapacityduetosedimentationbetweendredgingefforts,withtheexceptionofthe“bridgeflow”usedtodeterminewhentobeginliftingtheSouthBoeingBridge.The“bridgeflow”methodologywillbereassessedtoensurethatsufficientwarningisavailabletohavethebridgeliftedbeforethewatersurfaceisincontactwiththebridge,andtheO&MManualwillbeupdatedtoaccountforperiodicassessmentsofcriticaldischargesusedtoassesswhentoinitiatefloodprotectionmeasuresfortheremainderoftheleveesystem.1JTETRATECH11September2,2016AGENDA ITEM #1. a)
CEDARRIVER205PROJECTLEVEESCERTIFICATIONScopeofWork,Schedule&FeeEstimate—Phase2Assumptions:•BasedonthereviewinthePhaseNeedsAssessmentonlyminorrevisionstotheO&Mmanualarerequired.•ThisCitywillreviewtheeditstotheO&MmanualproposedintheDraftversionDeliverables:•DraftversionoftherevisedO&MManual•FinalversionoftherevisedO&MManualTask10—IdentifyImprovementNeedsTheresultsofthetechnicalanalysesmayidentifyspecificstructuralimprovementsnecessarytoallowcertificationoftheleveesystem.Theseimprovementswillbedescribedandsummarizedinatechnicalmemorandum.Theimprovementswillbecategorizedintooneoftwocategories:1.SmallScaleImprovementProjects.Theseincludeprojectsthatdonotrequireextensivepermitacquisitionorthatdonotrequirein-waterconstructionactivities.Theseprojectswilllikelynotrequireanalternativesevaluationifanobviousandcost-effectivesolutionisapparent.TheProjectManagerandtheCitywillmeettoperformaninformalalternativesanalysisifmultipleoptionsexisttoaddressaspecificissue.2.LargeCapitalImprovementProjects.Theseincludemorecostlystructuralimprovementsandmayrequireextensivepermittingandin-waterconstructionactivities.TheProjectManagerandtheCitywillmeettoperformaninformalalternativesanalysisifmultipleoptionsexisttoaddressaspecificissue.Assumptions:•ThedesignoftheimprovementisnotperformedinPhaseII,butwillbethefocusofPhaseIll.•TheProjectManagerwillmeetwiththeCitypriortoproducingtheTechnicalMemorandumtoscreenandtheselecttheimprovements.Deliverables:•TechnicalMemorandumdescribingtheimprovementsidentifiednecessarytoallowcertificationoftheleveesTask11—CertificationReportlitheleveeappearstomeetFEMACertificationcriteria,TetraTechwillprepareaFEMALeveeCertificationReportpackage.Ifimprovementneedswereidentifiedasbeingnecessary,thenthisreportwillbeconsideredaConditionalLetterofMapRevision(CLOMR)andthereportwillincludethepreliminarydesignsheetsfortheimprovements.Iftherewerenoimprovementsnecessaryforthelevee,thenthisreportwillbeconsideredaLetterofMapRevision(LOMR).Thispackagewillincludetheleveeforms(theMT-2FEMAForm1—“Overview&Concurrence”,Form2—“RiverineHydrology&Hydraulic”,andForm3—“RiverineStructures”)andallothersupportinginformation.TheformatwillfollowtherequirementsestablishedbyFEMA,particularlyProceduralMemorandumNo.63.TetraTechwillsubmitthepackagetotheCityofRentonforreviewandcommentpriortosubmittingtoFEMAfortheirreviewandapproval.Thebodyofthereportwillsummarizetheresuftsofthetechnicalanalysesandthereportappendiceswillincludeallofthesupportinginformation.TETRATECH12September2,2016AGENDA ITEM #1. a)
CEDARRIVER205PROJECTLEVEESCERTIFICATIONScopeofWork,Schedule&FeeEstimate—Phase2Appendicesmayinclude:•As-builtplans•PreliminaryDesignPlansofImprovements(ifnecessary)•MT-2Forms•PreviousInspectionReports•OperationsandMaintenanceManual•Hydrologic/HydraulicReports•GeotechnicalReport•WorkMapandAnnotatedFIRMAssumptions:•CompletionofthistaskmaybedelayeduntilPhaseIllifitisdeterminedthatimprovementsarerequiredtocertifythelevee.•AddressingFEMAcommentsonthecertificationpackageiscoveredinTask12Deliverables:•Submittalwillincludeadraftandfinalcertificationreport.ThedraftwillbereviewedbytheCityandthefinalreportwillrepresenttheConsultant’srevisionstothereporttoaddresstheCity’scomments.Task12—RespondtoFEMACommentsTetraTechandGeoEngineerswillrespondtocommentsprovidedbyFEMA.Thenumberofcommentsexpectedandthelevelofeffortnecessarytoaddressthemwillbeunknown.Theactuallevelofefforttoaddressthecommentswilldependuponthenatureandnumberofthecomments.Therefore,areservepoolofhourswillbeestablishedtoaddressthecomments.Thistaskwillincludethefollowingworkitems:•ReviewFEMAcommentsandparticipateinaphonecallmeetingwithCitystafftodiscussapproachtoaddressingthecomments.AppropriatestaffmemberfromTetraTechandGeoEngineersandwillparticipateinthisphonecallmeeting.TheconsultantteamwillprovideabriefwrittendocumenttotheCitythatoutlinestheapproachtoaddressingthecommentsandtheexpectedlevelofeffortnecessarytoaddressthecomments.•Ifnecessary,TetraTechandGeoEngineerswillparticipateinaphonecallmeetingwiththeFEMAreviewersand/orFEMAregionalengineerstopresentourapproachforaddressingthecomments.•TetraTechandGeoEngineerswilladdresstheFEMAcomments.•Theconsultantteamwillissueanaddendumtothe(C)LOMRreportthatdescribeshowthecommentswereaddressed.Itwillbeassumedthattheoriginal(C)LOMRReportwillnotbereissued.Assumptions:•OneroundofcommentswillbeallthatisnecessarytosatisfyFEMA.•ThistaskmaybedelayeduntilPhaseIllifitisdeterminedthatimprovementsarerequiredtocertifythelevee.Deliverables:TETRATECH13September2,2016AGENDA ITEM #1. a)
CEDARRIVER205PROJECTLEVEESCERTIFICATIONScopeofWork,Schedule&FeeEstimate—Phase2•RevisedcertificationsubmittalpackageincludingMT-2forms,certificationreportandappendices.TETRATECH14September2,2016AGENDA ITEM #1. a)
CEDARRIVER205PROJECTLEVEESCERTIFICATIONScopeofWork,Schedule&FeeEstimate—Phase2ReferencesClearcreekSolutions.2006.WesternWashingtonHydrologyModelVersion3User’sManual,Olympia,Washington.ComputationalHydraulicsInt.(CHI).2016.PCSWMMProfessional2-Dv6.2.Guelph,OntarioCanada.Dinicola,R.S.1990.CharacterizationandSimulationofRainfall-RunoffRelationsforHeadwaterBasinsinWesternKingandSnohomishCounties,Washington.Water-ResourcesInvestigationsReport89-4052.U.S.GeologicalSurvey.Tacoma,Washington.FederalEmergencyManagementAgency(FEMA).2005.FloodInsuranceStudyforKingCountyandIncorporatedAreas.RevisedApril19,2005.Geo-SlopeInternational,Ltd.2012.StabilityModelingwithSLOPE/W.AnEngineeringMethodology.July.ItascaConsultingGroup,Inc.2016.FLACVersion8.0ExplicitContinuumModelingofNon-LinearMaterialBehaviorin2D.Minneapolis,MinnesotaNorthwestHydraulicConsultants(NHC).2014.HydraulicAnalysis—CedarRiverGravelRemovalProject.FinalTechnicalMemorandumdatedOctober20,2014.UnitedStatesArmyCorpsofEngineers(USACE).1987.HydrologicAnalysisofInteriorAreas.EM1110-2-1413.January15,1987.USACE.1994.DesignofSheetPileWalls.EngineeringManual1110-2-6067.March.USACE.2007.CASE/GCASEProgramCWALSHTDesign/AnalysisofSheetpileWallsbyClassicalMethods.U.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineersWaterwaysExperimentStationInformationTechnologyLaboratory,Program#X0031,VersionDateNovember9.USACE.2000.DesignandConstructionofLevees.EngineeringManual1110-2-1913,April.USACE.2010.USACEProcessforNationalFloodInsuranceProgram(NFIP)LeveeSystemEvaluation.EngineeringCircular1110-2-6067,August.USACE.2011.DesignofI-Walls.EngineeringTechnicalLetter1110-2-575,April.U.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineersHydrologicEngineeringCenter(HEC),2008.HEC-FDAFloodDamageReductionAnalysisUser’sManualVersion1.2.4November,2008.U.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineersHydrologicEngineeringCenter(HEC),2010.HEC-SSPStatisticalSoftwarePackageUser’sManual.October,2010.U.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineersHydrologicEngineeringCenter(HEC),2016.HEC-RASRiverAnalysisSystemVersion5.0User’sManual.February,2016.TETRATECH15September2,2016AGENDA ITEM #1. a)
CEDARRIVER265PROJECTLEVEESCERTIFICATIONScopeofWork,Sohodolo&FoeEotinrats—Phase2TETRATECHCEDARRIVER205PROJECTLEVEECERTIFICATIONPHASE!!SCHEDUlETirescheduleforPhaseIIisshowobelow.Thescheduleisbasedontheperiodstartingafteranoticetoproceedisprovided.RIVER205LEVEECER1WICATION-PHASEII16Septeerber2,2016AGENDA ITEM #1. a)
CEDARRIVER205PROJECTLEVEESCERTIFICATIONScopeofWork,Schedule&FeeEstimate—Phase2CEDARRIVER205PROJECTLEVEECERTIFICATIONCOSTESTIMATE1JTETRATECH17September2,2016AGENDA ITEM #1. a)
CEDARRIVER205PROJECTLEVEESCERTIFICATTION540700$Work2ndFooEntioralo—Phano2FeeEstimate:TetraTechwithSubcontractorRoll-up___________________________________FEMAIveeCortification-CrarRiVor205L47vee-PhaseII00,70000,$OS.00$5300$0340$0540$7025CS74CSSO$0570$0545$01.74$02.40$07.40Cool__________500700000,74F$0__—000600000S75db.g.SO.51,0..$404001o.daoa$0.534.570.5d.Os..407500ThI.aC..tICaL.rSco•dTa.k.U.470000040C..t.OSl0300.4•I03g.Os.51o(mOo.)6.a.5o.)7500.4.)Pr.l.22..C0.74000.00W—J!1j_=..3......=0Pn.sl4700300670072410InFF00C00310401000240Cbo4U.&lo—12_4120——_12—0————700—2u——2i0...•—Fkodr,agunscyAngysO——————424————DooCinonniIIlOts)C6.OnoHydodjn0744——————S—30————-OakondUr.40aj00000y.j,———————2472—10——-R74,o.0nlbo.boold0rPO.0aItha.rgon——————_10_56————-—WjtflodW,tIoolLo..oOndy,o,04Map0.og——————_6—JL.—D0,,,00130400IT.cN75aIApo.dOo,)60‘4422464%RhEZ°!I—————•U———Hydrm4lMod4,ng1220Foldotmoror000.04003p.74.ton2——_64———D40040040070Thn0lflppo)I84I-7—II———••—HVU1009ISU,dOI-HSPF640EoVoatoyllvdraI4,CModnl—PC-SWMM324004240C0n740Coda,01,47Slag.——_4————Ln,g-rennllydmulooodd——————St20Floi,,oy0007..,—————.——Dor0000tat.ollrontno.l077041,1244272024———00)00CErg,n.o,WoO2—10——-—Tell)S6..flo,4y,j,5074.200030700.70037.0———2—————————lllSo,nit40Dob530A03,o———03———————————2————————————StradurdElalLottot2325600000007.740(rorsondflo¶220-000onoCDodoC0506.04NN—————NN————————II———————————W.nt,&00.701.0Neeth7224102446I-———II——————————C03l$00000R0$0ll-DtS6722_‘4_0——023230——S-—C.7103000000501.F5042$002-———II——————————RospodloFEMACannon).42I6163264‘Scullyml..no.0011.7tOcughJan00y34.2017Hody.41.0018b.o4mI.d0307,1,01korea..F1,2017.lyE...)ad(.atmnd.4por53dto$001.45TenTad,Labor_flInT.Oh0CC.-05TaoSEnefloadc0Labor-120.40%13JflTachF.a.flUbor.ndeUlZ%_25.O&OMAOI.Lab.,34C..031011..ar.000.0.ednane004104donL.bor-2mro%_30.otrglnnoF..onLaboraIdeu-las—l.350006aIbC.eUctora10%TErRATECHIaSepletnber2,2076AGENDA ITEM #1. a)
CEDARRIVER205PROJECTLEVEESCERflFICAUIONSCOPeofWorkandPoeEstin,04o—Phone2ProjectmanagementFEMACoordinatIonClientMoetingetisIntal&Eotal152,1onot:rryRspaIrSupraSPrs.board.,.,entsntFmrberdAscnnsnet5114ErobkmttrIs60ErnbunkmnntPretectsnAcssssmsnt,VItnjDrInegdtbaoAnelrtsCoordtnatoExplorationsartSCityofRenterendUtrirtinePerformSubsoIler.EnploratrnrendLaboratoryTeotrnglionIAnetyoleofEoottngLosoarendFl008walloTsrIISeismicAnalynto.SimplifiedDnfnneat,rnAnalysisSolsmioAbecia.t0l030.ettnnAbesicMAitnot03..,tAnatynloS,AoentrortndOr60rg—Helen.,,.Dnii:ng.He100mg.)SrAnernaotndO60rg—HeSitoEtinoennglen(CPTs)Pnent,UtlityLnsel.,—APS152125400021.25-0001520350050.04500IStC820001.00000IQuantityICootITotalIMorsrur.ContentlASTMU22101PercentParsing00200(AST1.I0t140lSi,,,.(ASTM04221Arteth.rgLimit.1451101D43161Conodidetion(ASIM045401Mileage12010005226008$8200$482000$10000$000004013500$54000I555000SS5000FeeEstimate:GeoEngineersFEMALeveeCertification-CedarRiver205Levee-PhaseIIPrinrIndP11111,3&0.01.05.ot.5.01.0,.G.et.rV0.01.05O.Ot.eh000t,rh04501503mmCoralCostLakerTETRATECH1$September2,2016AGENDA ITEM #1. a)
DEPARTMENTOFTHEARMYSEATTLEDISTRICT,CORPSOFENGINEERSSEATTLE,WASUNGTON981243755RECEIVEDREPLYTOU‘Jut31ZO1ZGeotechnicalandEnvironmentalRestorationBranchCITYOFRENTONUTILITYSYSTEMSMr.RonStrakaCityofRenton1055SGradyWayRenton,Washington98055DearMr.Straka:Thisletteristoinformyouthattheleveecertification(evaluation)letterprovidedtoFEMAandtheCityin2004fortheCedarRiver(LefiandRightBank)FloodControlProjectwillbeconsideredinvalidbytheUSArmyCorpsofEngineers(USACE)onAugust31,2013.ThischangeinstatusisaresultofrevisionstoEngineeringCircular1110-2-6067,USACEPROCESSFORTHENATIONALFLOODINSURANCEPROGRAM(NFIP)LEVEESYSTEMEVALUATIONwhichwasfinalizedonAugust31,2010.ThispublicationwasdevelopedtoguideUSACEproceduresforleveesystemevaluationsinsupportoftheNFIPasadministeredbyFEMA.PriortotherevisionoftheEngineeringCircular,USACEassistedFEMAinevaluatingleveesfordesignandconstructionissuestosupportFEMA’seffortsintheFloodMapModernizationProgramthatstartedin2003.Aspartofthatprogram,specificdefinitionsandrequirementswereidentifiedthatallowedUSACEtomakeleveesystemevaluationsinsupportoftheNFIP.Insomecases,USACEisonrecordwithFEMAforapositiveNFl?leveesystemevaluationthatiscomprisedofonlyaletteroraletterwithincompletedocumentation.Underthesecircumstances,therevisedEngineeringCircularrequiresthatUSACEnotifytheleveesponsorandFEMAthatUSACEcannolongerremainonrecordasprovidingapositiveNFl?leveesystemevaluation.SincetheevaluationofyourleveesystemwasbasedondataavailableatthetimeandwascompletedbeforethepublicationoftheEngineeringCircular,the2004certificationletterwillexpirenextyear.TheECalsolimitsUSACEabilitytoperformleveeevaluationsfornon-Federalsponsorsduetofundingconstraints.Evaluationscanbeperformedonacostreimbursablebasis,butthatapproachisgenerallyunavailablesincethereareprivateArchitect-Engineering(A-E)firmsthatarecapableofperformingtheevaluationsinaccordancewithFEMArequirements.ItisourrecommendationthatyoupursueanupdatedcertificationthroughanA-EfirmifyouwishtocontinuetohaveyourleveeaccreditedintheNFl?.AGENDA ITEM #1. a)
-2-FurthercommunicationbetweentheCorpsofEngineers,FEMARegionXandyourselfisplannedtoclarifyissuesrelatingtothisdevelopment.VForadditionalinformation,pleasecontactmeat(206)764-3776orDennisFischerofmystaffat(206)764-3555orviaemailatdennis.a.fischer@usace.army.mil.Sincerely,MarkA.Offistrom,P.E.Chief,EngineeringDivisionSeattleDistrict,CorpsofEngineersAGENDA ITEM #1. a)
DEPARTMENTOFTHEARMYSEATTLEDISTRICT,CORPSOFENGINEERSREPLYTOSEATTLE,WASHINGTON981243755ATTENTIONOFRECEIVEDEngineeringDivisionGeotechnicalandEnvironmentalRestorationBianchMAYOR’SOFFiCEHonorableDenisLawMayorofRenton1055SouthGradyWayRenton,Washington98057DearMayorLaw:ThisletterisinresponsetoyourletterdatedOctober18,2012regardingNationalFloodInsuranceProgram(NFIP)certification.Asyouareaware,theU.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineers’(Corps)lettercertificationdatedSeptember30,2004wiltexpireonAugust31,2013.ThisisduetorevisionstoCorpsHeadquarterspolicyguidanceregardingthetypeofcertificationstheCorpscanprovideandthelengthoftimetheyarevalid.OnAugust31,2013,theCorpswillnolongerconsiderthelettercertificationvalidfortheCedarRiverflooddamagereductionprojectsponsoredbytheCityofRenton.Thisdoesnotmeanthattheprojectwillbecomede-accreditedatthatpointintimeandtheareasbehindtheprojectmappedaspartofthefloodzone.FEMAadministerstheNFIPanddelineatesfloodzonesforthepurposesoffloodinsurance.WithoutthecertificationletterfromSeattleDistrict,theCitywillhavethreeoptionstocontinuewiththecurrentaccreditation:a.DoingnothingwillresultinFEMAleveede-acereditationandlossofNFW100-yearinsuranceexemptionbehindtheleveesatsomepointinthefuture.ThetimeframeforthistooccurwouldbedependentonFEMAworkloadandschedulingofthemaprevisions.b.RequestfromFEMAthattheprojectbecomeaProvisionallyAccreditedLeveewhichifgrantedwouldprovide2yearsfromthatdatetoprovideanewcertificationtoFEMA.c.ProvideFEMAallofthedatarequiredby44CFR65.10byAugust31,2013signedbyaprofessionalengineer.SeattleDistrictwillbeabletoassistyouinthiseffortbyprovidingdocumentationandengineeringanalysisusedinthedesignandconstructionoftheproject.Wearealsoavailabletomeetanddiscussanytechnicalissuesyoumayhavewhenpursuingthisnewcertification.AGENDA ITEM #1. a)
—2—WevalueyourparticipationasadedicatedpartnerandwillworkwithyoutoensurethattheCedarRiverfloodcontrolprojectprovidestheflooddamageriskreductiontheCityofRentonexpectsanddeserves.Foradditionalinformation,pleasecontactmeat(206)764-3690orDennisFischerofmystaffat(206)764-3555orviaemailatdennis.a.fischer@usace.army.miLSincerely,CorpsofEngineersAGENDA ITEM #1. a)
AB - 1754
City Council Regular Meeting - 26 Sep 2016
SUBJECT/TITLE: 2017 and 2018 Utility Revenue Requirements, CIP and Fees
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Refer to Utilities Committee
DEPARTMENT: Utility Systems Division
STAFF CONTACT: Lys Hornsby, Utility Systems Director
EXT.: 7239
FISCAL IMPACT SUMMARY:
The proposed revenue increase will generate $408,353 in 2017 and $431,057 in 2018 for the Surface Water
Utility, $374,930 in 2017 and $389,927 in 2018 for the Wastewater Utility, and $170,000 in 2018 for the Solid
Waste Utility.
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
Staff hired a consultant to run the rate model for the 2017 and 2018 budget and provide six-year revenue
projections. The recommended revenue increases for 2017 and 2018 are 4% each year for the Surface Water
Utility and Wastewater Utility; maintain the current Water Utility rates for 2017 and 2018; maintain the
current Solid Waste Utility rates for 2017; and increase the Solid Waste Utility rates by 1% for 2018.
In addition staff proposes to defer the King County rate stabilization charge for 2017 and 2018. This fund has
been growing so we can defer this charge for the next two years.
Staff also proposes increasing the system development charges by 14% to 26% to be phased in over two years
to provide funding for revitalization capital projects.
Staff further proposes moderate increases to fees to reflect actual costs of permits and hydrant meters.
EXHIBITS:
A. Issue Paper
B. Table 1 Average Monthly Rates for 2017 and 2018
C. Table 2 System Development Charges
D. Table 3 System Development Charges Comparison
E. CIP Maps
F. Fee Schedule
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approve the 2017-2018 proposed utility rates and fees and direct staff to prepare the necessary ordinances to
effect the changes.
AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE:September 15, 2016
TO:Randy Corman, Council President
Members of Renton City Council
VIA:Denis Law, Mayor
FROM:Gregg Zimmerman, Administrator
STAFF CONTACT:Lys Hornsby, Utility Systems Director, ext. 7239
SUBJECT:2017 and 2018 Utility Revenue Requirements, CIP and Fees
ISSUE:
Should Council approve the proposed 2017 and 2018 utility revenue requirements and
updated fees?
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve the proposed 2017 and 2018 revenue increase of 4% each year for the
Surface Water Utility and Wastewater Utility; maintain the current Water Utility
rates for 2017 and 2018; maintain the current Solid Waste Utility rates for 2017
and increase the Solid Waste Utility rate by 1% for 2018.
Change the King County rate stabilization charge from $0.58 to $0.00.
Approve the proposed 2017 and 2018 system development charges and updated
utility development fees and charges.
Direct staff to prepare the ordinances allowing the City to charge the 2017 utility
rates beginning January 1, 2017, and to charge the 2018 utility rates beginning
January 1, 2018.
BACKGROUND SUMMARY:
In 2010 Council adopted financial criteria to stabilize the utility funds. The financial
criteria include:
Fund Balance, Operating Reserves and Rate Stabilization:
Water, Wastewater and Surface Water funds: 12% of annual
operating expenses or 30 to 45 days.
AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
Randy Corman, Council President
Members of the Renton City Council
Page 2 of 6
September 15, 2016
\LLHtp
Solid Waste: $400,000.
King County Wastewater Treatment: $380,000.
Capital Contingency as System Reinvestment and Debt Service:
Surface Water: 1.25 debt service coverage (DSC) and
approximately $3 million annual system reinvestment.
Wastewater: 1.25 DSC and approximately $3 million annual
system reinvestment.
Water: 1.25 DSC and approximately $4 million annual system
reinvestment.
Bonds versus Cash Funded Projects:
All non-CIP projects should be paid for using rates (programs,
system plans, education materials, etc.).
All system reinvestment, maintenance, replacement and
rehabilitation CIPs should be paid for using rates.
CIPs for new infrastructure, growth or increased capacity can be
paid for using bonds.
Over the past eight years, City utilities placed a high priority on reinvesting in the
infrastructure and replacing, rehabilitating and maintaining the system. We have been
able to avoid bonding during this period which has stabilized the utility funds, reduced
our debt service costs and our debt to equity ratio.
Budget Considerations
Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
The emphasis in the utility capital improvement program for 2017 and 2018 is on
providing infrastructure for the City’s revitalization areas in downtown and the
Highlands. In addition, we must maintain our level of system reinvestment to ensure
that our infrastructure is up to date and operating efficiently. System reinvestment
projects include major maintenance, rehabilitation and replacement.
Water Utility
The Water CIP consists of transmission and distribution main improvements for
revitalization areas and system reinvestment, infrastructure improvements (security and
telemetry), increased reservoir capacity (Kennydale and Highlands reservoirs) and
emergency power improvements (see Water CIP map for project locations). Program
work includes water conservation, update of the geographical information system (GIS),
hydraulic modeling, and water quality monitoring. The list of the Water CIP projects for
2017 and 2018 and their budgeted amounts (in thousands of dollars) is listed as follows:
AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
Randy Corman, Council President
Members of the Renton City Council
Page 3 of 6
September 15, 2016
\LLHtp
Water CIP Projects 2017
Budget
2018
Budget
Emergency Response Projects 50 50
Kennydale 320-Reservoir 3,500 3,500
Highlands 435-Zone Reservoir 2,000 2,000
Water Main Replacement 1,200 1,200
Downtown Water Main Replacement 2,000 500
Transmission Main Replacement 500 500
Telemetry Improvements 100 100
Water System Security 50 50
Emergency Power to Water Facilities 250 500
Water System Plan Update 200 200
Water Pump Station Rehab 150 150
Reservoir PRV Meters 100 100
Reservoir Recoating 150 150
Highlands Water Main Improvements 200 200
Aquifer Monitoring 30 30
Maplewood Filter Media Replacement 50 50
Water Main Oversizing 100 100
Total Project Costs 10,630 9,380
Wastewater Utility
The Wastewater CIP consists of revitalization projects for downtown and the Highlands,
replacement/rehabilitation of a major interceptor (Thunder Hills), force mains and
sewer mains rehabilitation, lift station rehabilitation (Falcon Ridge) and major
maintenance projects (see Wastewater CIP map for project locations). The list of the
Wastewater CIP projects for 2017 and 2018 and their budgeted amounts (in thousands
of dollars) are listed below:
Wastewater CIP Projects
2017
Budget
2018
Budget
Force Main Rehabilitation/Replacement 300 300
Miscellaneous Sewer Projects 200 200
Thunder Hills Interceptor Replacement/Rehabilitation 3,000 2,000
Downtown Sewer Replacement/Rehabilitation 500 2,500
Falcon Ridge Lift Station Rehabilitation 900 0
Lift Station Replacement/Rehabilitation 500 500
Total Project Costs 5,400 5,500
AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
Randy Corman, Council President
Members of the Renton City Council
Page 4 of 6
September 15, 2016
\LLHtp
Surface Water Utility
The Surface Water CIP consists of the Cedar River dredging, revitalization projects for
downtown and the Highlands, infrastructure maintenance/replacement/rehabilitation,
pump station upgrades, and major maintenance (wetland mitigation bank and sediment
pond cleaning). Program work includes mosquito abatement, update of GIS, manual
update, and flow and water quality monitoring (see Surface Water CIP Map for project
locations). The complete list of the Surface Water CIP projects for 2017and 2018 and
their budgeted amounts (in thousands of dollars) are listed below:
Surface Water CIP Projects
2017
Budget
2018
Budget
Cedar River Gravel Removal (Maintenance Dredge)954 505
Downtown Storm System Improvements 2,000 5,000
Renton Hill Storm System Improvements 950 0
Small Drainage Projects 250 250
Maplewood Golf Course Sedimentation Basin Cleaning 75 75
Madsen Creek Sedimentation Basin Cleaning 50 50
Rainier Ave and Oakesdale Ave Pump Station Upgrades 0 100
Wetland Mitigation Bank 120 120
Surface Water Utility GIS 100 100
Stormwater Facility Fencing 100 100
Mosquito Abatement Program - Talbot Hill Area 75 75
Stream Flow & Water Quality Monitoring Program 10 10
Green River Watershed Forum Ecosystem Restoration 20 20
Miscellaneous/Emergency Storm 50 50
Total Project Costs 4,754 6,455
Rate Modeling
Budget year 2015 was the fifth year of our five-year plan to stabilize the utility funds,
levelize rates, reduce debt and maintain our infrastructure. We accomplished our goal
of meeting the financial policies by the end of the last budget cycle. Our goal now is to
continue to commit adequate funds for system reinvestment, while providing
infrastructure for revitalization projects and economic priority areas. The increase in
capital funding necessary to complete major revitalization projects scheduled for 2017
and 2018 require small rate increases in the Wastewater and Surface Water utilities.
Rate modeling for 2017 and 2018 showed a need for revenue increases in both the
Wastewater and Surface Water utilities (4% in 2017 and 2018). Solid Waste rate
modeling indicated a need for a 1% increase in 2018. The aggregate rate revenue
AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
Randy Corman, Council President
Members of the Renton City Council
Page 5 of 6
September 15, 2016
\LLHtp
increase for all four utilities for 2017 is 1.6% and 1.9% in 2008, which is significantly less
than the average inflation rate (approximately 2.5%).
There are two significant rate increases by King County that affect our rates. King
County is proposing an increase of 14.7% in the solid waste disposal fee (tipping fee)
from $120.17/ton to $137.75/ton. This is a significant increase that represents an
equivalent 3.7% rate increase. The City’s new solid waste contract starts on
February 1, 2017 and we are realizing significant savings from the new contract. These
savings make it possible to have no increase in the solid waste rate in 2017 and only 1%
in 2018 even with the increase in King County’s waste disposal fee.
The second increase by King County is an increase in the King County (KC) treatment
charge of 5.2% ($2.19) in 2017 from $42.03 to $44.22. This rate increase impacts the
Wastewater Utility by increasing the amount of utility tax paid. In previous years we
have had a KC treatment stabilization fund to equalize the way that King County charges
for treatment. We propose this charge be deferred during the 2017 and 2018 budget
cycle because we have enough in the funds to cover the 2017 and 2018 charges. We
will assess the need for this charge in the 2019 and 2020 budget.
Table 1 shows the proposed average monthly bills for the single-family customer class.
The average single-family customer’s total City utility bill will increase by $1.04 in 2017
(1.0% overall) and $1.96 in 2018 (1.9% overall).
System Development Charges and Development Fees
As part of the rate modeling, the consultant updated the system development charges
necessary to pay for the future capital projects that increase system capacity to serve
growth. The consultant’s calculations projected increases ranging from 14% to 26%
depending on the utility. Staff has proposed that these increases be phased in over two
years. Table 2 shows the proposed system development charges for the piped utilities.
The increases in system development charges are due to the increase in plant value
from the City’s contribution in capital projects and improvements. An increase in plant
value increases the share a new customer pays to connect to the existing infrastructure.
All three piped utilities have been completing record high capital improvement project
costs and adding significant capacity to the infrastructure as part of the City’s
revitalization program. These investments by the utilities are the major factor in the
increasing connection charges for 2017 and 2018. Table 3 shows a comparison of
system development charges for neighboring utilities. Renton still has very low
connection charges compared to the rest of the region.
Staff updates the utility development fees each two-year budget cycle to reflect
increases in labor and materials costs and to add necessary permits. We propose an
increase in the Wastewater and Surface Water construction permit fees from $200 or
AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
Randy Corman, Council President
Members of the Renton City Council
Page 6 of 6
September 15, 2016
\LLHtp
$250, to $300. We also propose increases to King County permits and inspections to
reflect King County’s increased fees. We are also proposing increases to all of the
hydrant meter fees to reflect actual costs. Table 4 lists the proposed utility
development fees.
CONCLUSION:
Implementing the proposed 2017 and 2018 revenue requirements will allow the utilities
to continue to reduce reliance on debt, stabilize rates, invest in existing infrastructure to
prevent deterioration, failure, and/or lapse in service and complete revitalization
projects critical to the City’s vision. Increases in system development charges reflect the
increase in the value of the system and provide funding for capital projects to increase
system capacity for growth and complete revitalization projects. Updating the
development fees assures that the utilities are recouping their costs to serve
development.
cc: Jan Hawn, Administrative Services Administrator
Hai Nguyen, Senior Finance Analyst
AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
TABLE 1
Utility Rates for 2017 and 2018
Average Single-family Residential Monthly Rates
Current
Rate
Proposed Rates- Budget
$ (%)
2- year Projected Rates
$ (%)
Utility 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Water $37.12 $37.12 (0%)$37.12 (0%)$37.86 (2%)$38.62 (2%)
Wastewater $27.65 $28.72 (4%)$29.90 (4%)$31.39 (5%)$32.95 (5%)
Surface Water $13.73 $14.28 (4%)$14.85 (4%)$15.55 (4%)$16.06 (4%)
Solid Waste $21.12 $21.12 (0%)$21.33 (1%)$21.75 (2%)$22.18 (2%)
King County Rate
Stabilization charge
$0.58 $0.00 (-100%)$0.00 (0%)
CITY TOTAL $100.20 $101.24 $103.20 $106.55 $109.81
Change (%)$1.04 (1.0%)$1.96 (1.9%)$3.35 (3.2%)$3.26 (3.0%)
King County
Treatment Charge
$42.03 $44.22 (5.2%)$44.22 (0%)$46.53 (5.2%)$46.53 (0%)AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
TABLE 2
System Development Charges
3/4” or 1” Single-family Residential Customers
Existing Charge
2016
Recommendation from
Rate Study $ (%)
Proposed 2017 $ (%)Proposed 2018 $ (%)
Water $3,245 $3,727 (14.8%)$ 3,486 (7%)$3,727 (7%)
Wastewater $2,242 $2,837 (26%)$2,540 (13%)$2,837 (13%)
Surface Water $1,485 $1,718 (16%)$1,602 (8%)$1,718 (8%)
Total $6,972 $8,282 $7,628 $8,282
$ (% change)$1,310 (18.7%)$656 (9%)$656 (9%)
Split the increase to put half in 2017 and half in 2018
AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
TABLE 3
System Development Charges Comparison
Other Agencies (Existing Fees-2016)
Agency Water Wastewater Storm Total
Kirkland $9,411 $3,106 $508 $13,025
Issaquah $12,034 None None $12,034
Redmond $8,625 $2,500 None $11,125
Skyway Water and Sewer District $5,379 $5,696 Seattle, Renton $11,075
Auburn $6,423 $2,383 $1,190 $9,996
Kent $7,156 None $2,150 $9,306
Lacey $5,776 $3,305 None $9,081
Olympia $3,918 $3,442 $1,164 $8,524
Renton (proposed 2018)$3,727 $2,837 $1,718 $8,282
Renton (proposed 2017)$3,486 $2,540 $1,602 $7,628
Renton (existing 2016)$3,245 $2,242 $1,485 $6,972
Federal Way (Lakehaven WS)$3,629 $3,306 None $6,835
AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
Re
n
tonKing County
N e wcast leKing Co u nt y NewcastleNewcastle
Kent
King County
KingCounty
King CountyKing County
Seattle
King CountySeattle
King CountyKing CountyKing CountyKing County
RentonRenton
Renton Rent
onRenton
Renton
Renton
RentonKing County
S. Talbot HillReservoirRecoating
Highlands435-ReservoirReplacement
EmergencyPower to WaterFacilities
Renton Hill WatermainReplacementPhase I & II
NE 12thSt Transmission MainReplacement
KennydaleReservoir
SunsetLane WaterImprovements
Water MainImprovements in S2nd St & S 3rd St
Sources: Esri, DeLorme, NAVTEQ, USGS, NRCAN, METI, iPC, TomTom
City of Renton Utility SystemsCapital Improvement Program µ
Drinking Water Utility Projects - 2017/2018
Water Programs
- Telemetry Upgrade to Water Facilities- "Cityworks" Maintenance Management System Replacement- Implementation of Aquifer Protection Code, Cross-Connection Control, and Water use Efficiency Programs- Public Education on Water Conservation and Aquifer Protection- Publication of Annual Water Quality Report- Monitoring and Maintain Database for Water Quality, Water Levels- Hydraulic Modeling for Water System and Fire flow Mapping- Maintain and Update GIS Database for Water Pipes
Print Date: 09/08/2016Document Path: Y:\Files\DrinkingWater\MapDocuments\wCIP_2017-2018.mxd
AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
MercerIslandBellevue
Newcastle
Bellevue
Newcastle
BellevueKingCounty
King CountySeattleKingCountyNewcastleKing CountyNewcastle
King County Newc
a
s
t
l
eKi
n
g
C
o
un
t
y
NewcastleNewcastle
KentTukwilaKe
n
t
King
C
ountyKentKing CountyKingCounty
King CountyKing CountyKi
n
g
C
o
u
n
t
y
T
u
k
w
i
l
a
King County
Seattle
King
C
o
u
n
t
y
TukwilaSeattleSeattle
King CountyKing CountyKing CountyKin
g
C
o
u
n
t
y
KingCounty King CountyKing CountyKing CountyKing CountyKing CountyKingCounty
KingCounty
King County
KingCountyKingCounty
KingCounty
KingCounty
King CountyKing CountyKing County
Renton King CountyNewportHillsCree
kP
a
nther
Creek
LewisCreek
NorthForkSpringbrookCreek
K ennydaleCree kSoosetteCre ekTributarySouthForkSpringbrookCreek
NorthFork G arrisonCreek
Gr
eenes
Cr
eekDuwamishRiver
Rolling Hills Creek
Springbrook
CreekT
h
u
nde
r
Hills
Cre
ek BorenCreekGin
g
e
r
C
r
e
e
k
Su
m
merfield
Creek
HoneyCreek
Maplewood C r ee k
Johns Cree k
G y psyC re ekLowerGarrisonCreek
Ma
d
s
e
n
C
r
e
e
kPanther CreekMolassesCreekL o ng MarshCre e k
BigSoosCreek
M a y C r e e kMay Cree
k
Madso n C re e k
CoalCreek
MillCreekGreenR iv e rC ed arRiver
DuwamishRiver Ced
a
r
River
Ceda r RiverCedar RiverCed ar River
NE 12th St
72ndAveSStrander Blvd
SE 116th St
SE 204th St
SEFairwoodBlvd
8
0
t
hPl
SSE63 rd St
160thAveSESE 200th StAndover Park W134thAveSES 196thSt BurnettAveSS 128thSt
S E 1 4 1 s tS t
SE 176th St
SE 144th StParkAveNSLangstonRd
Talbot Rd SNE 2nd St
120thAveSESE 200th St
SLakeridgeDr Island Crest WayBeacon
Way
SWPerimeterRd
SE156th St
ChristensenRd156thAveSE106thAveSESE 78thWa y
84thAveSEStevensAveSWNile Ave NE81stPlSE116thAveSEUnionAveNE157th
A
v
e
S
E
SE66thSt
SE 75th Pl
132ndPlSE138t
hAve
SEWatersAve
S
131stPlSE127t
hAveSEAberdeenAveNE80thAveS84thAveS139thPlSE131stAveSE163rdPlSEJonesAveNESpruce Dr119thAveSEFir Dr104thPl
SEGardenAveN124thAveSEMonsterRdSW136t
hAv
e
S
E127thPlSE135thPlSEIndustryDrCrestwoodDrS126thAveSE80thPlSESE 171st PlBronsonWayNENE6thPl121st Pl SEDuvallAveNEBurnettAveNHarringtonAveNESSunnycrestRd
64thAveSSE79th
Dr
112thAveSE76thAveSEdmondsAveSEQueenAveNEM
orrisAveS
SE183rd
D
r
113th Pl SEPascoPlNEAlderPl
CedarAveS161stAveSE103rdAveSE116thAveSE162ndAveSE76thAveSSE 74thS tTalbotRdS164thWaySE120thAveSE156thAveSE85thAveSSE
1
7
0
t
h
P
l82ndAveSE 155thAveSE86thAveS
E 122ndAveSESperryDr149thAveSEFieldAveNE126thPl
S
EShel
tonAveNE164thAveSESE 189t hPl121stAveSEAva lonDrSE88thWay
S 120th St
145th Ave126t
hAveSE61stAveSPowellAveSWSE 112th St85thPlSE
167thPlSEMontereyAveNESE 159th PlStevensAveNWAub
u
r
nAv
e
SLynnwoodAveNE166thAveSEMillAveSRentonAveS105th Pl SES E 160thPl
166thPl
SE113thAveSE75th
A
v
eS104thAveSESE161stPlJonesAveSSE8thPl81stAveSE
1
2
0
t
h
T
e
r
SE147t
hAveSESE 4th Pl
PineDr69thAveSSE1stPl
SE7thSt
LakeAveS84thAveS110thAveSEJonesAveNER
edmondAveNENE 7th Pl
Oak Dr110th Pl SEBoeingBoeing737 Plant737 Plant
SierraSierraHeightsHeightsElemElem
Oliver MOliver MHazen HighHazen High
ApolloApolloElemElem
McKnightMcKnightMiddleMiddleSchoolSchool
HighlandsHighlandsElemElem
MaplewoodMaplewoodHeightsHeights
CascadeCascadeElemElem
Charles ACharles ALindberghLindberghHighHigh
RentonRentonPark ElemPark Elem
Fred NelsenFred NelsenMiddleMiddleSchoolSchool
RentonRentonAcademyAcademy
TalbotTalbotHillHillElemElem
SecondarySecondaryLearningLearningCenterCenter
SpringbrookSpringbrookElemElem
CityCityUniversityUniversityRentonRenton
St AnthonySt AnthonyPrivatePrivate
New MiddleNew MiddleSchool/NameSchool/NameTBDTBD
IslanderIslanderMiddleMiddleJr HighJr High
LibertyLibertyHighHigh
RidgewoodRidgewoodElemElem
MeekerMeekerMiddleMiddleHighHigh
KennydaleKennydaleElemElem
FairwoodFairwoodElemElem
CarriageCarriageCrest ElemCrest Elem
LakeLakeYoungsYoungsElemElem
LakeridgeLakeridgeElemElem
CampbellCampbellHill ElemHill Elem
SartoriSartoriEducationEducationCenterCenter
RentonRentonHighHigh
HighlandsHighlandsMarketMarketplaceplace
CascadeCascadeShoppingShoppingCenterCenter
RentonRentonShoppingShoppingCenterCenter
Skyway ParkSkyway ParkShopping CenterShopping Center
CommercialCommercialnearnearLandingLanding
StationStation1414
StationStation2121
StationStation2222
StationStation1717
StationStation5151
StationStation7676
StationStation99
StationStation9292
TukwilaTukwilaCity HallCity Hall
King CountyKing CountyCommunity &Community &Emergency CenterEmergency Center
KC Dept ofKC Dept ofTransportationTransportation
King CountyKing CountyParks &Parks &RecreationRecreation
RentonRentonCity HallCity Hall
KC DistrictKC DistrictCourtCourt
GreenwoodGreenwoodMemorialMemorialParkPark
HoneyHoneyDew ElemDew Elem
StationStation1313
PacificPacificMedicalMedicalCenterCenter
Benson HillBenson HillElementaryElementarySchoolSchool
RentonRentonTechnicalTechnicalCollegeCollege
ValleyValleyMedicalMedicalCenterCenter
The LandingThe LandingShoppingShoppingCenterCenter
GlenridgeGlenridgeElemElem
KentridgeKentridgeHighHigh
HazelwoodHazelwoodElemElem
Meadow CrestMeadow CrestEarly LearningEarly LearningCenterCenter
StationStation1616
RentonRentonMemorialMemorialHS StadiumHS Stadium
SeahawksSeahawksHQ RentonHQ Renton
RentonRentonMainMainLibraryLibrary
StationStation1212
Mt OlivetMt OlivetCemeteryCemetery
HighlandsHighlandsLibraryLibrary
RentonRentonFacilitiesFacilitiesShopsShops
Henry MosesHenry MosesAquaticAquaticCenterCenter
City OwnedCity Ownednext tonext toKenyon-DobsonKenyon-Dobson
Facilities,Facilities,Maintenance &Maintenance &Operations CenterOperations Center
LakeridgeLakeridgeElemElem
LakeLakeYoungsYoungs
LakeLakeWashingtonWashington
LakeLakeBorenBoren
PantherPantherLakeLake
ú÷÷515
ú÷÷167
ú÷÷515
ú÷÷181
ú÷÷900
ú÷÷900
ú÷÷181
ú÷÷900
ú÷÷900
ú÷÷169
ú÷÷515
ú÷÷900
ú÷÷169
ú÷÷181
ú÷÷515
ú÷÷169
ú÷÷900
ú÷÷169
ú÷÷515
ú÷÷900
ú÷÷167
ú÷÷167
ú÷÷167
'&'405
'&'405
'&'405
'&'405
'&'405
'&'405
'&'405
'&'405
'&'405
'&'405
'&'405
NE7th St HoquiamAveNEE Valley HwyNewcastle Way
UnionAveNES
E
RentonIssaquahRd
SW 7th St
NES unsetBlvdMaple
ValleyHwy
Maple Valley Hwy
SE 192nd St SE 192nd StTalbotRdSLindAveSWS 180th St 116thAveSESE 168th St
R
enton
AveS164thAveSESE Petrovitsky Rd
SEPetrovitskyRdS Puge
t
D
r
NE 4th St NE 4th St
68thAveS84thAveSSE89thPl
I
n
t
e
r
u
r
b
a
n
Av
e
S
Rainier
Ave
S
RainierAve
S
NileAveNE124thAveSESE J o nesR dRai
ni
er
AveNSW 41st St 156thAveSENE 3rd StMartinLKingJrWayS
140thAveSE140thAveSES G r a d yW a yOakesdale AveSWSW 43rd St LoganAveNBe
n
so
n
D
r
S
SEMay Valley Rd
Newcastle Golf
C
lubRd
S W G r a d y W a y
SW 34th St
SW 27th St
108thAveSEParkAveNSunsetBlvdNEDuvallAveNEMonroeAveNEWest Valley HwyEdmondsAveNELakemont
Bl
vdSEWilliamsAveSLa
ke
W
a
sh
i
ng
to
n
B
l
vd
NWellsAveSRainierAveSWMercerWay148thAveSECoal
C
r
eekPkwySEEast Valley Rd140thWaySE 154thPlSEFalcon RidgeLift StationReplacement
DowntownSewerRepalcement/Rehabilitation
Thunder HillsInterceptorRepl/Rehab
City of Renton Utility SystemsCapital Improvement Program µ
Wastewater Utility Projects - 2017/2018
0 0.5 10.25 Miles
Sanitary Sewer Programs
- Forcemain Rehabilitation / Replacement- Lift Station Replacement / Rehabilitation- Misc. Sewer Projects
Print Date: 08/30/2016Document Path: Y:\Files\WasteWater\MapDocuments\ssCIP_2017-2018.mxd
AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
Springbrook CreekWetland and HabitatMitigation - $240,000
Cedar River Gravel Removal(Maint. Dredge) Project - $1,459,000
Green River Watershed ForumEcosystem RestorationProject - $40,000
Rainier Ave/OakesdaleAve Stormwater PumpStations Upgrade - $100,000
Maplewood CreekSediment FacilityMaintenance - $150,000
Madsen CreekSediment FacilityMaintenance - $100,000
Downtown StormSystem ImprovementProjects - $7,000,000
Renton Hill StormSystem ImprovementProject - $950,000
Talbot Hill AreaMosquito AbatementProgram - $150,000
Cedar River205 LeveeRecertification Harrington AveNE StormwaterRetrofit Phase 2
Sunset LaneNE Storm SystemImprovements
City of Renton, ESRI, Inc.2017-2018 Surface Water Utility CIP Projects ´
Small Drainage Projects Program - $500,000Stream Flow - Water Quality Monitoring Program - $20,000Misc Emergency Storm Projects - $100,000Surface Water Utility GIS - $200,000Stormwater Facility Fencing Project - $200,000Surface Water Utility System Plan - $75,000
Print Date: 09/01/2016
Programs/Projects:
AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
City of Renton Fee Schedule
TYPE OF FEES 2016 2017 2018
1Per RMC 4‐3‐050F7, the City may charge and collect fees from any applicant to cover costs incurred by the city
in review of plans, studies, monitoring reports and other documents related to evaluation of impacts to or
hazards from critical areas and subsequent code‐required monitoring.
2 When the City is the lead agency for a proposal requiring an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and the
Environmental Review Committee (ERC) determines that the EIS shall be prepared, the City may charge and collect a
reasonable fee from any applicant to cover costs incurred by the City in preparing the EIS. The ERC shall advise the
applicant(s) of the projected costs for the EIS prior to actual preparation; the applicant shall post bond or
otherwise ensure payment of such costs. The ERC may determine that the City will contract directly with a
consultant for preparation of an EIS, or a portion of the EIS, and may bill such costs and expenses directly to the
applicant. Such consultants shall be selected by mutual agreement of the City and applicant after a call for
proposals. If a proposal is modified so that an EIS is no longer required, the ERC shall refund any fees collected
under this subsection which remain after incurred costs are paid. The City may collect a reasonable fee from an
applicant to cover the cost of meeting the public notice requirements of this Title relating to the applicant’s
proposal. The City shall not collect a fee for performing its duties as a consulted agency. The City may charge any
person for copies of any document prepared under this Title, and for mailing the document, in a manner provided
by chapter 42.17 RCW.
b.Exception for Projects Vested in the County: For those projects that have vested to a land use permit under
the development regulations of King County, the King County Land Use Review Fee Schedule shall apply, and
is hereby adopted by reference. A copy of that fee schedule has been filed with the City Clerk and is
available at the City Clerk’s office for public review.
3. Public Works Fees
a.Franchise Permit Fees:
Unless otherwise specified in a franchise agreement, the fee shall be due and payable at or prior to the
time of construction permit issuance. If a franchise agreement does not specify the fee amount, the generic
fee, as identified in the following table, shall be collected. A bond as stipulated in RMC 9‐10‐5,
Street Excavation Bond, is also required.
(i) Small work, including trenching less than 60 $350.00 $350.00 $350.00
linear feet or installation of 6 or less utility poles
(ii) All other work permit fee plus $60.00 per $350.00 $350.00 $350.00
overtime hour of inspection.
b.Latecomers' Agreement Application Fees:
The processing fee is due at the time of application. The administration and collection fee is deducted
from each individual latecomer fee payment and the balance forwarded to the holder of the latecomer’s
agreement pursuant to RMC 9‐5, Tender of Fee.
(i) Processing fee (Nonrefundable) if amount covered $500.00 $500.00 $500.00
by latecomers’ is $20,000.00 or less
(ii) Processing fee (Nonrefundable) if amount $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00
covered by latecomers' is between $20,000.00
and $100,000.00
(iii) Processing fee (Nonrefundable) if amount $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00
covered by latecomers' is greater than $100,000.00
(iv) Latecomers' Agreement – Administration and 15% of total 15% of total 15% of total
collection fee if amount covered by latecomers'
is $20,000.00 or less
(v) Latecomers' Agreement – Administration and 10% of total 10% of total 10% of total
collection fee if amount covered by latecomers' is
between $20,000.00 and $100,000.00
(vi) Latecomers' Agreement – Administration and 5% of total 5% of total 5% of total
collection fee if amount covered by latecomers'
is greater than $100,000.00
(vii) Segregation processing fee, if applicable $750.00 $750.00 $750.00
c.System Development Charge Tables:
(i) Water and Wastewater System Development Charges:
(1) 5/8 x 3/4 inch and 1 inch
(a) Water service fee $3,245.00 3245 3486 3245 3727
(b) Fire service fee a,b $422.00 422 450 422 477
(c) Wastewater fee $2,242.00 2242 2540 2242 2837
AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
City of Renton Fee Schedule
TYPE OF FEES 2016 2017 2018
(2)1 inch
(a)Water service fee $3,245.00 $3,245.00 $3,245.00
(b)Fire service fee a,b $422.00 $422.00 $422.00
(c)Wastewater fee $2,242.00 $2,242.00 $2,242.00
(2)1‐1/2 inch
(a) Water service fee $16,225.00 16225 17430 16225 18635
(b) Fire service fee a,b $2,110.00 2110 2247 2110 2384
(c) Wastewater fee $11,210.00 11210 12700 11210 14185
(3)2 inch
(a) Water service fee $25,960.00 25960 27888 25960 29816
(b) Fire service fee a,b $3,376.00 3376 3596 3376 3815
(c) Wastewater fee $17,936.00 17936 20320 17936 22696
(4)3 inch
(a) Water service fee $51,920.00 51920 53776 51920 59632
(b) Fire service fee a,b $6,752.00 6752 7191 6752 7630
(c) Wastewater fee $35,872.00 35872 40640 35872 45392
(5)4 inch
(a) Water service fee $81,125.00 81125 87150 81125 93175
(b) Fire service fee a,b $10,550.00 10550 11236 10550 11922
(c) Wastewater fee $56,050.00 56050 63500 56050 70925
(6)6 inch
(a) Water service fee $162,250.00 162250 174300 162250 186350
(b) Fire service fee a,b $21,100.00 21100 22476 21100 23843
(c) Wastewater fee $112,100.00 112100 127000 112100 141850
(7)8 inch
(a) Water service fee $259,600.00 259600 278880 259600 298160
(b) Fire service fee a,b $33,760.00 33760 35955 33760 38149
(c) Wastewater fee $179,360.00 179360 203200 179360 226960
a Based upon the size of the fire service (NOT detector bypass meter)
b Unless a separate fire service is provided, the system development charge(s) shall be based upon the size
of the meter installed and a separate fire service fee will not be charged.
(ii) Storm Water System Development Charges:
(1) New single family residence (including $1,485.00 1485 1608 1485 1718
mobile/manufactured homes)
(2) Addition to existing single family residence greater than $0.594 0.594 0.641 0.594 0.687
500 square feet (including mobile/manufactured homes) per sq foot per sq foot per sq foot
Fee not to exceed $1,485.00
(3) All other uses charge per square foot of new impervious $0.594 0.594 0.641 0.594 0.687
surface, but not less than $1,485.00 per sq foot per sq foot per sq foot
d.Administrative Fees for SDC Segregation Request: The applicant shall pay the City’s administrative costs for
the preparation, processing and recording of the partial payment of the fee(s). At the time of application for
special assessment district, and/or latecomer’s charge partial payment the applicant shall pay the
administrative fee of $750.00 for each segregation. If the same segregation is used for more than one
utility’s special assessment district, and/or latecomer’s charge, then only one administrative fee is
collected.
e.Public Works Construction Permit Fees: The following public works construction permit fees, utility permit
fees, and miscellaneous charges are payable at or prior to the time of construction permit issuance.
(i) Water Construction Permit Fees:
(1) Water meter tests for 3/4” to 2" meter $50.00 $50.00 $50.00
(a) Water meter tests on meters 2" or larger $60 deposit +
time and
materials
$60 deposit +
time and
materials
$60 deposit +
time and
materials
(b) Open and close fire hydrants for fire Time and Time and Time and
flow tests conducted by others. materials materials materials
AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
City of Renton Fee Schedule
TYPE OF FEES 2016 2017 2018
(c) Water service disconnection $250.00 $250.00 $250.00
(cut at main)
(d) Meter resets $95.00 $95.00 $95.00
(e) Repair of damage to service $225.00 $225.00 $225.00
(f) Water main connections $535.00 $535.00 $535.00
(g) Water main cut and cap $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00
(h) Water quality/inspection/purity tests $65.00 65 80 65 80
(i) Specialty water tests (lead, copper, etc) Cost of test + $70
processing fee
Cost of test + $70
processing fee
Cost of test + $70
processing fee
(j) Water turn ons/offs after hours $185.00 $185.00 $185.00
(k) Installation of isolation valve. $2,000 deposit +
time and
materials
$2,000 deposit +
time and
materials
$2,000 deposit +
time and
materials
(l) New water line chlorination fee. Fee $250 + $0.15 $250 + $0.15 $250 + $0.15
plus $0.15 per lineal foot for any per lineal per lineal per lineal
footage after the first two hundred fifty foot foot foot
(250) lineal feet
(m) Miscellaneous water installation fees.
Time and
materials
Time and
materials
Time and
materials
(n) Service size reductions $50.00 $50.00 $50.00
(o) Installation fees for ring and cover $200.00 $200.00 $200.00
castings
(2) Water meter installation fees – City installed: The following fees are payable at the time of
application for water meter installation(s).
(a) 3/4” meter installed by City within $3,075.00 3075 2850 3075 2850
City limits. Installation of stub
service and meter setter only.
(i) 3/4" meter drop in only $400.00 $400.00 $400.00
(b) 3/4” meter installed by City outside City $3,310.00 3310 2910 3310 2910
limits. Installation of stub service
and meter setter only.
(i) 3/4" meter drop in only $400.00 $400.00 $400.00
(c) 1” meter installed by the City. $3,310.00 3310 2850 3310 2850
Installation of stub service and meter setter only.
(i) 1" meter drop in only $460.00 $460.00 $460.00
(d) 1‐1/2" meter installed by the City. $5,330.00 5330 4580 5330 4580
Installation of stub service and meter setter only.
(i) 1‐1/2” meter drop in only $750.00 $750.00 $750.00
(e) 2” meter installed by the City. $5,660.00 5660 4710 5660 4710
Installation of stub service and meter setter only.
(i) 2" meter drop in only $950.00 $950.00 $950.00
(3) Water meter processing fees – Applicant installed: For meters larger than 2”, 220 220
the applicant must provide materials and installs.
The City charges a $220.00 processing fee at the time of meter application.
(4) Hydrant Meter fees: The following fees are payable at the time of application for a hydrant meter:
(a) Hydrant meter permit fee $50.00 $50.00 $50.00
(b) Deposits:
(i) 3/4” meter and backflow $300.00 300 500 300 500
prevention assembly.
(ii) 3” meter and backflow $800.00 800 2000 800 2000
prevention assembly.
(iii) Deposit processing charge, $25.00 $25.00 $25.00
nonrefundable.
(c) Cost of water per ccf. $3.70 3.7 5.58 3.7 5.58
(d) Meter rental begins on day of pickup.
(i) 3/4” meter and backflow $11.66 11.66 50 11.66 50
prevention assembly. Per month.
(ii) 3” meter and backflow $143.67 143.67 250 143.67 250
prevention assembly. Per month.
AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
City of Renton Fee Schedule
TYPE OF FEES 2016 2017 2018
(ii) Wastewater and surface water construction permit Fees:
(1) Residential:
(a) Wastewater permit fee $250.00 250 300 250 300
(b) Surface water permit fee $250.00 250 300 250 300
(2) Commercial:
(a) Wastewater permit fee $300.00 $300.00 $300.00
(b) Surface water permit fee $300.00 $300.00 $300.00
(3) Industrial:
(a) Wastewater permit fee $300.00 $300.00 $300.00
(b) Surface water permit fee $300.00 $300.00 $300.00
(4) Repair of any of the above
(a) Wastewater permit fee $200.00 200 300 200 300
(b) Surface water permit fee $200.00 200 300 200 300
(5) Cut and cap/Demolition permit
(a) Wastewater permit fee $250.00 250 300 250 300
(b) Surface water permit fee $250.00 250 300 250 300
(6) Ground water discharge (temporary Reinspection Fee for Wastewate N/C N/C 300 N/C 300
connection to wastewater system for Surface Water Permits
one‐time discharge of contaminated ground
water to 50,000 gallons)
(7) Ground water discharge (temporary $300.00 $300.00 $300.00
connection to wastewater system for plus King plus King plus King
discharge of contaminated ground water County County County
over 50,000 gallons) Rate plus billed for sewer rate on sewer rate on sewer rate on
current Renton and King County sewer rate discharged discharged discharged
on discharged amount (meter provided by amount amount amount
property owner)
(iii) Work in right‐of‐way – construction permit: Utility and street/sidewalk improvements: A bond is required,
as stipulated in RMC 9‐10‐5, Street Excavation Bond.
(1) Less than 35 feet in length $100.00 $100.00 $100.00
(2) 35 to 100 feet in length $125.00 $125.00 $125.00
(3) Greater than 100 feet in length $150.00 $150.00 $150.00
(4) Wastewater or storm water service $150.00 150 300 150 300
(5) King County ROW Permits/Inspections
(a) Service Installation Only $600.00 600 1000 600 1000
(b) Utility Extension per 100' of Length (Min 200' Length) $300.00 300 500 300 500
Exception: No permit fee shall be charged for individual homeowners for work in street rights‐of‐way
for street tree or parking strip irrigation systems.
(iv) Street light system fee: All new installations of street lighting facilities shall incur a fee of $500.00 per
connection to the power system, payable at or prior to the time of construction permit issuance.
f.Public works plan review and inspection fees: All developers, municipal or quasi‐municipal entities, or utility
corporations or companies, except those specifically exempted, shall pay fees under this Section. Exempted
entities include City‐franchised cable TV, cable modem, natural gas, telecommunications, and electrical power.
Half of this fee must be paid upon application and the remainder when the permit(s) is issued. There are
additional construction permit fees which are also payable upon issuance. The fee will be based upon
percentages of the estimated cost of improvements using the following formula.
(i) Street and utility plan review and inspection fees; estimated construction cost: The applicant must
submit separate, itemized cost estimates for each item of improvement subject to the approval by the
Public Works Plan Review Section.
(1) $150,000.00 or less 6% of cost 6% of cost 6% of cost
(2) Over $150,000.00 but less than $300,000.00. $9,000 + 5% over
$150,000
$9,000 + 5% over
$150,000
$9,000 + 5% over
$150,000
(3) $300,000.00 and over. $16,500 + 4%
over $300,000
$16,500 + 4%
over $300,000
$16,500 + 4%
over $300,000
(ii)Standard or minor drainage adjustment review $550.00 $550.00 $550.00
AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
City of Renton Fee Schedule
TYPE OF FEES 2016 2017 2018
Construction cost, also known as the Engineer’s Estimate or the Contractor’s Bid, shall mean cost estimate for all
project related improvements outside of the building envelopes, including, but not limited to, all costs required to
construct the following: paved parking lots, private sidewalks or walkways; private and public storm water
management facilities; temporary erosion and sedimentation control facilities; water quality facilities; public and
private streets; public and private sanitary sewers; public water main improvements; required off‐site street, bike
and pedestrian improvements; street lighting improvements; required landscaping and street tree improvements;
and site grading and mobilization costs.
g.Release of easement fees: The imposition, collection, payment and other specifics concerning this charge are
detailed in chapter 9‐1 RMC, Easements.
(i) Filing fee, payable at the time of application $250.00 $250.00 $250.00
(ii) Processing fee (paid upon Council approval of $250.00 $250.00 $250.00
release of easement)
h.Right‐of –Way use permit fees & Revocable permits for the Use of Excess Public Right‐of way: These fees are
payable at the time of application. The imposition, collection, payment and other specifics concerning this charge
are detailed in chapter 9‐2 RMC, Excess Right‐of Way Use.
(i) Single family and two family uses annually, fee $10.00 + LET1 $10.00 + LET1 $10.00 + LET1
plus leasehold excise tax1 if applicable
(ii) All uses without public benefit fee is a per month 0.5% x Value2 0.5% x Value2 0.5% x Value2
charge based on property value2 of land to be LET1 LET1 LET1
utilized, plus leasehold excise tax1, if applicable.
Payable yearly in advance
(iii) Uses with public benefit fee is a per year of 0.5% x Value2 0.5% x Value2 0.5% x Value2
assessed value of land adjoining the property, LET1 LET1 LET1
plus leasehold excise tax1, if applicable. In no
case less than $10.00. Payable yearly in advance.
(iv) Insurance Required: Public Liability and property damage insurance is also required pursuant to
RMC 9‐2‐5B, Minimum Permit Requirements for Excess Right‐of‐Way Use.
(v) Exception for Public Agencies: a no‐fee permit may be issued only when the applicant is a public agency
and when the proposed use of the right‐of‐way provides a direct service to the public (e.g., Metro
applications for right‐of‐way for bus shelters).
1There is hereby levied and shall be collected a leasehold excise tax on that act or privilege of occupying or using
public owned real or personal property through a leasehold interest at the rate established by the
State of Washington
2Right‐of‐way value shall be based on the assessed value of the land adjoining the property as established by
the King County Assessor
i.Street and Alley vacation Fees: The imposition, collection, payment and other specifics concerning this charge
are detailed in chapter 9‐14 RMC, Vacations.
(i) Filing fee, payable at the time of application $500.00 $500.00 $500.00
(ii) Processing and completion fee, payable upon Council approval of the vacation and upon administrative
determination of appraised value of vacated right‐of‐way:
Appraised Value of Vacated right‐of‐way:
(1) Less than $25,000 $750.00 $750.00 $750.00
(2) $25,000 to $75,000 $1,250.00 $1,250.00 $1,250.00
(3) Over $75,000 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00
j.Temporary connections to a City utility system may be granted for a one‐time, temporary, short‐term use of a
portion of the property for a period not to exceed three (3) consecutive years.
(i) Storm Water Fee; Annual fFee equal to ten thirty percent (10% 30%) of the current system development charge
applicable to that portion of the property.*
(ii) Wastewater Fee; Annual fFee equal to ten thirty percent (10%30%) of the current system development charge
applicable to the size of the temporary domestic water meter(s).*
(iii) Water Fee; Annual fFee equal to ten thirty percent (10%30%) of the current system development charge
applicable to the size of the temporary water meter(s).*
AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
Utility Revenue Needs and
Capital Improvement Program
2017-2018
Presentation to Utilities Committee
October 3, 2016 AGENDA ITEM #2. b)
Presentation Summary
• Financial Policies
• Funding Options
• Factors Driving Rates
• Capital Improvement Program
• Proposed Revenue Projections
• Average Monthly Bills
• Proposed Connection Charges
• Other Fees
• King County Disposal Fee Increase
• King County Treatment Charge
• Recommendations AGENDA ITEM #2. b)
Financial Policies
•Reserves
–Debt Coverage: 1.25 debt service coverage
–Operating Reserves: 12% of operating budget or
minimum of 30 days of operation
–Rate Stabilization: Required by bond covenants
–Fund Balance: Target of $400,000 Solid Waste,
$380,000 KC Wastewater Treatment AGENDA ITEM #2. b)
Financial Policies (continued)
• Annual System Reinvestment Goals
– Water Utility: $4 million
– Wastewater Utility: $3 million
– Surface Water Utility: $3 million
AGENDA ITEM #2. b)
Funding Options
• Bonds:
– growth projects
– new infrastructure
– capacity improvement
– large regional projects
• Rates:
– maintenance
– rehabilitation and replacement
– programs
AGENDA ITEM #2. b)
What Is Driving Rates?
•Capital Improvement Projects
–Revitalization Projects
–System Reinvestment
•No Rate Increases in 2015/2016 for Water,
Wastewater, and Solid Waste
•Wastewater: King County Treatment Rate Increase
(5.2%)
•Solid Waste: King County Disposal Fee Increase AGENDA ITEM #2. b)
Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
•Downtown and Highlands revitalization
projects
•Economic Development Priority Areas
•System Reinvestment
– maintenance
– rehabilitation
– replacement
AGENDA ITEM #2. b)
Joint Utility Projects AGENDA ITEM #2. b)
Downtown Utility Systems Improvements
A joint utilities project to replace aging and undersized utilities in
coordination with Transportation improvements to support the
two-way traffic conversion
•Water: Construct new 12-inch water main (4,200 feet)
in conjunction with roadway improvements, $2 Million
•Wastewater: Replace aged and/or undersized sewer
mains, $3 Million
•Surface Water: Replace existing and install new storm
systems, $7 Million
•Construction in 2017 AGENDA ITEM #2. b)
Sunset Lane Utility Systems Improvements
•In conjunction with the Transportation Division’s Sunset Lane NE Street
Improvement Project, the Utilities will be making system improvements
as part of the Sunset revitalization area in the Renton Highlands AGENDA ITEM #2. b)
Sunset Lane Utility Systems Improvements
•Water: Install approximately 2,300 linear feet of 12-inch water main to
replace existing 6-inch main, $700,000
•Wastewater: Install approximately 1,710 linear feet of 12-inch sewer main
to replace existing 8-inch and 10-inch sewer main, $800,000
•Surface Water: Install 2,500 LF of 8”-24”new storm systems in Sunset Lane
NE, $950,000
•Construction in 2017 AGENDA ITEM #2. b)
Renton Hill Utility Systems Improvements
A joint utilities project to replace aging and undersized utilities
•Water: Install approximately 8,000
feet of 8-inch water main to replace
old 6-inch and 8-inch unlined pipe,
$2 Million
•Wastewater: Replace approximately
1,500 feet of existing 8-inch sewer
mains, $650,000
•Surface Water: Install approximately
4,000 feet of 12-inch to 18-inch new
storm pipe, $1,875,000
•Construction in 2017 AGENDA ITEM #2. b)
Water AGENDA ITEM #2. b)
Highlands Reservoir Replacement
•Construct 6.3MG
reservoir and
emergency power
generator
•To replace 74-year old
leaky reservoir
•2016-2019
•$13 Million AGENDA ITEM #2. b)
Kennydale 320-Zone Reservoir
•Construct 1 MG
Water Reservoir
•For operating storage
and surge control
•2016-2019
•$6 Million AGENDA ITEM #2. b)
Wastewater AGENDA ITEM #2. b)
Thunder Hills Interceptor
Rehabilitation
•Restoration of access road, lining existing
pipeline, and relocation of vulnerable sections
of pipeline
•Existing access is insufficient and sections of
pipeline are subject to undercutting by
Thunder Hills Creek
•Design 2017, Construction 2018/19
•2017/18 Budget $5 Million AGENDA ITEM #2. b)
Kennydale Lakeline Sewer System
Evaluation
•Complete condition assessment and
alternatives analysis for lakeline
•Concerns over existing condition and long-
term replacement of the lakeline
•2017-2018
•$1.5 Million AGENDA ITEM #2. b)
Lift Station/Force Main
Rehabilitation
•Upgrade existing lift stations and force mains
to bring up to current standards
•Upgrades increase efficiency of stations and
reduce risks of sanitary sewer overflows
•Design 2016/17 Construction 2017/18
•2017/18 Budget $1.6 Million AGENDA ITEM #2. b)
Surface Water AGENDA ITEM #2. b)
Cedar River Gravel Removal Project
(Maintenance Dredge)
•Flood protection on lower 1.25
miles of the Cedar River
•Construction completed in
2016
•Ongoing mitigation, monitoring
and maintenance
•2016 – $10,588,333
•2017-2018 – $1,459,000
•100% funded by the King
County Flood Control District
AGENDA ITEM #2. b)
Harrington Ave NE Stormwater Retrofit
Phase 2 (NE 7th Street to NE 8th Place)
•Install storm systems,
water quality treatment
facilities and porous
concrete sidewalks to treat
and reduce runoff
•Construction in 2017
•2016: $900,089
•75% funded by an Ecology
grant AGENDA ITEM #2. b)
Stormwater Facility Fencing Project
•Fence stormwater ponds that
were not required to have
fences when originally
constructed
•Public safety and reduce City
liability
•Program started in 2014 and 16
fences have been installed
•18 ponds remain to be fenced
•2017-2018: $200,000 AGENDA ITEM #2. b)
Capital Improvement Program Links
•For complete Water CIP projects, please visit:
Q:\2017-2018 Budget\CIP\13_Water 2017-2018.xlsx
•For complete Wastewater CIP projects, please visit:
Q:\2017-2018 Budget\CIP\15 Wastewater 2017-2018.xlsx
•For complete Surface Water CIP projects, please visit:
Q:\2017-2018 Budget/CIP/17 Surface Water 2017-2018.xlsx AGENDA ITEM #2. b)
2017 2018 2019 2020
Water $0.0 $0.0 $0.74 $0. 76 0% 0% 2% 2%
Wastewater $1.10 $1.15 $ 1.49 $1.56
4% 4% 5% 5%
Potential Borrowing $1.5 M 2.2 M
Surface Water $0.55 $0.57 $ 0.59 $ 0.62
4% 4% 4% 4%
Solid Waste $0.0 $0.21 $0.42 $0.43
0% 1% 2% 2%
Total $1.65 $1.72
Proposed Increase to Average
Single-Family Monthly Bill AGENDA ITEM #2. b)
Average Monthly Single-Family Bill
Utility – 2016 Bill 2017 2018 2019 2020
Water - $37.12 $37.12 $37.12 $37.86 $38.62
Wastewater - $27.65 $28.75 $29.90 $31.39 $32.95
Surface Water - $13.73 $14.28 $14.85 $15.44 $16.06
Solid Waste - $21.12 $21.12 $21.33 $21.75 $22.18
TOTAL - $99.62 $101.27 $103.20 $106.44 $109.81
Total % Increase 1.6% 1.9% AGENDA ITEM #2. b)
Proposed Connection Charges
Existing 2017 2018
Water $3,245 $3,486 $3,727
Wastewater $2,242 $2,540 $2,837
Surface Water $1,485 $1,602 $1,718 AGENDA ITEM #2. b)
Other Fees
•Increase Wastewater and Surface Water
construction permits to $300
•Increase hydrant meter fees to reflect actual
costs
•Increase King County permits and inspection
to reflect increases in King County fees AGENDA ITEM #2. b)
King County Disposal Fee Increase
(Tipping Fees)
•Current Fee (Since January 1, 2013)
–$120.17/ton
•Proposed Fee (Effective January 1, 2017)
–$137.75/ton
–Increase of 14.7%
•Increased fee represents a 3.7% rate increase AGENDA ITEM #2. b)
King County Treatment Charge
•Defer collection of King County rate
stabilization charge for 2017 and 2018
•King County’s sewer charge to increase by:
2017-2018 - $2.19 (5.2%) to $44.22
2019-2020 - $2.31 (5.2%) to $46.53 AGENDA ITEM #2. b)
•Approve the 2017 and 2018 proposed
revenue increases
•Defer collection of King County rate
stabilization charge for 2017 and 2018
Recommendations AGENDA ITEM #2. b)