The URL can be used to link to this page

10 October 3, 2023, Planning Commission Meeting PacketCITY OF PORT ORCHARD Planning Commission 216 Prospect Street, Port Orchard, WA 98366 (36o) 874-5533 planning@portorchardwa.gov PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, October 3, 2023 — 6:00 pm *** Attendees and Planning Commissioners may attend in person at City Hall or via Zoom*** Join Zoom Meeting, Public Link: https://us02web.zoom.us/i/86180242823 Dial -in (phone audio) only: + 1253 215 8782 Webinar ID: 8618024 2823 Planning Commissioners please use individual webinar links. 1. Call to Order: 6:00 p.m. Pledge of allegiance. 2. Welcome and Introduction. Planning Commission and City Staff Introductions. 3. Audience Comments: Topics not listed for public hearing on tonight's agenda. Please limit comments to 3 minutes. 4. Approval of Minutes from September 5, 2023. (Attachment)( ACTION) 5. Business Items: a) PRESENTATION: 2024 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update Existing Conditions Report (Attachment) A presentation of the final 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Existing Conditions Report and discussion on upcoming steps related to the Comprehensive Plan Update. Staff Contact: Jim Fisk, AICP, Senior Planner b) PRESENTATION: Stormwater Comprehensive Plan (Attachment) The City is considering the adoption of a Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan to guide the management of surface water, stormwater and watersheds within the city. Staff Contact: Jacki Brown, Utility Manager c) PUBLIC HEARING: 2023 Comprehensive Plan Amendments (ACTION) (Attachment) A public hearing regarding the proposed 2023 Comprehensive Plan Amendments related to the City of Port Orchard Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and Capital Facilities Plan (CFP). These proposed amendments align with Port Orchard Municipal Code 20.04.020 and are intended for long-term planning responsive to community needs. Staff Contact: Jim Fisk, AICP, Senior Planner d) PUBLIC HEARING: Temporary Signage in Right-of-way (ACTION) (Attachment) The City of Port Orchard Planning Commission will hold a Public Hearing on proposed amendments to Port Orchard Municipal Code 20.132, specifically addressing revisions to requirements concerning the placement of temporary signs in public right-of-way. Staff Contact: Nick Bond, AICP, Community Development Director e) DISCUSSION: Director's Report Update to the Planning Commission on recent related to past and upcoming Planning Commission activity. Staff Contact: Nick Bond, Community Development Director 6. Adjourn Next Planning Commission Meeting — November 7, 2023 CITY OF PORT ORCHARD Planning Commission Minutes 216 Prospect Street, Port Orchard, WA 98366 Phone: (36o) 874-5533 • Fax: (36o) 876-498o Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 5, 2023 Hybrid Zoom Teleconference COMMISSIONERS: Present: Bek Ashby, Annette Stewart, Paul Fontenot, Stephanie Bailey, and Joe Morrison. Absent: Tyler McKlosky and David Bernstein. CITY STAFF: Community Development Director Nick Bond, Senior Planner Jim Fisk, and Planning Permit Clerk Jackie Krukoff. 1. CALL TO ORDER: Chair Ashby called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance. 2. WELCOME AND INTRODUCTION: Chair Ashby introduced the present Planning Commissioners, Commissioner Bailey, Commissioner Fontenot, Commissioner Morrison and Commissioner Stewart and present City staff, Community Development Director Nick Bond, Senior Planner Jim Fisk, and Planning Permit Clerk Jackie Krukof£ 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Public comment was open to any subject not related to the public hearing. There were no comments from the public regarding issues not on the agenda. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM AUGUST 1, 2023: Commissioner Stewart made a motion to approve the minutes as corrected from the August Pt meeting. Commissioner Bailey seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously with Commissioner Fontenot abstaining. 5. BUSINESS ITEMS: PUBLIC HEARING: Open Space Tax Senior Planner, James Fisk, introduced the request for current use assessment as open space public hearing. Fisk provided the intent and an overview of the Open Space Taxation Act, and the process which allows voluntary resource conservation on private property to preserve, protect or restore open space resources in exchange for tax incentive. Fisk describes the location, ownership and general condition of the subject property identified as Tract E of Amherst Subdivision. Fisk states the subject property is adjacent to and west of an open space tract associated with the Strathmore subdivision. Fisk presents the Department of Community Development's recommendation of approval. Chair Ashby opened the public hearing. There were no comments from the public. Chair Ashby closed the public hearing. Commissioner Fontenot identifies the proposed Ordinance and the criteria the Commission should consider in decision -making. Commissioner Fontenot indicates his familiarity with the site does not lead him to believe the request is consistent with approval criteria. Commissioner Bailey identifies the surrounding area as open space associated with the Strathmore development immediately east of the subject property. Commissioner Morrison requests clarification on the Department of Community Development's recommendation of approval. Fisk states, the request is consistent with Open Space Taxation Act criteria and that it expands the existing open space immediately east of the request. Commissioner Stewart asks Commissioner Fontenot to provide additional explanation as to his opinion that the request is not consistent with the criteria. Commissioner Fontenot describes the request as not meeting certain criteria. Fisk states that Fontenot is correct that the request does not meet all criteria as established, but it meets certain criteria that qualifies it as open space under the Act. Commissioner Fontenot made a motion not to approve. For lack of a second, the motion died. Commissioner Bailey made a motion to recommend to the City Council approval of an Ordinance approving a current use assessment request for tax parcel 56860580001 as presented. Commissioner Morrison seconded the motion. The motion passed 3-2 with Commissioners Morrison, Bailey, and Ashby in favor, and Commissioners Fontenot and Stewart against. DISCUSSION: Temporary Signage in Right-of-way Director Bond described that the Planning Commission has discussed the temporary sign issue for about one year. Bond states DCD staff has documented temporary signage in public right -of way and gathered historic photographic evidence of temporary signage in the study areas and incorporated Port Orchard Police crash data to determine any nexus between temporary signage and crash data. Bond states the crash data was reviewed for the five years before 2017, when the content -neutral sign code was adopted by the City of Port Orchard, and five years after its adoption. Bond states that in five of the seven study areas, the five-year average prior to 2017 was less than the five-year average after 2017. In five of the seven study areas, the Department was able to document an increase in temporary signage beginning in 2017 and the two outliers had significant roadway improvements, such as Tremon, which likely attributed to the reduction in crashes. Bond requests the Planning Commission's input and guidance on what type of amendments should be incorporated in any amendments to 20.132. Bond states that staff has a few alternatives in mind such as a prohibition of temporary signage within a certain distance of intersections, the City could implement a permit requirement for commercial speech in the right-of-way, and/or establish zones where temporary signage is permitted. Page 2 of 3 Commissioner Fontenot indicates support for a prohibition of temporary signage with intersections while considering speech issues and safety for all roadway users. Commissioner Ashby indicates support of a zonal approach where temporary signage may only be placed in areas established by the City while considering safety for all roadway users. Commissioner Ashby also indicates support of a permitting system for temporary signage to gather contact information for the individuals responsible for placing temporary signs. Bond responds to the Commission to clarify that aesthetics should not be a consideration in the temporary signage discussion nor considered as part of any amendments to POMC 20.132. Commissioner Morrison indicates that he is supportive of Commissioner Ashby's comments and adds that understands the aesthetic argument but would still like to see fewer signs. Bond describes the difference between temporary signs and signs that require a building permit. Bond also describes a zonal approach to temporary signage in right-of-way. The Planning Commission asks staff to pursue developing code which would limit the placement of temporary signs in identified zones. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Director Bond, shared a potential solution to saving the 100-year-old tree on Mitchell Avenue that was subject to the August 2023 Planning Commission meeting. ADJOURN: Chair Ashby adjourned the meeting at 6:55 pm. Bek Ashby, Chair Nick Bond, Community Development Director Page 3 of 3 CITY OF PORT ORCHARD DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 216 Prospect Street, Port Orchard, WA 98366 Ph.: (36o) 874-5533 • FAX: (36o) 876-4980 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No: 5(a) 2024 Comprehensive Plan Subject: Periodic Update Existing Conditions Report Meeting Date: October 3, 2023 Prepared by: Nick Bond, AICP, Development Director Issue: At the August 2023 Planning Commission meeting, City staff and its consultant presented a draft Existing Conditions Report to function as a baseline for the 2024 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update. The Existing Conditions Report presented population, demographics, households, housing stock, economy, and planning targets to assist in the decision -making process while developing goals and policies for the 2024 Comprehensive Plan. Current trends, future projections, and key takeaways for various elements of the Comprehensive Plan were discussed, and the report establishes common baseline data which will inform the various elements of the Comprehensive Plan. The data is based on a variety of sources including the US Census Bureau, City permitting data and the Puget Sound Regional Council among others. In summary, the Report describes baseline data for: • Port Orchard's Population and Demographics - Rapid growth and diversity of the Port Orchard population. • Port Orchard Households - Household and housing unit size, and household incomes. • Housing Stock and Affordability — Vacancy rates and a lack of missing middle housing types. • Economy — Describes the local economy as primarily service and retail and most employees in Port Orchard reside elsewhere. • Population and Job Targets — Historic rates of population and job growth in Port Orchard The Planning Commission provided feedback to staff and its consultant for additional modifications to the Existing Conditions Report. Since then, the Existing Conditions Report has been updated to reflect the August Planning Commission discussion and is presented to the Planning Commission in its final form. Additionally, staff has included a memorandum summarizing public outreach efforts thus far in the Periodic Update process. The Social Pinpoint online survey closed on September 17, 2023, to allow time to analyze and incorporate public feedback into the memorandum included in the October Planning Commission packet. Staff intends to incorporate any of the Planning Commission's input into a final memorandum. This also allows staff to provide the public with an additional opportunity to provide feedback through printed versions of the online survey. If staff receives additional input, those comments will be included in the final public outreach memorandum. Recommendation: N/A. Suggested Motion: N/A Attachments: City of Port Orchard 2024 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update Existing Conditions Report. Public Engagement Summary Memorandum dated September 22, 2023 2 Port Orchard 2024 Comprehensive Plan Existing Conditions Report Executive Summary This report sets the background framework for the 2044 periodic update of Port Orchard's comprehensive plan by presenting baseline data on the City's population, demographics, households, housing stock, economy, and planning targets. This executive summary section presents key findings from each of the sections in this report, with further details, charts, graphs, data sources, and discussion found subsequently in the full report. Population & Demographics • Port Orchard is a rapidly growing city, with population growth rates in recent decades exceeding those of the county and state due to annexation, in -migration, and natural population growth. • The city has a diversity of built environments and densities ranging from older buildings downtown to corridor commercial development and modern apartments along Sidney Ave. and more dispersed single-family new construction in McCormick Woods. • Port Orchard's population is younger and more diverse than regional averages, with lower levels of educational attainment than the county and state. • The Kitsap County Jail, located in Port Orchard, contained 411 inmates as of the 2020 Census, and there were an additional 146 residents in group quarters outside of the jail. The OFM estimates the 2023 number of group quarters residents at 694, or 3.9 percent of the city's population. Households • Port Orchard has a similar household size to the county and state, and there are a large number of households with children in the city, including single parent households. • There is a mismatch between household size and housing unit size, with a larger share of smaller households than smaller units, which can impact housing choice. • About 39 percent of Port Orchard households are renters. Renters in the city earn considerably less than homeowners and have different household size needs. • Port Orchard incomes have increased over the past decade but have not kept pace with county and statewide incomes in recent years. There is a higher share of low-income households and a smaller share of middle -income households in the city, and incomes are not distributed evenly around Port Orchard. Housing Stock and Affordability • Vacancy rates in Port Orchard decreased significantly between 2015 and 2021 but have since rebounded due to increased multifamily housing production. • Most housing in Port Orchard is in single-family homes and apartment complexes, with relatively little "middle housing." The city's housing stock is relatively new, with over half of the housing in the city built since 1990. • The high rate of housing production and permitting is continuing in Port Orchard, with over 5,000 units in the permitting or production pipeline. • Most recent single-family construction has been in new subdivisions in McCormick Woods and the Bethel- Sedgwick area. Recent and forthcoming apartment projects have been more evenly spread throughout the city. Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan I Existing Conditions Report DRAFT v2 Page 1 Port Orchard incomes have stagnated in recent years. Ownership housing prices have continued to increase, making it more difficult for residents to purchase housing, but rental prices have begun to decrease in 2022, due to the large amount of multifamily construction in the city. A household earning the median income in Port Orchard would not be able to afford the median home sales price in the city as of 2021. Although incomes and housing prices vary across the city, this indicates high demand for housing overall. About a third of low- and moderate -income Port Orchard households are cost -burdened, paying more than 30 percent of their income on housing costs. Many of the lowest -income households in the city are paying more than half their income in housing costs. Economy • Port Orchard's economy is dominated by the service and retail sectors, as well as government jobs. The city has smaller shares of the types of information and technology jobs prevalent in the greater Puget Sound region. • Port Orchard experiences a net inflow of commuters, primarily from Bremerton and nearby areas. The primary commuting destinations for Port Orchard residents are Seattle and Bremerton. Many of the city's retail, health care, and public employees commute from elsewhere. • Government, hospitality, and retail are expected to see significant regional growth in the coming decades. There is also forecast growth in some sectors which are less represented in Port Orchard's employment landscape, including professional and business services. • The proximity to Naval Base Kitsap in Bremerton results in a large number of military employees, both enlisted and civilian, who likely live in Port Orchard. These residents have unique economic situations, such as receiving military housing stipends. Anecdotal reports also suggest military employees move in and out of the city more frequently than other residents as work demands shift. • There has been considerably less commercial development than residential development in the city in over the past decade. Population and Job Targets If past development trends continue, Port Orchard could see a 2044 population of 26,972, slightly exceeding the planning target of 26,087. This suggests the city should plan for infrastructure in excess of that which would be needed over the next 20 years. A continuation of the historic rate of employment growth in the city does not reach the full 2044 employment allocation of 13,962. If the job growth rate over the last decade continues, the city could expect to see a total of 11,898 jobs by 2044. However, the city is required to plan for the full amount of the job allocation. Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan I Existing Conditions Report DRAFT v2 Page 2 Overview and Zoning This report sets the background framework for the 2044 periodic update of Port Orchard's comprehensive plan by presenting baseline data on the City's population, demographics, households, housing stock, economy, and planning targets. Current trends, future projections, and key takeaways for various elements of the Comprehensive Plan are discussed, and the report establishes common baseline data which will inform the various elements of the Comprehensive Plan. This information is drawn from a variety of sources, primarily the 2020 American Community Survey (ACS) conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau, as well as City permitting data, Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) and Census employment data, U.S. Bureau of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) housing data, and real estate data from Costar and Redfin. The map below in Figure 1 shows Port Orchard's current City and Urban Growth Area (UGA) boundaries. Per state law (RCW 36.70A.110), UGAs are intended to provide land supply for 20 years of projected growth, and the area outside UGAs should accommodate growth "only if it is not urban in nature." Much of the southwestern area of Port Orchard, the McCormick Woods area, was annexed in the 2000s. As of 2023, the total size of the city, including right-of-way and water, is 7,175 acres, with another 3,095 acres outside the city but within the UGA. Figure 1. Port Orchard Boundaries Port Orchard City Limits and UGA, 2023 Navy Yard City 41iaa,i,iel a� a �P m y �P4 ST � tt �e t � -SF'` SE MILEHILL-DR SE MILE HILL DR - V Z `oN E 1 ' SE SALMONBERRY RD SW BERRY LAKE RD -W p Legend Sll ��EDGWICK RD A i 0 Port Orchard City Limits r F 7J Port Orchard LIGA Roads-- W — State Highway Bethel - - Collector / Arterial Local Road sw LIDER RD \\ m o V Water Bodies se uoe 0 0 0,5 1 mi /t �tioRr a I I i Source.Kitsop County, City orport Orchard, LCG The map below in Figure 2 shows the zoning in Port Orchard as of June 2023. Port Orchard's residential zones increase in density from R1 to R4, with R1 allowing detached houses and cottage courts, R2 adding duplexes and townhomes, R3 adding apartments, and R4 allowing only apartments, townhomes and fourplexes. R6 allows detached houses, cottage courts, and duplexes. The R5 zone is not currently mapped. The mixed -use zones (NMU, BPMU, CMU, DMU, and GMU) allow a variety of commercial uses ranging from medical to retail and residential uses ranging from detached and attached single-family units to apartments and live/work uses. The commercial zones focus on more auto -oriented commercial Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan I Existing Conditions Report DRAFT v2 Page 3 uses, particularly in the CH zone. The city has two industrial districts: IF focuses on light industrial, commercial and residential whereas LI is geared towards manufacturing and similar uses. There is also a HI district in the code which is not currently mapped. Other zones include the Cl zone for schools and religious facilities, PF for city offices and similar uses, and PR for parks. There is also a Greenbelt zone which is intended to protect natural resources and critical areas and allows only very sparse development. The full zoning code can be found in Port Orchard Municipal Code (POMC) Title 20, and a comprehensive review of residential zoning can be found in the Housing Action Plan (HAP) Existing Conditions and Housing Needs Analysis Report, adopted in June 2023. A table of parcel acreage by zone, excluding right-of-way and water, is also shown below in Figure 2. Figure 2. Port Orchard Zoning Map and Parcel Acreage by Zone Port Orchard Zoning, 2023 Legend Q Port Orchard City Limits =_j Per Orchard UGA Water Bodies Zone Greenbelt (GB) Residential 1 (Rt) Residential 2 (1 Residential 3 (R3) Residential 4 (1 Residential 6 (1 Neighborhood Mixed Use (Ni Business Prof. Mixed Use (BPMU) Commercial Mixed Use (CMU) Downtown Mixed Use (DMU) ®0 Gateway Mixed Use (GMU) Commercial Corridor (CC) Commercial Heavy (CH) Industrial Flex (IF) Light Industrial (U) - Civic and Institutional (CI) Parks and Recreation (PR) Public Facilfties (PF) Roads — State Highway Collector / Arterial Local Road ID j — Wi 3—Y LAKE RD�t Ru J � J Y. �I � swu❑ERao 0 i -MILE. HILL EIN G F / z/ r` 4 ; SFSAL.'Er itYRD Bethel Ifi �I N lmi, SE LIDER'p 1 I LI, Source: Kitson County, City of Parr Orchard, LCG Zone Acres GB 503.4 R1 311.9 R2 2,068.2 R3 1,047.9 R4 123.6 R6 321.1 NMU 17.1 BPMU 51.9 CMU 336.2 DMU 48.2 GMU 35.1 CC 189.6 CH 162.3 IF 7.6 LI 137.6 Cl 113.8 PR 134.1 PF 280.6 Total 5,894.5 Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan I Existing Conditions Report DRAFT v2 Page 4 Population & Demographics Population Trends Port Orchard's population in 2020 was 15,587 according to the U.S. Census. The Washington Office of Financial Management (OFM) 2023 population estimate for the city is 17,480. The Kitsap County Jail, located in Port Orchard, contained 411 inmates as of the 2020 Census, and there were an addition 146 residents in group quarters outside of the jail. The OFM estimates the 2023 number of group quarters residents at 694, or 3.9 percent of the city's population. Figure 3 shows the city's population trends since 1960 along with average annual growth rates by decade. The rate of population increase slowed down from the 1970s-1990s, but picked up significantly in the 2000s and 2010s, partially due to annexation. Since 2000 the city has grown on average 4.0 percent annually, a total increase of 10,522 residents. Figure 3. Port Orchard Population and Growth Rate, 1960-2020 20,OC 6% i Population 15,000 c O 10,000 Q 0 a 5,000 0 — GI:Ii�G1rI�i�iZsI@ i rl�1011�,ii�:?t 5% 1% 0% Source: Washington Office of Financial Management, U.S. Census Bureau, LCG As shown below in Figure 4, Port Orchard's population has significantly outpaced county and statewide averages over the past two decades. The city's population is now more than four times larger than in 1960. The City annexed a large amount of acreage between 2010 and 2020, which contributed to the comparatively rapid population growth in the 2010s. During this period, the City annexed 1,400 acres comprising 515 parcels. Together, the newly annexed areas make up 19.5% of Port Orchard's total acreage. Without granular population numbers at a parcel level, it is difficult to assess exactly how many new residents are represented by this area, but these annexations have certainly affected the rapid growth rates seen over the past 20 years. Future population targets are discussed below under "Population and Job Targets" on page 27. Figure 4. Port Orchard Population Change 1960-2020 with Regional Comparisons 500% 400% 300% 200% 100% 0% u my Iton 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 Source: Washington Office of Financial Management, U.S. Census Bureau, LCG Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan I Existing Conditions Report DRAFT v2 Page 5 Population density varies across Port Orchard geographically. As shown below in Figure 5, densities range from 1 to over 10 people per square mile across the city's Census Block Groups. Downtown and the Tremont and Sidney Ave areas have the highest population densities, with older development patterns downtown and apartment development along Sidney. On the other hand, Ruby Creek, Clifton Park, and McCormick Woods have the lowest population densities, reflecting more dispersed single-family development patterns, areas with more commercial or industrial rather than residential development, and areas which are not fully built -out. Figure 5. Population Density in Port Orchard Port Orchard Population Density, 2021 Bremerton aE-FP\RJ ALLEY RD Legend I—] Port Orchard City Limits __ j Port Orchard UGA Roads — State Highway — Collector/Arterial Local Road Water Bodies Population per Square Mile (by Census Block Group) Q 0-1 1 - 2.5 2.5-5 5-10 10+ 0 OS mi /t I I I Age and Gender QGorst 0y0 .�irnaui�la.°t City h Qy ST � i Q 6 3 � � x o O� y �F �G qVE a SW BERRY LAKE RD j _j H� 0 n4 /� m O —SF MILEHILL---DR F� `� I Bethel r w fR pD �yI SE LIDFRQq 1 Source., US Census 2027 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Kitsap County, LCG The population of Port Orchard is notably younger than regional and statewide averages. Over half of Port Orchard residents are under 34 years old, and the share of children under 19 has grown since 2010, as shown below in Figure 6. There is a particularly small share of residents aged 45 to 54 in the city, but an increasing share of people aged 35-44. Overall, the younger population suggests the possibility of increased natural population growth due to the large share of residents in their 20s and 30s, as well as the potential for a robust workforce in the city. There will also be a continued need for schools in the City to serve the large number of children and young residents. Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan I Existing Conditions Report DRAFT v2 Page 6 Figure 6. Age Distribution in Port Orchard with Regional Comparisons, 2020-2021 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 14% M Port Orchard (2010) Port Orchard (2021) Kitsap County 14% Washington Source: American Community Survey 20215-Year Estimates, Table DP05, 2010 Decennial Census, Table P72 Race & Ethnicity The racial and ethnic makeup of Port Orchard is shown at right in Figure 7. The city's residents are about two-thirds white, with significant shares of Hispanic/Latino (13 percent) and Asian (5 percent) populations. Following trends seen throughout the county in recent Census surveys, a notable share of the population identifies as mixed -race, at 8 percent. The city is more diverse than Kitsap County as a whole, which has about 25 percent BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, People of Color) residents, compared to slightly over 30 percent in Port Orchard. The city's Hispanic/Latino population is larger than the county and regional average. According to the ACS, about 2.5 percent of Port Orchard residents, or 351 residents, speak Spanish at home. Some of Port Orchard's neighborhoods are more diverse than others, particularly Downtown, Bethel-Sedgewick, and the area along Sidney Ave., as shown below in Figure 8. ■ 65 and older ■55to64 ■ 45 to 54 ■35to44 ■ 20 to 34 ■ 19 and younger Figure 7. Race & Ethnicity in Port Orchard, 2021 Two or More Native Hawaiian Races American Ind / Alaska Nati 1% Black / Africa American 2% 69% Source. American Community Survey 2027 5-Year Estimates, Table DP05 Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan I Existing Conditions Report DRAFT v2 Page 7 Figure 8. Race and Ethnicity by Census Block Group Port Orchard Race and Ethnicity, 2021 3remerton �El4P,R�pLLLY Rp Legend Q Port Orchard City Limits Port Orchard UGA Roads — State Highway — Collector/Arterial Local Road Water Bodies Share of BIPOC Population (by Census Block Group) 0 5-10% E=] 10-20% Q 20-30% - 30-40% - 40%i 0 0.5 1 m /t I I [�, Educational Attainment r __d = �� I �6ethel N 16 t SW LIVER R° ,�rl SE LI°EAe� 1 Source. US Census 2021 American Cammuntty Survey 5-Year Estimates, Kitsup County LCG Port Orchard residents have slightly lower levels of educational attainment than the county and the state, as shown in Figure 9 below. Overall, 32 percent of residents have a bachelor's degree or higher, compared with 35 percent countywide and 37 percent across Washington. This reflects Port Orchard's more "blue collar' employment landscape, detailed below under "Economy" on Page 23. Figure 9. Educational Attainment in Port Orchard with Regional Comparisons, 2021 100% 90% 80% ° ■ Graduate or Professional Degree 70 /° 60% 900■ Bachelor's Degree 50% ■ Associate's Degree 40% A ■ Some College 30% ■ High School 20% '% ■ Less than High School 10% ' 0% �' Port Orchard Kitsap County Washington Source: American Community Survey 20215-Year Estimates, Table DP05 Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan I Existing Conditions Report DRAFT v2 Page 8 Key Takeaways • Port Orchard is a rapidly growing city, with population growth rates in recent decades exceeding those of the county and state due to annexation, in -migration, and natural population growth. • The city has a diversity of built environments and densities ranging from older buildings downtown to corridor commercial development and modern apartments along Sidney Ave. and more dispersed single-family new construction in McCormick Woods. • Port Orchard's population is younger and more diverse than regional averages, with lower levels of educational attainment than the county and state. Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan I Existing Conditions Report DRAFT v2 Page 9 Households In Port Orchard, there are 5,886 occupied housing units as of the 2021 ACS. The U.S. Census Bureau considers each unit to be occupied by one "household," comprised of any combination of related family members, unrelated people, or individuals. Type & Size Figure 10 shows Port Orchard's household type breakdown. There are 3,724 married or cohabitating couple households in Port Orchard, about 63 percent of households. Of these, nearly half, or 1,708 households, have children. There are 2,162 households which have a single person householder. This includes people living alone and single parents. Of these single - parent households, 443 households have children and most of those are single mothers. This is a higher share of single - parent households than the county and the state. In addition, 543 of the single -person households in Port Orchard are householders over age 65 living alone. Overall, according to the Washington OFM, Port Orchard's average household size is 2.56 people, slightly higher than the county average of 2.53 and similar to the statewide average of 2.55. Figure 10. Household Type in Port Orchard, 2021 Port Orchard Kitsap County Households Share Households Share Total Households 5,886 100% 104,977 100% Married or cohabitating couple household 3,724 63% 64,160 61% With children under 18 7,708 29% 22,220 21 % Male householder, no spouse/partner 856 15% 18,368 17% With children under 18 84 1 % 7,506 1 % Householder living alone 547 9% 12,407 12% 65 years and over 136 2% 3,780 4% Female householder, no spouse/partner 1,306 22% 22,449 21% With children under 18 359 6% 3,880 4% Householder living alone 760 73% 73,000 72% 65 years and over 407 7916 7,322 7916 Total Households with Children 2,372 40% 31,107 30% Total Householders over 65 living alone 543 9% 11,102 11% Source: American Community Survey 20215-Year Estimates, Table DP02 Over half of Port Orchard's households are made up of one or two people. On the other hand, 25 percent of housing units are studios, one -bedroom or two -bedroom units, as shown below in Figure 11. Although smaller households may choose to live in larger units, this mismatch between household size and housing unit size can have negative implications for housing affordability if smaller households are not able to find units suitable to their needs and budgets. Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan I Existing Conditions Report DRAFT v2 Page 10 Figure 11. Household Size and Housing Unit Size in Port Orchard, 2021 Housenold Size 4+ per— housO 26°r 3-persor househol, 17% 1-nPrson hold rson hold 35% Housing Unit Size 4+ Studio / 1 Of herirnnm bedre 42% Source: American Community Survey 2027 5-Year Estimates, Tables DP04, S2507 Tenure s The majority of Port Orchard's households are ownership households, although a sizeable 39 percent are renters, higher than county and statewide averages. Renters can face increased housing instability due to evictions and rent increases not faced by homeowners. In addition, renters are more likely to be BIPOC and lower -income households, compounding the effects of these housing challenges. According to the 2021 ACS, 88 percent of ownership households in Port Orchard have a householder who identifies as White, compared with 72 percent of renter households. Additionally, as discussed further under "Income" below, renters in Port Orchard earn less than homeowners, with a median household income for renter households of $47,785 in 2021 compared to $101,318 for ownership households. Figure 12. Tenure in Port Orchard with Regional Comparisons, 2021 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Port Orchard Kitsap County Source: American Community Survey 2027 5-Year Estimates, Table DP05 Washington ■ Renter -occupied ■ Owner -occupied Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan I Existing Conditions Report DRAFT v2 Page 11 Port Orchard's renter households are also distributed unevenly by household size. Figure 13 shows this breakdown, with one- and three -person households evenly divided between renters and owners. Two -person households are the most common size of household overall and are skewed slightly towards owners, whereas large households of over four people are much more likely to be ownership households. This has implications for unit size, since many rental units tend to have fewer bedrooms than ownership units, but in Port Orchard there seems to be a demand for rental units for 3-person as well as one- and two -person households. Figure 13. Port Orchard Household Size by Tenure, 2021 4-or-more-person household 3-person household E 2-person household 1-person household 0 500 1,000 1,500 Source: American Community Survey 20215-Year Estimates, Table DP05 Income ■ Ownership Households ■ Renter Households 2,000 2,500 Port Orchard incomes have increased steadily over the past decade, as shown below in Figure 14. Incomes in the city were keeping pace with county and statewide averages throughout the mid-2010s but have fallen behind in the past several years as regional incomes have grown even more quickly since the COVID-19 pandemic. Figure 14. Port Orchard Median Household Income with Regional Comparisons, 2010-2021 $90,000 $85,000 $80,000 $75,000 $70,000 $65,000 $60,000 $55,000 $50,000 Kitsap County 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Source: American Community Survey 20215-Year Estimates, Table S2503 Washington Port Orchard Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan I Existing Conditions Report DRAFT v2 Page 12 A breakdown of income bands in the city and county shows more detail about the variety of household incomes in Port Orchard, as shown below in Figure 15. Compared with the county, Port Orchard has a higher share of very low-income households earning under $10,000 per year and a smaller share of upper middle -income households earning $50,000 to $100,000 per year, though there are also a significant amount of high -income earners in the city, with roughly a third of Port Orchard households earning over $100,000 per year. Figure 15. Port Orchard and Kitsap County Income Distribution, 2021 16% 14% 12% ■ Port Orchard 10% OKitsap County 8% .6% 4% 2% 0% ,L O Ln �n ,L CDul Ln O rn O Un O N M M b4 to to b4 b4 ta4 b4 V O O Ln CDLn O N N M M 17 b2 kfi 41q b4 b4 {{} b4 Y ,L Y Y -lL ,L OLn CD l0 r- O N O b4 to b4 b4 tA -11 O O Y __\z _sz Ln Q0 U1 O Ln O tq to Il- b9 O N Ln b4 b4 Source: American Community Survey 2027 5-Year Estimates, Table 819007 A different picture emerges when considering incomes broken down by renter and ownership households, as shown below in Figure 16: renters in the city earn considerably less than homeowners, and renters in Port Orchard have seen only a 28 percent increase in incomes between 2010 and 2021, compared to a 58 percent increase in incomes of ownership households. Rental households' lower incomes and slower income growth compared with ownership households raises concerns over the ability of renters to keep up with rising housing costs or to move into homeownership, particularly given that wealthier ownership households may be able to pay more for housing. Figure 16. Median Household Income by Tenure in Port Orchard, 2010-21 $75,766 $50,275 All Households $101,318 $64,068 0 Ownership Households Source: American Community Survey 2027 5-Year estimates, Table S2503 ■ 2010 ■ 2021 $47,785 $37,351 M I Renter Households Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan I Existing Conditions Report DRAFT v2 Page 13 Figure 17 shows incomes in Port Orchard geographically by Census block group. Incomes are not distributed evenly around the city, with McCormick Woods and areas west of Downtown showing the highest income levels, whereas the Bethel and Mile Hill areas show the lowest household incomes. Figure 17. Incomes by Census Block Group in Port Orchard, 2021 Port Orchard Median Household Income, 2021 Bremerton � `F P`¢�ALLEY Rp M Gorst Legend Q Part Orchard City Limits - Part Orchard UGA Roads State Highway Collector / Arterial LacalRoad Water Bodies MHI $35k-$50k 0 $50k - $65k 0 $65k - $80k $BOk - $95k - $95k + 0 0.5 1 mi n I Ah Key Takeaways Navy Yard City yh �P 6 L SW BERRY LAKE RD W 0 -VE r Bethel � o \ � m , SW LIDER ID \ i �r sE uoeR� Source. US Censu52027 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Kitsap County, LCG • Port Orchard has a similar household size to the county and state, and there are a large number of households with children in the city, including single parent households. • There is a mismatch between household size and housing unit size, with a larger share of smaller households than smaller units, which can impact housing choice. • About 39 percent of Port Orchard households are renters. Renters in the city earn considerably less than homeowners and have different household size needs. • Port Orchard incomes have increased over the past decade but have not kept pace with county and statewide incomes in recent years. There is a higher share of very low income households and a smaller share of middle - income households in the city, and incomes are not distributed evenly around Port Orchard. Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan I Existing Conditions Report DRAFT v2 Page 14 Housing Stock and Affordability Housing Units and Vacancy As of 2021, there were 6,165 total housing units in Port Orchard, of which 5,886 were occupied. The other 279 were vacant. Since this latest Census data, the city has seen a significant amount of multifamily construction, discussed further below under "Production" on page 18. Vacancy rates for both renters and homeowners decreased in Port Orchard from the mid-2010s until recently as housing demand and prices increased. Vacancy rates as reported by the Census Bureau's American Community Survey through 2021 are shown below in Figure 18. Figure 18. ACS Reported Vacancy Rates in Port Orchard, 2010-2021 12.0% 10.0% 8.0% 6.0% 4.0% 2.0% 0.0% 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Source: American Community Survey 2027 5-Year estimates, Table DP04 Census -reported vacancy rates were reported as 1.8 percent for ownership properties and 2.0 percent for rental properties as of 2021.). However, the large amount of multifamily production seen since 2021 has had a noticeable effect on vacancy rates as shown below in Figure 19, which shows vacancy rates for multifamily properties of 5 units or more in the city, as reported by Costar, a leading commercial real estate data provider. Since early 2021, the overall vacancy rate has spiked at over 14 percent and is currently around 11 percent as of July 2023. The "stabilized vacancy rate", which smooths rapid increases in vacancy resulting from new inventory being added to the market, is currently at 7.7 percent. This brings vacancy rates back within or sightly above the range generally considered healthy in the housing market, around 5-6 percent. Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan I Existing Conditions Report DRAFT v2 Page 15 Figure 19. CoStar Reported Multifamily Vacancy in Port Orchard, 2013-2023 Overall Vacancy ` 11.449% • .W • Stabilized Vacancy 7.651% 2% — 0% 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Source: Costar Type & Age The majority of Port Orchard's housing stock, about 70 percent, is in single -unit buildings, nearly all of which are detached single-family homes, plus a small number of attached townhomes. There is a much smaller amount of "middle housing" of 2-4 units, and a large share of the city's housing stock is in larger apartment buildings, at 22 percent. The remaining three percent are manufactured homes. The breakdown of housing unit type is shown below in Figure 20. Port Orchard's housing stock is considerably newer than regional averages, as shown below in Figure 21. Twice as much of Port Orchard's housing was built since 2010 than the share of countywide housing built in the same period. Over half of the housing stock was built since 1990, and two-thirds was built since 1980. This reflects the very active housing development seen in the McCormick Woods area since it transitioned from forest land to housing and later was annexed by the City. Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan I Existing Conditions Report DRAFT v2 Page 16 Figure 20. Housing Unit Type in Port Orchard, 2021 Manufactured 5+ 3-4 Units 4% 2-Uni 1% lit Yo Source: American Community Survey 20215-Year estimates, Table DP04 Figure 21. Age of Housing in Port Orchard and Kitsap County, 2021 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Port Orchard Kitsap County Source: American Community Survey 2027 5-Year estimates, Table DP04 ■ 2010-2021 ■ 2000-2009 ■ 1990-1999 ■ 1980-1989 ■ 1970-1979 ■ 1960-1969 ■ 1950-1959 ■ 1940-1949 ■ 1939 or earlier Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan I Existing Conditions Report DRAFT v2 Page 17 Production Port Orchard has been producing housing very rapidly in recent decades. Figure 22 shows a breakdown of new permits issued by housing type over the past 40 years. Note that this data shows permits which were issued, and not all of these projects were or will necessarily be completed. However, it does give an indication of important trends, including a recent uptick in permitting and a lack of multifamily construction in the early 2000s which has restarted more recently. It also shows the prevalence of single-family and larger apartment development in Port Orchard, compared with the small number of permitted 2-4 unit building types. Figure 22. Permits Issued in Port Orchard by Unit Type, 1982-2022 .�1 500 400 a 300 0 iv 200 E Z) WWI 0 ■ 5+ Unit Multifamily ■ Triplex / 4-Plex ■ Duplex fi �I:�i E:I:�I:�:�i GI:I:i ��I�i ��> r��I:��I:�iZ�Z�i�iI��iI�L i�iI�L3�iI�Y3�iS [iZ�iy f��ZiS L i�iS [:i�iS E:�iL►�iZ�i� Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) State of the Cities Database (SOCDS) City permit data indicates over 5,000 units currently in the permitting pipeline at some stage, as shown below in Figure 23. The majority of these are single-family units and apartments, although there are several developments which incorporate both detached and attached units as well as some units in mixed -use projects forthcoming in 2023 and beyond, showing some increasing housing diversity in the city. Figure 23. Recent and Forthcoming Permit Activity in Port Orchard, 2022-2025+ 3,000 2,500 2,000 .E 1,500 E z 1,000 500 — — 0 2022 2023 2024 Source: City of Port Orchard Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan l Existing Conditions Report DRAFT v2 ■ Mixed -Use Development ■ 5+ Unit Apartment ■ 4-Plex ■ Townhouse ■ Development including single- family homes and townhomes Single Family Permitting Initiated, Timeline Uncertain Page 18 The map below in Figure 24 shows recent completed single-family and multifamily development in Port Orchard, according to Redfin and Costar data. Most single-family development in the past five years has been part of new subdivisions in McCormick Woods, in the Bethel-Sedgwick area, and in East Port Orchard outside the city limits, with some scattered new construction elsewhere in the city. Apartment construction (as well as forthcoming development shown with dashed borders) has been distributed throughout the city, including several projects in the Mile Hill area and near Bethel and Sedgwick as well as proposed a pa rtm ents/town homes as part of a new project in McCormick Woods. Figure 24. Recent Housing Production in Port Orchard Port Orchard i Residential Development, 2018-2023 Legend ty Port Orchard City Limits eP Port Orchard UGA Roads 1 - State Highway me / o0 0 Collector/Arterial ^� o O MILEH,uuR sEMaiHauDR Local Road - o _ Water Bodies O Single -Family Homes rs Built Since 2018 O 2018 O 2019 2020 2021 1 SESALMONeERRYRD SW BERRY LAKURD - .I 2022 4\ ZO 2023L�oWICI9 RD Multifamily Development 4 Built Since 2018 / Multi -Family i.4 Proposed / Under Construction O a -F 1 Development Size 4j 1 z FTRBA — 2- B�thei1-4 T 500+k SF { o^ SW LIDER RD r 10k �SELIDER,P © m 0,5 I I Al i� s� Source Kitsap County, Redfin, Costar, LCG ' Cost & Affordability Port Orchard has traditionally been considered a relatively affordable city compared to the region. Considering the relationship between rents, home prices, and household incomes shown below in Figure 25, Port Orchard was relatively affordable throughout most of the 2010s, with increases in rents and home prices overall matching increases in household incomes. However, incomes have stagnated since 2018, and both rents and home values increased dramatically between 2019 and 2021. Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan I Existing Conditions Report DRAFT v2 Page 19 Figure 25. Change in Rent, Home Value, and Income in Port Orchard, 2010-2021 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% -20% 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Source: American Community Survey 20215-Year Estimates, Table S2503, DP04, Zillow More recent rent trends in multifamily projects of 5 or more units tracked by Costar indicate that the large amount of multifamily construction in the city seen in the past two years is beginning to mitigate rent prices, as shown below in Figure 26. Recent ownership housing data does not show a similar pattern, however. Nonetheless, this data does suggest that the continued rapid rate of rental housing in the city is helping to keep rents more affordable to a wider variety of income levels. Figure 26. Average Multifamily Rent Per Unit, 2013-2023 $1,800 2022 Q2 $1,700 $1,675 $1,600 $1,500 2023 Q3 QTD, $1,400 $1,597 $1,300 0000 $1,200 $1,100 $1,000 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Source: Costar Figure 27 shows the current relationship between housing prices and household incomes in Port Orchard. The average household earning the 2021 median income of $75,766 would be able to afford a home worth about $310,000. However, the median sales price in 2021 was $468,000, a full $158,000 higher. In order to afford that home at the median sales price, a household would need to earn about $114,000, nearly $40,000 more than the median household Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan I Existing Conditions Report DRAFT v2 Page 20 income. The chart also shows a variety of household incomes and the housing price which would be affordable to each income level, since Port Orchard residents vary significantly in income levels as discussed above under "Households." The gap between median income and median housing sales price indicates an overall market with high demand for housing and in which many households may not be able to afford to purchase a home or may have more difficulty doing so. Figure 27. Housing Affordability at Various Price and Income Levels in Port Orchard, 2021 $900 ■ Household Income ($1,000s) $800 ■ House Price ($1,000s) $700 $600 Median Sales Price ($468) $500 $400 $300 Median Household $202 $200 Income ($75) $101 $100 ' $25 A household earning $100,000 could not afford the median Port Orchard sales price of $468,000 even though they are earning nearly $30,000 more than the median household income. $607 $405 $304 $200 $150 $75 : $100 - 0 Source: American Community Survey 20215-Year Estimates, Table S2503, Zillow, Freddie Mac, LCG $810 In addition to income, HUD uses a measurement of "cost burden" to further determine which subset of a community's residents are most in need of housing support or most at risk of displacement or housing hardship. A household is considered to be "cost -burdened" if they are spending more than 30% of monthly income on housing costs (including rent/mortgage and utilities). A "severely cost -burdened" household spends more than 50% of their monthly income on housing costs. Figure 28 below shows the most recent HUD data on Port Orchard's cost -burdened households by income level based on percentage of HUD Area Median Income, which was $85,500 in 2019. The lowest -income households (earning less than 30 percent of AMI) are overwhelmingly cost -burdened, with nearly 500 of the 715 households in this category spending more than half their income on housing costs. More than half of households earning up to 80 percent AMI are also cost -burdened or severely cost -burdened, and about a quarter of households earning 80-100 percent AMI are also paying more than 30 percent of their income on housing costs. In total, 1,670 low- and moderate -income households, or 32 percent of Port Orchard's households, are facing cost burden, and these households are likely the most in need of subsidized affordable housing in the city. Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan I Existing Conditions Report DRAFT v2 Page 21 Figure 28. Cost -Burdened Low -Income Households by Income Bracket in Port Orchard, 2019 ■ Severely Cost Burdened Cost Burdened Not Cost Burdened 80-100% AM I 0 � 50-80%AMI a� E 0 V C 0 30-50% AMI Z3 0 < 30% AMI , 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Number of Households Source: 2075-2079 HUD Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) Key Takeaways • Vacancy rates in Port Orchard decreased significantly between 2015 and 2021 but have since rebounded due to increased multifamily housing production. • Most housing in Port Orchard is in single-family homes and apartment complexes, with relatively little "middle housing." The city's housing stock is relatively new, with over half of the housing in the city built since 1990. • The high rate of housing production and permitting is continuing in Port Orchard, with over 5,000 units in the permitting or production pipeline. • Most recent single-family construction has been in new subdivisions in McCormick Woods and the Bethel- Sedgwick area. Recent and forthcoming apartment projects have been more evenly spread throughout the city. • Port Orchard incomes have stagnated in recent years. Ownership housing prices have continued to increase, making it more difficult for residents to purchase housing, but rental prices have begun to decrease in 2022-3, due to the large amount of multifamily construction in the city. • A household earning the median income in Port Orchard would not be able to afford the median home sales price in the city as of 2021. Although incomes and housing prices vary across the city, this indicates high demand for housing overall. • About a third of low- and moderate -income Port Orchard households are cost -burdened, paying more than 30 percent of their income on housing costs. Many of the lowest -income households in the city are paying more than half their income in housing costs. Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan I Existing Conditions Report DRAFT v2 Page 22 Economy Employment Figure 29 below shows the latest employment data for workers in Port Orchard. In total, there were 7,722 jobs in the city in 2022, an increase of 56 percent over the past 20 years, or an average increase of 2.2 percent per year. Jobs in the city are dominated by the service and retail sectors, with a significant number of jobs in government as well, due to the presence of Kitsap County administration in the city. Overall, job growth has been primarily confined to the service and retail sectors, with some small growth in construction jobs over the past decade, likely reflecting the large amount of homebuilding going on in the city. Port Orchard has a notably smaller share of technology and information jobs compared to Seattle and other parts of the Puget Sound region. Current estimates as of summer 2023 suggest that up to 25 percent of workdays nationally are worked from home, and this trend has potential implications for the city, particularly if technology and other knowledge industry workers in the region choose to live in Port Orchard due to lower costs of living. The presence of the Bremerton fast ferry also provides an added incentive for commuters to Seattle. Figure 29. Employment by Sector in Port Orchard, 2000-2022 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 111 500 Reta i I Services Government Warehousing,Transport. Education p Finance, Real Estate � on Manufactu 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Source: Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRQ Covered Employment Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan I Existing Conditions Report DRAFT v2 Page 23 Commuting As shown at right in Figure 30, Port Orchard experiences a net inflow of commuters as of the most recent Census LEHD data in 2020. Employees in the city who commute from elsewhere primarily live in Bremerton (7 percent) and nearby unincorporated communities including Parkwood, East Port Orchard, and Manchester (8.6 percent total). About 2 percent each of Port Orchard employees live in Tacoma, Silverdale, and Seattle. On the other hand, Port Orchard residents' primary commuting destination is Seattle, with about 14 percent of residents working there. Another 12 percent each work in Bremerton and in Port Orchard itself. About 4 percent each work in Tacoma, Silverdale, Gig Harbor, and East Port Orchard. Figure 30. Commuting Patterns in Port Orchard, 2020 4,435 pp - Commuters out of Port Orchard Live and work in Port Orchard Source: US Census Longitudinal Employer Household Dynamics (LEND) via Census OnTheMap Figure 31 shows the breakdown of commuting patterns by job sector. Sectors above the diagonal line have more out - commuters than in -commuters. Since Port Orchard has a net inflow, there are relatively fewjobs in this category, but some more traditionally "white collar' sectors such as Administration, Professional Services, and Finance are in this area. Job sectors under the line have more commuter inflow than outflow. Most notably is the large number of retail employees who commute into the city as well as government employees. Health care is more balanced between in- and out - commuters. Figure 31. Port Orchard Commuting by Sector, 2020 2,000 1,500 -a 0 tf ° 1,000 w J 500 It Administration Professional Education Services — r Construction Manufacturing Wholesale Trade Finance / Insuran Other Services 0 500 Food / Hospitality oe Health Care / Social Assistance Public Administration 1,000 1,500 WORK in Port Orchard Source: U.S. Census Bureau Longitudinal Employer Household Dynamics (LEHD), via Census OnTheMap Retail Trade 2,000 Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan I Existing Conditions Report DRAFT v2 Page 24 Employment Forecasts The Washington Employment Security Department (ESD) publishes medium- and long-term forecasts of employment growth by region. The chart below in Figure 32 shows forecast newjobs by sector in Kitsap, Clallam, and Jefferson Counties through 2030. Many of Port Orchard's prominent sectors, including government, leisure and hospitality, and retail trade, are expected to see significant regional growth in the coming decades, some of which should be captured by Port Orchard. On the other hand, there are also expected to be a significant number of new professional, business, and health carejobs in the region as well, which Port Orchard may wish to consider strategies for attracting. Figure 32. Job Growth Forecast, Olympic Consortium (Kitsap, Clallam, Jefferson Counties), 2020-2030 GOVERNMENT . - OTHER SERVICES � ■ 2020-2025 ■ 2025-2030 LEISURE and HOSPITALITY EDUCATION and HEALTH SERVICES PROFESSIONAL and BUSINESS SERVICES - FINANCIAL ACTIVITIES . INFORMATION . TRANSPORTATION, WAREHOUSING AND UTILITIES ■ RETAIL TRADE . WHOLESALE TRADE . MANUFACTURING ■ CONSTRUCTION . NATURAL RESOURCES and Mining 0 Source: Washington Employment Security Department Military Employment 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 Forecast New Jobs A unique characteristic of the Port Orchard population is the presence of military personnel, families, and contractors due to the proximity of the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard in Bremerton. The shipyard is part of Naval Base Kitsap, a large military installation across multiple sites in Kitsap County. The military is a significant contributor to the economy of the region. The installation as a whole has 45,532 employees, including 31,585 military and civilian personnel residing in the same counties.' Average salaries of enlisted personnel were $33,400, plus an annual housing allowance of $12,000 - $25,000, and average salaries of civilian employees were $74,000 as of 2014.1 The military provided countywide data on its ' Naval Base Kitsap. "Naval Base Kitsap Operations and Economic Contributions." http://www2.economicciateway.com/media/userfiles/subsite 197/files/nbk-economic-impact-factsheets.pdf 2 Naval Base Kitsap and Naval Magazine Indian Island Joint Land Use Study, September 2015. Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan I Existing Conditions Report DRAFT v2 Page 25 civilian population for this report, but provided no data on active duty population nor data specific to personnel living in Port Orchard. Census data shows approximately 645 Port Orchard residents, representing 5.5% of the employed population of the city, employed in the Armed Forces overall, with a moderate margin of error.' This likely reflects enlisted personnel rather than civilian employees but provides a general picture of the extent of military employment in the city. The Kitsap Economic Development Alliance notes that the shipyard is anticipated to see significant investment through the Navy's 21-year, $20 billion Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Program (SIOP), suggesting continued economic and housing impacts in the region.' Commercial Building Stock Port Orchard's commercial building stock is concentrated downtown and along several large arterials including Bethel Ave, Mile Hill Dr, and Sidney Rd, as shown below in Figure 33. The Clifton Industrial Park has a cluster of existing industrial development. Although there is a large amount of retail development in the city, particularly along Bethel, there has been almost no recent nonresidential commercial development in the past five years, aside from a Dutch Brothers Coffee built in 2020 and a new 5,000 square foot industrial building built just outside the city limits in 2022. There is some commercial development in the pipeline, including the new Kitsap Bank headquarters and Port Orchard Community Center & Library, as well as a KFC, Starbucks, and some retail associated with the McCormick Village development. Overall, the city's recent commercial development trends contrast significantly with the large amount of residential development discussed earlier in this report, although it is not surprising given recent trends in commercial development, both office and retail, in recent years and particularly since the COVID-19 pandemic. Many developers nationwide are reticent to build purely commercial buildings, though ground floor retail continues to be built in mixed -use buildings around the Puget Sound. Office development has been essentially negligible in the larger Bremerton market over the past few years, with none under construction.' a 2021 American Community Survey, Table DP03 ° Kitsap EDA. "Kitsap is a Leader in the States and Nation's Defense Industry." https://www.kitsar)eda.org/key-industries/defense s Costar. "Bremerton, WA Office Market Profile" June 2023. Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan I Existing Conditions Report DRAFT v2 Page 26 Figure 33. Commercial Development in Port Orchard / f TIE, Orchard ifE I fI � All Commercial Development Legend [1 !,J_ tyl Q Port Orchard City Limits j j Port Orchard UGA Roads - State Highway 5,000 sq It • Collector/Arterial Industrial Local Road (Built 2022) Water Bodies Development Type19 ws( r� Office - - Health Care Retail Hospitality • Education / Government Industrial , eo o. 40 Self Storage Specialty S ? ` O [Built Since 20181 i_I [Proposed / Under Construction] Development Size Retail at RBA McCormick 500+k SF Village 10k -sw BE RY AKE-Ro J_ r L'VX Dutch �c _o Brothers O Coffee (Built 2020) f6 � T Saurcew Kiisap County, `ostar, LCG - Key Takeaways • Port Orchard's economy is dominated by the service and retail sectors, as well as government jobs. The city has smaller shares of the types of information and technology jobs prevalent in the greater Puget Sound region. • Port Orchard experiences a net inflow of commuters, primarily from Bremerton and nearby areas. The primary commuting destinations for Port Orchard residents are Seattle and Bremerton. Many of the city's retail, health care, and public employees commute from elsewhere. • Government, hospitality, and retail are expected to see significant regional growth in the coming decades. There is also forecast growth in some sectors which are less represented in Port Orchard's employment landscape, including professional and business services. • The proximity to Naval Base Kitsap in Bremerton results in a large number of military employees, both enlisted and civilian, who likely live in Port Orchard. These residents have unique economic situations, such as receiving military housing stipends. Anecdotal reports also suggest military employees move in and out of the city more frequently than other residents as work demands shift. • There has been considerably less commercial development than residential development in the city in over the past decade. Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan I Existing Conditions Report DRAFT v2 Page 27 Population and Job Targets The Washington Office of Financial Management (OFM) and Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) allocate future population and jobs forecasts to counties, which in turn distribute those allocations to individual cities. Cities are responsible for planning to accommodate the level of population, housing, and job growth provided in these countywide allocation targets as part of their comprehensive planning process. This section contains a citywide review of past growth trends in relation to targets. A detailed forecast at smaller geographic levels will be conducted later in the comprehensive planning process to inform transportation and infrastructure planning. Population Port Orchard's 2023 population is 17,480, according to the OFM. The 2044 population allocation for the City is 26,087, according to the most recent Kitsap County Countywide Planning Policies. In order to reach this target, Port Orchard would need to see an average annual increase of 440 residents. Over the past decade, the City has seen an average increase of 452 residents, slightly higher than the rate implied by the Countywide target. Therefore, if past development trends continue, Port Orchard could see a population of 26,972, slightly exceeding the planning target. This suggests the city should plan for infrastructure in excess of that which would be needed over the next 20 years. Figure 34. Port Orchard Historic Population Growth Rate and 2044 Allocation 30,000 25,000 20,000 5,000 Source: OFM, Kitsop County, LCG Population Grows at 26,972 2012-2022 rate ,do • •/ 26,087 do dP ,• �,• Port Orchard I f Population Allocation dp ,i Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan I Existing Conditions Report DRAFT v2 Page 28 Employment Figure 35 below shows the same chart for employment. A continuation of the historic rate of employment growth in the city does not reach the full employment allocation of 13,962. If the job growth rate over the last decade continues, the city could expect to see a total of 11,898 jobs by 2044. However, the city is required to plan for the full amount of the job allocation. Figure 35. Port Orchard Historic Employment Growth Rate and 2044 Allocation 13,9� 14,000 Port Orchard • • Employment Allocation 10 • 12,000 • • 40 • 1\ • . ' 11,898 • 10,000 • • • • . ' ' Jobs Grow at 10- Ln Historic Employment • �� ' year rate 0 8,000 ' 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 OOti 00� 000 00� OHO O�ti O�� OHO O�� OLO OL1 OLD OHO 01R� OHO O,a, Oft. OHO O�� OHO OI ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti Source: PSRC, Kitsap County, LCG Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan I Existing Conditions Report DRAFT v2 Page 29 Glossary of Abbreviations ACS — American Community Survey — A yearly survey conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau with detailed demographics, employment, income, educational attainment, and other data. AMI — Area Median Income — A HUD measurement of median income in a region used to determine eligibility for subsidized housing programs. CHAS — Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy — A Census -based HUD dataset on the share of household incomes being spent on housing, a metric referred to as "cost burden." HAP — Housing Action Plan, adopted by Port Orchard City Council in 2023. HUD — U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development — The federal government bureau which oversees housing programs and funding. LEHD — Longitudinal Employer -Household Dynamics — A Census dataset that provides spatial employment data. MHI — Median Household Income — The median (average) income for households in a city or region. OFM — Washington Office of Financial Management — The state government bureau which provides population data and forecasts, as well as fiscal services and policy for the state. POMC — Port Orchard Municipal Code PSRC — Puget Sound Regional Council — The planning organization for the greater Puget Sound region comprising King, Pierce, Snohomish and Kitsap Counties. PSRC develops policies and coordinates decisions about regional growth, transportation and economic development planning. TAZ — Transportation Analysis Zone — A small geography used in Transportation Demand Modeling to aggregate origin and destination trips. UGA — Urban Growth Area — Areas outside cities required by Washington's Growth Management Act to allow urban growth over the next 20 years based on population projections, and outside which urban growth should not be allowed. Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan I Existing Conditions Report DRAFT v2 Page 30 PROJECT MEMO ORCHARD TO: Nick Bond DATE: September 22, 2023 FROM: AHBL PROJECT NO.: 2220437.30 PROJECT NAME: Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan Update SUBJECT: Public Engagement Summary This memo serves to summarize the public engagement efforts associated with the Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan Update to date. The project is in the primary phase of gathering public input, which has consisted of a kick-off meeting and an online survey. Kick -Off Meeting An initial public meeting was held on January 31, 2023 to kick-off the Comprehensive Plan Update with the option to attend virtually or in person in the City Council Chambers from 6-8pm. The meeting was advertised on social media and the city's webpage, but unfortunately, did not attract many participants. A total of seven community members attended the kick-off meeting, two of which are on the planning commission. The meeting consisted of a brief presentation by AHBL and MAKERS that provided an overview of the project and an explanation as to why the plan is being updated. During their portion of the presentation, MAKERS conducted a live poll prompting attendees to share their loves, concerns and hopes for Port Orchard to get folks thinking about their vision for future of the city. After the presentation, participants were invited to provide their input at five different stations where they were asked to respond to the following questions by marking up maps/boards with sticky dots and writing their responses on comment cards provided: 1. How has the city done meeting the current Comprehensive Plan Targets? 2. What types of land use would you like to see in the Bethel/Lund Subarea? 3. What types of land use would you like to see in the Sedgwick/Bethel Subarea? 4. What types of land use would you like to see in the Salmonberry Subarea? 5. Where could transportation be improved and how? Due to the low attendance, very little input was gathered and is therefore not included in this summary memo. See Figures 1-6 for a snapshot of the meeting, the different materials displayed, and an idea of how input was solicited from the public. After the kick-off meeting, the project team reevaluated their approach and determined that a more convenient means of providing input should be made available to the community. In efforts to accommodate, the team developed a Social Pinpoint page for the project that included a survey that mirrored the input prompts at the kick-off meeting. Page 1 of 11 YOU'RE INVITED! to the 2024 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update Kick -Off and Visioning Meeting When: January 31. 2023@6:00 Where: Port Orchard City Cou nci l Chambers 216 Prospect Street Port Orchard, WA 98366 Fol more nta rcnat onvs[the Glty's Comprehene 4e Plan update W bmm horr dlnorxorcnarawa go�hozn-rumprehens ve plan-perioaloumeiel Figure 2 — Introductory Presentation. Figure 1 - Kick -Off Meeting Flyer. laves, Can<e,ns, Mopes taO • ��.,. o, .ks i,a.ii on�n.a iu '� a"\ � KnPond:��avnllr�n^�m/make�350yni::� �;17 Figure 4 — Subarea Planning Station. Figure 3 — Live Polling Exercise. What types of land uses f building types would you like to see in these subareas? SOW rCOMWRCIAURETAIL I RESIDENTIAL; APAPTMEMTS OFFICE I IRESTAURAw LIVE -WORK I r, 11 I I 'I II � 11 , III I — — PARK$ OPiN SPACE HEAW MANUFACTURING LIGHT MANUFACTURING 9 Nor — Figure 5 — Subarea Planning Land Use Preference Board. 00 Project Memo Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan Update 2220437.30 September 22, 2023 Figure 6 — Transportation Station Board. ORCHARD Page 2 of 11 Online Engagement In efforts to gather more initial public input for the Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan Update, a survey was developed on Social Pinpoint and hosted at https://engage.ahbi.com/ PortOrchard2044. The landing page is shown in Figure 7. The survey was open from July 28, 2023 through September 18, 2023 and advertised on social media, the city's webpage, and at the local farmers market. The online survey was designed to solicit feedback on the same topics as the kick-off meeting, with the exception of the Salmonberry Subarea, which was omitted from the online survey due to the redefinition of the subarea boundaries since the initial kick-off meeting was held. As seen on the landing page in Figure 7, the online survey was broken into four sections described below: Part Orchard 2024 Update Target Statements Want to stay updated? '-. .. --.-in:IWes1-0Ln6n'xa.re nelLiNxsum[wue Leecm.nulLjsdes.hlwL[omn. _... - cen nLlecauui ns Ne[oimwnLy w,oM1eineiA ' -.ec=.i .in_ eLLrye�laLe-.ea ruwaM, ad eaLaLJisMxMwNe[anmurrLY meLxseogrvw in '"-"' Clit.N below m rare how we aretloirg meetlngthese existing target statements: Subarea Planning wtig tie c�n.h.Ln:,. a.,� upWL.pee.s; n,. coy III awtl.p plan. ru L..n aw.,.ae: d Wb .uoNnrl.T�L�;gnu,.pl.,.ypiuceaa,u,.nLy,..�mL...ann,. n„wyee.Lh �n e. r=—ain lib— ..e antlgalm mrimL.+y-y.L ui Len ei ni seaiuii gmntlitvaa a W Nw a paenuel. (lid helmrm proride your input on the bllowi ng suhaeas Transportation Planning I.Lbe p.i L -a.. [u,iprelri Dire =len J rl.Le ii Iooking-1 vansporurien ineauru[wreaLW wats Lo iny.ti e uryyuLb.nd pe.ple.WewwW Yeeu know WLere, in yon. qe N:nyy er kirk we eLliin.l earl ee ii,pLuue,1.[u vrlei riuL UJyxliieuleL.npiwrnniu, euL als., pMcuen arcl nr Clid ba— pro.ide your input on transportarion.- Figure 7 - Social Pinpoint Online Survey Landing Page. 1. Comprehensive Plan Targets —Participants were asked to rate the 13 existing Comprehensive Plan Targets on a scale from 1-10 using a slider bar. 2. Bethel/Lund Subarea Planning — Participants were asked to share land use preferences for the subarea by indicating on a map with a comment, selecting from photos of land use type examples, and providing text response to open questions. 3. Sedgwick/Bethel Subarea Planning - Participants were asked to share land use preferences for the subarea by indicating on a map with a comment, selecting from photos of land use type examples, and providing text response to open questions. 4. Transportation Planning — Participants were asked to indicate on a city-wide map where and how transportation could be improved by mode. Participation Overview A total of 47 people participated in the online survey resulting in a total of 103 contributions. The graph in Figure 7 illustrates the activity throughout the duration of the survey. The spikes in views, visits, visitors, contributions, and contributors can be attributed to the city's advertising efforts as they correspond with the days where staff was present at the farmers market on August 191" and September 9t" or an announcement was made online. 0 A2A Jul 11 A,g 01 &gN Pu9m Aug 12 AW 15 Au918 Au921 Pug 24 Aug 27 AgN 5ep� 5ep% 5%88 Sep 11 5ep 14 Sep 17 5.p 28 Figure 8 — Participation Graph. 00 Project Memo Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan Update 2220437.30 September 22, 2023 ORCHARD Page 3 of 11 Project Memo Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan Update 2220437.30 September 22, 2023 ORCHARD Page 4 of 11 Comprehensive Plan Target Rating This portion of the survey asked participants to rate how the city is doing meeting the current Comprehensive Plan Targets on a scale from poor/one to great/ten using a slider bar as shown in the example in Figure 9. Impacts to natural systems are minimized while population and job growth targets are met Poor Neural :-eat Figure 9 - Slider Bar Used to Rate How the City is Meeting the Current Comprehensive Plan Targets. Comprehensive Plan Target Rating Results A total of 31 participants contributed to this section of the survey. The current targets are listed in Figure 10 below followed by the rating average. ComprehensiveCurrent . 1. The city has retained its small town character 5.07 2. The historic downtown is more attractive and vibrant 3.22 3. More efficient patterns of development have reduced real per capita infrastructure 2.71 costs 4. Housing has remained available to all members of the community, and the diversity 3.18 of housing types has expanded 5. Walking, biking, driving, and transit infrastructure make it easy to get around the city 2.81 6. The city's waterfront and open space resources are highly enjoyed by the community 6.12 7. Community organizations are better empowered to coordinate events and activities 4.17 8. Citizens enjoy a comfortable and productive relationship with city government 3.36 9. Citizens have access to well -paying jobs, have short commutes, and choose to shop 3.32 locally 10. Citizens have access to well -paying jobs, have short commutes, and choose to shop 4.53 locally 11. Citizens are better informed and connected to the planning process 3.56 12. The city's critical areas, shorelines and other natural resources are appropriately protected with no net loss to critical areas and their functions, and where feasible 5.09 critical areas and shorelines are restored or enhanced 13. Impacts to natural systems are minimized while population and job growth targets are 3.35 met Figure 10 — Current Comprehensive Plan Target Rating Results Comprehensive Plan Target Rating Results Summary • Participants feel that the city is doing a good job meeting the three targets that aim to retain the city's small town feel, accommodate the enjoyment of the city's waterfront and open space amenities, and protect and enhance critical areas, all of which received an average rating over five. • The remaining targets did not receive an average rating greater than five and the results reveal that participants generally do not feel that the city is meeting the majority of the current Comprehensive Plan Targets. 00 Project Memo ORCHARD Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan Update 2220437.30 September 22, 2023 Page 5 of 11 Bethel/Lund Subarea Planning The Bethel/Lund Subarea planning portion of the survey is broken into three parts as follows: 1. Participants were provided with a map indicating the subarea boundary and asked to share what they would like to see in the Bethel/Lund Subarea by indicating on the map with a comment. 2. Participants were provided with several land use type photo examples and prompted to select the ones they think are appropriate for the Bethel/Lund Subarea. 3. Participants were asked the following questions in which an open text box was provided: a. What other cities/neighborhoods should be looked to for inspiration for the Bethel/Lund Subarea? b. How is the Bethel/Lund Subarea different from other areas in Port Orchard? c. What elements from other Port Orchard neighborhoods/districts should be applied to the Bethel/Lund Subarea? d. Is there anything else you would like to recommend specific to Bethel/Lund Subarea? Mapping Exercise Results Summary • There was a total of 13 map contributions provided by six different contributors. Figure 11 shows the mapping results. • Three of the contributions were placed far beyond the subarea boundary with comments irrelevant to the Bethel/Lund Subarea and therefore have not been included in this summary. • The majority of the map comments refer to traffic concerns, especially regarding pedestrian and cyclist safety, and the need for improved infrastructure to support safe travel for all modes. • The few comments that mention land use express a preference for mixed -use commercial/residential, grocery stores, and community oriented recreation spaces. Figure 11 — Bethel/Lund Subarea Planning Mapping Exercise Results Land Use Preference Results • Of the 14 who responded to this specific question, 80% would prefer to see mixed -use commercial/residential in the Bethel/Lund Subarea (see Figure 12 for photo example). • The second most popular land use preference choice was Standalone Commercial which received support from 29% of respondents. • No respondents support Manufacturing/ Distribution land uses in the Bethel/Lund Subarea. 00 Project Memo Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan Update 2220437.30 September 22, 2023 Figure 12 — Mixed Use Commercial/Residential Example ORCHARD Page 6 of 11 Question Response Summary • Very few chose to respond to the four open questions following the mapping and photo example exercise. • Gig Harbor and Bainbridge Island were mentioned as areas to look to for inspiration for the Bethel/Lund Subarea. • The Bethel/Lund Subarea commercial and retail oriented land uses were described as the characteristics that set it apart from other areas of Port Orchard. • Parks, local retail shops, and community oriented land uses were identified as other elements participants would like to see in the Bethel/Lund Subarea. Sedgwick/Bethel Subarea Planning The Sedgwick/Bethel Subarea planning portion of the survey is broken into three parts as follows: 1. Participants were provided with a map indicating the subarea boundary and asked to share what they would like to see in the Sedgwick/Bethel Subarea by indicating on the map with a comment. 2. Participants were provided with several land use type photo examples and prompted to select the ones they think are appropriate for the Sedgwick/Bethel Subarea. 3. Participants were asked the following questions in which an open text box was provided: a. What other cities/neighborhoods should be looked to for inspiration for the Bethel/Lund Subarea? b. How is the Sedgwick/Bethel Subarea different from other areas in Port Orchard? c. What elements from other Port Orchard neighborhoods/districts should be applied to the Sedgwick/Bethel Subarea? d. Is there anything else you would like to recommend specific to Sedgwick/Bethel Subarea? Mapping Exercise Results • A total of three map contributions provided by two different contributors, as shown in the Figure 13 mapping results. All three comments express concern for pedestrian and cyclist safety in the Sedgwick/Bethel Subarea and the need for infrastructure such as protected multi -use paths to encourage alternative transportation use, accommodate for the city's growing population, and further promote connectivity and safe travel across all modes. Figure 13 — Sedgwick/Bethel Subarea Planning Mapping Exercise Results 00 Project Memo Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan Update 2220437.30 September 22, 2023 ORCHARD Page 7 of 11 Land Use Preference Results • Of the 11 who responded to this specific question, 82% would prefer to see mixed -use commercial/residential in the Sedgwick/Bethel Subarea (see Figure 12 for photo example). • The second most popular land use preference choice was Middle Housing which received support from 46% of respondents. • No respondents support Manufacturing/Distribution land uses in the Sedgwick/Bethel Subarea. Question Response Summary • Very few chose to respond to the four questions following the mapping and photo example exercise. • The few responses received mention Victoria, B.C., Madison, WI, Flagstaff, AZ, Eugene, OR as areas to look to for inspiration for the Sedgwick/Bethel Subarea. • The Sedgwick/Bethel Subarea was described as busy with convenient access to the interstate and the ferry, which set it apart from other areas of Port Orchard. • Parks, local retail shops, a grocery store, community oriented land uses, and transportation infrastructure improvements, were identified as other elements participants would like to see in the Sedgwick/Bethel Subarea. Transportation Planning Participants were asked to add a marker to the map based on their mode of travel and describe what they would like to see in the area in the accompanying text box. Participants were also given the opportunity to see and react to what others have posted by clicking and rating their submissions. Mapping Exercise Results Overview • A total of 30 contributions were made to the transportation map provided by nine different contributors. • Figure 14 shows all of the transportation map contributions for all modes participants indicated. • None of the contributors rated or reacted to other contributors posts. • Contributions are concentrated to the east/central part of Port Orchard, with several placed outside of city limits in the U GA. • Only two contributions were made in the area west of the WA-16 where most of the new development is concentrated. Figure 14 — Transportation Mapping Exercise Contributions — All Modes 00 Project Memo Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan Update 2220437.30 September 22, 2023 ORCHARD Page 8 of 11 Mapping Exercise Results by Mode • Contributions by transportation mode were distributed as follows: 0 37% Motor Vehicle 0 27% Bicycle/Scooter o 20% Pedestrian 0 17% Public Transit o 0% Boat o 0% Mobility Device • Pedestrian o Six pedestrian contributions were made. o Contributions are concentrated around Mitchell Ave, Mile Hill Dr, SE Lund Ave, and Bay St. o Contributors express concern for pedestrian safety, in particular for students who walk to school. o Contributors express the desire for sidewalks and pedestrian crossings along major arterials throughout the city to improve pedestrian safety. o Contributors also express the desire for multi -use paths that connect to amenities and support for improvements to the existing waterfront path. • Bicycle/Scooter o Eight bicycle/scooter contributions were made. o Contributions are concentrated mostly around Bethel Ave, SE Lund Ave, Sidney Ave, Bay St. o Contributors express the desire for increased connectivity in particular to downtown and the waterfront from other areas in the city. o Contributors express the desire for separated and protected multi -use paths to support safer travel for all modes and encourage the use of alternative transportation throughout the city in general. 00 Project Memo Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan Update 2220437.30 September 22, 2023 0 Bicycle/scoo... • Pedestrian 0 Public Transit Mobility rev... • Motor Vehicle ■ Boat Figure 15 — Contributions by Transportation Mode. SE We Hill Dr Port Orci. 3 Parkwood East P Brcharu L 16C SE Sedgwick V 16 Fernwood -0, Figure 16 — Pedestrian Contributions Map. Manchester Po hard Si Miie Hill Ur Po hard Parkwood • ort r� w,. N 7aa Sr' edgwick Rd Sao errwnnd m rt N Bethel r'c - m Banner Figure 17 — Bicycle/Scooter Contributions ORCHARD Page 9 of 11 • Public Transit o A total of five transit contributions were made, however, four of the contributions were irrelevant to transit and therefore not included in this summary. o The remaining contribution was placed far beyond the city limits in Banner and expressed a desire for a bus to downtown. • Motor Vehicle 0 11 motor vehicle contributions were made. 0 Contributions are concentrated around SE Lund Ave between Bethel Rd SE and Harris Rd SE with a few scattered to the north along SE Mile Hill Dr and to the west along SW Old Clifton Rd. 0 Contributors express safety concerns for all modes of transportation and identify areas that are prone to collisions and close calls as well as provide recommendations for how to improve specific intersections and road segments through traffic regulating interventions such as round abouts, prohibiting left turns, right turn only lanes, etc. 0 Contributors express frustration with existing traffic congestion and concern for increased traffic congestion that is anticipated with new development and population growth. 00 Project Memo Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan Update 2220437.30 September 22, 2023 SE MAO Hie or Port Orchard Parkwand COP v Q� SE Sedgwick Re 'D60 Bethel 9anner Figure 18 — Transit Contributions Map. QQ 5EMile Hill Qr Port Orchard Parkwood E; Ol`c aid W Ida SESedgwickN 1d1 m Bethel Figure 19 — Motor Vehicle Contributions Map. ORCHARD Page 10 of 11 Conclusion The first phase of public engagement revealed that participants generally support the following: • Continued protection of the waterfront and the city's small town character. • Mixed use residential/commercial, middle housing, and standalone commercial in the subareas. • More amenities such as grocery stores, local businesses, and entertainment in the subareas. • Elements and character of Gig Harbor and Bainbridge Island as inspiration for the subareas. • Infrastructure improvements that support safe and convenient alternative transportation options. • Traffic congestion mitigation and other interventions that support more efficient and safe travel for all modes. Contributors expressed general opposition or concern for the following: • Manufacturing/Distribution land uses in the subarvvcccbeffebucfvctldvugerjkfueekgclfgefrdgkjf • eas. • Unmitigated motor vehicle traffic congestion as the city continues to grow. • Unsafe conditions for alternative transportation users, especially along school routes. AM/ c: \\ahbl.com\data\Projects\2022\2220437\30 PLN\Working Files\Public Engagement Results\Public Engagement Summary Memo.dou 00 Project Memo Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan Update 2220437.30 September 22, 2023 ORCHARD Page 11 of 11 CITY OF PORT ORCHARD DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 216 Prospect Street, Port Orchard, WA 98366 Ph.: (36o) 874-5533 • FAX: (36o) 876-4980 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No: 5(b) Subject: Stormwater Comprehensive Plan Meeting Date: October 3, 2023 Prepared by: Jacki Brown, Utility Manager Summary: The City has chosen to develop and implement its first surface and stormwater comprehensive plan with a focus on watersheds spanning the landscape and stormwater influence on water resources. This approach recognizes the ecosystem function and value of receiving waters and creates a plan to accommodate future growth, correct existing flooding problems, involve the public, preserve functioning habitat, and enhance habitat where opportunities are found. This Plan sets a course for stormwater programs and capital projects and addresses current and anticipated regulatory requirements, future development, existing flooding and water quality concerns, infrastructure maintenance and management, and the resources needed for the City to fully implement this Plan. Recommendation: The Planning Commission should review the final stormwater comprehensive plan and provide feedback to staff. Attachments: 2023 Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan _J6 TL ■ �t ■ . �a s■ �� _ � fir•. 1 ,IN ti L 7 � J dr ti ■ 1 ,r ' i 1 ' ' f ~: Y• a EL f f ' ti ■ i• it T 1 i rr • �,r 1 i � � 1 LL T- r• i r �. J � 1 1 P • we 1 z r ti 1 P i s YOr?-aC 416 ' 4 , 4 1 — ■ i I This Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan (Plan) was produced through the combined efforts, ideas and contributions of the following City of Port Orchard staff, appointed and elected officials, and consultants. Photos courtesy of Herrera staff. Mayor City Council Planning Commission Rob Putaansu Shawn Cucciardi Annette Stewart Jay Roasapepe Stephanie Bailey Scott Diener Tyler McKlosky John Clauson Paul Fontenot Cindy Lucarelli David Bernstein Fred Chang Bek Ashby Mark Trenary Joe Morrison City Staff Zack Holt ........................... Stormwater Permit Manager Tony Lang ......................... Director of Public Works Mark Dorsey ..................... Former Director of Public Works Chris Hammer .................. City Engineer Jacki Brown ...................... Utility Manager Nick Bond ......................... Director of Community Development Ian Smith .......................... Engineer Jim Fisk ............................ Senior Planner Darren Padroza................ GIS/Inspections Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. Matthew Fontaine ............. Project Manager Mindy Fobn .-------.Watcrobod Planning Rvb000m Dugopolski ......... NPZ)E8Permit Specialist Julianne Cbechonover....... Staff Engineer Katie Wingrove ------ Geographic Information Systems Load Briao8noiek ...................... Capital Project Planning Jonathan Waggoner ---. Capital Project Planning BriauzuuBlaud.................... Capital Project Planning _---~ Vayanos .................... Graphic Design Reid Middleton, Inc. Mark Davis ......................... Engineer GeoEngineers Joe ------' Biologist Adam ------- Biologist FCS Group John GhUardncci................ Principal Take Aaker.......................... Project Manager 3 01 INTRODUCTION 10 Stormwater Runoff and Effects 11 Purpose of this Plan 12 Stormwater Management Mission Statement 13 Long-term Goals 16 Opportunities and Challenges 17 Plan Development 02 BACKGROUND 18 City Watersheds 22 City Stormwater System 24 Stormwater Impacts on Watersheds 26 Applicable Policies and Regulations 28 Program Accomplishments 30 Planning for Future Development 32 Climate Change 03 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) 34 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) 35 Problem and Project Identification 36 Project Prioritization 04 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 38 Levels of Service 40 Recommendations M 05 WATERSHED PLANNING 48 City Watersheds 52 Lower Blackjack Creek Watershed 06 PLAN IMPLEMENTATION 54 CIP Plan Implementation 56 Staffing and Funding Needs 58 Financial Analysis Summary 60 Linkages to Other Programs 61 Pursuit of Outside Funding ■ 07 REFERENCE 08 APPENDICES A Appendix A - Stormwater Management Program Staffing and Funding Matrix B Appendix B - Capital Improvement Program Summary Sheets, and Project Prioritization C Appendix C - Stormwater Management Action Plan D Appendix D - Financial Analysis 5 TABLE 1 Watershed Stormwater Impact Rating TABLE 2 Climate Change Impacts TABLE 3 Prioritized Projects and Ranking TABLE 4 Summary of Major Watershed Habitat Conditions for Salmon and Forage Fish TABLE 5 Capital Improvement Program Implementation Schedule TABLE 6 Staff FTE Summary by Year and Tier TABLE 7 Funding Summary by Year and Tier TABLE 8 Monthly Rate per Impervious Surface Unit by Level of Service TABLE 9 Capital Facility Charge by Level of Service 24 33 36 50 55 57 57 58 59 I FIGURE 1 City Watersheds 19 FIGURE 2 Presence of Key Stream and Nearshore Fish Species in City 20 of Port Orchard Watersheds FIGURE 3 Stormwater Infrastructure 23 FIGURE 4 Stormwater Influence Upon Watersheds 25 FIGURE 5 Projected 100 Year Marine Flood Extent Under Sea Level 32 Rise Scenario FIGURE 6 Top 10 Capital Projects 37 FIGURE 7 Nearshore and Major Watershed Stream Habitat Condition 51 FIGURE 8 Lower Blackjack Creek Catchment C 53 FIGURE 9 Levels of Service and Full Time Equivalents 56 7 BMP Best management practice CFC Capital Facilities Charge CTE Career & Technical Education CIP Capital improvement program City City of Port Orchard CMMS Computerized maintenance management system Ecology Washington State Department of Ecology ESA Federal Endangered Species Act FTE Full Time Equivalent GIS Geographic information systems GMA Washington State Growth Management Act IDDE Illicit discharge detection and elimination ISU Impervious Surface Unit LID Low Impact Development MS4 Municipal separate storm sewer system NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 0&M Operations and Maintenance 11 OFM Office of Financial Management Permit Western Washington Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit PMC Port Orchard Municipal Code QAPP Quality Assurance Project Plan RCW Revised Code of Washington SAM Stormwater Action Monitoring SMAP Stormwater Management Action Planning STEM Science, technology, engineering, and math TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load UGA Urban Growth Area UIC Underground Injection Control WAC Washington Administrative Code WRIA Water Resource Inventory Area WREC Watershed Restoration and Enhancement WSPER West Sound Partners for Ecosystem Recovery WSSOG West Sound Stormwater Outreach Group 0 Stormwater Runoff and Effects The City of Port Orchard (City) operates a system of drainage pipes and ditches to convey stormwater runoff to receiving waters including streams and Sinclair Inlet. The drainage system prevents and minimizes damage to private properties, city streets, and other infrastructure. As rain falls and travels across hard surfaces, such as roofs, yards, and streets, pollutants are picked up and carried to receiving waters. The City is faced with the challenge to convey runoff safely, while minimizing adverse high -flow impacts (erosion, flooding, and sediment deposition) and water quality degradation to receiving waters. In 2008, the City established the storm drainage utility (Utility) to create a funding source to address stormwater and receiving water management issues citywide. State and federal regulations related to stormwater have evolved since 2007, when the City was issued its first National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Western Washington Phase 11 Stormwater Permit (Permit) from the Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology), leading to more stringent requirements for implementing projects, programs, and maintenance. 10 Watershed signage, City of Port Orchard Purpose of this Plan City water resources include freshwater streams, marine water shorelines and estuaries, upland wetlands, and aquifers underground. These waters support aquatic wildlife, terrestrial wildlife, and people, in the form of recreation and drinking water. A watershed is the area of land where surface water flows to a receiving water body. supporting salmon in a stream, where children play at the beach, or the nearshore environment nourishing shellfish and forage fish. The City has chosen to develop and implement its first surface and stormwater comprehensive plan with a focus on watersheds spanning the landscape and stormwater influence on water resources. This approach recognizes the ecosystem function and value of receiving waters and maps out a plan to accommodate future growth, correct existing flooding problems, involve the public, preserve functioning habitat, and enhance habitat where opportunities are found. This Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan (Plan) sets a course for stormwater programs and capital projects for years to come and addresses current and anticipated regulatory requirements, future development, existing flooding and water quality concerns, infrastructure maintenance and management, and the resources needed for the City to fully implement this Plan. 11 Stormwater Management Mission Statement The mission of the stormwater management program is to regulate and manage use of the City's municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) as required by the City's NPDES permit while conscientiously managing and protecting surface and receiving waters for public health and enjoyment. it �M"Itwllr- 1 iS, s }may----�,�• �.,_ Md I 4 y L --.L 4P . 1 T . _ r• Lar l � i r•; i i J Z,�•' o r ,•- 7 i 1�1 O 7 r rr r� 1 1 ■ r 1"L . •ti • f 1 _ Z 57 AN" 1 r 1 IJ 1 IN" r nor Mir T Z t ` T ON& Long-term Goals FLOOD REDUCTION Conveyance infrastructure that meets the Public Works Engineering Standards (City Standards) (convey the 100-yr return period flow; 50-yr return period flow if the 100-yr overflow does not threaten buildings and critical structures) for the entire city. The City's tidally influenced stormwater infrastructure is resilient to tidal fluctuation including projected sea level rise. The City has a complete understanding of system deficiencies and a plan to address those deficiencies that is balanced with available funding. GROUND AND SURFACE WATER QUALITY Infiltrated stormwater does not negatively affect groundwater quality. Streams meet water quality standards for human health and aquatic life. GROUND AND SURFACE WATER QUANTITY Groundwater supply is replenished by infiltration from developed areas at a rate that is equal to the volume infiltrated under natural forested conditions. Streams have adequate summer flow volume and natural winter storm flow regimes to support local aquatic life. HABITAT ENHANCEMENT • City -influenced streams are fully restored to forested hydrologic conditions and meet designated uses and water quality standards. • City culverts that carry fish -bearing streams allow fish to pass unimpeded. • Pocket estuaries adjacent to city lands are ecologically functional and not negatively affected by stormwater runoff or hydraulic constraints from stormwater infrastructure. • Shorelines adjacent to city lands are not negatively affected by stormwater. • City watersheds are characterized and prioritized according to potential environmental restoration, conservation, or development so that investments in stormwater and watershed projects can be directed to where they achieve the maximum benefit. MAPPING AND ASSET MANAGEMENT Stormwater system asset attributes and conditions are tracked and managed in one cohesive system that is compatible with all other city systems. The stormwater system asset management system supports planning and prioritizing repairs, upgrades, and maintenance, as well as generating and tracking work orders to support annual review and evaluation. 14 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION (EDUCATION, OUTREACH, AND INVOLVEMENT) • Community members understand the relationship between their actions and stormwater quantity and quality and take action to minimize their stormwater impacts and habitat damage. 1 • City residents and people that work in the city support the mission of the stormwater and watersheds program. • The community has access to public natural areas for education and aesthetic enjoyment without creating negative impacts to sensitive habitat. • The community views stormwater and watershed management and planning as a necessary function for citizen enjoyment of water resources. POLLUTANT SOURCE CONTROL i • Pollutants from developed lands and roads do not enter surface water or groundwater at levels that are harmful to aquatic life or human health. • Citizens and businesses implement pollution prevention practices to the maximum extent feasible. INFRASTRUCTURE OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE All City -owned and privately -owned stormwater infrastructure, including flow control and water quality facilities, function as designed. DEVELOPMENT PRACTICES All development and redevelopment projects comply with City Standards for stormwater management. The City's approach to development and redevelopment oversight enables money spent on stormwater management to have the maximum benefit for water resources. Runoff from all manmade development and construction sites is mitigated by stormwater facilities in accordance with current City Standards prior to discharge to surface water bodies. COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING, ADMINISTRATION, AND FUNDING • The City's storm drainage utility has a comprehensive strategy to manage infrastructure protect water resources, restore damaged habitats, and ensure sustainable development. • The City's storm drainage utility is adequately funded to meet regulatory requirements and the stormwater related needs of citizens. • Existing property owners and developers pay for an equitable share of the necessary improvement and expansion of the City's stormwater system. • The City has a complete understanding of existing unmanaged manmade surfaces and a plan to retrofit those surfaces that is balanced with available funding. 15 Opportunities and Challenges As part of the stormwater and watersheds comprehensive planning process, the City identified opportunities and challenges faced by the Utility. The relationship between these opportunities and challenges and the City's long-term goals is discussed in more detail below. Opportunities The process to develop this Plan allowed City staff to identify long- term goals, describe the ideal state for managing stormwater runoff, and identify and plan capital projects to invest in the future of the City stormwater system. Existing activities, future programs and projects, and future regulatory requirements were evaluated when developing this Plan. This Plan sets a road map for the future of stormwater management. Challenges The City is operating its stormwater program according to the 2019- 2024 Permit (Ecology 2019). Challenges facing the City include meeting more stringent requirements in the 2019-2024 Permit, such as: business source control and inspection program, public education, reporting, watershed planning, and adoption of a new stormwater manual. Additionally, a new NPDES Permit will be issued in 2024 and is expected to have additional requirements. Lack of dedicated staff time is the primary challenge facing the City. Staff conduct the activities required by the 2019-2024 Permit, track progress, and report to Ecology on an annual basis. Staff also respond to flooding and water quality issues submitted by citizens and conduct inspections during construction, post -construction, and for maintenance of selected stormwater drainage facilities. The City lacks available staff time to manage stormwater capital projects and submit and manage grant applications and funds. Evaluate Stormwater Identify Initial List of Complete Receiving and Watersheds Capital Improvement Water Conditions Program Program (CIP) Assessment and Projectsa I Prioritization Complete Stormwater and Develop Summary Complete Stormwater Watersheds Program Sheets for Priority Management Action Evaluation and CIP Projects Plan (SMAP) Recommendations Define Levels of Service for Programs and CIP Projects Conduct Financial Develop Draft Plan Analysis Assemble Final Plan City Watersheds This chapter summarizes background information of existing conditions, regulations and environmental considerations influencing Plan development and implementation. Within the City of Port Orchard, there are 17 distinct watersheds (see Figure 2). These watersheds were delineated and characterized as part of the City's Watershed Inventory and Assessment (Herrera 2022a). The major watersheds (or watersheds with the most jurisdictional control) located within the City include: • Annapolis Creek • Downtown County Campus • Anderson Creek • Caseco Creek • Johnson Creek • Blackjack Creek (including Lower, Middle, and Upper Blackjack Creeks) • Melcher Creek • Ross Creek • Ruby Creek • Stream 270 The minor watersheds (or watersheds with the least jurisdiction control) located within the City include: • Karcher Creek • Coulter Creek • Rocky Creek • Sacco Creek • Square Creek Figure 1. City Watersheds. 18 1 • Legend Port Orchard City Limit Watershed Boundary Stream ' Roads — Waterbody _ Wetland 441 AN w w r Gorst Creek Anderson Creek (Coulter Creek• T ��- Rocky Creek M"T/ Sacco Creek Annapolis Creek Upper �,,...., Blackjack .� + Creek Ross % Creek !;• ;� " Karcher Creek Middle — 16 Blackjack i Creek I Lower Blackjack Creek Ruby 4 Creek �.Square� Cree19 i City Watersheds, Continued... Some watersheds support salmon while others support other aquatic species (see Figure 3). Streams, such as Johnson Creek, Annapolis Creek, Karcher Creek and Stream 270, support up to three salmonid species, while other larger stream systems associated with valued wetlands, such as Lower Blackjack Creek, Anderson Creek, Ross Creek, and Ruby Creek, support a wider variety of salmonid species which may include fall and summer chum, coho, fall chinook and steelhead. Smaller stream systems such as Downtown County Campus, Melcher Creek and Caseco Creek, do not support salmonids and may host other species including sculpin, freshwater eels, and other small stream aquatic species. Important species that utilize the nearshore marine environment of Sinclair Inlet are forage fish including surf smelt and sand lance (see Figure 3). These small fish serve to provide recreation for the local community in the form of "smelting" during the open season at Ross Point, and provide an essential food source for larger fish, seals, and river otter, to name a few local wildlife often seen from City shorelines. Refer to the City's Watershed Inventory and Assessment (Herrera 2022a) for detailed characteristics of each watershed. Above: Photo of Johnson Creek. Figure 2. Presence of Key Stream and Nearshore Fish Species in City of Port Orchard Watersheds. 20 O n k V--4 1 r -i' Stream y 270 j Ruby': Creek`-�, I `Y I ee� e l- 7 � � dill c � 41 _ I I Sacco ' Creek Y U � m r' I L7 I� L I Legend r _ Port Orchard City Limit L_ ` Watershed Boundary - Waterbody Roads Stream Surf Smelt Spawning Sand Lance Spawning Species Run (Documented Presence) Coho Resident Coastal Cutthroat Fall Chinook Fall Chum Summer Chum N Winter Steelhead 21 4 T City Stormwater System The City stormwater system (inlets, pipes, ditches, vaults, swales, culverts, and ponds) collects runoff from streets, yards, rooftops, and parking lots (see Figure 4). That runoff is discharged through stormwater outfalls to either waterbodies (streams or marine nearshore) or to an adjacent municipality. ism-) . a 7" Figure 3. City of Port Orchard Stormwater Infrastructure. Legend O Outfall Conveyance O Stormwater Vault Culver j ; Port Orchard City Limit Pipe Watershed Boundary Ditch Detention Pond -•••- Swale - Waterbody Stream Roads a% Sinclair Inlets Stormwater Impacts on Watersheds The degree to which the City stormwater system impacts local receiving waters can be categorized from low to high by assessing the dominance of City lands in the watershed and the level of stormwater infrastructure (see Figure 4 and Table 1). The total percent of impervious lands in a watershed is correlated to the health of receiving waters. The greater the percent impervious lands, the likely greater level of degradation upon water resources. City stormwater influence is highest in Downtown County Campus, Annapolis Creek and Johnson Creek watersheds, and lowest in the more rural or limited City presence in the Square Creek, Stream 270, Gorst Creek, Rocky Creek and Coulter Creek watersheds. Annapolis Creek High 55% 30% 1 4 Johnson Creek High 100% 29% 2 2 Lower Blackjack Creek Moderate/High 68% 22% 10 12 Ross Creek Moderate/High 65% 13% 10 13 Melcher Creek Moderate 100% 12% 0 3 Caseco Creek Moderate 100% 12% 1 1 Anderson Creek Moderate 60% 9% 4 5 Ruby Creek Moderate 54% 5% 6 NA Karcher Creek Moderate 11% 28% 3 0 Sacco Creek Moderate 22% 18% 0 0 Square Creek 7% 4% 1 NA Stream 270 L 45% 3% 0 NA Gorst Creek Low 5% 4% 1 NA Rocky Creek Low 'M 1% 2% 0 NA Coulter Creek Low � 1% <1% 0 NA Figure 4. Stormwater Influence Upon Watersheds. 24 Legend Watershed Boundary r Port Orchard City Limit - Waterbody Roads Stream Level of City Stormwater Impact Very High High Moderate/High Moderate Low Gorst Creek A J I l Annapolis's 166 ' Creek _ Upper Blackjack Creek".- -+ - 1 Ross 1 Creek r Karcher 1 � 1 Creek 16 1 ♦ a Middle �. 6 Blackjack Creek 1 1 1 e Lower 1 Blackjack 1 --- • Creek 1 �4 1 1 � ` I -■ 1 1 1 1 Ruby I r - -- + I reek - - - !- -J Creek - - Coulter Creek 1 Square Creek Rocky Creek � 0 Sacco Creek 0 1 25 Applicable Policies And Regulations In addition to addressing drainage and water quality concerns impacted by stormwater runoff, the Surface Water Management Program must also comply with several local, state, and federal regulatory requirements. They include: NPDES Permit The 2019-2024 Permit (Ecology 2019) has broad requirements associated with stormwater runoff and requires the City to develop distinct program components. The first Phase II Permit was issued by Ecology in 2007, reissued in 2012, and again in 2019. The requirements for the City's stormwater program have become more stringent with each new permit issuance. The permit requires that the City's program meet requirements in I primary areas: • Stormwater planning ■ ■ • Public education and outreach a .. • ' ' ■ Public involvement and participation • Municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) permit mapping and documentation • Illicit discharge detection and elimination (IDDE) • Controlling runoff from new development, redevelopment, and construction sites • Operations and maintenance (O&M) • Source control program for existing development • Compliance with Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) requirements • Monitoring and assessment • Reporting requirements Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) :. The Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) is a series ■� ' '■ of statues, which include requirements for the inventory and 46 protection of environmentally critical areas. Environmentally critical areas include steep slopes, wetlands, and streams (Chapter 36.70A of the Revised Code of Washington [RCW]). The GMA also requires fast-growing cities and counties to develop comprehensive plans to ensure environmentally responsible and economically sustainable development, which includes planning for stormwater related capital facilities. 26 . Port Orchard Municipal Code Several chapters of the Port Orchard Municipal Code (POMC) govern aspects of stormwater management on new development and redevelopment project sites, as well as inspection and maintenance requirements for private stormwater facilities. The primary chapters in the POMC related to surface and stormwater management include: • Chapter 13.06 — Storm Drainage Utility • Chapter 15.30 —Illicit Discharge Prevention, Detection, ,b and Elimination Ro• Chapter 20.140 — Land Disturbing Activity • Chapter 20.150 — Stormwater Drainage Ecology Total Maximum Daily Load Implementation Plans m A TMDL cleanup action is required for water bodies that have been identified as impaired on Ecology's Section 303(d) list due to poor water quality. The City implements actions in compliance with the Sinclair/Dyes Inlet Fecal Coliform TMDL as required per Appendix 2 of the 2019-2024 Permit. Federal Endangered Species Act The Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) prohibits the take of all listed species, including a take that could result from the City's stormwater facility operations or private development stormwater management activities that are permitted by the City. Underground Injection Control Program The underground injection control (UIC) program is a federal program intended to ensure that underground sources of drinking water are protected from surface discharges to the ground. In the . State of Washington, the UIC program is administered by Ecology m through Chapter 173-218 of the Washington Administrative Code (WAC). The Guidance for UIC Wells that Manage Stormwater (Ecology 2006) lays out the requirements for UIC wells, and Ecology has included additional guidance in the latest version of the Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington, released in 2019. 27 Program Accomplishments Since the storm drainage utility was founded in 2008, the City of Port Orchard has made significant progress in reducing detrimental effects of stormwater runoff on receiving waters in and around Port Orchard. The City has planned and built capital projects to alleviate drainage problems throughout the City. The City has also provided stewardship opportunities through education and outreach. The City's accomplishments for the past four years are described in chronological order below: City staff hosted a springtime shoreline cleanup and beach education activity. Participants were encouraged to remove any trash they encountered, as well as recovering and removing any riprap or shoring materials that had fallen on the beach from the upland shoreline. While participants worked, City staff provided educational guidance regarding ecosystem recovery efforts, shoreline biodiversity, effects of stormwater on shoreline habitats and anthropogenic effects on intertidal habitats in general. City staff provided outreach to assist with stormwater, stream, and habitat education at South Kitsap High School, supporting the school's Career & Technical Education and Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (CTE/STEM) program. This outreach event included providing demonstrations and descriptions of methods for establishing student stewardship activities relating to monitoring water quality, measuring discharge, and habitat and riparian monitoring methods at Annapolis Creek. The City completed the Tremont Street Widening project, which included stormwater detention, oil control, and enhanced treatment to protect critical downstream creeks and waterways (i.e., Johnson and Ross Creeks). Detention was provided by two underground stormwater vaults, a 164-foot-long by 20-foot-wide by 10-foot deep vault on the west end of the project and 100-foot-long by 20-foot-wide by 10-feet-deep vault on the east end, to provide flow control for downstream water bodies and mitigate stormwater issues. Stormwater conveyance was also upgraded to properly accommodate the volume of flow in the area. The City began developing the Downtown Basin Stormwater Plan. The area surrounding the downtown basin is shown in Figure 6. This plan is developing a roadmap for implementing water quality treatment and flow control best management practices for water quality outcomes in receiving waters. It will include the identification of feasible actions and implementable capital improvement projects that will modernize infrastructure and provide flow control in the downtown and nearshore areas of Port Orchard. Figure 6. Aerial Image of the City of Port Orchard's downtown Basin (photo courtesy of City of Port Orchard). City staff participated in the West Sound Partners for Ecosystem Recovery Lead Entity for Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) UL J 15 and the Watershed Restoration and Enhancement Committee (WREC) for WRIA 15. This committee connected and engaged citizens and stakeholders in watershed level discussions and actions related to water quality, salmon enhancement, and stormwater. Participation in the WREC was completed in 2021. 29 Planning for Future Development Due to the City's proximity to the urban centers of Bremerton and Tacoma and connection to Seattle via ferry transportation, Port Orchard is designated as a "high capacity transit community" by the Puget Sound Regional Council (Puget Sound Regional Council 2020). The Office of Financial Management (OFM) estimates that the City's population is 16,400 people as of 2022 and is expected to grow by much as 36%, or to 28,086 people by 2024 (Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council 2022; OFM 2022). This is one of many reasons why new development within the city will be significant in the coming years. Land development regulations and subarea planning efforts will be used to address environmental and water resource concerns. New development and redevelopment are and will continue to be regulated in accordance with the most recent flow control and water quality standards in the 2019 Public Works Engineering Standards and defined in POMC Chapter 20.150.06. The City adopts the following by reference: 2019 Washington State Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual 2012 Puget Sound Partnership Low Impact Development (LID) Technical Guidance Manual for Puget Sound Definitions, minimum requirements, and adjustment and variance criteria found in Appendix 1 of the 2019-2024 Permit, with exception of the erosivity waiver. Critical areas are regulated in accordance with POMC Chapter 20.162 addressing wetlands, fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas and related plans, geologically hazardous areas and related reports, frequently flooded areas, and critical aquifer recharge areas. 30 ar � IL • Vol Z Recently, the City completed the Ruby Creek Subarea Plan (City of Port Orchard 2022). The plan vision was to foster densification, future growth, walkable neighborhood, and business amenities, while accommodating the natural function of Ruby Creek and Blackjack Creek (see Figure 7). Similar planning efforts within the City will accommodate both people and aquatic species. W Aerial Rendition of the north end of the Ruby Creek Neighborhood. (image courtesy of City of Port Orchard) 31 Climate Change In 2020, the City of Port Orchard collaborated with Kitsap County and the City of Bremerton to develop the Kitsap County Climate Change Resiliency Assessment (Kitsap County 2020). The assessment reviewed and summarized current and future climate change drivers, impacts, and risks for Kitsap County. These projected impacts were grouped into impacts to social and economic systems and biophysical impacts, of which the following are related to this Plan: • Public infrastructure and support systems (stormwater), • Hydrology & hydrogeology (hydrologic changes and stream and riverine flooding), and • Habitat (freshwater and aquatic habitat). As part of the assessment, specific impacts to the City of Port Orchard were evaluated and have been summarized by the City's stormwater management component in Table 2. Legend 0 Outfalls •••••••• DNR Shoreline Flood Scenarios C 100 Year Marine Flood 2020 ..r 100 Year Marine Flood + 50°/u Probability SLR Projection 2040 100 Year Marine Flood + 1% Probability SLR Projection 2040 a .... 100 Year Marine Flood + 50% { Probability SLR Projection 2100 194W ❑� •54 W 190W ,F f'p 186WOQ 184W°i C 182 W 174W0176W 170W 0 172W 1 164W 150W 0 148W • 146W a w162W Bi 144W 160W }} 158W E * O4ST 0 3636E s 3632E =r • .+i O+ m_ Table 2. Climate Change Impacts. Stormwater Infrastructure Stream Flows Potential overload, degradation, and damage of stormwater infrastructure from sea level rise and more intense rain storms Winter stream flooding will become more frequent Lower spring and summer flows Groundwater recharge may be affected by hydrologic Groundwater Supply changes (e.g., increasing temperatures and potential for saltwater intrusion; declining summer flows; low water tables; and sea level rise) 0 Flood Risk Higher flood risk for low-lying coastal infrastructure, including stormwater conveyance and facilities Water Quality Regionally warmer stream temperatures Cold -water fish species across multiple life -cycle stages will be impacted by hydrologic changes. Possible loss of streamside vegetation Decrease in cooler/oxygenated aquatic habitat Habitat Wetland habitats are likely to contract and threaten shelter for juvenile fish and habitats for a variety of species Aquatic benthic invertebrates, amphibians, and salmonids will be impacted and will have downstream ecosystem and food -web impacts Capital Improvement Program (CIP) This section summarizes the surface water and stormwater capital improvement program (CIP). The purpose of the CIP is to define capital projects that make progress towards the City's long-term goals including: Flood Reduction Groundwater and Surface Water Quality Groundwater and Surface Water Quantity ++ Habitat Enhancement WOO Public Participation (Education, Outreach, and Involvement) Infrastructure Operations & Maintenance F Comprehensive Planning, Administration, and Funding 34 Problem and Project Identification Previous surface water and stormwater plans and input from City staff were used to develop an initial list of problems to be addressed during work on this Plan. Surface and stormwater plans reviewed included the following: • 2018 Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan (City of Port Orchard 2018) • Blackjack Creek Watershed Assessment and Protection and Restoration Plan (ESA 2017) • Ruby Creek Subarea Plan (City of Port Orchard 2022) • Downtown Basin Stormwater Plan (Reid Middleton 2020) • 2018 Annapolis Creek Culvert Replacement — 30% Design & Permitting Coordination Report (Reid Middleton 2018) • Blackjack Creek Floodplain Restoration Project Engineering Design Plans (City of Port Orchard 2020) Additional problems were identified by surveying City staff through Esri's ArcGIS Survey123 and hosting workshops with the City. Problems were evaluated using desktop methods and field evaluation to assess site -specific opportunities and constraints. Potential capital projects were developed to address the problems. The initial list of projects, problem descriptions, and solutions are provided in Appendix B. 35 1 Project Prioritization The initial surface water and stormwater CIP project list was ranked by City staff to determine the top 10 projects. The top 10 projects are shown in Figure 8. Once the top 10 projects were chosen, these projects were prioritized using a quantitative process that considered further input from City staff, review of background documents, and field reconnaissance of existing problems. This prioritization was then used to develop an implementation schedule that emphasized early completion of the projects providing the greatest benefit. An overview of the CIP project prioritization and goals is included in Table 3. Detailed prioritization results and CIP project summary sheets are provided in Appendix B. The CIP project implementation schedule is included in the Plan Implementation section of this Plan. South Sidney Regional Facility Johnson Creek Estuary Restoration Downtown Basin Stormwater Upgrades 3 South Blackjack Creek Floodplain Restoration 6%" Central Sidney Stormwater Improvements 6 Annapolis Creek Culvert Replacement 7 SE Salmonberry Road, Lower Blackjack Creek Culvert Retrofit M Ruby Creek Culvert Replacement South Blackjack Creek Culvert Removal and Bridge Installation 10 Anderson Creek Culvert Replacement d& C? 70 55 45 .0 35 Opposite: Figure 6. Top 10 Capital Projects. 36 Legend Q CIP Projects r--I Port Orchard City Limit Watershed Boundary - Waterbody Stream Roads I I I I Anderson Creek Culvert Replacement ` I I I I I I Downtown Stormwater Basin Upgrades Johnson Creek Estuary Restoration O/ 3 L- L- r I I � I i Annapolis Creek ' Culvert Replacement ` A /I � I ' I I L — J 1 r J .r_�-- _ _ - fJ Central Sidney Stormwater Improvements c\ L � I / I South Sidney �` Q f I Regional Facility I SE Salmonberry Road, ( I Lower Blackjack Creek Culvert Replacement Ruby Road Creek --�- 1 Culvert Replacement L I I _ — ` I IJ I I / I I I I South Blackjack Creek I�_ I � I Floodplain Restoration J \ I I i South Blackjack Creek Culvert Removal and I — — Bridge Installation I 37 Levels of Service This chapter summarizes surface water and stormwater recommendations for the City's stormwater management program. Recommendations are organized by the long-term goals and levels of service defined below. The City has identified three levels of service for this Plan: Level 1, Level 2, and Level 3. Level 1 recommendations are shown for all long-term goals. Levels 2 and 3 are not included when no additional recommendations were identified. The levels of service are defined as follows: Level 1 Represents activities needed to meet 2019-2024 Permit requirements, potential future permit requirements, and essential program activities. Level 2 Includes everything in Level 1 and several additional improvements to expand public education and stewardship opportunities, implement the new asset management program, and increase staffing to adequately inspect construction projects and private stormwater facilities to improve environmental protection. Level 3 R Includes everything in Levels 1 and 2 and represents staffing and funding to move towards achieving the City's goals. This level of service would result in the greatest benefits for the community and - the environment, but would have the highest cost. Level 3 includes expanding public involvement and environmental monitoring activities. Recommendations Recommendations are organized by the long-term goals and levels of service previously defined in this Plan. Detailed tables of recommendations with associated funding and staffing requirements are provided in City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Program Evaluation and Recommendations (Herrera 2022c) and in Appendix A. Implementation of these recommendations are discussed in the Plan Implementation section of this Plan. 39 Recommendations Continued... Flood Reduction Level 1: • Design and construct upgrades to the existing conveyance infrastructure Groundwater and Surface Water Quality Level 1: • Respond to spills and water quality complaints • Develop Pollution Control Program Plans (Quality Assurance Project Plan [QAPPI equivalent) to monitor stream health and provide water quality status updates • Make annual payments to the collective fund for S8 Monitoring and Assessment • Seek opportunities to participate with Kitsap County and other local jurisdictions in an integrated and coordinated monitoring assessment program • Provide information as requested for effectiveness and source identification studies that are under contract with Ecology as active Stormwater Action Monitoring (SAM) projects 0.25 FTE for Water Quality Technician Groundwater and Surface Water Quantity Aft Level 1: • Design and construct upgrades to the existing conveyance infrastructure .m Habitat Enhancement Level 1: • Conduct outreach on private property tree preservation and wetland buffers within Lower Blackjack Creek Catchment C Mapping and Asset Management Level 1: • Update the City's MS4 map on an ongoing basis, including all known connections from the MS4 to a privately owned stormwater system • Collect size and material data for known MS4 outfalls during the normal course of inspections and maintenance and update electronic records • Locate and map additional outfall • Additional 0.25 FTE for geographic information systems (GIS) Technician Level 2: • Includes all recommendations in Level 1 • Select and implement a computer maintenance management system (CMMS) • Additional 0.50 FTE for Asset Management Specialist 41 Public Participation (Education, Outreach and Involvement) 0011� Level 1: 00 • Review and update existing public education materials as needed Develop materials for one new target audience and subject area annually • Partner with West Sound Stormwater Outreach Group (WSSOG) on implementing social marketing campaigns • Host and/or advertise volunteer events related to stewardship opportunities and provide opportunities for public input • Continue collaborations with local builders' associations and participating in West Sound Partners for Ecosystem Recovery (WSPER) • 0.25 FTE for Education Specialist Level 2: • Develop an education and outreach plan for commercial and private facility owners related to LID principles and practices • Expand the partnership with South Kitsap School District • Additional 0.25 FTE for Education Specialist (0.50 FTE total) Level 3: • Develop materials for two additional target audiences and two additional subject areas annually (three target audiences and three subject areas total when combined with the Level 1 tier) • Create a volunteer stream team • Additional 0.50 FTE for Education Specialist (1.0 FTE total) 42 Pollutant Source Control Level 1: • Update the City's website with pollution control best management practice (BMP) resources • Perform field screening and tracking of illicit connections, illicit discharges, and spills • Continue to implement spill hotline and staff training program • Report illicit discharge data to Ecology using WQWebIDDE • Review and update public education materials gathered by the Business Inspection Group (BIG) to create a basic set of resources for the City's source control program • Provide enhanced source control technical assistances to businesses within the Lower Blackjack Creek Catchment C • 0.25 FTE for Source Control Program Coordinator Level 2: • Increase staff support to screen outfalls on an annual basis • Develop additional public education materials to supplement those gathered by the BIG to create a broader set of resources for the City's source control program 43 Infrastructure Operations & Maintenance Level 1: • Continue to implement a program to verify adequate long-term O&M of stormwater treatment and flow control BMPs/facilities • Use a third -party contractor to conduct private facility inspections • Document inspections and enforcement actions for private stormwater flow control and treatment BMPs/facilities • Perform spot checks and inspections after storms • Inspect catch basins and maintain as needed • Conduct additional outfall inspections • Clean targeted catch basins in Lower Blackjack Creek Catchment C • Continue to implement staff training program Level 2: • Have a dedicated inspector to conduct private facility inspections • Inspect and maintain additional catch basins • 0.50 —1.0 FTE for O&M Technician (0.50 FTE in 2024, 1.0 FTE in 2025-2028) Development Practices Level 1: • Continue to implement stormwater plan review, inspection, and escalating enforcement processes • Refine and improve inspections and enforcement procedures • Conduct annual review of stormwater standards • Continue to implement staff training program • Add engineering capacity to the capital project design team to assist with stormwater retrofit projects and upcoming SMAP implementation • Develop a policy and standards for considering more intense future precipitation and sea level rise in stormwater capital improvement projects • 0.25 FTE for Engineer Level 2: • Have a dedicated inspector to conduct construction inspections • 1.0 FTE for Construction Inspector • Increase engineering capacity for the capital project design team to assist with stormwater retrofit projects and upcoming SMAP implementation • Additional 0.25 FTE for Engineer (0.50 FTE total) Level 3: • Increase engineering capacity for the capital project design team to assist with stormwater retrofit projects and upcoming SMAP implementation • Develop a policy and standards for new and redevelopment projects to design for more intense future precipitation • Additional 0.25 FTE for Engineer (0.75 FTE total) 45 Comprehensive Planning, Administration, and Funding Level 1: • Continue to meet regularly to direct planning, development, 46 and implementation of the City's Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan, SMAP development, and continue to review and implement LID code updates Implement the SMAP activities Prepare annual reports summarizing coordination with long- range planning efforts Annually assess administrative or regulatory barriers to implementation of LID principles or LID BMPs • 0.25 FTE for Planner pro# 14 m rnZ' 0 J 3 City Watersheds The 2019-2024 Permit required the City to conduct watershed planning using a process defined by the permit as "Stormwater Management Action Planning" (SMAP). The SMAP process required the City to view watersheds through the lens of stormwater impacts to receiving water health and actions to protect or improve these water resources. This planning was completed in three distinct steps: • Develop an inventory of watershed characteristics, including water resource conditions, aquatic life and community uses, stormwater influence, and social equity (Herrera 2022a), • Apply a prioritization process to identify the highest priority watershed (Herrera 2022b), and • C letekan "Action Plan" that includes retrofit projects, Gor 'o a�rhe�rthancements, and land marAodWSMtegies, associated costs, and schedule (Appendie�&Qk Coulter Creek The goal of SMAP was t6S, city watershed where investments in stormwatergement are most likely to lead to environmental improveme Ross Creek Ruby Creek 166 Upper QI-% r%iei-% r%ie Artwork at Blackjack Creek estuary Creek Anderson Creek (Gorst) Annapolis Creek Downtown County Campus Gorst Creek Johnson Creek Karcher Creek Lower Blackjack Ross Creek Ruby Creek Stream 270 City Watersheds Continued... Marine nearshore and stream habitat conditions within major watersheds informed the prioritization process (See Table 4 and Figure 9). As a guiding principle, water resources with moderate or good habitat conditions for salmon and nearshore forage fish would benefit from water quality and flow control actions. However, the City also intends to invest in watersheds with poor habitat conditions to alleviate flooding and address water quality issues, where feasible. Good Good Poor Poor Fair Good Poor Good Poor Good Good Good Fair Fair Good Fair fr Good Good Good Fair Fair Poor Good AN Fair Good Poo *NA = Not Applicable, * = City lands within Ruby Creek and Stream 270 Watersheds are not directly connected to the marine nearshore Good Poor Good Fair Fair Good NA* Good NA Figure 7. Nearshore and Major Watershed Stream 50 Habitat Condition -1 Legend Port Orchard City Limit - Waterbody Minor Watershed Roads Nearshore Habitat Condition Good o Fair Poor Major Watershed Stream Habitat Condition Good Fair Poor Gorst Cree Coulter Creek Rocky Creek Johnson Creek Melcher Creek Sinclair Inlet W w Sacco Creek A napol Cree .ower ickreek k ' ;reek � Karcher Creek 1 51 Lower Blackjack Creek Watershed Lower Blackjack Creek watershed was selected as the highest priority watershed based on the following characteristics: • High receiving water use, including use by multiple salmonid species • Moderate level of development and future growth • Good water quality and habitat condition • Higher jurisdiction control • Promotes other plans and projects, most notably the Blackjack Creek Watershed Assessment and Restoration Plan (ESA 2017). Upon review with City staff, Catchment C (Figure 8) in the watershed was selected for the SMAP (Appendix C). The selected catchment was chosen due to the greater concentration of older development for retrofit opportunities. Above: Blackjack Creek Floodplain Right: Figure 8. City of Port Orchard Lower Blackjack Creek Catchment C 52 i r ' Legend QCatchment E 0 Waterbody Stream 53 This section presents detailed information on implementing the recommended surface water and stormwater program activities presented in Stormwater Management Program Evaluation and Recommendations section and the capital projects described in Capital Improvement Program section. The major components of plan implementation include the completion of CIP projects, addressing staffing and resource needs, interdepartmental collaboration, interagency collaboration, and utility finances. CIP Plan Implementation The CIP projects are described in the Capital Improvement Program section and additional details on each project can be found in the project summary sheets (Appendix B). Table 5 presents an implementation schedule that aligns with the Level 1 level of service. Additional levels of services, which implement some CIP projects on accelerated schedules, are included in Appendix B. This schedule balances project priority, project complexity, and coordination with other projects. Capital projects are reviewed regularly by the City and the implementation schedule shown in Table 5 is subject to change based on evolving regulatory requirements, City priorities, and available resources. 54 Annapolis Creek Culvert Replacement $400,000 $800,000 South Sidney Regional Facility Downtown Basin Stormwater Upgrades Ruby Creek Culvert Replacement Johnson Creek Estuary Restoration Ongoing Conveyance System Improvement Program SE Salmonberry Road, Lower Blackjack Creek Culvert Retrofit South Blackjack Creek Floodplain Restoration South Blackjack Creek Culvert Removal and Bridge Installation Central Sidney Stormwater Improvements Anderson Creek Culvert Replacement J $700,000 $2,800,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $1,760,000 $1,100,000 $982,000 $400,000 $1,200,000 a All costs are in 2022 dollars. b In 2023, $100,000 in capital funding is scheduled for Ongoing Conveyance System Improvement Program. °The projects listed in the `out years' column are scheduled after the six year planning period. $2,500,000 $13,000,000 $300,000 $7,000,00% $1,600,000■ $4,000,0A 55 Staffing and Funding Needs Under the current level of staffing, City staff can address surface water and stormwater problems that arise on a daily basis and troubleshoot specific issues that arise with development project reviews. However, they are not fully able to perform activities that would enable continual improvement of the City's stormwater management program. Current staffing levels will not be adequate to meet the rest of the requirements of the 2019-2024 Phase II Permit and make progress towards long-term goals defined as part of this Plan. The activities listed in the Stormwater Management Program Evaluation section of the Plan will require additional staffing and funding. Below are the number of full time equivalents (FTEs) and funding that are recommended for each level of service (see Figure 11 and Tables 6 and 7). Additional staffing and funding will be needed in Level 2 to support the City's source control, private facility inspection, education and outreach, asset management, and 0&M programs. In addition to the staffing and funding needed for Level 2, Level 3 includes an increase in education and outreach, and capital planning support. It should be noted that these recommendations start in 2023, but no new staffing and funding is included in the financial analysis for 2023. Refer to the Financial Analysis section for further information about the rate impacts of implementing the levels of service. Detailed estimates of staffing and funding needs can be found in Appendix A. 56 Figure 9. Levels of Service and Full Time Equivalents. "I co Cn 4 m cc 3 C7 w m 2 U- 1 0 Level - Level - Level 2023a 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 Year a No new staffing in 2023 is included in the financial analysis Year Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Tier 1 2023a 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 TotalLevel 2 FWAM .. 0!"1 Ah M 4.04 4.70 5.51 Level 1 Total $10,000 $10,000 $60,000 $10,000 $10,000 Level 2 To $30,000 M$30,00dj $60,000 `$10,001 $10,000 $30,000 $ 30,000 $60,000 10,000 $110,000 a No new staffing in 2023 is included in the financial analysis ° No new funding in 2023 is included in the financial analysis $110,000 $150,000 $250,000 57 Financial Analysis The activities and projects listed in this section would be funded primarily by revenue from the storm drainage utility. A financial analysis was conducted to define utility rate adjustments that are necessary to implement the levels of service listed in this Plan. During the financial analysis, the City evaluated the regulatory needs and stormwater-related issues facing the City to find a balance between level of service and increased utility rates. Table 8 includes the monthly rate per impervious surface unit (ISU) for the six -year planning period by level of service and the change (increase) from the previous year's monthly rate. An ISU is defined as one residential unit or 3,000 impervious square feet on non-residential parcels (e.g., commercial, multi -family). The full utility rate study report is included in Appendix D. The report documents assumptions for programmatic and capital project implementation for all three levels of service and includes monthly rates per ISU for years 2023 to 2041. revel1 $14.00 $16.94 $20.50 $24.80 $25.55 $26.31 Change to Monthly Rate $2.94 $3.56 $4.30 $0.75 $0.76 Level $14.00 $18.34 $24.03 $31.47 $32.42 $33.39 Change to Monthly Rate $4.34 $5.69 $7.44 $0.95 $0.97 111111=_ IIM� a $14.00 7 T$29.64 r $43.12 $44.42 $45.75 Change to Monthly Rate $9.27 $13.48 $1.30 $1.33 The City is interested in considering a capital facilities charge (CFC) for stormwater, which would recover a proportionate share of the cost of existing and future system assets from new customers as growth occurs. The City already has CFCs for water and wastewater utilities. Table 9 presents the maximum defensible CFC that can be implemented by the City for each level of service. City Council could opt to adopt a lower CFC than shown in Table 9. .ram A'• Rk ram..;: •� " !� � a � �� 19 01 y - . ��.. d: .l ��'i r r bhp . .� • C Table 9. Capital Facility Charge by Level of Service Level of Service Capital Facility Charge Level 3 Image from Kitsap Conservation District Linkages to Other City Programs Interdepartmental Collaboration The City's stormwater management program is led by staff in the Public Works Department. Plan implementation will require contributions from staff in the Public Works Operations and Maintenance, Engineering, Community Development, and Finance departments. Interagency Collaboration To address ongoing regional efforts, the City should continue to work with regional stakeholder groups and local governments in shared drainage basins to manage and treat stormwater effectively. Below are agencies and regional programs related to implementing program elements. Comprehensive Stormwater Planning • Coordinating with the Cities of Bremerton, Bainbridge Island, Poulsbo, and Kitsap County on the Dyes/Sinclair Inlets Fecal Coliform TMDL Implementation Plan • Coordinating with the City of Bremerton, Kitsap County, and Pierce County on potential future Stormwater Management Action Planning for shared drainage basins Public Education and Public Involvement • Coordinating with the West Sound Stormwater Outreach Group (WSSOG) on regional messaging and programs • Coordinating with the Kitsap Conservation District on potential future efforts including the homeowner rain garden cost share program • Coordinating with the South Kitsap School District on a school stormwater curriculum and field visits Capital Improvement Projects and Programs • Coordinating with the Suquamish Tribe and other relevant tribes on review of salmon habitat projects • Coordinating with the West Sound Partners for Regional Recovery on prioritization of regional salmon habitat projects • Coordinating with the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife on review of projects and their impacts to fish habitat • Coordinating with the Washington State Department of Transportation on City projects adjacent to state lands • Coordinating with Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council on regional transportation and land use decisions • Coordinating with Puget Sound Regional Council on transportation, growth management, and economic development .• Pursuit of Outside Funding All of the CIP projects identified in this Plan are eligible for outside funding. The City should pursue state grants for stormwater retrofit projects; habitat, fish passage, and floodplain improvement grants for culvert, floodplain, and estuary projects; and low interest loans for capital projects that are purely conveyance improvements. kill' xe zo 61 REFERENCES Ecology. 2019. Western Washington Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit. State of Washington Department of Ecology. Olympia, Washington 98504-7600. Issuance Date: July 1, 2019. ESA. 2017. Blackjack Creek Watershed Restoration Assessment and Protection and Restoration Plan. Prepared for Suquamish Tribe and Washington Department of Ecology, by ESA Consultants, Seattle, Washington. Mauger, Guillaume. 2017. Climate Change and Stormwater. Climate Impacts Group, University of Washington. 1-25. Kitsap County. 2021. Buildable Lands Report, Kitsap County, Washington. FINAL. https://www.kitsapgov.com/dcd/PEP%20 Documents/FINAL%20Buildable%20Lands%2OReport— November%202021.pdf Kitsap Regional Coordination Council. February 15, 2022. Land Use Planning Policy Committee Meeting. <https:// static1.squarespace.com/static/5660ba88e4bOe83ffe8O32fc/ t/6205bOf793b6a1302e7c8f41/1644540153978/ KRCC+P1anPOL+Feb+15+2022+Meeting+Packet.pdf. > Herrera. 2022a. City of Port Orchard Watershed Inventory and Assessment — Technical Memorandum. Prepared for the City of Port Orchard by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Seattle, Washington. March 21.< https://portorchardwa.gov/documents/ port -orchard -watershed -inventory/> Herrera. 2022b. City of Port Orchard Watershed Prioritization — Technical Memorandum. Prepared for the City of Port Orchard by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Seattle, Washington. June 22. < https://portorchardwa.gov/documents/port-orchard-watershed- prioritization/ > 62 Herrera. 2022c. City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Program Evaluation and Recommendations. Prepared for the City of Port Orchard by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Seattle, Washington. February 24. Herrera. 2020. Port Orchard Shoreline Master Program Update. Prepared for the City of Port Orchard, by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc., Seattle, Washington. OFM. 2022. Population of Cities, Towns and Counties Used for Allocation of Selected State Revenues State of Washington. <https:// ofm.wa.gov/site s/default/files/public/dataresearch/pop/april l/ofm— april l_population—final.pdf> Puget Sound Regional Council. 2020. Vision 2050 A Plan for the Central Puget Sound Region. Puget Sound Regional Council, Seattle, Washington. Adoption Date: October 29, 2020. < https://www.psrc. org/sites/default/files/2022-02/vision-2050-plan%20%281%29.pdf > Port Orchard. 2020. Blackjack Creek Floodplain Restoration Project Engineering Design Plans. 2020. Port Orchard, Washington. Port Orchard and Makers Architecture and Urban Design. 2022. Ruby Creek Subarea Plan. Port Orchard, Washington. Adoption Date: September 22, 2022. < https:Hstorage.googleapis.com/ proudcity/portorchardwa/uploads/2020/09/FINAL-ADOPTED-Ruby- Creek-Neighborhood-Subarea-Plan-09222020-1.pdf > Reid Middleton. 2018. 2018 Annapolis Creek Culvert Replacement — 30% Design & Permitting Coordination Report, Prepared for the City of Port Orchard by Reid Middleton, Inc., Everett, Washington. Reid Middleton. 2020. Downtown Basin Stormwater Plan, Prepared for the City of Port Orchard by Reid Middleton, Inc., Everett, Washington. 63 _J6 TL ■ �t ■ . �a s■ �� _ � fir•. 1 ,IN ti L 7 � J dr ti ■ 1 ,r ' i 1 ' ' f ~: Y• a EL f f ' ti ■ i• it T 1 i rr • �,r 1 i � � 1 LL T- r• i r �. J � 1 1 P • we 1 z r ti 1 P i s YOr?-aC 416 ' 4 , 4 1 — ■ i I This Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan (Plan) was produced through the combined efforts, ideas and contributions of the following City of Port Orchard staff, appointed and elected officials, and consultants. Photos courtesy of Herrera staff. Mayor City Council Planning Commission Rob Putaansu Shawn Cucciardi Annette Stewart Jay Roasapepe Stephanie Bailey Scott Diener Tyler McKlosky John Clauson Paul Fontenot Cindy Lucarelli David Bernstein Fred Chang Bek Ashby Mark Trenary Joe Morrison City Staff Zack Holt ........................... Stormwater Permit Manager Tony Lang ......................... Director of Public Works Mark Dorsey ..................... Former Director of Public Works Chris Hammer .................. City Engineer Jacki Brown ...................... Utility Manager Nick Bond ......................... Director of Community Development Ian Smith .......................... Engineer Jim Fisk ............................ Senior Planner Darren Padroza................ GIS/Inspections Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. Matthew Fontaine ............. Project Manager Mindy Fobn .-------.Watcrobod Planning Rvb000m Dugopolski ......... NPZ)E8Permit Specialist Julianne Cbechonover....... Staff Engineer Katie Wingrove ------ Geographic Information Systems Load Briao8noiek ...................... Capital Project Planning Jonathan Waggoner ---. Capital Project Planning BriauzuuBlaud.................... Capital Project Planning _---~ Vayanos .................... Graphic Design Reid Middleton, Inc. Mark Davis ......................... Engineer GeoEngineers Joe ------' Biologist Adam ------- Biologist FCS Group John GhUardncci................ Principal Take Aaker.......................... Project Manager 3 01 INTRODUCTION 10 Stormwater Runoff and Effects 11 Purpose of this Plan 12 Stormwater Management Mission Statement 13 Long-term Goals 16 Opportunities and Challenges 17 Plan Development 02 BACKGROUND 18 City Watersheds 22 City Stormwater System 24 Stormwater Impacts on Watersheds 26 Applicable Policies and Regulations 28 Program Accomplishments 30 Planning for Future Development 32 Climate Change 03 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) 34 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) 35 Problem and Project Identification 36 Project Prioritization 04 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 38 Levels of Service 40 Recommendations M 05 WATERSHED PLANNING 48 City Watersheds 52 Lower Blackjack Creek Watershed 06 PLAN IMPLEMENTATION 54 CIP Plan Implementation 56 Staffing and Funding Needs 58 Financial Analysis Summary 60 Linkages to Other Programs 61 Pursuit of Outside Funding ■ 07 REFERENCE 08 APPENDICES A Appendix A - Stormwater Management Program Staffing and Funding Matrix B Appendix B - Capital Improvement Program Summary Sheets, and Project Prioritization C Appendix C - Stormwater Management Action Plan D Appendix D - Financial Analysis 5 TABLE 1 Watershed Stormwater Impact Rating TABLE 2 Climate Change Impacts TABLE 3 Prioritized Projects and Ranking TABLE 4 Summary of Major Watershed Habitat Conditions for Salmon and Forage Fish TABLE 5 Capital Improvement Program Implementation Schedule TABLE 6 Staff FTE Summary by Year and Tier TABLE 7 Funding Summary by Year and Tier TABLE 8 Monthly Rate per Impervious Surface Unit by Level of Service TABLE 9 Capital Facility Charge by Level of Service 24 33 36 50 55 57 57 58 59 I FIGURE 1 City Watersheds 19 FIGURE 2 Presence of Key Stream and Nearshore Fish Species in City 20 of Port Orchard Watersheds FIGURE 3 Stormwater Infrastructure 23 FIGURE 4 Stormwater Influence Upon Watersheds 25 FIGURE 5 Projected 100 Year Marine Flood Extent Under Sea Level 32 Rise Scenario FIGURE 6 Top 10 Capital Projects 37 FIGURE 7 Nearshore and Major Watershed Stream Habitat Condition 51 FIGURE 8 Lower Blackjack Creek Catchment C 53 FIGURE 9 Levels of Service and Full Time Equivalents 56 7 BMP Best management practice CFC Capital Facilities Charge CTE Career & Technical Education CIP Capital improvement program City City of Port Orchard CMMS Computerized maintenance management system Ecology Washington State Department of Ecology ESA Federal Endangered Species Act FTE Full Time Equivalent GIS Geographic information systems GMA Washington State Growth Management Act IDDE Illicit discharge detection and elimination ISU Impervious Surface Unit LID Low Impact Development MS4 Municipal separate storm sewer system NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 0&M Operations and Maintenance 11 OFM Office of Financial Management Permit Western Washington Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit PMC Port Orchard Municipal Code QAPP Quality Assurance Project Plan RCW Revised Code of Washington SAM Stormwater Action Monitoring SMAP Stormwater Management Action Planning STEM Science, technology, engineering, and math TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load UGA Urban Growth Area UIC Underground Injection Control WAC Washington Administrative Code WRIA Water Resource Inventory Area WREC Watershed Restoration and Enhancement WSPER West Sound Partners for Ecosystem Recovery WSSOG West Sound Stormwater Outreach Group 0 Stormwater Runoff and Effects The City of Port Orchard (City) operates a system of drainage pipes and ditches to convey stormwater runoff to receiving waters including streams and Sinclair Inlet. The drainage system prevents and minimizes damage to private properties, city streets, and other infrastructure. As rain falls and travels across hard surfaces, such as roofs, yards, and streets, pollutants are picked up and carried to receiving waters. The City is faced with the challenge to convey runoff safely, while minimizing adverse high -flow impacts (erosion, flooding, and sediment deposition) and water quality degradation to receiving waters. In 2008, the City established the storm drainage utility (Utility) to create a funding source to address stormwater and receiving water management issues citywide. State and federal regulations related to stormwater have evolved since 2007, when the City was issued its first National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Western Washington Phase 11 Stormwater Permit (Permit) from the Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology), leading to more stringent requirements for implementing projects, programs, and maintenance. 10 Watershed signage, City of Port Orchard Purpose of this Plan City water resources include freshwater streams, marine water shorelines and estuaries, upland wetlands, and aquifers underground. These waters support aquatic wildlife, terrestrial wildlife, and people, in the form of recreation and drinking water. A watershed is the area of land where surface water flows to a receiving water body. supporting salmon in a stream, where children play at the beach, or the nearshore environment nourishing shellfish and forage fish. The City has chosen to develop and implement its first surface and stormwater comprehensive plan with a focus on watersheds spanning the landscape and stormwater influence on water resources. This approach recognizes the ecosystem function and value of receiving waters and maps out a plan to accommodate future growth, correct existing flooding problems, involve the public, preserve functioning habitat, and enhance habitat where opportunities are found. This Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan (Plan) sets a course for stormwater programs and capital projects for years to come and addresses current and anticipated regulatory requirements, future development, existing flooding and water quality concerns, infrastructure maintenance and management, and the resources needed for the City to fully implement this Plan. 11 Stormwater Management Mission Statement The mission of the stormwater management program is to regulate and manage use of the City's municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) as required by the City's NPDES permit while conscientiously managing and protecting surface and receiving waters for public health and enjoyment. it �M"Itwllr- 1 iS, s }may----�,�• �.,_ Md I 4 y L --.L 4P . 1 T . _ r• Lar l � i r•; i i J Z,�•' o r ,•- 7 i 1�1 O 7 r rr r� 1 1 ■ r 1"L . •ti • f 1 _ Z 57 AN" 1 r 1 IJ 1 IN" r nor Mir T Z t ` T ON& Long-term Goals FLOOD REDUCTION Conveyance infrastructure that meets the Public Works Engineering Standards (City Standards) (convey the 100-yr return period flow; 50-yr return period flow if the 100-yr overflow does not threaten buildings and critical structures) for the entire city. The City's tidally influenced stormwater infrastructure is resilient to tidal fluctuation including projected sea level rise. The City has a complete understanding of system deficiencies and a plan to address those deficiencies that is balanced with available funding. GROUND AND SURFACE WATER QUALITY Infiltrated stormwater does not negatively affect groundwater quality. Streams meet water quality standards for human health and aquatic life. GROUND AND SURFACE WATER QUANTITY Groundwater supply is replenished by infiltration from developed areas at a rate that is equal to the volume infiltrated under natural forested conditions. Streams have adequate summer flow volume and natural winter storm flow regimes to support local aquatic life. HABITAT ENHANCEMENT • City -influenced streams are fully restored to forested hydrologic conditions and meet designated uses and water quality standards. • City culverts that carry fish -bearing streams allow fish to pass unimpeded. • Pocket estuaries adjacent to city lands are ecologically functional and not negatively affected by stormwater runoff or hydraulic constraints from stormwater infrastructure. • Shorelines adjacent to city lands are not negatively affected by stormwater. • City watersheds are characterized and prioritized according to potential environmental restoration, conservation, or development so that investments in stormwater and watershed projects can be directed to where they achieve the maximum benefit. MAPPING AND ASSET MANAGEMENT Stormwater system asset attributes and conditions are tracked and managed in one cohesive system that is compatible with all other city systems. The stormwater system asset management system supports planning and prioritizing repairs, upgrades, and maintenance, as well as generating and tracking work orders to support annual review and evaluation. 14 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION (EDUCATION, OUTREACH, AND INVOLVEMENT) • Community members understand the relationship between their actions and stormwater quantity and quality and take action to minimize their stormwater impacts and habitat damage. 1 • City residents and people that work in the city support the mission of the stormwater and watersheds program. • The community has access to public natural areas for education and aesthetic enjoyment without creating negative impacts to sensitive habitat. • The community views stormwater and watershed management and planning as a necessary function for citizen enjoyment of water resources. POLLUTANT SOURCE CONTROL i • Pollutants from developed lands and roads do not enter surface water or groundwater at levels that are harmful to aquatic life or human health. • Citizens and businesses implement pollution prevention practices to the maximum extent feasible. INFRASTRUCTURE OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE All City -owned and privately -owned stormwater infrastructure, including flow control and water quality facilities, function as designed. DEVELOPMENT PRACTICES All development and redevelopment projects comply with City Standards for stormwater management. The City's approach to development and redevelopment oversight enables money spent on stormwater management to have the maximum benefit for water resources. Runoff from all manmade development and construction sites is mitigated by stormwater facilities in accordance with current City Standards prior to discharge to surface water bodies. COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING, ADMINISTRATION, AND FUNDING • The City's storm drainage utility has a comprehensive strategy to manage infrastructure protect water resources, restore damaged habitats, and ensure sustainable development. • The City's storm drainage utility is adequately funded to meet regulatory requirements and the stormwater related needs of citizens. • Existing property owners and developers pay for an equitable share of the necessary improvement and expansion of the City's stormwater system. • The City has a complete understanding of existing unmanaged manmade surfaces and a plan to retrofit those surfaces that is balanced with available funding. 15 Opportunities and Challenges As part of the stormwater and watersheds comprehensive planning process, the City identified opportunities and challenges faced by the Utility. The relationship between these opportunities and challenges and the City's long-term goals is discussed in more detail below. Opportunities The process to develop this Plan allowed City staff to identify long- term goals, describe the ideal state for managing stormwater runoff, and identify and plan capital projects to invest in the future of the City stormwater system. Existing activities, future programs and projects, and future regulatory requirements were evaluated when developing this Plan. This Plan sets a road map for the future of stormwater management. Challenges The City is operating its stormwater program according to the 2019- 2024 Permit (Ecology 2019). Challenges facing the City include meeting more stringent requirements in the 2019-2024 Permit, such as: business source control and inspection program, public education, reporting, watershed planning, and adoption of a new stormwater manual. Additionally, a new NPDES Permit will be issued in 2024 and is expected to have additional requirements. Lack of dedicated staff time is the primary challenge facing the City. Staff conduct the activities required by the 2019-2024 Permit, track progress, and report to Ecology on an annual basis. Staff also respond to flooding and water quality issues submitted by citizens and conduct inspections during construction, post -construction, and for maintenance of selected stormwater drainage facilities. The City lacks available staff time to manage stormwater capital projects and submit and manage grant applications and funds. Evaluate Stormwater Identify Initial List of Complete Receiving and Watersheds Capital Improvement Water Conditions Program Program (CIP) Assessment and Projectsa I Prioritization Complete Stormwater and Develop Summary Complete Stormwater Watersheds Program Sheets for Priority Management Action Evaluation and CIP Projects Plan (SMAP) Recommendations Define Levels of Service for Programs and CIP Projects Conduct Financial Develop Draft Plan Analysis Assemble Final Plan City Watersheds This chapter summarizes background information of existing conditions, regulations and environmental considerations influencing Plan development and implementation. Within the City of Port Orchard, there are 17 distinct watersheds (see Figure 2). These watersheds were delineated and characterized as part of the City's Watershed Inventory and Assessment (Herrera 2022a). The major watersheds (or watersheds with the most jurisdictional control) located within the City include: • Annapolis Creek • Downtown County Campus • Anderson Creek • Caseco Creek • Johnson Creek • Blackjack Creek (including Lower, Middle, and Upper Blackjack Creeks) • Melcher Creek • Ross Creek • Ruby Creek • Stream 270 The minor watersheds (or watersheds with the least jurisdiction control) located within the City include: • Karcher Creek • Coulter Creek • Rocky Creek • Sacco Creek • Square Creek Figure 1. City Watersheds. 18 1 • Legend Port Orchard City Limit Watershed Boundary Stream ' Roads — Waterbody _ Wetland 441 AN w w r Gorst Creek Anderson Creek (Coulter Creek• T ��- Rocky Creek M"T/ Sacco Creek Annapolis Creek Upper �,,...., Blackjack .� + Creek Ross % Creek !;• ;� " Karcher Creek Middle — 16 Blackjack i Creek I Lower Blackjack Creek Ruby 4 Creek �.Square� Cree19 i City Watersheds, Continued... Some watersheds support salmon while others support other aquatic species (see Figure 3). Streams, such as Johnson Creek, Annapolis Creek, Karcher Creek and Stream 270, support up to three salmonid species, while other larger stream systems associated with valued wetlands, such as Lower Blackjack Creek, Anderson Creek, Ross Creek, and Ruby Creek, support a wider variety of salmonid species which may include fall and summer chum, coho, fall chinook and steelhead. Smaller stream systems such as Downtown County Campus, Melcher Creek and Caseco Creek, do not support salmonids and may host other species including sculpin, freshwater eels, and other small stream aquatic species. Important species that utilize the nearshore marine environment of Sinclair Inlet are forage fish including surf smelt and sand lance (see Figure 3). These small fish serve to provide recreation for the local community in the form of "smelting" during the open season at Ross Point, and provide an essential food source for larger fish, seals, and river otter, to name a few local wildlife often seen from City shorelines. Refer to the City's Watershed Inventory and Assessment (Herrera 2022a) for detailed characteristics of each watershed. Above: Photo of Johnson Creek. Figure 2. Presence of Key Stream and Nearshore Fish Species in City of Port Orchard Watersheds. 20 O n k V--4 1 r -i' Stream y 270 j Ruby': Creek`-�, I `Y I ee� e l- 7 � � dill c � 41 _ I I Sacco ' Creek Y U � m r' I L7 I� L I Legend r _ Port Orchard City Limit L_ ` Watershed Boundary - Waterbody Roads Stream Surf Smelt Spawning Sand Lance Spawning Species Run (Documented Presence) Coho Resident Coastal Cutthroat Fall Chinook Fall Chum Summer Chum N Winter Steelhead 21 4 T City Stormwater System The City stormwater system (inlets, pipes, ditches, vaults, swales, culverts, and ponds) collects runoff from streets, yards, rooftops, and parking lots (see Figure 4). That runoff is discharged through stormwater outfalls to either waterbodies (streams or marine nearshore) or to an adjacent municipality. ism-) . a 7" Figure 3. City of Port Orchard Stormwater Infrastructure. Legend O Outfall Conveyance O Stormwater Vault Culver j ; Port Orchard City Limit Pipe Watershed Boundary Ditch Detention Pond -•••- Swale - Waterbody Stream Roads a% Sinclair Inlets Stormwater Impacts on Watersheds The degree to which the City stormwater system impacts local receiving waters can be categorized from low to high by assessing the dominance of City lands in the watershed and the level of stormwater infrastructure (see Figure 4 and Table 1). The total percent of impervious lands in a watershed is correlated to the health of receiving waters. The greater the percent impervious lands, the likely greater level of degradation upon water resources. City stormwater influence is highest in Downtown County Campus, Annapolis Creek and Johnson Creek watersheds, and lowest in the more rural or limited City presence in the Square Creek, Stream 270, Gorst Creek, Rocky Creek and Coulter Creek watersheds. Annapolis Creek High 55% 30% 1 4 Johnson Creek High 100% 29% 2 2 Lower Blackjack Creek Moderate/High 68% 22% 10 12 Ross Creek Moderate/High 65% 13% 10 13 Melcher Creek Moderate 100% 12% 0 3 Caseco Creek Moderate 100% 12% 1 1 Anderson Creek Moderate 60% 9% 4 5 Ruby Creek Moderate 54% 5% 6 NA Karcher Creek Moderate 11% 28% 3 0 Sacco Creek Moderate 22% 18% 0 0 Square Creek 7% 4% 1 NA Stream 270 L 45% 3% 0 NA Gorst Creek Low 5% 4% 1 NA Rocky Creek Low 'M 1% 2% 0 NA Coulter Creek Low � 1% <1% 0 NA Figure 4. Stormwater Influence Upon Watersheds. 24 Legend Watershed Boundary r Port Orchard City Limit - Waterbody Roads Stream Level of City Stormwater Impact Very High High Moderate/High Moderate Low Gorst Creek A J I l Annapolis's 166 ' Creek _ Upper Blackjack Creek".- -+ - 1 Ross 1 Creek r Karcher 1 � 1 Creek 16 1 ♦ a Middle �. 6 Blackjack Creek 1 1 1 e Lower 1 Blackjack 1 --- • Creek 1 �4 1 1 � ` I -■ 1 1 1 1 Ruby I r - -- + I reek - - - !- -J Creek - - Coulter Creek 1 Square Creek Rocky Creek � 0 Sacco Creek 0 1 25 Applicable Policies And Regulations In addition to addressing drainage and water quality concerns impacted by stormwater runoff, the Surface Water Management Program must also comply with several local, state, and federal regulatory requirements. They include: NPDES Permit The 2019-2024 Permit (Ecology 2019) has broad requirements associated with stormwater runoff and requires the City to develop distinct program components. The first Phase II Permit was issued by Ecology in 2007, reissued in 2012, and again in 2019. The requirements for the City's stormwater program have become more stringent with each new permit issuance. The permit requires that the City's program meet requirements in I primary areas: • Stormwater planning ■ ■ • Public education and outreach a .. • ' ' ■ Public involvement and participation • Municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) permit mapping and documentation • Illicit discharge detection and elimination (IDDE) • Controlling runoff from new development, redevelopment, and construction sites • Operations and maintenance (O&M) • Source control program for existing development • Compliance with Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) requirements • Monitoring and assessment • Reporting requirements Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) :. The Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) is a series ■� ' '■ of statues, which include requirements for the inventory and 46 protection of environmentally critical areas. Environmentally critical areas include steep slopes, wetlands, and streams (Chapter 36.70A of the Revised Code of Washington [RCW]). The GMA also requires fast-growing cities and counties to develop comprehensive plans to ensure environmentally responsible and economically sustainable development, which includes planning for stormwater related capital facilities. 26 . Port Orchard Municipal Code Several chapters of the Port Orchard Municipal Code (POMC) govern aspects of stormwater management on new development and redevelopment project sites, as well as inspection and maintenance requirements for private stormwater facilities. The primary chapters in the POMC related to surface and stormwater management include: • Chapter 13.06 — Storm Drainage Utility • Chapter 15.30 —Illicit Discharge Prevention, Detection, ,b and Elimination Ro• Chapter 20.140 — Land Disturbing Activity • Chapter 20.150 — Stormwater Drainage Ecology Total Maximum Daily Load Implementation Plans m A TMDL cleanup action is required for water bodies that have been identified as impaired on Ecology's Section 303(d) list due to poor water quality. The City implements actions in compliance with the Sinclair/Dyes Inlet Fecal Coliform TMDL as required per Appendix 2 of the 2019-2024 Permit. Federal Endangered Species Act The Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) prohibits the take of all listed species, including a take that could result from the City's stormwater facility operations or private development stormwater management activities that are permitted by the City. Underground Injection Control Program The underground injection control (UIC) program is a federal program intended to ensure that underground sources of drinking water are protected from surface discharges to the ground. In the . State of Washington, the UIC program is administered by Ecology m through Chapter 173-218 of the Washington Administrative Code (WAC). The Guidance for UIC Wells that Manage Stormwater (Ecology 2006) lays out the requirements for UIC wells, and Ecology has included additional guidance in the latest version of the Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington, released in 2019. 27 Program Accomplishments Since the storm drainage utility was founded in 2008, the City of Port Orchard has made significant progress in reducing detrimental effects of stormwater runoff on receiving waters in and around Port Orchard. The City has planned and built capital projects to alleviate drainage problems throughout the City. The City has also provided stewardship opportunities through education and outreach. The City's accomplishments for the past four years are described in chronological order below: City staff hosted a springtime shoreline cleanup and beach education activity. Participants were encouraged to remove any trash they encountered, as well as recovering and removing any riprap or shoring materials that had fallen on the beach from the upland shoreline. While participants worked, City staff provided educational guidance regarding ecosystem recovery efforts, shoreline biodiversity, effects of stormwater on shoreline habitats and anthropogenic effects on intertidal habitats in general. City staff provided outreach to assist with stormwater, stream, and habitat education at South Kitsap High School, supporting the school's Career & Technical Education and Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (CTE/STEM) program. This outreach event included providing demonstrations and descriptions of methods for establishing student stewardship activities relating to monitoring water quality, measuring discharge, and habitat and riparian monitoring methods at Annapolis Creek. The City completed the Tremont Street Widening project, which included stormwater detention, oil control, and enhanced treatment to protect critical downstream creeks and waterways (i.e., Johnson and Ross Creeks). Detention was provided by two underground stormwater vaults, a 164-foot-long by 20-foot-wide by 10-foot deep vault on the west end of the project and 100-foot-long by 20-foot-wide by 10-feet-deep vault on the east end, to provide flow control for downstream water bodies and mitigate stormwater issues. Stormwater conveyance was also upgraded to properly accommodate the volume of flow in the area. The City began developing the Downtown Basin Stormwater Plan. The area surrounding the downtown basin is shown in Figure 6. This plan is developing a roadmap for implementing water quality treatment and flow control best management practices for water quality outcomes in receiving waters. It will include the identification of feasible actions and implementable capital improvement projects that will modernize infrastructure and provide flow control in the downtown and nearshore areas of Port Orchard. Figure 6. Aerial Image of the City of Port Orchard's downtown Basin (photo courtesy of City of Port Orchard). City staff participated in the West Sound Partners for Ecosystem Recovery Lead Entity for Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) UL J 15 and the Watershed Restoration and Enhancement Committee (WREC) for WRIA 15. This committee connected and engaged citizens and stakeholders in watershed level discussions and actions related to water quality, salmon enhancement, and stormwater. Participation in the WREC was completed in 2021. 29 Planning for Future Development Due to the City's proximity to the urban centers of Bremerton and Tacoma and connection to Seattle via ferry transportation, Port Orchard is designated as a "high capacity transit community" by the Puget Sound Regional Council (Puget Sound Regional Council 2020). The Office of Financial Management (OFM) estimates that the City's population is 16,400 people as of 2022 and is expected to grow by much as 36%, or to 28,086 people by 2024 (Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council 2022; OFM 2022). This is one of many reasons why new development within the city will be significant in the coming years. Land development regulations and subarea planning efforts will be used to address environmental and water resource concerns. New development and redevelopment are and will continue to be regulated in accordance with the most recent flow control and water quality standards in the 2019 Public Works Engineering Standards and defined in POMC Chapter 20.150.06. The City adopts the following by reference: 2019 Washington State Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual 2012 Puget Sound Partnership Low Impact Development (LID) Technical Guidance Manual for Puget Sound Definitions, minimum requirements, and adjustment and variance criteria found in Appendix 1 of the 2019-2024 Permit, with exception of the erosivity waiver. Critical areas are regulated in accordance with POMC Chapter 20.162 addressing wetlands, fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas and related plans, geologically hazardous areas and related reports, frequently flooded areas, and critical aquifer recharge areas. 30 ar � IL • Vol Z Recently, the City completed the Ruby Creek Subarea Plan (City of Port Orchard 2022). The plan vision was to foster densification, future growth, walkable neighborhood, and business amenities, while accommodating the natural function of Ruby Creek and Blackjack Creek (see Figure 7). Similar planning efforts within the City will accommodate both people and aquatic species. W Aerial Rendition of the north end of the Ruby Creek Neighborhood. (image courtesy of City of Port Orchard) 31 Climate Change In 2020, the City of Port Orchard collaborated with Kitsap County and the City of Bremerton to develop the Kitsap County Climate Change Resiliency Assessment (Kitsap County 2020). The assessment reviewed and summarized current and future climate change drivers, impacts, and risks for Kitsap County. These projected impacts were grouped into impacts to social and economic systems and biophysical impacts, of which the following are related to this Plan: • Public infrastructure and support systems (stormwater), • Hydrology & hydrogeology (hydrologic changes and stream and riverine flooding), and • Habitat (freshwater and aquatic habitat). As part of the assessment, specific impacts to the City of Port Orchard were evaluated and have been summarized by the City's stormwater management component in Table 2. Legend 0 Outfalls •••••••• DNR Shoreline Flood Scenarios C 100 Year Marine Flood 2020 ..r 100 Year Marine Flood + 50°/u Probability SLR Projection 2040 100 Year Marine Flood + 1% Probability SLR Projection 2040 a .... 100 Year Marine Flood + 50% { Probability SLR Projection 2100 194W ❑� •54 W 190W ,F f'p 186WOQ 184W°i C 182 W 174W0176W 170W 0 172W 1 164W 150W 0 148W • 146W a w162W Bi 144W 160W }} 158W E * O4ST 0 3636E s 3632E =r • .+i O+ m_ Table 2. Climate Change Impacts. Stormwater Infrastructure Stream Flows Potential overload, degradation, and damage of stormwater infrastructure from sea level rise and more intense rain storms Winter stream flooding will become more frequent Lower spring and summer flows Groundwater recharge may be affected by hydrologic Groundwater Supply changes (e.g., increasing temperatures and potential for saltwater intrusion; declining summer flows; low water tables; and sea level rise) 0 Flood Risk Higher flood risk for low-lying coastal infrastructure, including stormwater conveyance and facilities Water Quality Regionally warmer stream temperatures Cold -water fish species across multiple life -cycle stages will be impacted by hydrologic changes. Possible loss of streamside vegetation Decrease in cooler/oxygenated aquatic habitat Habitat Wetland habitats are likely to contract and threaten shelter for juvenile fish and habitats for a variety of species Aquatic benthic invertebrates, amphibians, and salmonids will be impacted and will have downstream ecosystem and food -web impacts Capital Improvement Program (CIP) This section summarizes the surface water and stormwater capital improvement program (CIP). The purpose of the CIP is to define capital projects that make progress towards the City's long-term goals including: Flood Reduction Groundwater and Surface Water Quality Groundwater and Surface Water Quantity ++ Habitat Enhancement WOO Public Participation (Education, Outreach, and Involvement) Infrastructure Operations & Maintenance F Comprehensive Planning, Administration, and Funding 34 Problem and Project Identification Previous surface water and stormwater plans and input from City staff were used to develop an initial list of problems to be addressed during work on this Plan. Surface and stormwater plans reviewed included the following: • 2018 Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan (City of Port Orchard 2018) • Blackjack Creek Watershed Assessment and Protection and Restoration Plan (ESA 2017) • Ruby Creek Subarea Plan (City of Port Orchard 2022) • Downtown Basin Stormwater Plan (Reid Middleton 2020) • 2018 Annapolis Creek Culvert Replacement — 30% Design & Permitting Coordination Report (Reid Middleton 2018) • Blackjack Creek Floodplain Restoration Project Engineering Design Plans (City of Port Orchard 2020) Additional problems were identified by surveying City staff through Esri's ArcGIS Survey123 and hosting workshops with the City. Problems were evaluated using desktop methods and field evaluation to assess site -specific opportunities and constraints. Potential capital projects were developed to address the problems. The initial list of projects, problem descriptions, and solutions are provided in Appendix B. 35 1 Project Prioritization The initial surface water and stormwater CIP project list was ranked by City staff to determine the top 10 projects. The top 10 projects are shown in Figure 8. Once the top 10 projects were chosen, these projects were prioritized using a quantitative process that considered further input from City staff, review of background documents, and field reconnaissance of existing problems. This prioritization was then used to develop an implementation schedule that emphasized early completion of the projects providing the greatest benefit. An overview of the CIP project prioritization and goals is included in Table 3. Detailed prioritization results and CIP project summary sheets are provided in Appendix B. The CIP project implementation schedule is included in the Plan Implementation section of this Plan. South Sidney Regional Facility Johnson Creek Estuary Restoration Downtown Basin Stormwater Upgrades 3 South Blackjack Creek Floodplain Restoration 6%" Central Sidney Stormwater Improvements 6 Annapolis Creek Culvert Replacement 7 SE Salmonberry Road, Lower Blackjack Creek Culvert Retrofit M Ruby Creek Culvert Replacement South Blackjack Creek Culvert Removal and Bridge Installation 10 Anderson Creek Culvert Replacement d& C? 70 55 45 .0 35 Opposite: Figure 6. Top 10 Capital Projects. 36 Legend Q CIP Projects r--I Port Orchard City Limit Watershed Boundary - Waterbody Stream Roads I I I I Anderson Creek Culvert Replacement ` I I I I I I Downtown Stormwater Basin Upgrades Johnson Creek Estuary Restoration O/ 3 L- L- r I I � I i Annapolis Creek ' Culvert Replacement ` A /I � I ' I I L — J 1 r J .r_�-- _ _ - fJ Central Sidney Stormwater Improvements c\ L � I / I South Sidney �` Q f I Regional Facility I SE Salmonberry Road, ( I Lower Blackjack Creek Culvert Replacement Ruby Road Creek --�- 1 Culvert Replacement L I I _ — ` I IJ I I / I I I I South Blackjack Creek I�_ I � I Floodplain Restoration J \ I I i South Blackjack Creek Culvert Removal and I — — Bridge Installation I 37 Levels of Service This chapter summarizes surface water and stormwater recommendations for the City's stormwater management program. Recommendations are organized by the long-term goals and levels of service defined below. The City has identified three levels of service for this Plan: Level 1, Level 2, and Level 3. Level 1 recommendations are shown for all long-term goals. Levels 2 and 3 are not included when no additional recommendations were identified. The levels of service are defined as follows: Level 1 Represents activities needed to meet 2019-2024 Permit requirements, potential future permit requirements, and essential program activities. Level 2 Includes everything in Level 1 and several additional improvements to expand public education and stewardship opportunities, implement the new asset management program, and increase staffing to adequately inspect construction projects and private stormwater facilities to improve environmental protection. Level 3 R Includes everything in Levels 1 and 2 and represents staffing and funding to move towards achieving the City's goals. This level of service would result in the greatest benefits for the community and - the environment, but would have the highest cost. Level 3 includes expanding public involvement and environmental monitoring activities. Recommendations Recommendations are organized by the long-term goals and levels of service previously defined in this Plan. Detailed tables of recommendations with associated funding and staffing requirements are provided in City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Program Evaluation and Recommendations (Herrera 2022c) and in Appendix A. Implementation of these recommendations are discussed in the Plan Implementation section of this Plan. 39 Recommendations Continued... Flood Reduction Level 1: • Design and construct upgrades to the existing conveyance infrastructure Groundwater and Surface Water Quality Level 1: • Respond to spills and water quality complaints • Develop Pollution Control Program Plans (Quality Assurance Project Plan [QAPPI equivalent) to monitor stream health and provide water quality status updates • Make annual payments to the collective fund for S8 Monitoring and Assessment • Seek opportunities to participate with Kitsap County and other local jurisdictions in an integrated and coordinated monitoring assessment program • Provide information as requested for effectiveness and source identification studies that are under contract with Ecology as active Stormwater Action Monitoring (SAM) projects 0.25 FTE for Water Quality Technician Groundwater and Surface Water Quantity Aft Level 1: • Design and construct upgrades to the existing conveyance infrastructure .m Habitat Enhancement Level 1: • Conduct outreach on private property tree preservation and wetland buffers within Lower Blackjack Creek Catchment C Mapping and Asset Management Level 1: • Update the City's MS4 map on an ongoing basis, including all known connections from the MS4 to a privately owned stormwater system • Collect size and material data for known MS4 outfalls during the normal course of inspections and maintenance and update electronic records • Locate and map additional outfall • Additional 0.25 FTE for geographic information systems (GIS) Technician Level 2: • Includes all recommendations in Level 1 • Select and implement a computer maintenance management system (CMMS) • Additional 0.50 FTE for Asset Management Specialist 41 Public Participation (Education, Outreach and Involvement) 0011� Level 1: 00 • Review and update existing public education materials as needed Develop materials for one new target audience and subject area annually • Partner with West Sound Stormwater Outreach Group (WSSOG) on implementing social marketing campaigns • Host and/or advertise volunteer events related to stewardship opportunities and provide opportunities for public input • Continue collaborations with local builders' associations and participating in West Sound Partners for Ecosystem Recovery (WSPER) • 0.25 FTE for Education Specialist Level 2: • Develop an education and outreach plan for commercial and private facility owners related to LID principles and practices • Expand the partnership with South Kitsap School District • Additional 0.25 FTE for Education Specialist (0.50 FTE total) Level 3: • Develop materials for two additional target audiences and two additional subject areas annually (three target audiences and three subject areas total when combined with the Level 1 tier) • Create a volunteer stream team • Additional 0.50 FTE for Education Specialist (1.0 FTE total) 42 Pollutant Source Control Level 1: • Update the City's website with pollution control best management practice (BMP) resources • Perform field screening and tracking of illicit connections, illicit discharges, and spills • Continue to implement spill hotline and staff training program • Report illicit discharge data to Ecology using WQWebIDDE • Review and update public education materials gathered by the Business Inspection Group (BIG) to create a basic set of resources for the City's source control program • Provide enhanced source control technical assistances to businesses within the Lower Blackjack Creek Catchment C • 0.25 FTE for Source Control Program Coordinator Level 2: • Increase staff support to screen outfalls on an annual basis • Develop additional public education materials to supplement those gathered by the BIG to create a broader set of resources for the City's source control program 43 Infrastructure Operations & Maintenance Level 1: • Continue to implement a program to verify adequate long-term O&M of stormwater treatment and flow control BMPs/facilities • Use a third -party contractor to conduct private facility inspections • Document inspections and enforcement actions for private stormwater flow control and treatment BMPs/facilities • Perform spot checks and inspections after storms • Inspect catch basins and maintain as needed • Conduct additional outfall inspections • Clean targeted catch basins in Lower Blackjack Creek Catchment C • Continue to implement staff training program Level 2: • Have a dedicated inspector to conduct private facility inspections • Inspect and maintain additional catch basins • 0.50 —1.0 FTE for O&M Technician (0.50 FTE in 2024, 1.0 FTE in 2025-2028) Development Practices Level 1: • Continue to implement stormwater plan review, inspection, and escalating enforcement processes • Refine and improve inspections and enforcement procedures • Conduct annual review of stormwater standards • Continue to implement staff training program • Add engineering capacity to the capital project design team to assist with stormwater retrofit projects and upcoming SMAP implementation • Develop a policy and standards for considering more intense future precipitation and sea level rise in stormwater capital improvement projects • 0.25 FTE for Engineer Level 2: • Have a dedicated inspector to conduct construction inspections • 1.0 FTE for Construction Inspector • Increase engineering capacity for the capital project design team to assist with stormwater retrofit projects and upcoming SMAP implementation • Additional 0.25 FTE for Engineer (0.50 FTE total) Level 3: • Increase engineering capacity for the capital project design team to assist with stormwater retrofit projects and upcoming SMAP implementation • Develop a policy and standards for new and redevelopment projects to design for more intense future precipitation • Additional 0.25 FTE for Engineer (0.75 FTE total) 45 Comprehensive Planning, Administration, and Funding Level 1: • Continue to meet regularly to direct planning, development, 46 and implementation of the City's Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan, SMAP development, and continue to review and implement LID code updates Implement the SMAP activities Prepare annual reports summarizing coordination with long- range planning efforts Annually assess administrative or regulatory barriers to implementation of LID principles or LID BMPs • 0.25 FTE for Planner pro# 14 m rnZ' 0 J 3 City Watersheds The 2019-2024 Permit required the City to conduct watershed planning using a process defined by the permit as "Stormwater Management Action Planning" (SMAP). The SMAP process required the City to view watersheds through the lens of stormwater impacts to receiving water health and actions to protect or improve these water resources. This planning was completed in three distinct steps: • Develop an inventory of watershed characteristics, including water resource conditions, aquatic life and community uses, stormwater influence, and social equity (Herrera 2022a), • Apply a prioritization process to identify the highest priority watershed (Herrera 2022b), and • C letekan "Action Plan" that includes retrofit projects, Gor 'o a�rhe�rthancements, and land marAodWSMtegies, associated costs, and schedule (Appendie�&Qk Coulter Creek The goal of SMAP was t6S, city watershed where investments in stormwatergement are most likely to lead to environmental improveme Ross Creek Ruby Creek 166 Upper QI-% r%iei-% r%ie Artwork at Blackjack Creek estuary Creek Anderson Creek (Gorst) Annapolis Creek Downtown County Campus Gorst Creek Johnson Creek Karcher Creek Lower Blackjack Ross Creek Ruby Creek Stream 270 City Watersheds Continued... Marine nearshore and stream habitat conditions within major watersheds informed the prioritization process (See Table 4 and Figure 9). As a guiding principle, water resources with moderate or good habitat conditions for salmon and nearshore forage fish would benefit from water quality and flow control actions. However, the City also intends to invest in watersheds with poor habitat conditions to alleviate flooding and address water quality issues, where feasible. Good Good Poor Poor Fair Good Poor Good Poor Good Good Good Fair Fair Good Fair fr Good Good Good Fair Fair Poor Good AN Fair Good Poo *NA = Not Applicable, * = City lands within Ruby Creek and Stream 270 Watersheds are not directly connected to the marine nearshore Good Poor Good Fair Fair Good NA* Good NA Figure 7. Nearshore and Major Watershed Stream 50 Habitat Condition -1 Legend Port Orchard City Limit - Waterbody Minor Watershed Roads Nearshore Habitat Condition Good o Fair Poor Major Watershed Stream Habitat Condition Good Fair Poor Gorst Cree Coulter Creek Rocky Creek Johnson Creek Melcher Creek Sinclair Inlet W w Sacco Creek A napol Cree .ower ickreek k ' ;reek � Karcher Creek 1 51 Lower Blackjack Creek Watershed Lower Blackjack Creek watershed was selected as the highest priority watershed based on the following characteristics: • High receiving water use, including use by multiple salmonid species • Moderate level of development and future growth • Good water quality and habitat condition • Higher jurisdiction control • Promotes other plans and projects, most notably the Blackjack Creek Watershed Assessment and Restoration Plan (ESA 2017). Upon review with City staff, Catchment C (Figure 8) in the watershed was selected for the SMAP (Appendix C). The selected catchment was chosen due to the greater concentration of older development for retrofit opportunities. Above: Blackjack Creek Floodplain Right: Figure 8. City of Port Orchard Lower Blackjack Creek Catchment C 52 i r ' Legend QCatchment E 0 Waterbody Stream 53 This section presents detailed information on implementing the recommended surface water and stormwater program activities presented in Stormwater Management Program Evaluation and Recommendations section and the capital projects described in Capital Improvement Program section. The major components of plan implementation include the completion of CIP projects, addressing staffing and resource needs, interdepartmental collaboration, interagency collaboration, and utility finances. CIP Plan Implementation The CIP projects are described in the Capital Improvement Program section and additional details on each project can be found in the project summary sheets (Appendix B). Table 5 presents an implementation schedule that aligns with the Level 1 level of service. Additional levels of services, which implement some CIP projects on accelerated schedules, are included in Appendix B. This schedule balances project priority, project complexity, and coordination with other projects. Capital projects are reviewed regularly by the City and the implementation schedule shown in Table 5 is subject to change based on evolving regulatory requirements, City priorities, and available resources. 54 Annapolis Creek Culvert Replacement $400,000 $800,000 South Sidney Regional Facility Downtown Basin Stormwater Upgrades Ruby Creek Culvert Replacement Johnson Creek Estuary Restoration Ongoing Conveyance System Improvement Program SE Salmonberry Road, Lower Blackjack Creek Culvert Retrofit South Blackjack Creek Floodplain Restoration South Blackjack Creek Culvert Removal and Bridge Installation Central Sidney Stormwater Improvements Anderson Creek Culvert Replacement J $700,000 $2,800,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $1,760,000 $1,100,000 $982,000 $400,000 $1,200,000 a All costs are in 2022 dollars. b In 2023, $100,000 in capital funding is scheduled for Ongoing Conveyance System Improvement Program. °The projects listed in the `out years' column are scheduled after the six year planning period. $2,500,000 $13,000,000 $300,000 $7,000,00% $1,600,000■ $4,000,0A 55 Staffing and Funding Needs Under the current level of staffing, City staff can address surface water and stormwater problems that arise on a daily basis and troubleshoot specific issues that arise with development project reviews. However, they are not fully able to perform activities that would enable continual improvement of the City's stormwater management program. Current staffing levels will not be adequate to meet the rest of the requirements of the 2019-2024 Phase II Permit and make progress towards long-term goals defined as part of this Plan. The activities listed in the Stormwater Management Program Evaluation section of the Plan will require additional staffing and funding. Below are the number of full time equivalents (FTEs) and funding that are recommended for each level of service (see Figure 11 and Tables 6 and 7). Additional staffing and funding will be needed in Level 2 to support the City's source control, private facility inspection, education and outreach, asset management, and 0&M programs. In addition to the staffing and funding needed for Level 2, Level 3 includes an increase in education and outreach, and capital planning support. It should be noted that these recommendations start in 2023, but no new staffing and funding is included in the financial analysis for 2023. Refer to the Financial Analysis section for further information about the rate impacts of implementing the levels of service. Detailed estimates of staffing and funding needs can be found in Appendix A. 56 Figure 9. Levels of Service and Full Time Equivalents. "I co Cn 4 m cc 3 C7 w m 2 U- 1 0 Level - Level - Level 2023a 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 Year a No new staffing in 2023 is included in the financial analysis Year Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Tier 1 2023a 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 TotalLevel 2 FWAM .. 0!"1 Ah M 4.04 4.70 5.51 Level 1 Total $10,000 $10,000 $60,000 $10,000 $10,000 Level 2 To $30,000 M$30,00dj $60,000 `$10,001 $10,000 $30,000 $ 30,000 $60,000 10,000 $110,000 a No new staffing in 2023 is included in the financial analysis ° No new funding in 2023 is included in the financial analysis $110,000 $150,000 $250,000 57 Financial Analysis The activities and projects listed in this section would be funded primarily by revenue from the storm drainage utility. A financial analysis was conducted to define utility rate adjustments that are necessary to implement the levels of service listed in this Plan. During the financial analysis, the City evaluated the regulatory needs and stormwater-related issues facing the City to find a balance between level of service and increased utility rates. Table 8 includes the monthly rate per impervious surface unit (ISU) for the six -year planning period by level of service and the change (increase) from the previous year's monthly rate. An ISU is defined as one residential unit or 3,000 impervious square feet on non-residential parcels (e.g., commercial, multi -family). The full utility rate study report is included in Appendix D. The report documents assumptions for programmatic and capital project implementation for all three levels of service and includes monthly rates per ISU for years 2023 to 2041. revel1 $14.00 $16.94 $20.50 $24.80 $25.55 $26.31 Change to Monthly Rate $2.94 $3.56 $4.30 $0.75 $0.76 Level $14.00 $18.34 $24.03 $31.47 $32.42 $33.39 Change to Monthly Rate $4.34 $5.69 $7.44 $0.95 $0.97 111111=_ IIM� a $14.00 7 T$29.64 r $43.12 $44.42 $45.75 Change to Monthly Rate $9.27 $13.48 $1.30 $1.33 The City is interested in considering a capital facilities charge (CFC) for stormwater, which would recover a proportionate share of the cost of existing and future system assets from new customers as growth occurs. The City already has CFCs for water and wastewater utilities. Table 9 presents the maximum defensible CFC that can be implemented by the City for each level of service. City Council could opt to adopt a lower CFC than shown in Table 9. .ram A'• Rk ram..;: •� " !� � a � �� 19 01 y - . ��.. d: .l ��'i r r bhp . .� • C Table 9. Capital Facility Charge by Level of Service Level of Service Capital Facility Charge Level 3 Image from Kitsap Conservation District Linkages to Other City Programs Interdepartmental Collaboration The City's stormwater management program is led by staff in the Public Works Department. Plan implementation will require contributions from staff in the Public Works Operations and Maintenance, Engineering, Community Development, and Finance departments. Interagency Collaboration To address ongoing regional efforts, the City should continue to work with regional stakeholder groups and local governments in shared drainage basins to manage and treat stormwater effectively. Below are agencies and regional programs related to implementing program elements. Comprehensive Stormwater Planning • Coordinating with the Cities of Bremerton, Bainbridge Island, Poulsbo, and Kitsap County on the Dyes/Sinclair Inlets Fecal Coliform TMDL Implementation Plan • Coordinating with the City of Bremerton, Kitsap County, and Pierce County on potential future Stormwater Management Action Planning for shared drainage basins Public Education and Public Involvement • Coordinating with the West Sound Stormwater Outreach Group (WSSOG) on regional messaging and programs • Coordinating with the Kitsap Conservation District on potential future efforts including the homeowner rain garden cost share program • Coordinating with the South Kitsap School District on a school stormwater curriculum and field visits Capital Improvement Projects and Programs • Coordinating with the Suquamish Tribe and other relevant tribes on review of salmon habitat projects • Coordinating with the West Sound Partners for Regional Recovery on prioritization of regional salmon habitat projects • Coordinating with the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife on review of projects and their impacts to fish habitat • Coordinating with the Washington State Department of Transportation on City projects adjacent to state lands • Coordinating with Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council on regional transportation and land use decisions • Coordinating with Puget Sound Regional Council on transportation, growth management, and economic development .• Pursuit of Outside Funding All of the CIP projects identified in this Plan are eligible for outside funding. The City should pursue state grants for stormwater retrofit projects; habitat, fish passage, and floodplain improvement grants for culvert, floodplain, and estuary projects; and low interest loans for capital projects that are purely conveyance improvements. kill' xe zo 61 REFERENCES Ecology. 2019. Western Washington Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit. State of Washington Department of Ecology. Olympia, Washington 98504-7600. Issuance Date: July 1, 2019. ESA. 2017. Blackjack Creek Watershed Restoration Assessment and Protection and Restoration Plan. Prepared for Suquamish Tribe and Washington Department of Ecology, by ESA Consultants, Seattle, Washington. Mauger, Guillaume. 2017. Climate Change and Stormwater. Climate Impacts Group, University of Washington. 1-25. Kitsap County. 2021. Buildable Lands Report, Kitsap County, Washington. FINAL. https://www.kitsapgov.com/dcd/PEP%20 Documents/FINAL%20Buildable%20Lands%2OReport— November%202021.pdf Kitsap Regional Coordination Council. February 15, 2022. Land Use Planning Policy Committee Meeting. <https:// static1.squarespace.com/static/5660ba88e4bOe83ffe8O32fc/ t/6205bOf793b6a1302e7c8f41/1644540153978/ KRCC+P1anPOL+Feb+15+2022+Meeting+Packet.pdf. > Herrera. 2022a. City of Port Orchard Watershed Inventory and Assessment — Technical Memorandum. Prepared for the City of Port Orchard by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Seattle, Washington. March 21.< https://portorchardwa.gov/documents/ port -orchard -watershed -inventory/> Herrera. 2022b. City of Port Orchard Watershed Prioritization — Technical Memorandum. Prepared for the City of Port Orchard by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Seattle, Washington. June 22. < https://portorchardwa.gov/documents/port-orchard-watershed- prioritization/ > 62 Herrera. 2022c. City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Program Evaluation and Recommendations. Prepared for the City of Port Orchard by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Seattle, Washington. February 24. Herrera. 2020. Port Orchard Shoreline Master Program Update. Prepared for the City of Port Orchard, by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc., Seattle, Washington. OFM. 2022. Population of Cities, Towns and Counties Used for Allocation of Selected State Revenues State of Washington. <https:// ofm.wa.gov/site s/default/files/public/dataresearch/pop/april l/ofm— april l_population—final.pdf> Puget Sound Regional Council. 2020. Vision 2050 A Plan for the Central Puget Sound Region. Puget Sound Regional Council, Seattle, Washington. Adoption Date: October 29, 2020. < https://www.psrc. org/sites/default/files/2022-02/vision-2050-plan%20%281%29.pdf > Port Orchard. 2020. Blackjack Creek Floodplain Restoration Project Engineering Design Plans. 2020. Port Orchard, Washington. Port Orchard and Makers Architecture and Urban Design. 2022. Ruby Creek Subarea Plan. Port Orchard, Washington. Adoption Date: September 22, 2022. < https:Hstorage.googleapis.com/ proudcity/portorchardwa/uploads/2020/09/FINAL-ADOPTED-Ruby- Creek-Neighborhood-Subarea-Plan-09222020-1.pdf > Reid Middleton. 2018. 2018 Annapolis Creek Culvert Replacement — 30% Design & Permitting Coordination Report, Prepared for the City of Port Orchard by Reid Middleton, Inc., Everett, Washington. Reid Middleton. 2020. Downtown Basin Stormwater Plan, Prepared for the City of Port Orchard by Reid Middleton, Inc., Everett, Washington. 63 APPENDIX A Stormwater Management Program Staffing and Funding Recommendations December 2022 HERRERA City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan Table A-1. Recommended Activities for Stormwater Planning. Funding Staff Hours I One-Timea Ongoing Staff Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Recommendation Staff Support Assumptions Funding Support Funding (hours/ FTE` (hours) 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 year) Level 1 The interdisciplinary team will continue to meet regularly to direct planning, development, and implementation of the City's Stormwater and Watersheds Interdisciplinary team $0 0 $0 0 0 Comprehensive Plan, SMAP development, and continue to review and implement LID code updates. Assumes funding and staff support would be included with the current level of storm drainage utility funding. (Ongoing) Prepare report summarizing coordination with long-range planning efforts. Long-range planning $0 0 $0 0 0 Assumes funding and staff support would be included with the current level of storm drainage utility funding. (Due January 2023) The City will continue to annually assess whether any administrative or regulatory barriers to implementation of LID principles or LID BMPs were identified. Assumes LID code review $0 0 $10,000 40 0.023 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 40 40 40 40 40 40 $10,000 of consultant support and 40 staff hours annually. (Ongoing starting 2023) Receiving water assessment $0 0 $0 0 0 Receiving water assessment has been completed. (Due March 2022) Receiving water prioritization $0 0 $0 0 0 Receiving water prioritization has been completed. (Due June 2022) Prepare a Stormwater Management Action Plan (SMAP) for one high priority area. Assumes funding has already been set aside for this work and staff support would SMAP $0 0 $0 0 0 be included with the current level of storm drainage utility funding. (Due March 2023) Implement the SMAP. Assumes 0.25 FTE of staff time will be needed starting in SMAP implementation $0 0 $0 442 0.25 442 442 442 2026 to carry out activities defined in the SMAP. Level 1 Total $0 0 $10,000 482 0.27 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 40 40 40 482 482 482 Level 2 All activities from Level 1 $0 0 $10,000 482 0.27 Same assumptions as Level 1. $10,000 $10,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 40 40 40 482 482 482 Level 2 Total $0 0 $10,000 482 0.27 $10,000 $10,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 40 40 40 482 482 482 Level 3 All activities from Level 2 $0 0 $10,000 482 0.27 Same assumptions as Level 2. $10,000 1 $10,000 1 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 40 40 40 482 482 482 Level 3 Total $0 0 $10,000 482 0.27 $10,000 1 $10,000 1 $ 10,0001 $ 10,000 1 $ 10,0001 $ 10,000 1 40 1 40 1 40 1 482 1 482 1482 a One-time activities are completed once, such as hiring a consultant to develop new training materials b Ongoing activities occur every year, such as continuing an inspection program or annual review of procedures FTE, or Full-time equivalent staff, assumes 1,768 hours worked per year for one full-time staff member City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan October 2022 Table A-2. Recommended Activities for Public Education and Outreach. Funding Staff Hours One-Timea Ongoing Staff Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Recommendation Staff Support Assumptions Funding Support Funding (hours/ FTE` (hours) 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2023 2024 2025 2026 F2027 2028 year) Level 1 Review and update existing public education materials as needed. Develop General awareness public education $0 0 $0 221 0.125 materials for one new target audience and one new subject area annually. Assumes 221 221 221 221 221 221 materials 0.125 FTE of staff time will be needed starting in 2023. (Ongoing) Add additional Mutt Mitt pet waste pick up stations and conduct outreach within Lower Blackjack Creek Catchment to align with the SMAP. Outreach topics include SMAP outreach $0 80 $0 80 0.05 private property stormwater impacts, stormwater practices, tree preservation, and 80 80 80 80 wetland buffers. Assumes 0.05 FTE of staff time will be needed starting in 2024. (Onaoina startin 2024 Evaluate behavior change program $0 0 $0 0 0 Evaluation of the Mutt Mitt program has been completed. (Due July 2020) Partner with WSSOG on implementing a natural lawn care social marketing Implement social marketing for campaign as a behavior enhancement in attempt to reduce the use of chemical $0 80 $0 0 0 40 40 existing program lawn treatments from 2021-2023. Assumes 80 hours total of additional staff time needed for implementation in 2023. (Ongoing through 2023) Summarize the changes in understanding and adoption of targeted behaviors Report behavior changes $0 160 $0 0 0 related to the behavior change program. Assumes 80 hours of additional staff time 80 80 needed in 2023 and 2024. (Due March 2024). Continue to host and/or advertise volunteer events related to stewardship Continue stewardship opportunities $0 0 $0 221 0.125 opportunities (shoreline cleanups and rain gardens). Assumes 0.125 FTE of staff 221 221 221 221 221 221 time will be needed starting in 2023. (Ongoing) Level 1 Total $0 320 $0 522 0.3 $ $ $ $ $ $ 562 562 522 522 522 522 Level 2 All activities from Level 1 $0 320 $0 522 0.3 Same assumptions as Level 1. $ $ $ $ $ $ 562 562 522 522 522 522 Develop education and outreach materials for commercial and private facility Develop LID outreach materials $20,000 80 $0 0 0 owners related to LID principles and practices. Assumes $20,000 of consultant $ 20,000 80 support and 80 hours of staff support in 2024. (Complete in 2024). Expand the public education program by creating two additional stewardship opportunities and including field demonstrations/ interactive monitoring in the Expand stewardship opportunities $0 0 $0 442 0.25 442 442 442 442 442 442 partnership with South Kitsap School District. Assumes 0.25 FTE of staff time will be needed starting in 2023. (Ongoing starting 2023) Level 2 Total $20,000 400 $0 964 1 0.55 $ $ 20,000 $ 1 $ 1 $ 1 $ 1004 1 1084 1 964 1 964 1 964 1 964 Level 3 All activities from Level 2 $20,000 400 $0 964 0.55 Same assumptions as Level 2. $ $ 20,000 $ $ $ $ 1004 1084 964 964 964 964 Develop materials for two additional target audiences and two additional subject Develop new general awareness $0 0 $0 442 0.25 areas annually. Assumes 0.25 FTE of staff time will be needed starting in 2023. 442 442 442 442 442 442 public education materials (Ongoing starting 2023) Create a volunteer stream team for the City that would be trained on monitoring activities such as B-IBI sampling, and habitat/invasive species monitoring and Expand stewardship opportunities $0 0 $0 442 0.25 442 442 442 442 442 442 management. Assumes 0.25 FTE of staff time will be needed starting in 2023. (Ongoing starting 2023) Level 3 Total $20,000 400 $0 1848 1 1.05 1 1 $ $ 20,000 $ $ $ $ 1,888 1,968 1,848 1,848 1,848 1,848 a One-time activities are completed once, such as hiring a consultant to develop new training materials b Ongoing activities occur every year, such as continuing an inspection program or annual review of procedures ` FTE, or Full-time equivalent staff, assumes 1,768 hours worked per year for one full-time staff member City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan October 2022 Table A-3. Recommended Activities for Public Involvement and Participation. Funding Staff Hours I One-Timea Ongoing Staff Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Recommendation Staff Support Assumptions Funding Support Funding (hours/ FTE` (hours) 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 I year) Level 1 Continue collaborations with local builders' associations related to permit changes and stormwater issues. Continue participation in WSPER, WREC, WSSOG and Collaborate with local stakeholders $0 0 $0 0 0 expanding ways to reach and involve overburdened communities. Assumes funding and staff support would be included with the current level of storm drainage utility funding. (Ongoing) Continue to post SWMP and latest Annual Report on City's website. Assumes Post SWMP Plan and Annual Report $0 0 $0 0 0 funding and staff support would be included with the current level of SWM funding. (Ongoing) Level 1 Total $0 0 $0 0 0 $ $ $ $ $ $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 Level 2 All activities from Level 1 $0 0 $0 1 0 1 0 Same assumptions as Level 1. Level 2 Total $0 0 $0 0 1 0 $ $ $ $ $ $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 Level 3 All activities from Level 2 $0 0 $0 1 0 1 0 ISame assumptions as Level 2. 1 Level 3 Total $0 0 $0 1 0 1 0 1 $ $ $ $ $ - $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 a One-time activities are completed once, such as hiring a consultant to develop new training materials b Ongoing activities occur every year, such as continuing an inspection program or annual review of procedures FTE, or Full-time equivalent staff, assumes 1,768 hours worked per year for one full-time staff member City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan October 2022 Table A-4. Recommended Activities for MS4 Mapping and Documentation. Funding Staff Hours One -Times Ongoing Staff Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Recommendation Staff Support Assumptions Funding Support Funding (hours/ FTE` (hours) 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 year) Level 1 Continue to update the City's MS4 map on an ongoing basis. Assume 0.25 FTE Ongoing map updates $0 0 $0 442 0.25 additional staff time needed starting in 2023 to manage additions and updates to 442 442 442 442 442 442 stormwater mapping. (Ongoing) Locate and map additional outfalls. Assumes 40 hours total of additional staff time Locate and map additional outfalls $0 40 $0 0 0 40 needed to find and document outfalls. (Complete by 2024) Continue to collect size and material data for known MS4 outfalls during the normal course of inspections and maintenance and update records. Assumes Map outfall attributes $0 0 $0 0 0 funding and staff support would be included with the current level of storm drainage utility funding. (Ongoing) Continue to map all known connections from the MS4 to a privately owned Map known private connections $0 0 $0 0 0 stormwater system. Assumes funding and staff support would be included with the current level of storm drainage utility funding. (Due August 2023) Map new private connections when as-builts are received. Assumes funding and Continue to maintain electronic maps $0 0 $0 0 0 staff support would be included with the current level of storm drainage utility funding. (Ongoing) Levell Total $0 40 $0 442 0.25 $ $ $ - $ $ - $ 442 482 442 442 442 442 Level 2 All activities from Level 1 $0 40 $0 442 0.25 Same assumptions as Level 1. $ $ $ $ $ $ 442 482 442 442 442 442 Work with consultant to select a computerized maintenance management system Implement computerized (CMMS) and implement the CMMS. Assume that funding for consultant (and staff $0 0 $0 884 0.50 884 884 884 884 884 884 maintenance management system time to manage the consultant) is already in place and 0.5 FTE is needed to implement and manage the CMMS starting in 2023. (Ongoing) Level 2 Total $0 40 $0 1,326 1 0.75 $ $ $ $ $ $ 1,326 1,366 1,326 1,326 1,326 1,326 Level 3 All activities from Level 2 $0 40 $0 1 1,326 1 0.75 ISame assumptions as Level 2. $ $ $ - $ $ - $ 1,326 1,366 1,326 1,326 1,326 1,326 Level 3 Total $0 40 $0 1 1,326 1 0.75 $ $ $ - $ $ - $ 1,326 1,366 1,326 1,326 1,326 1,326 a One-time activities are completed once, such as hiring a consultant to develop new training materials b Ongoing activities occur every year, such as continuing an inspection program or annual review of procedures ` FTE, or Full-time equivalent staff, assumes 1,768 hours worked per year for one full-time staff member City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan October 2022 Table A-5. Recommended Activities for Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination. Funding Staff Hours I One -Times Ongoing Staff Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Recommendation Staff Support Assumptions Funding Support Funding (hours/ FTE` (hours) 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 year) Level 1 Continue to update the City's website with pollution control BMP resources. Post pollution control BMP resources $0 0 $0 0 0 Assumes funding and staff support would be included with the current level of storm drainage utility funding. (Ongoing) Continue field screening for illicit connections and illicit discharges. Assumes Field screening $0 0 $0 0 0 funding and staff support would be included with the current level of storm drainage utility funding. (Ongoing) Continue to implement staff training program. Assumes funding and staff support Staff training program $0 0 $0 0 0 would be included with the current level of storm drainage utility funding. (Ongoing) Continue to respond to spills and water quality complaints. Assumes funding and Source tracing/respond to spills and $0 0 $0 0 0 staff support would be included with the current level of storm drainage utility water quality complaints funding. (Ongoing) Report illicit discharge data to Ecology using WQWebIDDE. Assumes funding and Report to Ecology $0 0 $0 0 0 staff support would be included with the current level of storm drainage utility funding. (Ongoing) Level 1 Total $0 0 $0 0 0 $ $ $ $ $ $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 Level 2 All activities from Level 1 $0 0 $0 0 0 Same assumptions as Level 1. $ $ $ $ - $ $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 Integrate IDDE tasks into the computerized maintenance management system Integrate IDDE into computerized $0 0 $0 0 0 (CMMS). Assume this work will be performed by staff implementing the CMMS maintenance management system (see Table B-4), so no additional staff time needed. Level 2 Total $0 0 $0 0 0 $ $ $ $ $ $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 Level 3 All activities from Level 2 $0 0 $0 1 0 1 0 ISame assumptions as Level 2. $ $ $ $ $ $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 Level 3 Total $0 0 $0 0 0 $ $ $ $ $ $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 a One-time activities are completed once, such as hiring a consultant to develop new training materials b Ongoing activities occur every year, such as continuing an inspection program or annual review of procedures FTE, or Full-time equivalent staff, assumes 1,768 hours worked per year for one full-time staff member City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan October 2022 Table A-6. Recommended Activities for Controlling Runoff from New Development, Redevelopment, and Construction Sites. Funding Staff Hours One -Timed Ongoing Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Staff Recommendation Staff Support Assumptions Funding Support Funding (hours/ FTE` (hours) 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2023F24 2025 2026 2027 2028 year) Level 1 The Port Orchard Municipal Code (POMC) update to adopt Ecology's 2019 Ordinance $0 0 $0 0 0 SWMMWW has been completed. (Due June 30, 2022) Continue to implement stormwater plan review program. Assumes funding and Stormwater plan review $0 0 $0 0 0 staff support (including the recent new hire) would be included with the current level of storm drainage utility funding. (Ongoing) I Conduct a review of stormwater standards on an annual basis. Assumes 0.02 FTE Stormwater standards review $0 0 $0 40 0.02 40 40 40 40 40 of staff time will be needed starting in 2024. (Ongoing starting 2024) Refine and improve the stormwater plan review, inspection, and escalating enforcement processes. Assumes funding and staff support (including the recent Permit tracking system $0 0 $0 0 0 new hire) would be included with the current level of storm drainage utility fundin (Ongoing) Provide training opportunities for inspection practices, recordkeeping, and erosion control, update the staff training plan as needed, and improve record Staff training program $0 0 $0 0 0 keeping/documentation of training for City staff. Assumes funding and staff support would be included with the current level of storm drainage utility funding. (Ongoing) Level 1 Total $0 0 $0 40 0 $ $ $ $ $ $ 0 40 40 40 40 40 Level 2 All activities from Level 1 $0 0 $0 40 0 Same assumptions as Level 1. $ $ $ $ $ $ 40 40 40 40 40 Hire a dedicated stormwater inspector (1 FTE starting in 2024) to assist with Construction inspections $0 0 $0 1,768 1.00 1,768 1,768 1,768 1,768 1,768 construction inspections. (Ongoing) Level 2 Total $0 0 $0 1,808 1.02 $ $ $ $ $ $ 0 1,808 1,808 1,808 1,808 1,808 Level 3 All activities from Level 2 $0 0 $0 1 1,808 1 1.02 ISame assumptions as Level 2. $ $ $ $ $ $ 1,808 1,808 1,808 1,808 1,808 Level 3 Total $0 0 $0 1 1,808 1 1.02 1 $ $ $ $ $ $ 0 1,808 1,808 1,808 1,808 1,808 a One-time activities are completed once, such as hiring a consultant to develop new training materials b Ongoing activities occur every year, such as continuing an inspection program or annual review of procedures ` FTE, or Full-time equivalent staff, assumes 1,768 hours worked per year for one full-time staff member City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan October 2022 Table A-7. Recommended Activities for Operations and Maintenance. Funding Staff Hours One- Timea Ongoing Staff Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Recommendation Staff Support Assumptions Funding Support Funding (hours/ FTE` (hours) 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 L 2023 2024 2025 T 2026 2027 2028 year) Level 1 Continue implement private facility inspectors via a third -party contractor. Private facility inspections $0 0 $0 0 0 Assumes funding and staff support would be included with the current level of storm drainage utility funding. (Ongoing) Maintenance SOPS $0 0 $0 0 0 Stand-alone SOPS, to address the practices, policies, and procedures listed in the NPDES permit, have been developed. (Due December 2022) Continue to annually inspect and maintain municipally owned or operated Public facility inspections and stormwater treatment and flow control BMPs/facilities according to permit $0 0 $0 0 0 maintenance conditions. Assumes funding and staff support would be included with the current level of storm drainage utility funding. (Ongoing) Continue to implement spot checks and inspections after major storms. Spot checks $0 0 $0 0 0 Assumes funding and staff support would be included with the current level of SWM funding. (Ongoing) Continue to inspect catch basins and maintain as needed. Assumes funding and Catch basin inspections $0 0 $0 0 0 staff support would be included with the current level of storm drainage utility funding. (Ongoing) Continue to implement training programs for staff whose work could impact O&M training $0 0 $0 0 0 stormwater. Assumes funding and staff support would be included with the current level of storm drainage utility funding. (Ongoing) Inspect additional outfalls. Assumes locating and mapping outfalls process is Outfall inspections $0 200 $0 0 0 complete and 200 hours total of additional staff time needed to inspect the 200 outfalls in 2025. (Complete in 2025) Clean targeted catch basins in the Lower Blackjack Creek Catchment to align Catch basin cleanings $0 0 $0 120 0.07 with the SMAP. Assumes 0.07 FTE of staff time will be needed starting in 2024. 120 120 120 120 120 l(Ongoing starting 2024) Continue to conduct annual SWPPP inspections. Assumes funding and staff Conduct annual SWPPP $0 0 $0 0 0 support would be included with the current level of storm drainage utility inspections funding. (Ongoing) Conduct and document SWPPP training for staff. Assumes funding and staff SWPPP training $0 0 $0 0 0 support would be included with the current level of storm drainage utility funding. (Ongoing) Level 1 Total $0 200 $0 120 1 0.07 $ $ $ $ $ $ 0 120 320 120 120 120 Level 2 All activities from Level 1 $0 200 $0 120 0.07 Same assumptions as Level 1. $ $ $ $ $ $ 120 320 120 120 120 Private facility inspections $0 0 $0 884 0.50 Add 0.25 FTE in 2024 and increase to 0.5 FTE total in 2026 to implement private 442 442 884 884 facility inspections with City inspectors. (Ongoing) Catch basin inspections $0 0 $0 884 1 0.50 Add 0.5 FTE in 2024 to support catch basin inspection and cleaning. (Ongoing) 884 884 884 884 884 Level 2 Total $0 200 $0 1,888 1 1.1 $ $ $ $ $ $ 0 1004 1,646 1,446 7888 1,888 Level 3 All activities from Level 2 $0 200 $0 1,888 1.1 Same assumptions as Level 2. $ $ $ $ $ $ 1004 1,646 1,446 1,888 1,888 Level 3 Total $0 200 -4 $0 1,888 1.1 $ $ $ $ $ $ 0 1004 1,646 1,446 1,888 1,888 a One-time activities are completed once, such as hiring a consultant to develop new training materials b Ongoing activities occur every year, such as continuing an inspection program or annual review of procedures `FTE, or Full-time equivalent staff, assumes 1,768 hours worked per year for one full-time staff member City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan October 2022 Table A-8. Recommended Activities for Source Control Program for Existing Development. Funding Staff Hours I One -Times Ongoing Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 St aff Recommendation Staff St Support Assumptions Funding Support Funding (hours/ FTE` (hours) 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 year) Level 1 The City's Stormwater Ordinance to address source control program and Ordinance $0 0 $0 0 0 enforcement has been developed. (Due August 2022) Source control inventory $0 0 $0 0 0 The City's initial source control inventory has been developed. (Due August 2022) Review and update public education materials gathered by the Business Inspection Review/update public education Group (BIG) to create a basic set of resources for the City's source control $0 0 $0 40 0.02 40 40 40 40 40 40 materials program. Assumes ongoing staff support of 40 hours per year starting in 2023 to update materials. (Ongoing) Conduct annual source control inspections on 20% of the businesses and/or properties included in the updated source control inventory. Prioritize inspections Source control inspections $0 0 $0 280 0.16 in the Lower Blackjack Creek Catchment to align with the SMAP. Assumes 0.16 FTE 280 280 280 280 280 280 will be needed to implement the inspection program (total staff need for Source Control will be 0.25 FTE). (Ongoing starting in 2023) Investigate sites identified through legitimate complaints. Assumes approximately Investigate complaints $0 0 $0 40 0.02 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 hours of staff support needed annually. (Ongoing starting January 2023) Ongoing maintenance of inspection records and enforcement documentation. Source control recordkeeping $0 0 $0 80 0.05 Assumes 80 hours of staff support needed annually starting in 2023 to implement 80 80 80 80 80 80 recordkeeping system. (Ongoing) Provide enhanced source control technical assistances to businesses within the Enhanced business source control $0 0 $0 40 0.02 Lower Blackjack Creek Catchment. Assumes 0.02 FTE of staff time will be needed 40 40 40 40 40 technical assistance starting in 2024. (Ongoing starting 2024) Conduct and document source control training for staff. Assumes funding and staff Staff training program $0 0 $0 0 0 support would be included with the current level of storm drainage utility funding. (Ongoing starting in 2023) Level 1 Total $0 0 $0 480 0.27 $ $ $ $ $ $ 440 480 480 480 480 480 Level 2 All activities from Level 1 $0 0 $0 480 0.27 Same assumptions as Level 1. $ $ $ $ $ $ 440 480 480 480 480 480 Develop additional public education materials to supplement those gathered by the BIG and developed as part of Level 1 to create a broader set of resources for Develop additional public education $20,000 0 $0 40 0.02 the City's source control program. Assumes $20,000 of consultant support in 2023 $ 20,000 40 40 40 40 40 materials and ongoing staff support of 40 hours per year starting in 2024 to update 1 materials. (Ongoing) Level 2 Total $20,000 0 $0 520 0.29 $ 20,000 $ $ $ $ $ 440 520 520 520 520 520 Level 3 All activities from Level 2 $20,000 0 $0 1 520 1 0.29 ISame assumptions as Level 2. $ 20,000 1 $ $ $ $ $ 440 520 520 520 520 520 Level 3 Total $20,000 0 $0 1 520 1 0.29 1 $ 20,000 It $ $ $ $ 440 520 520 520 520 520 a One-time activities are completed once, such as hiring a consultant to develop new training materials b Ongoing activities occur every year, such as continuing an inspection program or annual review of procedures ` FTE, or Full-time equivalent staff, assumes 1,768 hours worked per year for one full-time staff member City of Part Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan October 2022 Table A-9. Recommended Activities for Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDQ Requirements. Funding Staff Hours One-Timea Ongoing Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Staff Recommendation Staff Support Assumptions Funding Support Funding (hours/ FTE` (hours) 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 year) Level 1 Prioritize IDDE screening in areas discharging to Sinclair Inlet via Blackjack, Annapolis, and Karcher Creeks and to shorelines (2021-2023). Assumes funding and IDDE screening in high priority areas $0 0 $0 0 0 staff support would be included with the current level of storm drainage utility funding. (Continue into 2023) Develop a Pollution Prevention Control Plan (QAPP equivalent) to monitor stream health and provide water quality status updates by the end of 2023. Assume cost to Pollution Prevention Control Plan and $0 0 $0 442 0.25 prepare Pollution Prevention Control Plan is included with the current level of storm 442 442 442 442 442 442 ongoing monitoring drainage utility funding, but that implementation in 2023 and beyond would require 0.25 FTE staff support. (End of 2023 for Plan; Ongoing for monitoring) Level 1 Total $0 0 $0 442 0.25 $ $ $ $ $ $ 442 442 442 442 442 442 Level 2 All activities from Level 1 $0 0 $0 442 0.25 Same assumptions as Level 1. $ $ $ $ $ $ 442 442 442 442 442 442 Level 2 Total $0 0 $0 442 0.25 $ - $ $ $ - $ $ - 442 442 442 442 442 442 Level 3 All activities from Level 2 $0 0 $0 1 442 1 0.25 ISame assumptions as Level 2. $ $ $ $ $ $ 442 442 442 442 442 442 Level 3 Total $0 0 $0 1 442 1 0.25 1 $ - $ $ $ $ $ - 442 442 442 442 442 442 a One-time activities are completed once, such as hiring a consultant to develop new training materials b Ongoing activities occur every year, such as continuing an inspection program or annual review of procedures FTE, or Full-time equivalent staff, assumes 1,768 hours worked per year for one full-time staff member City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan October 2022 Table A-10. Recommended Activities for Monitoring and Assessment. Funding Staff Hours I One-Timea Ongoing Staff Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Recommendation Staff Support Assumptions Funding Support Funding (hours/ FTE` (hours) 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 year) Level 1 The City should continue to pay into the Regional Status and Trends Monitoring at the annual contribution amount specified in Appendix 11 of the 2019-2024 Regional status and trends $0 0 $0 0 0 permit. This is already included in the annual budget. The City should also seek monitoring opportunities to participate with Kitsap County and other local jurisdictions in an integrated and coordinated monitoring assessment program. The City should continue to pay into the Regional Effectiveness Studies and Effectiveness studies and source Source Identification Studies at the annual contribution amount specified in $0 0 $0 0 0 identification studies Appendix 11 of the 2019-2024 permit. This is already included in the annual budget. The City will continue to implement monitoring required by TMDLs (see Table B-9 TMDL requirements $0 0 $0 0 0 for funding and staffing). $ $ $ $ - $ $ - 0 0 0 0 0 0 Level 1 Total $0 0 $0 0 0 Level 2 All activities from Level 1 $0 0 $0 1 0 1 0 Same assumptions as Level 1. $ $ $ $ $ - $ Level 2 Total $0 0 $0 0 0 $ $ $ $ - $ $ - 0 0 0 0 0 0 Level 3 All activities from Level 2 $0 0 $0 1 0 1 0 Same assumptions as Level 2. $ $ $ $ $ - $ Level 3 Total $0 0 $0 0 0 $ $ $ $ - $ $ - 0 0 0 0 0 0 a One-time activities are completed once, such as hiring a consultant to develop new training materials b Ongoing activities occur every year, such as continuing an inspection program or annual review of procedures FTE, or Full-time equivalent staff, assumes 1,768 hours worked per year for one full-time staff member City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan October 2022 Table A-11. Recommended Activities for Reporting. Funding Staff Hours I One-Timea Ongoing Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Staff Recommendation Staff Support Assumptions Funding Support Funding (hours/ FTE` (hours) 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 year) Level 1 Continue to update the SWMP plan and answer the Annual Report questions each Annual report and SWMP plan $0 0 $0 0 0 year. Assumes funding and staff support would be included with the current level updates of storm drainage utility funding. (Due March 31 st each year) Continue retaining records for a minimum of 5 years. Assumes funding and staff Record keeping $0 0 $0 0 0 support would be included with the current level of storm drainage utility funding. (Ongoing) Level 1 Total $0 0 $0 0 0 $ $ $ $ $ $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 Level 2 All activities from Level 1 $0 0 $0 0 0 Same assumptions as Level 1. $ $ $ $ $ $ Level 2 Total $0 0 $0 0 0 $ $ $ $ $ $ - 0 0 0 0 0 0 Level 3 All activities from Level 2 $0 0 $0 1 0 1 0 ISame assumptions as Level 2. $ $ $ $ $ $ Level 3 Total $0 0 $0 0 0 1 $ $ $ $ $ $ - 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 One-time activities are completed once, such as hiring a consultant to develop new training materials b Ongoing activities occur every year, such as continuing an inspection program or annual review of procedures FTE, or Full-time equivalent staff, assumes 1,768 hours worked per year for one full-time staff member City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan October 2022 Table A-12. Recommended Activities for Other SWM Program Support. Funding Staff Hours One -Time' Ongoing Staff Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Recommendation Staff Support Assumptions Funding Support Funding (hours/ FTE` (hours) 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 year) Level 1 Add engineering capacity to the capital project design team to assist with Capital project design and project $0 0 $0 442 0.25 stormwater retrofit projects and upcoming SMAP implementation projects. 442 442 442 442 management Assumes h i i n f 2 FTE in in 2 2 n in Develop a po icy an Stan ar s or consi Bring more intense future preapitation Climate change in capital $50,000 100 $0 0 0 and sea level rise in stormwater capital improvement projects. Assumes $40,000 $ 50,000 100 improvement projects Level 1 Total $50,000 100 $0 442 0.25 $ $ $ 50,000 $ - $ - $ 0 0 542 442 442 442 Level 2 All activities from Level 1 $50,000 100 $0 442 0.25 Same assumptions as Level 1. $ $ $ 50,000 $ $ $ 542 442 442 442 Increase engineering capacity for the capital project design team to assist with Additional capital project design and $0 0 $0 442 0.25 stormwater retrofit projects and upcoming SMAP implementation projects. 442 442 442 442 project management Assumes the addition of 0.25 FTE starting in 2025. (Ongoing) Level 2 Total $50,000 100 $0 884 1 0.50 $ $ $ 50,000 $ $ $ 0 0 984 884 884 884 Level 3 All activities from Level 2 $50,000 100 $0 884 0.50 Same assumptions as Level 2. $ $ $ 50,000 $ $ $ 984 884 884 884 Increase engineering capacity for the capital project design team to assist with Additional capital project design and $0 0 $0 442 0.25 stormwater retrofit projects and upcoming SMAP implementation projects. 442 442 442 442 project management Assumes the addition of 0.25 FTE starting in 2025. Climate change in private Develop a policy and standards for new and redevelopment projects to esign or $100,000 100 $0 0 0 more intense future precipitation. Assumes $40,000 of consultant support and $ 100,000 100 development projects Level 3 Total 1 $150,000 1 200 $0 1 1,326 1 0.75 1 1 $ $ $ 50,000 $ $ 100,000 $ 0 0 1,426 1,326 1,426 1,326 a One-time activities are completed once, such as hiring a consultant to develop new training materials b Ongoing activities occur every year, such as continuing an inspection program or annual review of procedures FTE, or Full-time equivalent staff, assumes 1,768 hours worked per year for one full-time staff member City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan October 2022 Table A-13. Cost Summary by Program Area, Year, and Tier. Program Area Tier Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Total 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 Stormwater Planning Level $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $0 $0 $0 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 Level 2 Level3 Public Education and Outreach Level $0 $20,000 $20,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $20,000 $20,000 Level 2 Leve13 Public Involvement and Participation Level $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Level 2 Leve13 MS4 Mapping and Documentation Level $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Level 2 Leve13 Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Level $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Level 2 Level Controlling Runoff from New Development, Redevelopment, and Construction Sites Levell $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Level 2 Level Operations and Maintenance Level $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 1 $0 $0 $0 1 $0 $0 $0 1 $0 $0 $0 $0 Level 2 Level Source Control Program for Existing Development Level $0 $20,000 $20,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $20,000 $20,000 Level 2 Leve13 TMDL Requirements Level $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Level 2 Level Monitoring and Assessment Level $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Level 2 Leve13 Reporting Level $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Level Level Other SWM Support Level $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $0 $0 $50,000 $50,000 $150,000 Level 2 Leve13 City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan October 2022 ITable A-14. Cost Summary by Year and Tier. Tier Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Total 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 Level 1 Total $10,000 $10,000 $60,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $110,000 Level 2 Total $30,000 $30,000 $60,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $150,000 Level 3 Total $30,000 $30,000 $60,000 $10,000 $110,000 $10,000 $250,000 City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan October 2022 Table A-15. Program Area Stormwater Planning `Public Education and Outreach Public Involvement and Participation MS4 Mapping and Documentation Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Controlling Runoff from New Development, Redevelopment, and Construction Sites Operations and Maintenance Staff Hours Summary by Program Area, Year, and Tier. Total Tier Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 Level 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 482 482 482 482 482 482 482 482 482 1,566 1,566 1,566 Leve12 Leve13 Levell 562 1,004 1,888 562 1,084 1,968 522 924 1,848 522 964 1,848 522 964 1,848 522 964 1,848 3,212 5,904 11,248 0 0 0 2,692 7,996 7,996 0 0 0 Leve12 Leve13 Level 0 0 0 442 1,326 1,326 0 0 0 0 0 0 442 1,326 1,326 0 0 0 442 1,326 1,326 0 0 0 0 0 0 442 442 1,326 1,326 1,326 1,326 Leve12 Leve13 Levell I 482 1,366 1,366 Leve12 Level Level 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 40 1,808 1,808 0 0 0 40 1,808 1,808 Level 2 Leve13 Levell 0 0 0 40 1,808 1,808 40 1,808 1,808 40 1,808 1,808 200 9,040 9,040 Leve12 Leve13 Levell 0 0 0 120 1,004 1,004 320 1,646 1,646 120 1,446 1,446 120 1,888 1,888 120 1,888 1,888 800 7,872 7,872 Leve12 Leve13 Source Control Program for Existing Development TMDL Requirements Monitoring and Assessment Reporting Other SWM Support Level 1 440 440 440 480 520 520 480 520 520 480 520 520 480 520 520 480 520 520 2,840 3,040 3,040 2,652 2,652 2,652 Leve12 Leve13 Levell 442 442 442 442 442 442 442 442 442 442 442 442 442 442 442 442 442 1 442 Leve12 Leve13 Levell 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Leve12 Leve13 Levell 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Leve12 Leve13 Levell 0 0 0 0 0 0 542 984 1,426 442 884 1,326 442 442 884 884 1,426 1,326 1,868 3,636 5,504 Leve12 Leve13 Table A-16. Staff Hours Summary by Year and Tier. Tier Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 Levell Total 1,926 2,166 2,828 2,970 2,970 2,970 Level 2 Total 3,252 6,264 7,690 7,872 8,314 8,314 Level 3 Total 4,136 7,148 9,056 9,198 9,740 9,640 Table A-17. Staff FTE Summary by Year and Tier. Tier Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 Levell Total 1.09 1.23 1.60 1.68 1.68 1.68 Level 2 Total 1.84 3.54 4.35 4.45 4.70 4.70 Level 3 Total 2.34 4.04 5.12 5.20 5.51 5.45 City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan October 2022 Table A-18. Funding and Staffing Summary by Program Area and Tier. Program Area Tier One-Timea Ongoing Funding Staff Support (hours) Funding Staff Support (hours/year) FTE Stormwater Planning Level $0 $0 $0 0 0 1 0 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 482 482 482 0.27 0.27 0.27 Level 2 Level Public Education and Outreach Level $0 $20,000 $20,000 320 400 400 $0 $280 $0 $0 $0 $0 522 964 1,848 0.30 0.30 1.05 Level 2 Level Public Involvement and Participation Level $0 $0 $0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Level 2 Level MS4 Mapping and Documentation Level $0 $0 $0 40 40 40 $0 $0 $0 442 1,326 1,326 0.25 0.75 0.75 Level 2 Level Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Level $0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Level 2 Level Controlling Runoff from New Development, Redevelopment, and Construction Sites Level $0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 �$0 $0 $0 40 1,808 1,808 0 1.02 1.02 Level 2 Level 3 Operations and Maintenance Level $0 $0 $0 200 200 200 120 1,888 1,888 480 520 520 442 442 442 0 0 0 0 0 0 442 884 1,326 0 1.07 1 1.07 Level 2 Level 3 Source Control Program for Existing Development Level $0 $20,000 $20,000 0 0 0 0.27 0.29 0.29 Level 2 Level TMDL Requirements Level $0 $0 $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Level 2 Level Monitoring and Assessment Level $0 $0 $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Level 2 Level Reporting Level $0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0 0 0 Level Level Other SWM Support Level $50,000 $50,000 $150,000 100 100 200 0.25 0.50 0.75 Level 2 11-evel 3 a One-time activities are completed once, such as hiring a consultant to develop new training materials b Ongoing activities occur every year, such as continuing an inspection program or annual review of procedures FTE, or Full-time equivalent staff, assumes 1,768 hours worked per year for one full-time staff member City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan October 2022 December 2022 t,i HERRERA City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan APPENDIX B Capital Improvement Program December 2022 t,i HERRERA City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan APPENDIX B.1 Initial Capital Improvement Projects, Problem Descriptions, and Solutions December 2022 * HERRERA City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan Table 1. Initial Capital Improvement Projects, Problem Descriptions, and Solutions. ID Project Name Basin Problem Description Solution Phase II Scope a Project Type I The two existing culverts are undersized for fish Replace undersized culverts with fish passable box culverts Conduct a site assessment to determine the necessary Culvert Retrofits or 1 Anderson Creek Culvert Retrofits Anderson Creek passage and have not been able to be or a bridge. Coordinate the project with water main culvert size. Develop a summary sheet, figure, and Replacement inspected in the past 10 years. replacement on Old Clifton Road. analogous cost estimate. The existing culvert is failing, which is impairing Replace the failing culvert with new modern fish passable Develop a project summary sheet and figure. The details 2 Annapolis Creek Culvert Annapolis Creek upstream estuary conditions, and contributing o culvert and restoring estuary processes upstream. 30% in the summary sheet and cost estimate will come from Culvert Retrofits or Replacement to local flooding and property damage. design has been completed by Reid Middleton. Currently in design work that is underway. Replacement the process of selecting a preferred alternative. SE Salmonberry Road Lower The existing culvert at SE Salmonberry Road Replace the failing culvert with new modern fish passable Identify a reference reach and conduct a site assessment Culvert Retrofits or 3 Blackjack Creek Culvert Lower Blackjack Creek crossing has collapsed. culvert. Coordinate with Bethel and Sedgwick Road to determine the necessary culvert size. Develop a Replacement Replacement Corridor Stormwater Improvement projects. summary sheet, figure, and analogous cost estimate. Blackjack Creek Floodplain The mainstem of Blackjack Creek and the surrounding floodplain are impaired. The Restore natural channel configuration and floodplain Develop conceptual solution for restoration of fluvial Floodplain and 4 Restoration and Stormwater Lower Blackjack Creek floodplain currently lacks adequate water function on Blackjack Creek to improve Stormwater process and floodplain function, summary sheet, figure, Stream Restoration Management treatment, infiltration, and water storage for low flows. and analogous cost estimate. storage. There are multiple storm outfalls that need Conduct site assessment to confirm existing conditions Outfall Condition 5 Blackjack Creek Storm Outfall Lower Blackjack Creek rehabilitation. The outfalls have inadequate Rehabilitate the outfalls. and develop conceptual solutions. Create a summary Assessment and Assessment and Retrofits energy dissipation, infiltration, and water sheet, figure, and analogous cost estimate. Rehabilitation quality treatment. November 2021 4 HERRERA City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan Table 1. Initial Capital Improvement Projects, Problem Descriptions, and Solutions. ID Project Name Basin Problem Description Solution Phase II Scope a Project Type I Old and undersized stormwater infrastructure is Construct adequately sized stormwater conveyance Conduct hydrologic modeling to size the regional facility. Stormwater Central Sidney Stormwater Downtown -County resulting in frequent flooding of the roadway infrastructure throughout the neighborhood and construct Develop conceptual plan for conveyance system and Conveyance and 6 Improvements Campus and private property. Stormwater runoff a regional facility / stormwater park to provide flow control regional facility location. Create a summary sheet, figure, Water Quality currently discharges untreated to Unnamed and water quality treatment in accordance with current and analogous cost estimate. Treatment Stream negatively affecting aquatic organisms. stormwater requirements. The Downtown -County Campus Basin has The Downtown Basin Stormwater Plan is underway. It Develop project summary sheets and figures for Stormwater 7 Downtown Basin Stormwater Downtown -County inadequate conveyance, water quality includes infrastructure, condition assessment, and approximately five projects. The details in the summary Conveyance and Upgrades Campus treatment, and flow control to manage modeling. The work will define approximately five new sheet and cost estimate will come from the Downtown Water Quality stormwater runoff. capital projects. Basin Stormwater Plan. Treatment Glenwood Road Ruby Creek There are multiple undersized fish barrier Remove undersized culverts and replace with fish passable Conduct a site assessment to determine the necessary Culvert Retrofits or 8 Culvert Replacement Ruby Creek culverts and drainage issues near Glenwood culverts. culvert sizes. Develop a summary sheet, figure, and Replacement Road. analogous cost estimate. Feasibility assessment and alternatives analysis for Johnson Creek Stream There are 18 fish barrier culverts along Johnson realigning Johnson Creek and Port Orchard Boulevard to Conduct field assessment to size the new culverts. Culvert Retrofits or 9 Realignment Johnson Creek Creek, many of which are unnecessary. Johnson restore stream channel function and fish passage. This will Develop a summary sheet, figure, and analogous cost Replacement (Full Creek also has alignment issues. involve removing the 18 culverts and potentially installing estimate. Stream Realignment) fish passable culverts. The Johnson Creek estuary has been filled by Feasibility assessment and alternatives analysis to restore Conduct field assessment to define estuary footprint. 10 Johnson Creek Estuary Johnson Creek development and contains potentially the estuary. Remove two 30" pipes in the easement and Develop a summary sheet, figure, and analogous cost Estuary Restoration Restoration contaminated soils. restore the estuary. This will require property acquisition at estimate. the mouth of Johnson Creek. McCormick Woods Drive Culvert There are three failing culverts along Remove the three failing culverts and replace with fish Conduct field assessment to size the culverts. Create a Culvert Retrofits or 11 Barrier Replacement Anderson Creek McCormick Woods Drive that need to be passable culverts. summary sheet, figure, and analogous cost estimate. Replacement removed and replaced. November 2021 4 HERRERA City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan Table 1. Initial Capital Improvement Projects, Problem Descriptions, and Solutions. ID Project Name Basin Problem Description Solution Phase II Scope a Project Type I Stormwater outfalls in the Eastern Shoreline are Confirm number of outfalls on public and private 12 Port Orchard East Shoreline Lower Blackjack Creek not accessible for inspection and maintenance. Acquire access to all shoreline properties east of Rockwell property. Develop a summary sheet, figure, and Shoreline Acquisition Acquisition and Easement Right The shoreline is currently inaccessible to the Park to eastern city limit. analogous cost estimate. public. The Rockwell Area has inadequate water quality treatment. The area also has a high Rockwell Area Stormwater groundwater table and steep grade resulting in Install water quality treatment system(s) for the Rockwell Develop conceptual plan for water quality treatment Water Quality 13 Improvements Lower Blackjack Creek high stormwater flow rates and sediment Area. system(s). Create a summary sheet, figure, and Treatment accumulation at the following intersections: Bay analogous cost estimate. Street and Seattle Avenue; Bay Street and Rockwell Avenue. Ross Creek and the surrounding floodplain are Conduct field assessment to identify locations for beaver 14 Ross Creek Beaver Dam Analogs Ross Creek impaired. The floodplain currently lacks Install beaver dam analogs or other in -stream elements to dam analogs or other in -stream elements along Ross Floodplain and Installation adequate water storage. improve floodplain connectivity in the most effective areas. Creek. Develop a summary sheet, figure, and analogous Stream Restoration cost estimate. Ross Creek Estuary Restoration The Ross Creek estuary is impaired and there is Restore estuary function and processes in Ross Creek and Develop a summary sheet, figure, and analogous cost Estuary Restoration 15 and Beach Recreation Area Ross Creek limited public recreation access at the nearby open privately owned beaches for recreation activities. estimate. Shoreline Acquisition beaches. Sidney Road SW Ruby Creek There is a failing culvert under Sidney Road SW. Create a summary sheet, figure, and analogous cost 16 Culvert Replacement and Bridge Ruby Creek The culvert is a fish barrier due to a plunge pool Replace the culvert under Sidney Road SW. estimate. The details in the summary sheet and cost Culvert Retrofits or Installation and elevation drop. estimate will come from design work that is underway Replacement (Brian Abbott grant). Silver Creek, a Type F tributary to Blackjack Redirect flow into a deep pipe, trapezoidal channel, or Conduct a site assessment to define a conceptual Floodplain and Stream Restoration 17 Silver Creek Rehabilitation Lower Blackjack Creek Creek, requires rehabilitation to restore its through private property. solution. Develop a summary sheet, figure, and Stormwater original fluvial function. analogous cost estimate. Conveyance November 2021 4 HERRERA City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan Table 1. Initial Capital Improvement Projects, Problem Descriptions, and Solutions. ID Project Name Basin Problem Description Solution Phase II Scope a Project Type I 18 South Blackjack Creek Culvert Lower Blackjack Creek There is a failing fish barrier culvert under Sedgwick Road. The culvert needs to be Remove culvert under Sedgwick Road and replace with a Conduct site assessment to size the bridge. Develop a Culvert Retrofits or Removal and Bridge Installation removed and replaced. large span bridge. Coordinate with TIP projects. summary sheet, figure, and analogous cost estimate. Replacement Old and undersized stormwater infrastructure is resulting in frequent flooding on Sherman Avenue and private property in nearby cul-de- sacs. There is no visible stormwater conveyance Conduct hydrologic modeling to size the regional facility. 19 South Sidney Regional Facility Lower Blackjack Creek system nearby. Stormwater runoff currently Construct a regional facility that includes infiltration. This Develop conceptual plan for regional facility location. Water Quality discharges untreated to Blackjack Creek project will require property acquisition. Create a summary sheet, figure, and analogous cost Treatment negatively affecting aquatic organisms. There is estimate. also a need for residential pedestrian connectivity between Bravo Terrace and South Sidney. Old and undersized stormwater infrastructure is resulting in localized flooding. There is currently no water quality treatment in the area. Develop conceptual plan for water quality treatment and Stormwater 20 Westbay Stormwater Lower Blackjack Creek Stormwater runoff currently discharges Install stormwater conveyance and water quality treatment conveyance upgrades. Create a summary sheet, figure, Conveyance and Improvements untreated to Sinclair Inlet negatively affecting infrastructure. and analogous cost estimate. Water Quality aquatic organisms. The area has steep slopes Treatment and limited right-of-way, making this a difficult project. November 2021 4 HERRERA City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan APPENDIX B.2 Capital Improvement Project Summary Sheets December 2022 HERRERA City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan -Capital Improvement Projects Existing Site Plan Site Characteristics and Constraints Basin Available Space Grades and Elevations • Annapolis Creek Bay Street ROW Flat stream grade Basin • 9 feet elevation drop from road to culvert invert Soils and Groundwater Critical Areas Utilities • Site soils consist of fill material, Fish stream channel Existing sewer force main beach, and estuary deposits and shoreline and water main along • Groundwater at 7 feet Bay Street Problem Description The existing wood -framed box culvert under Bay Street is deteriorating causing maintenance costs to increase. Flooding occurs in the area due to tidal influences. The 36-inch culvert that connects to the box culvert creates a fish passage barrier. Existing Conditions 36-inch culvert inlet Existing utilities crossing through box culvert CHARD. * HERRERA t i i GMENGINEERS_ Wood -framed box culvert at high tide October 2022 City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan -Capital Improvement Projects Project Description Replace existing 36-inch culvert and wood - framed box culvert with a 12-ft wide bottomless concrete box culvert on concrete foundations. Existing utilities will continue to pass through the culvert walls. Permits Required Hydraulic Project Approval (WDFW) USACE Section 404 Permit SEPA DNS Right -of -Way Permit Commercial Permit Critical Areas Documentation Shoreline Permit Estimated Costs Total Construction Cost (2022) $1,200,000 Prioritization Matrix Concept Site Plan Flood Reduction I Groundwater and Surface i Groundwater and Surfa Water Quality Water Quantity 15 n 61 ri Sak 4 L4 y M1 �y Culvert Section 5 7 - f I r^ f� 7 7 77 12' wide box culverts —` _ r � rry - 1S Y I �~y � k mod,•-Y 5 �J~I Wing walls 5� ■j� 57I 5/%�� '�.�� Y �5 5y5 55 45 L5 • � {� i� 5x 55\ 5ti � 51 � 5, C7' Program Elements (0 -15 Scale) ,e Habitat Enhancement Infrastructure Public Participation Comprehensive Planning, Total Operations and (Education, Outreach, and Administration, and Funding Maintenance Involvement) 10 5 0 10 45 QRCHARD�. * HERRERA - i GEoENGINEER� r1T October 2022 City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan -Capital Improvement Projects Existing Site Plan Site Characteristics and Constraints Problem Description Old and undersized stormwater infrastructure is resulting in frequent flooding on Sherman Avenue and private property in nearby cul-de-sacs. There is no visible stormwater conveyance system nearby. Stormwater runoff currently discharges untreated to Blackjack Creek negatively affecting aquatic organisms. The neighborhood currently lacks sidewalks and walkability. Existing Conditions Undeveloped Parcel at the South End of Sherman Avenue (Photos Courtesy of Google Earth) saw_ Available Space "L- 0 L Grades and Elevations I I Soils and Groundwater Critical Areas Utilities LEE— • Lower Blackjack Creek 1;;;E iiiil No available space without property acquisition Steeper slopes on eastern and southern sides of the property Mostly Kitsap Silt Loam (Hydrologic Soil Group A) Stream buffer located on the east side of the property — . • No known utility conflicts on the property • Multiple ROW utilities (e.g., overhead power, gas, water, sewer) are present CHARD. * HERRERA -144 � F i GEOENGINEER� October 2022 City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan -Capital Improvement Projects Project Description Build a new regional stormwater facility on the parcel southeast of Sherman Avenue. The facility will provide centralized flow control and treatment of an approximately 30-acre upstream drainage area extending from Sidney Avenue to Sherman Avenue. The facility could incorporate elements from constructed wetlands, bioretention, and infiltration ponds. The facility will serve as a neighborhood amenity and will enhance aesthetics, biodiversity, and habitat. A combination of surface (swale) and subsurface (piped) stormwater conveyance will be constructed to convey flow to the facility. This project will require property acquisition and facilitate the construction of sidewalks in the neighborhood. Design Precedent Whispering Firs Stormwater Park Example (Photo Courtesy of Contech Engineered Solutions, LLC) Permits Required Hydraulic Project Approval (WDFW) USACE Section 404 Permit SEPA DNS Estimated Costs Concept Site Plan Prioritization Matrix Total design + permitting + construction cost does Program Elements (0 -15 Scale) not include property acquisition. Flood Groundwater and Groundwater and Habitat Infrastructure Public Participation Comprehensive Planning, Total Design + Permitting + Construction Cost (2022) Reduction Enhancement Surface Water Surface Water Operations and (Education, Outreach, Administration, and Quality Quantity Maintenance and Involvement) Funding $3,500,000 — 5 15 10 10 0 15 1 15 ORCHARD, HERRERA i i GEoENGINEERS� October 2022 City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan -Capital Improvement Projects Existing Site Plan Site Characteristics and Constraints Basin Available Space Grades and Elevations Downtown -County Public Road ROWs Steep slopes in the upper Campus Basin • City owned parking lots in part of the basin marina and boat launch • Flatter grades north of Bay Street Soils and Groundwater Site soils consist of Harstine gravelly ashy sandy loam in the upper basin Urban land-Alderwood in the lower basin Critical Areas Stream channel Shoreline Utilities Existing water, sewer, and storm pipes throughout the basin Problem Description Most of the stormwater from the basin discharges to Sinclair Inlet without treatment. Some of the existing infrastructure is under capacity and pipe routing is inefficient. Flooding of the lower basin occurs during high tide events. Existing Conditions Typical drain inlets in Downtown Basin IJ •� a�' - "Y � ,; I. ;.fir 41 Drainage structure with crossing utility pipes QRCHARD. V HERRERA ' • t i i GEOENGINEERS� One of two water quality facilities in ram_ Downtown Basin October 2022 City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan -Capital Improvement Projects Project Description Install tide gates in new manhole structures at all outfall pipes directly discharging into Sinclair Inlet. Install water quality vaults in centralized locations to collect and treat stormwater runoff. Replace and reconfigure convoluted storm pipe systems to new water quality facilities. Remove smaller pipe outfalls prone to tidal flooding. Install optional detention vault (2500 CF) to reduce flooding during large tidal and storm events. This project aligns with the Downtown Subarea Plan and Community Events Center (CEC), and is related to the federal funding to improve Bay Street in Downtown Port Orchard. Permits Required Right -of -Way Permit Commercial Permit Estimated Costs Total Design + Permitting + Construction Cost (2022) $1,760,000 Prioritization Matrix Flood Reduction 15 Groundwater and Surface Water Quality 15 Concept Site Plan Groundwater and Surface Water Quantity n Program Elements (0 - 15 Scale) Habitat Enhancement Infrastructure Operations and Maintenance 10 Public Participation (Education, Outreach, and Involvement) X Comprehensive Planning, Administration, and Funding QRCHA�RD. * HERRERA GEOENGINEERS� r1� October 2022 City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan -Capital Improvement Projects Project Description Install tide gates in new manhole structures at all outfall pipes directly discharging into Sinclair Inlet. Install water quality vaults in centralized locations to collect and treat stormwater runoff. Replace and reconfigure convoluted storm pipe systems to improve function and maintenance. Install optional detention vaults (2500 CF) to reduce flooding during large tidal and storm events. This project aligns with the Downtown Subarea Plan and Community Events Center (CEC), and is related to the funding to improve Bay Street in Downtown Port Orchard. Permits Required Right -of -Way Permit Commercial Permit Estimated Costs Total Design + Permitting + Construction Cost (2022) $970,000 (Near City Hall) or $1,100,000 with Optional Detention $982,000 (Near Kitsap County Courthouse) Prioritization Matrix Flood Reduction Groundwater and Surface Water Quality 15 Q CHARD. *HERRERA 15 Concept Site Plan Program Elements (0 - 15 Scale) Groundwater and Surface Habitat Enhancement Infrastructure Water Quantity Operations and Maintenance 0 0 10 Jei:dMiddleton • Public Participation (Education, Outreach, ar Involvement) 0 d Comprehensive Planning, Administration, and Funding Total 15 55 October 2022 City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan -Capital Improvement Projects Existing Site Plan Site Characteristics and Constraints Basin Available Space uraaes ana Soils and Critical Areas Utilities Other Elevations Groundwater • Ruby Creek Basin • Sidney Rd ROW. Flat stream gradient Site soils consist of Streams and Existing water main within New dense residential development under • Mixed - sparse • Need temporary Approximately 12 Bellingham silty clay wetlands - WDFW Sidney Road. construction within contributing basin - residential, construction feet of fill cover over loam habitat assessment Storm outfall enters new culvert should be sized appropriately lawn/pasture, new easements on the culvert reports frequent downstream channel from for increased storm flood magnitude and dense residential, private property areas of ponding and the north time period. forested beaver activity. 7 CHARD. HERRERA F i GEoENGINEER� Problem Description Existing 8' wide CMP elliptical culvert has a damaged inlet and rusted bottom and is a partial fish barrier. Existing Conditions Damaged culvert inlet Rusted culvert outfall with short water surface drop Geotextile fabric -lined upstream right bank October 2022 City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan -Capital Improvement Projects Project Description Replace existing culvert under Sidney Road SW with a proposed bottomless 14-ft wide box culvert using trenchless methods for installation. This project aligns with the Ruby Creek Subrea Plan and Parks Plan. Permits Required Hydraulic Project Approval (WDFW) USACE Section 404 Permit SEPA DNS Right -of -Way Permit Commercial Permit Critical Areas Documentation Estimated Costs Total Design + Permitting + Construction Cost (2022) $1,600,000 Prioritization Matrix Concept Site Plan 56 54 52 :.,.-- 50 1,000 1,100 1,200 1,300 Sidney Road Crossing 1.400 '.5c0 1500 Distance (ft) from Blackjack Creek Confluence 1.'00 1,300 1,900 2,000 Program Elements (0 -15 Scale) Flood Reduction Groundwater and Surface Groundwater and Surface Habitat Enhancement Infrastructure Public Participation Comprehensive Planning, Total Water Quality Water Quantity Operations and (Education, Outreach, and Administration, and Funding Maintenance Involvement) 5 1 0 1 5 1 10 1 5 1 0 1 10 1 35 1PQV HERRERA 04- ' • -HARD, GEOENGINEERORC� October 2022 City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan -Capital Improvement Projects Existing Site Plan 11 T Site Characteristics and Constraints See historic estuary in Existing Conditions Photo. DEKALE ST �s r .4 capital Improvement Projects Q Stormwater Structures outfalls Topo (5ft) Streams Conveyance aterbodies Roads Pa rce Is itsap CGunty Wetlands FEMA Flood Zones Pork Orchard City Limits 0 40 80 160 Feet Basin Available Space Grades and Elevations Soils and Groundwater Critical Areas Utilities Other • Johnson Creek Basin Heavily constrained by Site is relatively flat and • Extensive fill • Marine Multiple Property • Mouth of Johnson existing structures, SR accessible • Area within historical Shoreline utilities cross acquisition is Creek, within middle to 116, and Port Orchard tidal zone • Stream Johnson Creek required high end of tidal range Boulevard under SR 116 of Sinclair Inlet Problem Description Johnson Creek and its estuary were piped and filled during development of Port Orchard. Estuary habitat has been completely lost and fish passage is difficult at best. Several businesses and houses as well as SR 116 are built over the fill. Multiple major utility lines are routed along SR 116. Existing Conditions highlighted yellow) Downstream end of culvert under public dock t ++Si +7 i tir o CHARD• * HERRERA -144 � F i GEOENGINEER� Historical T-Sheet (#t1637, ca. 1881) showing extent of estuary fill October 2022 City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan -Capital Improvement Projects Project Description Restoration of the Johnson Creek Estuary will require acquisition of multiple properties prior to removal of structures and fill from the nearshore. Coordination with WSDOT will be required for construction of a bridge on SR 116, replacement of existing utility lines, and connection of pedestrian access to the public pier. Additional investigation of the stability of Port Orchard Boulevard will be required. The central location and nearby parking makes the estuary an excellent location for walkways, overlooks, and educational opportunities. This project aligns with the Downtown Subarea Plan and Parks Plan. Permits Required Hydraulic Project Approval (WDFW) USACE Section 404 SEPA DNS Right -of -Way Permit Cultural Resources (DHAP) Critical Areas Documentation Shoreline Permit Estimated Costs Total Cost (2022) Property Acquisition and Easements: $2,500,000 Planning, Design, and Permitting: $1,000,000 Construction: $2,500,000 Total Project Cost: $6,000,000 Prioritization Matrix Flood Reduction Groundwater and I Groundwater and Surface Surface Water Quality Water Quantity 5 10 F Concept Site Plan Program Elements (0 -15 Scale) Habitat Enhancement Infrastructure Operations and Maintenance 15 10 Public Participation (Education, Outreach, and Involvement) 10 Not to scale Comprehensive Planning, I Total Administration, and Funding 15 1 70 Q CHARD. HERRERA t i i GEOENGINEER�-5 October 2022 City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan -Capital Improvement Projects Existing Site Plan Existing temporary relief channel} .� Existing sinkhole ar-'- ` ' I I M. Capital Irnprovernent Projects Culvert to be replaced Stormwater Structures o SE. PN4 SE SALJVQNJ3ERRy Rl) T C�# J (5ft) z Strearns Conveyance Roads Pa roels `■+�r 0 Pork Orchard City Limits - �r-�..� 0 40 SO 160 Feet Site Characteristics and Constraints Basin Available Space Grades and Elevations Soils and Groundwater Critical Areas Utilities Other • Lower Blackjack Creek Basin SE Salmonberry Flat road and culvert grades • Site soils consist of Stream channel • No existing water WFC observed • Wild Fish Conservancy (WFC) Rd ROW Ragnar fine sandy loam and sewer service Type-F flow into 2013 survey found the upstream Will require within the Salmonberry headwaters at Bethel Road near property Salmonberry. road culvert in Sylvis Lane easements • Storm culverts 2013, pre - resent blockage CHARD. * HERRERA i i GEoENGINEERS� Problem Description Previous work to convey stream channel under Salmonberry Road and through private property with a culvert has failed. Flooding occurs at the Salmonberry Road crossing. The culvert across the site is damaged and caused sinkhole on the property. Drainage fix with temporary relief channel and piping is not functioning properly. Upstream stream/pond Sinkhole on property from damaged culvert Temporary relief channel dug on northern property October 2022 City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan -Capital Improvement Projects Project Description Remove and replace existing crossing culverts under SE Salmonberry Road with new storm conveyance system. New storm pipe system to extend from channel outfall to an existing swale channel west of the crossing. The swale drains to the Blackjack Creek tributary channel. It's anticipated that a fish passage culvert is not required since fish habitat only occurs north of SE Salmonberry Road. This project is adjacent to the City's Bethel and Sedgwick Road Corridor Plan. Permits Required Hydraulic Project Approval (WDFW) USACE Section 404 Permit SEPA DNS Right -of -Way Permit Commercial Permit Critical Areas Documentation Estimated Costs Total Design + Permitting + Construction Cost (2022) $300,000 Prioritization Matrix Concept Site Plan LEGEND STORM PIPE (EXISTING) STORM PIPE (PROPOSED) .1 _ CATCH BASIN (EXISTING) T� ~ CATCH BASIN (PROPOSED) } I 1k� DRAINAGE SWALE (EXIST) -- - - - - -- ) I ! POND/STREAM (EXIST) ,k JIM ho I ,I I f � Roadway — - Overflow Water Surface SE SALMONBERRY RD Y- Normal W.S. i1 Weir Opening • .x ;' 3.+ „«. Existing r . Channel/ Ponded Area Proposed storm { structures and storm Pipe! Ak New Storm Profile - - '+'•.: Not to scale Program Elements (0 -15 Scale) Flood Reduction Groundwater and Surface Groundwater and Surface Habitat Enhancement Infrastructure Public Participation Water Quality Water Quantity Operations and (Education, Outreach, and Maintenance Involvement) 15 0 5 5 10 0 HqR�. *HERRERA - i GEoENGINEER� Comprehensive Planning, Total Administration, and Funding 5 1 40 October 2022 City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan -Capital Improvement Projects Existing Site Plan - _- — -- - Lecend ...-._� _. AlzP1 �� _ . [� Existing Floodplain EkIS11NG FLOOOPLAIN ,' Q TO REMAIN _ t n l 0 Proposed Floodplain Restoration s b �15 Existing Stream Location (Approximate) BLACKJACK • r � tsar � > \. I ti .n O Sy 54L r I 3Y CREEK PROPOSED FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION -12.5 AGY �n p $5 1 � F� t � t �• 4 > l Z op LLI Lo rJIDhiEy iZd $w .... - Scale in F•A HI::•,=��; Proposed Conditions ,.,� p City of Port Orchard °"'�' Fau•zt,� ° AH�� . Floodplain Resloralion Project 216 PPosoeclstreet APPR�YE➢ UK _ Blackjack Creek Port 6rcharci, WA S8366 ''-'T� 914Er 9 CF 5 Site Characteristics and Constraints Basin • Stream with good fish Available Space Floodplain and wetland Grades and Elevations Shallow gradient Soils and Groundwater Critical Areas Utilities Soils in the flood zone Freshwater emergent Existing water main habitat, but limited habitat, designated throughout open space, are dominated by Kitsap wetlands; Chinook and chum along SW Sedgwick floodplain and wetland FEMA Flood Zone west of with slope upward silt loam and Bellingham salmon and steelhead stream Road. connectivity. Blackjack Creek. towards Sidney Road SW. silty clay loam. use; and FEMA flood zone. Problem Description Existing reach of Blackjack Creek is confined along eastern edge of the open space with minimal floodplain and wetland connectivity. While the stream channel has good riparian cover, vegetation throughout the property is a mix of native and invasive species. A rock dam located approximately 50 feet upstream from the confluence with Ruby Creek likely contributes to the observed backwatered conditions and supports established wetlands within the floodplain. Existing Conditions Good riparian cover over stream Adjacent floodplain and wetland habitat CHARDHERRERA t t i - i GEoENGINEER .S� Placed rock dam immediately downstream of confluence with Ruby Creek October 2022 City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan -Capital Improvement Projects Project Description The main objective of the project is to increase floodplain connectivity. The project includes creating alluvial streambeds for off channel habitat with depressional water storage and placing large woody debris on Blackjack and Ruby Creeks. A mix of coniferous trees and riparian understory will be planted to create a wetland forest complex. This project was designed by the City of Port Orchard. It may be impacted by upcoming work by the Washington Department of Transportation and Kitsap Transit on State Road (SR) 16 and SR 16 Park and Ride, respectively. Permits Required Section 7 ESA Consultation and Magnuson -Stevens Fishery and Conservation Act Section 106 Review SEPA DNS Hydraulic Project Approval (WDFW) USACE Section 404 Permit Critical Areas Documentation Estimated Costs Total Cost (2022) Planning, Design, and Permitting: $1,000,000 Construction: $5,000,000 Property Acquisition: $1,000,000 Total Project Cost: $7,000,000 Prioritization Matrix Concept Site Plan EXISTING FLO LAIN Yp .jam• TO REMAIN w�° ram. ��• 65J IN 91 oc �� t • � � � � RU3YCRLL� 0, Ole Sri a i . ` • l 4' sscxf4A c REEK \, sr0 4 ' 4 N, 7 1� 4 o� I Legend: Large Woody debris Floodplain Assemblage Qepressional Water Storage) Wetland Complex with Wetland Plant Mix Alluvium Streambed Coniferous Trees (CedarlFir/Hem Mix) Riparian Llnderstory Planting Mix Existing Stream Location (Approximate) Al A0 . ti r 40 rE 40 > 4 aa¢ a a say _1 .L . _ Z N IN L7 { sInNFr xa sw 1i�4�iN1Fli fi- f.HiF Proposed Site Plan � City of Port Orchard 4H R� Floodplair+Restarali0oProjecl 216PFospwSvDel arc«Eo ORCHARD. Fo Blackjack Creek Port Orchard. WA 9896fi ucaeren - Sr k in F¢[ w.E. Fa4, 7�, 7oQ9 LRAM1HGMlFlm1 C3.00 ORC_HgRD* HERRERA GEOENGINEER� r1� . October 2022 City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan -Capital Improvement Projects Existing Site Plan -.,5W SEDGW1CK RD 7.0 to 6+ac ae�...reek .f _�� . Site Characteristics and Constraints Basin • South Blackjack Creek Basin • Productive fish stream, areas of ditched channel through pasture and un-channelized wetland Available Space • SW Sedgwick Road ROW • Need temporary construction easements on private property A 144. ; Culvert to be replaced j .V • r r r f 01 Pr Jw Ap 10 �� tdI i'Arlp WNW �f ,3F_lr .. 1 f? R �• capital improvement Projects Q SbDrmwater Structures Topo (5ft) — Streams Conveyance Roads Parcels Kitsap County Wetlands FEMA Flood Zone Pork Orchard City Limits Feet / Y ,Wyµ Grades and Elevations Soils and Groundwater • Flat road and culvert Site soils consist of grades Bellingham silty clay • Less than 5 feet of loam pipe cover Critical Areas Utilities • Fish stream • Existing water main channel, FEMA within SW Sedgwick flood zone, and Road overbank wetlands • Storm culverts present Problem Description Existing CMP culvert is undersized for the site and restricts ecological and floodplain function. Existing Conditions SW Sedgewick Road Stream channel stretch upstream of crossing Q CHARD. qm HERRERA i i GEOENGINEERS- Culvert inlet October 2022 City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan -Capital Improvement Projects Project Description Replace existing culvert under SW Sedgwick Road with a bridge structure (40'x26'). A wider structure may be necessary to accommodate upstream debris potential and floodplain backwater effects. Further geomorphic investigation will be needed to access the stream sediment debris concerns. Permits Required Hydraulic Project Approval (WDFW) USACE Section 404 Permit SEPA DNS Right -of -Way Permit Commercial Permit Critical Areas Documentation Estimated Costs Total Design + Permitting + Construction Cost (2022) $1,600,000 Prioritization Matrix Concept Site Plan Existing Pavement High Flow Low Flow Channel Channel Section 53 52 51 50 SW Sedgwick Road i T 1,s0o i,sso 1,9aa =°: Program Elements (0 -15 Scale) Flood Reduction Groundwater and Surface Groundwater and Surface Habitat Enhancement Water Quality I Water Quantity 5 15 10 5 Sedgwick Road Crossing 2,150 2,200 2,250 2300 2 350 2,400 Distance (ft) from Ruby Creek Confluence Infrastructure Public Participation Comprehensive Planning, I Total Operations and (Education, Outreach, and Administration, and Funding Maintenance Involvement) 5 0 10 35 ORCHg�RD* HERRERA t i i GEoENGINEERS� r1� . October 2022 City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan -Capital Improvement Projects Existing Site Plan Site Characteristics and Constraints Basin Available Space Grades and Elevations • Downtown -County Basin Available space is located near Steeper slopes on eastern and existing ditch and underneath southern sides of Givens the baseball fields Playfield QRCHARD. HERRERA t i i GEOENGINEER�_5 Soils and Groundwater • Mostly Harstine gravelly ashy sandy loam (Hydrologic Soil Group C) Critical Areas • No critical areas Problem Description Old and undersized stormwater infrastructure in the vicinity of Givens Playfield is resulting in frequent flooding of the roadway and private property. Stormwater runoff currently discharges untreated to Unnamed Stream (not shown) negatively affecting aquatic organisms. Existing Conditions �, rl Givens Playfield Facing East (Courtesy of Explore Port Orchard) Givens Playfield Facing North (Courtesy of Google Earth) Utilities I Other • Existing stormwater ditch flows south to north through Givens Playfield • Overhead powerlines may be in conflict • Givens Playfield is owned by the City of Port Orchard October 2022 City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan -Capital Improvement Projects Project Description Construct a bioswale through Givens Playfield to help convey flow and treat stormwater. Install new synthetic turf with a subsurface drainage system at Givens Playfield to provide additional flow control in accordance with current stormwater requirements. Design Precedents 1 ')" 0.5-1.0% Slope 5,and Fine Gravel Subsurface Drainage Example (Courtesy of Pacific Northwest Extension) Bioswale Example Estimated Costs Total design + construction + permitting cost does not include lights, fencing, dugouts, walkways, and emergency vehicle access. Total Design + Permitting + Construction Cost (2022) $4,000,000 Concept Site Plan Prioritization Matrix Flood Reduction Program Elements (0 -15 Scale) Groundwater and Groundwater and Habitat Infrastructure Public Participation Comprehensive Planning, Surface Water Surface Water Enhancement Operations and (Education, Outreach, Administration, and Quality Quantity Maintenance and Involvement) Funding 10 10 10 C 10 10 Total 55 CHARD. * HERRERA t i i GMENGINEERS� October 2022 City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan -Capital Improvement Projects Existing Site Plan Site Characteristics and Constraints Basin Available Space Grades and Soils and Elevations Groundwater Critical Areas Utilities Other Anderson Creek Basin 0 Road ROW • Flat stream • Underlying soils consist Stream channel • Existing storm and Semi -frequent Crossing located in upper watershed 0 City owned grade of Shalcar muck surrounded by water along Old wildlife/traffic Tributary confluence —2 miles property • 15 feet of • Very poorly drained soil wetlands and Clifton Road incidents downstream with multiple active and relic downstream of culvert cover multiple beaver • New development reported beaver ponds upstream and downstream crossing ponds ongoing CHARD. * HERRERA i i GEOENGINEERS� Problem Description The existing 36-inch concrete culvert is undersized and submerged due to upstream and downstream beaver activity, creating backwater conditions through the crossing. Existing Conditions lewly installed stormwater input at the Channel conditions looking upstream from the crossing inlet Wetland and stream conditions looking downstream from the crossing outlet October 2022 City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan -Capital Improvement Projects Project Description Replace existing 36-inch culvert with a bridge structure or large arch/box culvert to accommodate fish and wildlife passage through the crossing. A larger structure sized to accommodate flow, debris, and sediment transport during high flow events, including potential failure of the beaver dam will provide long-term resilience to local infrastructure and restore natural ecological processes. Structure size likely 25 - 35 feet to accommodate geomorphic setting with wetlands and beaver activity. Permits Required Hydraulic Project Approval (WDFW) USACE Section 404 Permit SEPA DNS Right -of -Way Permit Commercial Permit Critical Areas Documentation Estimated Costs Total Design + Permitting+ Construction Cost (2022) $1,600,000 Prioritization Matrix Flood Reduction 5 Concept Site Plan Existing Pavement Concrete Approach Brid a Deck r, Proposed bridge High Flaw optional Wildlife tl� Low Flow Channel Grossing Bench Channel Section 122 120 w 119 J01d Clifton Road Crossing Beaver Dam 116 , 0 50 100 _-- 250 300 350 400 450 Groundwater and Surface Groundwater and Surface Water Quality Water Quantity 0 5 Program Elements (0 -15 Scale) Habitat Enhancement Infrastructure Operations and Maintenance 10 5 Public Participation (Education, Outreach, and Involvement) I Comprehensive Plar Administration, and FI R CHARD. * HERRERA t i i GMENGINEERS_ October 2022 December 2022 APPENDIX B.3 Prioritization Results t,i HERRERA City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan SE Salmonberry South Blackjack Anderson Creek Annapolis Creek South Blackjack Central Sidney Downtown Basin Johnson Creek Ruby Creek Culvert Road, Lower Creek Culvert South Sidney Culvert Retrofits Culvert Replacement Creek Floodplain Stormwater Stormwater Estuary Restoration Replacement Blackjack Creek Removal and Bridge Regional Facility Restoration Improvements Upgrades Culvert Replacement Installation Groundwater and Groundwater and Groundwater and Groundwater and Habitat Habitat Goals and Outcomes Primary Criteria Flood Reduction Surface Water Flood Reduction Surface Water Surface Water Flood Reduction Surface Water Flood Reduction Enhancement Enhancement Quality Quality Quality Quality Flood Reduction Outcomes Points Prevents property damage caused by flooding or damage to other utilities 15 15 15 15 15 Prevents flooding of a major street (arterial or larger) 10 7 10 Prevent flooding of a low -volume street or improves City's ability to respond to flood 5 5 5 5 5 5 events or minor nuisance flooding No impact to flood reduction 0 Groundwater and Surface Water Quality Improvement Outcomes Points Major water quality improvements for receiving water bodies 15 15 15 Moderate water quality improvements for receiving water bodies or improves City's ability to control pollutants and perform water quality improvement activities 10 10 10 Minor water quality improvements for receiving water bodies 5 No water quality improvements for receiving water bodies 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Groundwater and Surface Water Quantity Improvement Outcomes Points Major improvements to summer streamflow and/or groundwater supply 15 15 Moderate improvements to summer streamflow and/or groundwater supply 10 10 10 Minor improvements to summer streamflow and/or groundwater supply 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 No improvements to summer streamflow and/or groundwater supply 0 0 Habitat Enhancement Outcomes Points Corrects a significant fish passage barrier or creates significant habitat 15 15 15 Corrects a fish passage barrier (but immediate benefits are limited due to other barriers) or creates a moderate amount of new habitat/public amenity 10 10 10 10 10 10 Minor improvements to habitat or public amenity 5 5 5 No habitat enhancement 0 0 Infrastructure Operations and Maintenance Outcomes Points Major reduction level of effort needed by operations and maintenance 15 Moderate reduction of level of effort needed by operations and maintenance 10 10 10 10 Minor reduction of level of effort needed by operations and maintenance 5 5 5 5 5 No benefit to operations and maintenance personnel 0 0 0 0 Public Participation (Education, Outreach, and Involvement) Outcomes Points High-level opportunity for public participation 15 15 Mid -level opportunity for public participation 10 10 10 Limited opportunity for public participation 5 5 No opportunity for public participation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Comprehensive Planning, Administration, and Funding Outcomes Points Strong candidate for external funding (e.g., fish passage grant, water quality grant, transportation grant) 15 15 15 15 Average candidate for external funding (e.g., fish passage grant, water quality grant, transportation grant) 10 10 10 10 10 Weak candidate for external funding (e.g., fish passage grant, water quality grant, transportation grant) 5 5 5 5 Not a candidate for external funding 1 0 TOTALSCORE 30 45 55 55 55 70 RANK 10 6 3 3 3 1 8 7 8 1 City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan October2022 APPENDIX B.4 Level 2 and Level 3 Implementation Schedules December 2022 * HERRERA City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Projects Stormwater and Watersheds Long-term CIP Project Implementation Schedule Herrera Environmental Consultants Level 2 includes: Implementation of all projects within 20 years Moderate grant funding. (projects would not proceed without grants) Earlier implementation of Johnson Creek Estuary Restoration (begin 2027) and Downtown Basin Stormwater Upgrades (2024) Infrastructucture rehab replacement funding increases to $1M+ per year in 2024 and continues through 2042 - Downtown Basin Plan Implementation and then $1M per year for ongoing conveyance system rehab / replacement No funding for projects that are not currently defined aside from infrastructure rehab above. Costs in 2022 dollars. Project Name (Prioritization Score) 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 Total Cost to City South Sidney Regional Facility (70) $700,000 $2,800,000 South Sidney Regional Facility (70) - SFAP Grant 50% -$350,000 -$1,400,000 Johnson Creek Estuary Restoration (70) $2,500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $2,500,000 Johnson Creek Estuary Restoration - Estuary restoration, floodplains by design grant 50% -$1,250,000 -$250,000 1 -$250,000 -$1,250,000 South Blackjack Creek Floodplain Restoration (55) $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $5,000,000 South Blackjack Creek Floodplain Restoration - Salmon Recovery 50% -$500,000 -$500,000 -$2,500,000 Downtown Basin Stormwater Upgrades (55) $1,760,000 $1,100,000 $982,000 Downtown Basin Stormwater Upgrades - Low Interest Loan Ongoing Conveyance System Rehab / Replacement Program $100,000 $100,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 Central Sidney Stormwater Improvements (55) $500,000 $3,500,000 Central Sidney Stormwater Improvements - SFAP Grant 50% -$250,000 -$1,750,000 Annapolis Creek Culvert Replacement (45) $400,000 $800,000 Annapolis Creek Culvert Replacement - Brian Abbott Grant 50% -$200,000 -$400,000 SE Salmonberry Road, Lower Blackjack Creek Culvert Retrofit (40) $300,000 None South Blackjack Creek Culvert Removal and Bridge Installation (35) $400,000 $1,200,000 South Blackjack Creek Culvert Removal and Bridge Installation - Fish Passage Grant (TBD) 50% 1 1 1 1 -$200,000 -$600,000 Ruby Creek Culvert Replacement (35) $400,000 $1,200,000 Ruby Creek Culvert Replacement - Brian Abbott Grant 50% -$200,000 -$600,000 Anderson Creek Culvert Replacement (30) $400,000 $1,200,000 Anderson Creek Culvert Replacement - Fish Passage Grant (TBD) SO% -$200,000 -$600,000 TOTAL - Cost to City (CIP Cost - Grant Funding) $100,000 $2,410,000 $1,500,000 $2,382,000 $2,450,000 $1,850,000 $1,250,000 $2,250,000 $1,300,000 $1,000,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $3,700,000 $1,600,000 $1,250,000 $2,750,000 $1,200,000 $1,600,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $33,592,000 12/15/2022 1/1 City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Projects Stormwater and Watersheds Long-term CIP Project Implementation Schedule Herrera Environmental Consultants Level 3 includes: Implementation of all projects within 6 years. No grant funding. Infrastructucture rehab replacement funding of $1M per year begins in 2028 and continues through 2042. No funding for projects that are not currently defined aside from infrastructure rehab above. Costs in 2022 dollars. Project Name (Prioritization Score) 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 Total Cost to City South Sidney Regional Facility (70) $700,000 $700,000 $2,100,000 Johnson Creek Estuary Restoration (70) $2,500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $2,500,000 South Blackjack Creek Floodplain Restoration (55) $1,000,000 $5,000,000 Downtown Basin Stormwater Upgrades (55) $1,760,000 $1,100,000 $982,000 Ongoing Conveyance System Rehab / Replacement Program $100,000 $100,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 Central Sidney Stormwater Improvements (55) $500,000 $3,500,000 Annapolis Creek Culvert Replacement (45) $400,000 $800,000 SE Salmonberry Road, Lower Blackjack Creek Culvert Retrofit (40) $300,000 South Blackjack Creek Culvert Removal and Bridge Installation (35) $400,000 $1,200,000 Ruby Creek Culvert Replacement (35) $400,000 $1,200,000 Anderson Creek Culvert Replacement (30) $400,000 $1,200,000 TOTAL $100,000 $3,300,000 $3,960,000 $9,200,000 $8,582,000 $5,700,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $44,842,000 12/15/2022 1/1 December 2022 t,i HERRERA City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan APPENDIX C Stormwater Management Action Plan December 2022 n� HERRERA City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan CITY OF PORT ORCHARD STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ACTION PLAN Prepared for City of Port Orchard Prepared by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. (NJA- HERRERA Note: Some pages in this document have been purposely skipped or blank pages inserted so that this document will print correctly when duplexed. CITY OF PORT ORCHARD STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ACTION PLAN Prepared for Zack Holt City of Port Orchard 216 Prospect Street Port Orchard, Washington 98366 Prepared by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. 2200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 1100 Seattle, Washington 98121 Telephone: 206-441-9080 October 24, 2022 CONTENTS Purpose...............................................................................................................................................................................1 Background.......................................................................................................................................................................3 Watershed Prioritization Summary 5 Lower Blackjack Creek Watershed Function................................................................................................5 CatchmentConditions..........................................................................................................................................8 LandUse and Future Growth.................................................................................................................8 StormwaterInfluence...............................................................................................................................8 Stormwater Management Actions............................................................................................................................9 Process to Identify Stormwater Management Actions............................................................................9 Strategic Stormwater Retrofit Projects...........................................................................................................9 Land Management Strategies.........................................................................................................................12 Stormwater Program Enhancements............................................................................................................13 Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Field Screening....................................................13 Source Control Program for Existing Development....................................................................13 Operationsand Maintenance..............................................................................................................13 Public Education and Outreach..........................................................................................................14 Changesto Long Range Plans........................................................................................................................14 Budgetand Schedule..................................................................................................................................................15 Future Assessment and Feedback..........................................................................................................................17 References........................................................................................................................................................................19 APPENDICES Appendix A Project Summary Sheet: South Sidney Regional Facility Appendix B Project Summary Sheet: South Blackjack Floodplain Reconnection Project n� HERRERA sw 20-07401-001 smap-cityofportorchard 20221024.docx TABLES Table 1. City of Port Orchard Lower Blackjack Creek Catchment A Stormwater Retrofit Projects.........................................................................................................................................................12 Table 2. City of Port Orchard Lower Blackjack Creek Catchment A Land Management Strategies.....................................................................................................................................................12 Table 3. City of Port Orchard Lower Blackjack Creek Catchment A Stormwater Program Enhancements...........................................................................................................................................14 Table 4. Lower Blackjack Creek Catchment A Stormwater Management Actions Schedule and Cost Summary...............................................................................................................16 FIGURES Figure 1. Lower Blackjack Creek Catchment A Overview Map....................................................................7 Figure 2. Lower Blackjack Creek Catchment A Stormwater Projects.......................................................11 * HERRERA sw 20-07401-001 smap-cityofportorchard_20221024.docx PURPOSE The City of Port Orchard (City) Stormwater Management Action Plan (SMAP) is prepared pursuant to requirements of S5.C.1.d.iii of the 2019 -2024 Western Washington Phase II National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Stormwater Permit issued by the Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology). The Plan is organized according to the permit language and identifies the following for the high priority catchment located in the Lower Blackjack Creek watershed: A description of the stormwater facility retrofits needed for the area, including the best management practice (BMP) types and preferred locations. Land management/development strategies and/or actions identified for water quality management. Targeted, enhanced, or customized implementation of stormwater management actions related to permit sections within S5, including: Illicit discharge detection and elimination (IDDE) field screening, Prioritization of Source Control inspections, Operations and Maintenance (O&M) inspections or enhanced maintenance, or Public Education and Outreach behavior change programs. If applicable, identification of changes needed to local long-range plans, to address SMAP priorities. A proposed implementation schedule and budget sources for: Short-term actions (i.e., actions to be accomplished within six years), and Long-term actions (i.e., actions to be accomplished within seven to 20 years). A process and schedule to provide future assessment and feedback to improve the planning process and implementation of procedures or projects. October 2022 (kji HERRERA City of Port—Orchard—Stormwater Management Action Plan BACKGROUND The City completed the "City of Port Orchard Watershed Inventory and Assessment" March 21, 2022 (Herrera 2022a) and the "City of Port Orchard Watershed Prioritization" June 22, 2022 (Herrera 2022b). Additionally, the City is in the process of developing their "Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan", anticipated in 2023. This SMAP will be incorporated within the stormwater comprehensive planning process when developing programmatic and capital improvement programs. Additionally, much of the watershed data and analysis conducted for meeting the SMAP permit requirements will serve to better understand stormwater pressures upon water resources on a watershed basis. October 2022 n� HERRERA City of Port—Orchard—Stormwater Management Action Plan WATERSHED PRIORITIZATION SUMMARY Eighteen watersheds were originally identified during the first step of the City's watershed inventory. Thirteen watersheds were removed from the prioritization process due to low or no City stormwater influence or because the watershed was smaller than the 400 acre size threshold identified by Ecology in their SMAP guidance (Ecology 2019). The remaining five candidate watersheds were subjected to a prioritization and scoring process. The prioritization process resulted in selection of Lower Blackjack Creek watershed as the highest priority watershed based on the following characteristics: High receiving water use support Moderate level of development and future growth Good water and habitat condition Highest jurisdiction control Promotes other plans and projects, most notably the Blackjack Creek Watershed Assessment Plan and Protection and Restoration Plan (ESA 2017). LOWER BLACKJACK CREEK WATERSHED FUNCTION Lower Blackjack Creek watershed processes are considered "functioning" for hydrologic regime, sediment regime, riparian areas and wetlands, nutrient supply, floodplain channel interactions, habitat connectivity, fish passage and water quality (ESA 2017). Organic matter input is rated "Moderately Impaired" However, elevated summer stream temperatures and low dissolved oxygen levels are a concern. Lower Blackjack Creek supports an abundance of salmonid species. The creek supports spawning and rearing activity for fall and summer chum and coastal cutthroat trout. The stream corridor supports migration of coho salmon to extensive upper watershed areas for spawning and rearing. Blackjack Creek is included in the area for endangered species for fall Chinook and winter steelhead. Lower Blackjack Creek stream health is good based upon aquatic insect scores. Aquatic insect diversity is monitored at multiple locations within the Lower Blackjack Creek watershed. This benthic index of biotic integrity (B-IBI) and many of the sub -indexes are strongly correlated with stormwater impacts (both erosive flows and water quality). Station KCSSWM-035 (Blackjack Middle) was monitored for 7 years between 2011 to 2021 with an average score of 52 and a standard deviation of 12. Scores range from 33 (2014) to 76 (2019). Overall, the stream aquatic October 2022 %HERRERA City of Port—Orchard—Stormwater Management Action Plan insect community index is classified as "Fair", where some years the score classifies as "Poor" and other years as "Good" (Puget Sound Benthos Database, 2022). The watershed was subdivided into three catchments, A, B and C, and Catchment A was selected for development of the SMAP. This catchment has a greater concentration of older development for retrofit opportunities. Catchment A is depicted in Figure 1. * HERRERA October 2022 City of Port Orchard—Stormwater Management Action Plan r r- SW BERRY LAKE w � st _ 1 - SE SEDGWICK RD rn o � W Blackjack ,�•' m ' Ruby Creek it yaa '•�' SW SEDGWICK 9� C? , z' Legend Figure 1. Lower Blackjack Creek Catchment �J Port Orchard City Limits A Overview Map. Port Or a Lower Blackjack Creek Watershed Catchment Boundary Gorst f a 0 500 1,000 2,000 Waterbody Fer I Feet City Roads HERRERA Stream Kitsap County, 2020 533 ft \\SEA-FILE-GISOI\gis k\Proj—\Y2020\20-07401-000\Ar.P,.\SMAP_Pla.Maps\SMAP_Plan Maps.p CATCHMENT CONDITIONS Below is a brief description of the catchment for land use, growth and City stormwater influence. This information provides background about Catchment A existing characteristics and potential future conditions considered during development of the SMAP. Land Use and Future Growth Catchment A is 615 acres. Land use is diverse and comprised of commercial, single-family residential, multi -family residential, high use state highways and City roads. Vacant lands are targeted for development and the watershed within the City limits is developing rapidly. The City of Port Orchard, due to its proximity to the urban centers of Bremerton and Tacoma and connection to Seattle via ferry transportation, is designated as a "high capacity transit community" by the Puget Sound Regional Council (Puget Sound Regional Coordination Council, 2020). The City is expected to grow as much as 36% by 2044 (Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council, 2022). Stormwater Influence The City has four major stormwater outfalls (greater than 24" diameter) within Catchment A, and multiple smaller outfalls. Washington State Department of Transportation also discharges runoff within the catchment. Fourteen public and private stormwater ponds are located within the catchment. 6 HERRERA October 2022 City of Port Orchard—Stormwater Management Action Plan STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ACTIONS PROCESS TO IDENTIFY STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ACTIONS The process to identity stormwater management actions included a detailed evaluation of landscape characteristics and the existing stormwater system. Landscape characteristics reviewed included zoning, vacant lands, stream buffers, wetlands, geohazard areas and roadways . In general, actions potentially effective to protect the receiving water of Lower Blackjack Creek were identified. All retrofit projects are one-time actions. However, programmatic and land management strategy actions can be conducted one time, annually during the term, or conducted during a three-year pilot project. Annual and pilot projects are evaluated to determine if it is beneficial to continue the action or to end the action due to completion, or if the action is determined to be ineffective. The assessment of the stormwater system included identifying stormwater ponds (both City and private) and stormwater outfalls. Stormwater pond owners were identified and the year the pond built determined to assess the level of water quality and or flow control according to the design requirements of the era it was designed. For all roadways the owners (City or State) were identified. Current capital improvement projects (CIPs) that improve stormwater quality and/or flow control or floodplain reconnection were identified including the location, drainage area, and best management practice (BMP) type. Existing and future potential partnerships with local agencies were also reviewed. Based on this information a series of 'actions'were identified to further protect and/or enhance ecosystem function of Catchment A. The actions cover three categories: strategic retrofits, land management strategies and stormwater program enhancements. These actions were presented to internal City and local stormwater and natural resource stakeholders prior to conducting two workshops in August 2022. General cost estimates were provided for each action and stakeholders provided their input on selection of Catchment A and prioritization of actions. Stakeholder feedback was incorporated into this plan. STRATEGIC STORMWATER RETROFIT PROJECTS The potential benefits of stormwater retrofit implementation opportunities were examined based on factors including location, degree of existing water quality or flow control, ownership (more challenging to implement for private ownership versus City ownership), and likelihood to succeed. Three retrofit projects were identified in Lower Blackjack Creek Catchment A. The projects are the South Sidney Regional Facility, Flowers Meadows St. Pond Retrofit and Naturalization, and October 2022 %HERRERA City of Port—Orchard—Stormwater Management Action Plan 9 the Sedgewick Water Campus Pond Naturalization. The locations of the three projects and preliminary drainage areas are depicted in Figure 2. The projects and BMP types are described in Table 1. The project summary sheet for the South Sidney Regional Facility project is included in Appendix A. 6 HERRERA October 2022 10 City of Port Orchard—Stormwater Management Action Plan RD Ruby CoPeek , Ar"x ck Water Retrofit Legend Figure 2. Lower Blackjack Creek Catchment Stormwater Retrofits Preliminary Blackjack Creek A Stormwater Projects. Floodplain Restoration Project Q Catchment Boundary Area Preliminary South Sidney Wetlands Regional Facility Drainage Area N 0 500 1,000 2,000 Waterbody Feet — Stream HERRERA Kitsap County, 2020 \\SEA-FILEGIS01\gis k\Projects\V2020\20 07401000\A,.P,.\SMAP_Plan Maps\SMAP_Plan Maps.aprx Table 1. City of Port Orchard Lower Blackjack Creek Catchment A Stormwater Retrofit Projects. Best Management Practice(s) to Be Action Considered' Cost South Sidney Regional Facility Constructed wetlands Design: $1,400,000 Biofiltration Construction: $2,100,000 Infiltration ponds Flower Meadows St. Pond Retrofit and Enhance flow control and water quality $45,000 Naturalization Naturalize pond Sedgewick Water Campus Pond Naturalize pond $45,000 Naturalization Total Cost $3,590,000 ' These projects are still in early design phase and the specific BMP that will be implemented may change. LAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES The potential benefits of land management strategies were examined based on factors including but not limited to the age of existing development, potential future land use, and opportunities to enhance stream function. These were evaluated for opportunities to leverage and mitigate future development to improve watershed health and reduce negative impacts from development. As a result of this evaluation, three land management strategies were identified to help protect or enhance ecosystem functions in Lower Blackjack Creek Catchment A (Table 2). The strategies are the South Blackjack Creek Floodplain Restoration project, a pilot rain garden and low impact development cost share program and regular review of stormwater standards for new development and re -development. The project summary sheet for the South Blackjack Creek Floodplain Restoration project is included as Appendix B. Table 2. City of Port Orchard Lower Blackjack Creek Catchment A Land Management Strategies. Action Description Cost South Blackjack Creek Increase floodplain connectivity creating alluvial Design: $1,000,000 Floodplain Restoration streambeds for off channel habitat with depressional Construction: $5,000,000 water storage, plant coniferous trees and riparian buffer areas, and add large woody debris Rain Garden and Low Implement a pilot private property rain garden or $60,000 Impact Development Cost other low impact retrofit program with cost -share from Share Pilot Program the City Regular Review of Annual meeting of stormwater review staff to identify $5,000 Stormwater Standards process improvements in review, inspection and enforcement of new development projects Total Cost $6,065,000 HERRERA October 2022 12 City of Port Orchard—Stormwater Management Action Plan STORMWATER PROGRAM ENHANCEMENTS The City conducts a number of activities for compliance with the 2019-2024 Western Washington Phase II NPDES Stormwater Permit (permit). These include activities associated with Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination, Source Control , Operations and Maintenance, and Public Education and Outreach. The City's existing procedures for implementing these activities were reviewed to consider what enhancements would be beneficial for accelerating water quality and habitat improvements in the Catchment A. This section describes the enhancements implemented within Catchment A that will exceed NPDES permit required actions. Table 3 summarizes stormwater program enhancement actions. Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Field Screening The City is required to inspect 12 percent of stormwater outfalls annually. The City will conduct the following additional actions in Lower Blackjack Creek Catchment A: Locate and map additional outfalls. Visit and inspect stormwater outfalls annually. Source Control Program for Existing Development The City is required to implement an inspection program January 1, 2023. Twenty percent of the inventory list is to be inspected annually with provisions for response to complaints and re - inspection visits. The City will conduct the following additional actions in Lower Blackjack Creek Catchment A: Prioritize businesses for inspections the first year of the Source Control Program. Revisit Source Control Program sites that require additional attention to promote better use of BMPS to reduce pollution sources entering the storm drainage system. Add multi -family properties to the Source Control Business Inspection inventory list. Operations and Maintenance The City is required to clean catch basins every two years, with provisions for reduced cleaning based upon inspection. The City will conduct the following additional actions in Lower Blackjack Creek Catchment A: Clean City catch basins where inspection shows areas which accumulate sediment at higher rates annually. October 2022 H E R R E RA City of Port—Orchard—Stormwater Management Action Plan 13 Public Education and Outreach The City is required to implement public education and outreach programs to build awareness, foster behavior change, and provide stewardship opportunities all related to water resource protection. The City will conduct the following additional actions in Lower Blackjack Creek Catchment A: Identify new locations and add Mutt Mitt pet waste stations to key pet walking areas. Conduct a one-time targeted public education effort to property owners to build awareness about stormwater impacts to surface waters and best management practices, including car washing, pet waste pickup, and other practices to reduce pollution. Develop and distribute education materials to property owners about tree preservation and wetland buffer best management practices. Implement a three year pilot program for education and public participation in a citizen volunteer stream team. Implement a three year pilot program for technical assistance to property owners to improve or establish riparian plantings. Table 3. City of Port Orchard Lower Blackjack Creek Catchment A Stormwater Program Enhancements. Permit Section Action Cost Illicit Discharge Detection Locate and map additional outfalls one time $1,200 and Elimination S.5.C.5 Inspect City stormwater outfalls annually $7,200 Source Control Program Inspect businesses the first year of the program $0 for Existing Development Conduct enhanced technical assistance $7,200 S.5.C.8 Include and inspect multi -family properties $0 Operations and Clean targeted City catch basins annually $25,000 Maintenance S.5.C.7 Public Education and Add Mutt Mitt pet waste pick up stations $4,000 Outreach S.5.C.2 Conduct one time public education to build awareness about $6,000 stormwater impacts to surface waters and best management practices Conduct one time education about tree preservation and $12,000 wetland buffer best management practices Implement a citizen stream team pilot program $60,000 Implement a stream riparian planting pilot program $60,000 Total Cost $182,600 CHANGES TO LONG RANGE PLANS The SMAP will be incorporated into the City 2024 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update by reference. H E R R E RA October 2022 14 City of Port Orchard—Stormwater Management Action Plan BUDGET AND SCHEDULE Cost estimates for each SMAP action were developed and identified for either short-term (2024- 2030) or long-term(2O31-2044) implementation. These costs may be mitigated by grant funding programs; the retrofit projects, the floodplain project and some of the education projects may be grant eligible. For the purpose of this document, no assumptions have been included about grant funds. Some actions are implemented annually while others are a one-time project implemented as a 3-year pilot (see Table 4). The schedule does not assume continuation of programs identified as "short-term" or "pilot" projects beyond the minimum time frame, either 2024-2030 or three year pilot. The total estimated cost for short-term actions is $1,467,600. The total estimated cost for long- term actions is $8,370,000. A summary of short-term and long-term actions costs are shown in Table 4. October 2022 %HERRERA City of Port—Orchard—Stormwater Management Action Plan 15 Table 4. Lower Blackjack Creek Catchment A Stormwater Management Actions Schedule and Cost Summary. Schedule Short- or Action Long -Term' Duration Cost Design South Sidney Regional Facility Short One time $1,400,000 Construct South Sidney Regional Facility Design and Construct Flower Meadows St. Pond Retrofit and Naturalization Long One time $2,100,000 Long One time $45,000 Design and Construct Sedgewick Water Campus Pond Naturalization Long One time $45,000 Design South Blackjack Creek Flood lain Restoration Long One time $1,000,000 Construct South Blackjack Creek Flood lain Restoration Long One time $5,000,000 Conduct private property rain garden & LID retrofit program Long Annual for 3 year pilot $60,000 (over 3 ears) Conduct review of stormwater standards Short Annual $5,000 (over 5 ears) Locate and map additional outfalls Short One time $1,200 Inspect City outfalls Short One time $7,200 Inspect businesses the first year of the program Short One time $0 Conduct enhanced Business Source Control technical assistance Short Annual $7,200 (over 5 ears) Include and inspect multi -family properties in Business Source Control Program Short One time $0 Clean targeted City catch basins Short Annual $25,000 Add Mutt Mitt pet waste pick up stations Short One time $4,000 Conduct private property stormwater impacts & practices outreach Short One time $6,000 Conduct private property tree preservation and wetland buffer Outreach Program Short Annual for 3 year pilot $12,000 Implement a citizen stream team pilot program Long Annual for- 3 year pilot $60,000 Implement a stream riparian planting pilot program Long Annual for 3 year pilot Total Short -Term Costs $60,000 $1,467,600 Total Long -Term Costs 1 $9,837,600 Note=Cost estimates are in 2022 dollars. Inflation and escalation of costs were not incorporated into cost estimates. a Short-term = implementation between 2024 to 2030 Long-term = implementation between 2031 and 2044 LID= low impact development (6 HERRERA October 2022 16 City of Port Orchard-Stormwater Management Action Plan FUTURE ASSESSMENT AND FEEDBACK The purpose of the SMAP is to conduct actions in Catchment A to protect or enhance the receiving water of Lower Blackjack Creek. The SMAP is comprised of retrofit projects, land management strategies and enhanced programmatic activities. The City will assess implementation by tracking project implementation, effectiveness and demand for programs, and environmental monitoring data. This tracking will provide feedback to the City about SMAP implementation. Projects are typically reviewed and tracked as part of capital project planning and budgeting. More detailed program analysis, financial assessment and capital project planning occurs on a 6- to 7-year cycle as part of comprehensive planning and provides an additional opportunity for tracking. Projects (those shown in Figure 2) will be tracked for implementation. Design, construction, and potential grant oversight will require City staff time. Staff capacity or lack of grant funding may be limiting factors for implementation. Programs are typically reviewed annually for NPDES permit reporting The City desires to implement programs that are effective, in demand, and worthwhile continuing. Programs will be evaluated to determine if they are not effective (due to lack of response or engagement) or no longer effective (catch basin cleaning, business source control assistance). Successful programs may be continued through the long term depending upon staff capacity and funding. Environmental data collection also occurs annually as part of routine monitoring for stream flow and benthic macroinvertebrates. These data may be useful in assessing trends of stream health over time. B-IBI data will be evaluated for long-term trends and stream flow metrics related to stormwater impacts will be evaluated. October 2022 %HERRERA City of Port—Orchard—Stormwater Management Action Plan 17 REFERENCES Ecology. 2019. Stormwater Management Action Planning Guidance. Washington Department of Ecology -Water Quality Program. Publication Number 19-10-010. ESA. 2017. Blackjack Creek Watershed Restoration Assessment and Protection and Restoration Plan. Prepared for Suquamish Tribe and Washington Department of Ecology, by ESA Consultants, Seattle, Washington. Herrera. 2022a. City of Port Orchard Watershed Inventory and Assessment — Technical Memorandum. Prepared for the City of Port Orchard by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Seattle, Washington. March 21.<httPS:Hportorchardwa.gov/documents/port-orchard- watershed-i nventory/> Herrera. 2022b. City of Port Orchard Watershed Prioritization — Technical Memorandum. Prepared for the City of Port Orchard by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Seattle, Washington. June 22. <httPS:Hportorchardwa.gov/documents/port-orchard-watershed- prioritization/> Kitsap Regional Coordination Council. 2022. Land Use Planning Policy Committee Meeting. February 15. < https:Hstaticl .squarespace.com/static/5660ba88e4bOe83ffe8O32fc/t/6205bOf793b6a l 302e7c8f 41/1644540153978/KRCC+PlanPOL+Feb+15+2022+Meeting+Packet.pdf. > Puget Sound Benthos Database. 2022. Accessed August 1, 2022. <https:HPugetsoundstreambenthos.org/> Puget Sound Regional Council. 2020. Vision 2050 A Plan for the Central Puget Sound Region. Puget Sound Regional Council, Seattle, Washington. October 2022 n� HERRERA City of Port—Orchard—Stormwater Management Action Plan 19 December 2022 t,i HERRERA City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan December 2022 APPENDIX D Financial Analysis HERRERA City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan 0 CHARD This entire report is made of readily recyclable materials, including the bronze wire binding and the front and back cover, which are made from post -consumer recycled plastic bottles. �'_ to ____) City of Port Orchard tormwater Utility Rate Study FINAL REPORT December 2022 Washington 7525 166th Avenue NE, Ste. D215 Redmond, WA 98052 425.867.1802 Oregon 5335 Meadows Road, Ste. 330 Lake Oswego, OR 97035 503.841.6543 Colorado 1320 Pearl St, Ste 120 Boulder, CO 80302 719.284.9168 www.fcsgroup.com • ❖> FICS GROUP • Solutions -Oriented Consulting Firm Headquarters Established 1988 •••> F CS GROUP Redmond Town Center Washington 1425.867.1802 • 7525166thAve NE, Ste. D-215 Oregon 1503.841.6543 Solutions -Oriented Consulting Redmond, Washington 98052 Colorado 1719.284.9168 December 15, 2022 Zack Holt, Public Works Stormwater Manager City of Port Orchard 216 Prospect St. Port Orchard, WA 98366 Subject: Stormwater Utility Rate Study Dear Mr. Holt: FCS GROUP is pleased to submit this report summarizing the results of the Stormwater Utility Rate Study. We want to thank you and City staff for your assistance and participation in data collection, analysis review, and discussion of key policy topics. This report includes consideration of three stormwater levels of service, each with varying levels of staffing and capital project considerations. The detailed methodologies used to derive the revenue needs for all levels of service (and a capital facility charge for each) are included in this report. It has been a pleasure to work with you and City staff on this study. Please let us know if you have any questions. Tage can be reached at (425) 615- 6487 or TageAkfcsgroup.com. Sincerely, A�- John Ghilarducci Tage Aaker Luke Rosson Project Principal Project Manager Analyst City of Port Orchard December 2022 Stormwater Utility Rate Study page i Table of Contents Section I. Introduction/Summary ........................... Utility Background ................................................... RateStudy.............................................................. Utility Rate and Inflation ........................................... Revenue Requirement Results by Level of Service... Capital Facility Charge by Level of Service ............... TABLE OF CONTENTS Section II. Fiscal Policies ............................................... Operating Reserve — Fund 421......................................... Capital Reserve — Fund 423.............................................. Adopted City Fiscal Policies .............................................. Stabilization Reserve — Fund 422...................................... DebtManagement............................................................ Rate Funded System Reinvestment (Rate Funded Capital) Summary of Fiscal Policies ............................................... Section III. Revenue Requirement ............ Economic & Inflation Factors ........................ Fund Balances ............................................. Staffing & Other Operational Funding Needs. Capital Expenditures .................................... Capital Funding Strategy .............................. Revenue Requirement for Level of Service 1 Revenue Requirement for Level of Service 2 Revenue Requirement for Level of Service 3 Section IV. Capital Facility Charges .......... Introduction.................................................. LegalBasis .................................................. Methodology................................................. Existing Cost Basis ....................................... Future Cost Basis ......................................... Estimated Customer Base (System Capacity) ...........................................................................1 ...................................................................................1 ...................................................................................1 ................................................................................... 2 ...................................................................................2 ................................................................................... 3 .......................................................................................... 8 ................................................................................................... 8 ................................................................................................... 8 ................................................................................................... 9 .................................................................................................10 .................................................................................................11 .................................................................................................12 .................................................................................................13 .................................................................................................14 ................................................... 15 .........................................................15 .........................................................15 .........................................................15 .........................................................16 .........................................................17 .........................................................18 •:;> FCS GROUP www.fcsgroup.com City of Port Orchard December 2022 Stormwater Utility Rate Study page ii CFC Results Section V. Summary ...................................... Capital Facility Charge ..................................... Single -Family Residential Rate Comparison..... Single -Family Stormwater CFC Comparison..... Updating This Study's Findings ........................ Model Appendices .........................................................19 ........................................................................................ 20 ................................................................................................. 20 ................................................................................................. 20 ................................................................................................. 22 ................................................................................................. 22 23 •*;4 FCS GROUP www.fcsgroup.com City of Port Orchard Stormwater Utility Rate Study December 2022 page 1 Section I. INTRODUCTION/SUMMARY Utility Background According to the City's Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan 2023 (Comprehensive Plan) by Herrera Environmental Consultants, "the City of Port Orchard (City) operates a system of drainage pipes and ditches to convey Stormwater runoff to receiving waters including streams and Sinclair Inlet. The drainage system prevents and minimizes damage to private properties, city streets, and other infrastructure... The City is faced with the challenge to convey runoff safely, while minimizing adverse high -flow impacts (erosion, flooding, and sediment deposition) and water quality degradation to receiving waters." The City bills and collects fees from customers within its service area to provide resources needed to plan, manage, design, construct, maintain, revise, and upgrade its stormwater system. Rate Study The rate study has two main goals — to develop revenue requirement analyses and capital facility charges for the City's stormwater utility. The results corresponding to each level of service vary because each level of service incorporates different operational and capital project needs. Revenue Requirement One main purpose of this rate study is to develop a funding plan ("revenue requirement") for the City's stormwater utility for the 2022-2041 study period. The revenue requirement identifies the total amount of rate revenue needed to fully fund the utility on a standalone basis, considering operating and maintenance expenditures, existing debt service, capital funding needs identified in the City's capital plan, and fiscal policies. Exhibit 1 shows the general methodology of the rate study process. Exhibit 1: Revenue Requirement Overview Financial Policies REVENUE REQUIREMENT t Capital Facility Charge (CFC) The other purpose of this rate study is to develop a capital facility charge, or CFC, for the City's stormwater utility. The City currently has water and sewer utility CFCs, but none for its stormwater utility. CFCs are designed to recover from new development a proportionate share of the cost of capital facilities. CFCs are one-time charges, not ongoing rates. They are typically payable at the time of development (or redevelopment to a higher intensity of development). Capital facility charges serve two primary purposes: to provide equity between existing and new customers; and to provide a source of capital funding for system capital costs, as growth occurs. ��> FCS GRDUP www.fcsgroup.com City of Port Orchard Stormwater Utility Rate Study December 2022 page 2 Utility Rate and Inflation In June 2015, the City increased its monthly stormwater utility fee from $9.70 to $14.00 per impervious surface unit (ISU). It has not increased since that time. Exhibit 2 compares that fee against what that fee would have been if annual inflationary adjustments had been applied. The fee would need to be roughly $18 in 2022 to have a similar amount of buying power as it did in 2015. Since 2015, the utility has faced significant cost inflation and development. While new development does result in new customers who pay the monthly rate, new development may also require additional services and can result in additional costs for the utility to build and maintain the infrastructure that serves the new development. Additionally, the City has gone through another iteration of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Municipal stormwater permit (2019) which has resulted in increased regulatory requirements for the stormwater program. Exhibit 2: City's Monthly Stormwater Fee vs. Consumer Price Index (CPI) Inflation $20 $17.90 $15----------- - - - - -• f14.00 $10 $5 $0 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 � City's Fee • • • CPI Inflation Applied to 2015 Fee Revenue Requirement Results by Level of Service The following sections summarize revenue requirement results by level of service (LOS). In each LOS, there is a three-year phase -in to help rates "catch up" to the level of service needs. After that, inflationary -level adjustments are assumed — 3% per year for each level of service. In LOS 3, increases drop to 1.5% in 2033 to avoid a large buildup of reserves. As previously noted, the forecast goes through the end of 2041, but the tables below show results through 2031 due to space limitations. To give City staff and City Council time to consider each level of service, and the associated rate adjustments, it is assumed initial rate adjustments would not be made until 2024. If the City were to incorporate rate increases earlier, say effective July 1, 2023, it would reduce future rate increases by roughly $1-2 per month per ISU. Among the information listed for each level of service are details regarding capital expenditures. Capital projects (net of grants) refers to net capital expenditures after receiving grant funding; both factors vary based on level of service. Level of Service 1 Level of Service 1 requires monthly rate increases averaging $3.60 per year for 2024-26. This level of service funds approximately $36 million in capital projects (net of grants) inflated to the year of construction (2022-2041) and provides funding for up to 1.7 additional FTEs. Exhibit 3: Level of Service 1: Rate Adjustments 2023 1 2024 2025 1 2026 2027 2028 1 2029 Monthly Rate I ISU $14.00 $16.94 $20.50 $24.80 $25.55 $26.31 $27.10 $27.91 $28.75 Changein Monthly Rate $2.94 $3.56 $4.30 $0.75 $0.76 $0.79 $0.81 i$ � ��> FCS GRDUP www.fcsgroup.com City of Port Orchard December 2022 Level of Service 2 Stormwater Utility Rate Study page 3 Level of Service 2 requires monthly rate increases averaging $5.82 per year for 2024-26. This level of service funds approximately $48 million in capital projects (net of grants) inflated to the year of construction (2022-2041) and provides funding for up to 4.7 additional FTEs. Exhibit 4: Level of Service 2: Rate Adjustments I2023 1 2024 I 2 2026 2027 1 2028 2029 2030 1 2031 Monthly Rate / ISU $14.00 $18.34 $24.03 $31.47 $32.42 $33.39 $34.39 $35.42 $36.49 Change in $4.34 $5.69 $7.44 $0.95 $0.97 $1.00 $1.03 $1.07 Monthly Rate Level of Service 3 Level of Service 3 requires monthly rate increases averaging $9.71 per year for 2024-26. This level of service funds approximately $58 million in capital projects (net of grants) inflated to the year of construction (2022-2041) and provides funding for up to 5.5 additional FTEs. Exhibit 5: Level of Service 3: Rate Adjustments I2023 I 2024 I 2025 1 2026 I 2027 I 2028 I 2029 I 2030 I 2031 Monthly Rate / ISU $14.00 $20.37 $29.64 $43.12 $44.42 $45.75 $47.12 $48.54 $49.99 Change in $6.37 $9.27 $13.48 $1.30 $1.33 $1.37 $1.42 Monthly Rate Capital Facility Charge by Level of Service The calculated stormwater capital facility charge varies by level of service. Each level of service assumes a different amount of grants which are subtracted from the recoverable cost basis. The CFCs by level of service, per impervious surface unit (ISU), are shown below. Per the City's municipal code, one ISU is defined as one single-family residential account (including a mobile home) or 3,000 impervious square feet of ground cover for all other developed parcels. • LOS 1: $2,469 per impervious surface unit • LOS 2: $3,087 per impervious surface unit • LOS 3: $3,914 per impervious surface unit These charges reflect the maximum defensible CFC that the City Council could adopt, by level of service. The Council could adopt, by policy, a CFC that is lower than the indicated amounts. Lastly, the City should align its revenue requirement and CFC choices. For example, if the City Council adopts a rate plan supporting the revenue requirement for level of service 1, it should not adopt a CFC that aligns with level of service 2 or 3. ��> FCS GRDUP www.fcsgroup.com City of Port Orchard Stormwater Utility Rate Study December 2022 page 4 Section II. FISCAL POLICIES The basic framework for evaluating utility revenue needs includes sound fiscal policies. Several policy topics are important to consider further as part of managing the finances of the City, including operating reserves, capital reserves, debt management, and rate funded capital. The City makes use of four different funds / reserves: operating, stabilization, capital, and debt service. When evaluating reserve levels and objectives, it is important to recognize that the value of reserves lies in their potential use. A reserve strategy that deliberately avoids any use of reserves negates their purpose. The fluctuation of reserve levels may indicate that the system is working, while the lack of variation over many years strongly suggests that the reserves are, in fact, unnecessary. Operating Reserve — Fund 421 An operating reserve is designed to provide a liquidity cushion; it protects the utility from the risk of short-term variation in the timing of revenue collection or payment of expenses. Industry practice for utility operating reserves typically ranges from 30 days (8%) to 120 days (33%) of operating expenses, with the lower end more appropriate for utilities with stable revenue streams and the higher end of the range more appropriate for utilities with significant seasonal or consumption -based fluctuations. Recommended Policy: Achieve a year-end balance target of 90 days (25%) of total annual operating expenditures. This equates to $397,000 for the 2022 budget, $486,000 for the 2023 budget, and $483,000 for the 2024 budget. Capital Reserve — Fund 423 This reserve provides a source of emergency funding for unexpected asset failures or other unanticipated capital needs. This capital reserve policy is not intended to guard against catastrophic system failure or extreme acts of nature. Minimum balances for capital reserves are often based on a percentage (commonly 1% to 2%) of the original cost of utility fixed assets or an amount determined sufficient to fund an emergency capital project or equipment failure. Capital reserves larger than these amounts may be prudent if the City is saving for future capital projects that cannot be funded with same -year rate revenues. Recommended Policy: Achieve a year-end target of at least 1 % of the original cost of fixed assets. In 2022, the City had over $16 million in stormwater assets plus construction in progress, which results in a $160,000 capital reserve target. Capital reserves larger than this may be prudent if the City is saving in advance for future capital projects. This target is projected to grow over time as the City executes its capital improvement program. •:;> FCS GROUP www.fcsgroup.com City of Port Orchard December 2022 Adopted City Fiscal Policies Stormwater Utility Rate Study page 5 Per Resolution No. 053-20, the City's stormwater operating reserve (Fund 421) balance must be sufficient to meet roughly two months of recurring revenue, with a goal to work towards a maximum of three months of revenues. The City does not have an adopted policy regarding its capital reserve (Fund 423). Calculating a reserve based on revenue in the rate forecast model can create a circular type of argument, so it was not modeled that way. As previously noted, operating reserves are typically based on a certain number of days of operating expenditures. The American Water Works Association (AWWA) published a 2018 Cash Reserve Policy Guidelines, and it cites recommended reserve levels from the Water Environment Federation, International City/County Management Association, and the Government Finance Officers Association, all of which reference a certain number of days of operating expenses. Capital reserves are typically based on a percentage of fixed assets or an amount sufficient to respond to an emergency capital project. To make sure the rate plan in each level of service met the City's adopted policy, we tested the combined operating reserve (90 days of operating expenses) plus the capital reserve (1% of fixed assets) to ensure that it was equal to or greater than two months of revenues. Stabilization Reserve — Fund 422 The City maintains stabilization reserves for each of its water, sewer, and stormwater utilities. Per the City's adopted fiscal policies, this reserve "shall be used if all efforts have been exhausted to fund a qualifying event and no reasonable budget adjustments are available to continue to provide essential services to the public." The policy notes qualifying events as follows: • The State of Washington or the Federal government formally declares a disaster or emergency. • A natural or urgent event that jeopardizes public safety, impedes commerce, or threatens additional damage to City infrastructure. • Unforeseen events or situations outside of the scope of contingency planning or planned normal course of government operations. • An act of war, terrorism, or declaration of Martial law. Recommended Policy: Per Resolution No. 053-20, the stabilization reserve should target having 90 days (25%) of annual expenditures. Per discussions with City staff, this reserve is fully funded through the end of 2024. The forecast did not assume these funds were available for use, nor did the forecast add any funds to this reserve throughout the study period. 0 Debt Management The City currently has two outstanding stormwater utility -related loans. For the management of current as well as potential future debt, some considerations are provided below. Types of Debt Considered as Part of this Forecast For utilities, there are two primary sources of debt financing: State or federal loan programs, and market debt financing. •*;4 FCS GROUP www.fcsgroup.com City of Port Orchard December 2022 Stormwater Utility Rate Study page 6 State -Administered Loan Programs State -administered loans (including federal loans administered by the State) are generally preferable to market debt financing. The interest rate is generally lower for State loans, and the loan terms often offer more flexibility in administering the debt. For instance, most State loan programs do not include a requirement that the utility maintain a certain minimum level of debt service coverage. Market Debt Financing General Obligation Bonds General Obligation (G.O.) bonds are voter -approved bonds secured by the full faith and credit of the issuing agency, committing all available tax and revenue resources to debt repayment. With this high level of commitment, G.O. bonds have relatively low interest rates. General Obligation taxing authority can be sought as a backup pledge to reduce the interest rate of utility debt, even if the actual source of repayment is intended to be utility rates. However, the use of G.O. bond financing is limited in relation to assessed valuation, and G.O. bonds must be authorized by 60% of the voters. For these reasons, G.O. bonds are not often used for utility capital projects. Limited Tax General Obligation (LTGO) bonds can also be issued up to a statutory ceiling without a vote of the people. In Washington, they are sometimes referred to as "councilmanic" bonds. Unlike G.O. bonds, LTGO debt does not authorize additional property taxes; instead, it must be repaid within the City's existing taxing authority. Usually there are competing demands for that funding within a City, and for that reason, LTGO debt is not often used for utility capital projects either. Revenue Bonds Revenue bonds are secured by the revenues of the issuing utility; the debt obligation does not extend to the City's other revenue sources. With this limited commitment, revenue bonds usually bear higher interest rates than G.O. bonds. Revenue bonds typically require the achievement of minimum debt service coverage each year. Revenue bonds can be issued in Washington without a public vote. There is no limit, except the practical limit of the utility's ability to generate revenue to repay the debt and meet debt service coverage each year. Forecast Assumption: The forecast assumes that the City will issue revenue bonds when debt is needed. While low-cost state loans are typically preferred, revenue bonds are conservatively assumed as they require the forecast to cover higher interest rates and debt service coverage requirements. If the City secures low-cost state loans, that will be a positive result that will not negatively impact the forecast, while the inverse could have a negative impact on the forecast (relying on state loans but ultimately needing to rely on revenue bonds instead which have higher interest and debt service coverage requirements). Debt Service / Reserve — Fund 424 A debt reserve is most often required as a condition of bond issuance, though some state loan programs also require a reserve. The reserve intends to protect bondholders (or the agency issuing loans) from the risk of the borrower defaulting on their payments and is most often linked to either average annual debt service or maximum annual debt service. Recommended Policy: The policy should be dictated by terms outlined in contracts for debt obligations. ��> FCS GRDUP www.fcsgroup.com City of Port Orchard December 2022 Debt Service Coverage Stormwater Utility Rate Study page 7 Debt service coverage is typically a requirement associated with revenue bonds and some state loans, and it is an important benchmark to measure the riskiness of the water utility's capital funding plans. Coverage is most easily understood as a factor applied to annual debt service. In such a case, if it issues revenue bonds, the utility agrees to collect enough revenue to meet operating expenses and not only pay debt service but to collect an additional factor (often 25%) above bonded debt service. The extra revenue is a "cushion" that makes bondholders more confident that debt service will be paid on time. JA Recommended Policy: While a factor of 1.25 is a common legal minimum coverage requirement for revenue bonds, we recommend a more conservative internal policy coverage target of at least 1.50 to 2.00 for revenue bond debt. We are not currently aware of any debt service coverage requirements related to the City's existing stormwater-related loans. Rate Funded System Reinvestment (Rate Funded Capital) Rate funded system reinvestment is the funding of long-term infrastructure replacement needs through a regular (annual) and predictable rate provision. Most commonly, utilities that have addressed replacement funding needs have used historical (original cost) depreciation expense as the basis for a reasonable level of reinvestment in the system. In other cases, utilities strive to rate fund routine repair and replacement projects, saving debt for larger and / or more one-time type projects. Recommended Policy: Set rates to fund a majority of routine repair and replacement projects with cash, such as the City's Ongoing Conveyance System Improvement Program. This annual program is expected to cost approximately $1,000,000 per year in 2022 dollars. Summary of Fiscal Policies Exhibit 6 provides a summary of the recommended fiscal policies for the City. Exhibit 6: Summary of Fiscal Policies Operating Reserve Achieve a year-end minimum balance target of 90 days (25%) of total annual operating expenditures. This target increases as the City's operating costs increase. Capital Reserve Achieve a year-end target of at least 1 % of the original cost of fixed assets. Operating plus Capital Compare the combined operating plus capital targets against the City's adopted policy of two to three months of recurring revenues. Rate Funded Capital Strive to rate fund a majority of the City's ongoing Conveyance System Improvement Program, which is estimated to be roughly $1,000,000 per year, plus inflation. Debt Service Coverage While a factor of 1.25 is a common legal minimum coverage for revenue bonds, achieve an internal policy coverage target of at least 1.50 to 2.00 when possible. �� FCS GRDUP www.fcsgroup.com City of Port Orchard Stormwater Utility Rate Study December 2022 page 8 Section III. REVENUE REQUIREMENT As previously mentioned, the main purpose of the revenue requirement analysis is to develop a funding plan ("revenue requirement") for the 2022-2041 study period. For each level of service, the revenue requirement identifies the total rate revenue needed to fully fund the utility on a standalone basis considering current financial obligations including operating expenditures, existing debt service, policy -driven commitments, and future capital project needs. Rate increases are applied "across-the-board" — that is, it is assumed that each charge on the rate schedule increases by the same percentage, which maintains the existing rate structure. Economic & Inflation Factors The operating and maintenance expenditure forecast largely relies on the City's 2022 -2024 budgets. The line items in the budget are then adjusted each year by utilizing one of the following applicable factors: • General Cost Inflation. Assumed to be 3.0 percent per year based on both the Washington State Economic & Revenue Forecast Council projection for the Consumer Price Index and the recent historical performance of the Seattle -Tacoma -Bellevue Consumer Price Index. • Construction Cost Inflation. Assumed to be 3.5 percent per year based on the Engineering News- Record's Construction Cost Index (20-City Average). • Taxes. State Business and Occupation tax rate of 1.75 percent (taxable revenue goes above the $1.0 million threshold) and the City utility tax rate of 5.00 percent. • Personnel Cost Inflation. Based on Employment Cost Indices (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics), experience with other stormwater utilities, and discussions with City staff. » Labor inflation: assumed to be 3.0 percent per year. » Benefits inflation: assumed to be 5.0 percent per year. • Cost per Additional Full -Time Equivalent (FTE). Each level of service incorporates additional staff. Based on discussions with City staff, we assumed a "fully loaded" cost of $125,000 per FTE (2022 $), which is assumed to include both wages and benefits. • Fund Earnings. Assumed to be 2.25% percent per year based on recent earnings reports from the State's Local Government Investment Pool (LGIP) at the time of the analysis. • Customer Account Growth. City staff provided a detailed growth forecast for the 2023-2025 period, based on projects currently identified in the City's permitting pipeline. Based on that forecast, City staff estimated that 300 impervious surface units would be added each year through 2025, and that 150 units per year would be added after that. This equates to annual growth rates of approximately 2.75% per year through 2025 and 1.25% for each year thereafter. Fund Balances The 2022 starting cash balances associated with the stormwater utility funds are shown below in Exhibit 7 and total $2.5 million. ��> FCS GRDUP www.fcsgroup.com City of Port Orchard December 2022 Exhibit 7: 2022 Beginning Fund Balances Operating Reserve - 421 $2,116,000 Rate Stabilization Reserve - 422 - 343,001 Capital Reserve - 423 94,000 Debt Reserve - 424 0 Total $2,553,000 Staffing & Other Operational Funding Needs Stormwater Utility Rate Study page 9 According to the City's 2023 Comprehensive Plan, "City staff can address surface water and stormwater problems that arise on a daily basis and troubleshoot specific issues that arise with development project reviews. However, they are not fully able to perform activities that would enable continual improvement of the City's surface water management program. Current staffing levels will not be adequate to meet the rest of the requirements of the 2019-2024 Phase II Permit and long-term goals defined as part of this Plan." The resulting staffing requirements and other funding needs (e.g., consultant support) are shown by level of service in Exhibits 8 and 9. Additional Staffing Requirements Herrera Environmental Consultants (Herrera) worked with City staff to identify the following staffing requirements (above those that are included in the 2023 -24 budget). By 2029, LOS 1 would require 1.7 additional full-time equivalents (FTEs), LOS 2 would require 4.7 additional FTEs, and LOS 3 would require 5.5 additional FTEs. Exhibit 8: Total Additional Staffing Needs by Level of Service 6 5 03 Lu 4 , �3 0 a Q 2 1 1 0 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 ■ LOS 1 LOS 2 ■ LOS 3 FCSGRDUP www.fcsgroup.com City of Port Orchard Stormwater Utility Rate Study December 2022 page 10 Other Operational Funding Needs Herrera worked with City staff to identify other funding needs, primarily in the form of consultant support to assist City staff in certain programmatic areas. These costs, shown in Exhibit 9, are in addition to the City's adopted 2023-24 budget and are summarized below: • LOS 1: Stormwater planning, climate change in capital projects support. • LOS 2: LOS 1, plus public education & outreach for low impact development practices. • LOS 3: LOS 2, plus climate change in private development projects support. The $100,000 bump in 2028 is related to developing policy and standards for new and redevelopment projects to design for more intense future precipitation. Exhibit 9: Other Operational Funding Needs by Level of Service (2022 $) $120,000 $100,000 z c' $80.000 cu Q $60,000 0 $40,000 o � $20,000 a ■ oil ■■■ ■■I ■ $- 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 ■ LOS 1 LOS 2 ■ LOS 3 Capital Expenditures Herrera worked with City staff to develop three levels of service for the stormwater capital program, each with varied timelines and grant assumptions, shown in Exhibit 10. Exhibit 10: Capital Program Assumptions by Level of Service Level of Service 1 Implementation of all projects within 20 years Level of Service 2 Implementation of all projects within 20 years Level of Service 3 Implementation of all projects within 6 years Maximum grant funding (many projects would not proceed without grants) Moderate grant funding (some projects would not proceed without grants) No grant funding assumed Given these assumptions, Exhibit 11 shows the assumed level of annual capital expenditures, after the assumed grants have been deducted. ��> FCS GRDUP www.fcsgroup.com City of Port Orchard Stormwater Utility Rate Study December 2022 page 11 Exhibit 11: Annual Capital Costs by Level of Service (Net of Assumed Grants) in 2022 $ $10,000,000 $9,000,000 $8,000,000 $7,000,000 $6,000,000 $5,000,000 $4,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 � � � � `� � i � � i ■ $1,000,000 o�� oti° off° o`ti`' oti° 0�1 0�° oti o,° ti o�� ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ■ LOS 1 ■ LOS 2 ■ LOS 3 Summary notes related to the capital plan are provided below for the three levels of service: • Level of Service 1: The 2022-2041 CIP totals $25 million ($1.2 million per year) in 2022 dollars and $36 million with forecasted inflation ($1.8 million per year). • Level of Service 2: The 2022-2041 CIP totals $34 million ($1.7 million per year) in 2022 dollars and $48 million with forecasted inflation ($2.4 million per year). • Level of Service 3: The 2022-2041 CIP totals $45 million ($2.3 million per year) in 2022 dollars and $58 million with forecasted inflation ($2.9 million per year). Capital Funding Strategy The 2022-2041 capital plan varies in funding sources as well as total capital. The latter is due to changes in capital timing and associated inflation. A few observations are shown below: • Rate funded capital ranges from $17.4 to $23.4 million in each level of service. • Borrowing increases from $15 million in LOS 1 to $34 million in LOS 3. • Assumed grants and other sources decrease from $28.6 million in LOS 1 to just $0.5 million in LOS 3; it is assumed that the general fund contributes $0.5 million in each level of service for a multi -purpose land acquisition budgeted for 2023. • Total capital in LOS 3 is much less than LOS 1 or LOS 2 because most projects are assumed to be completed in the next six years, which reduces the impact of inflation compared to a twenty- year completion schedule. Exhibit 12: Capital Funding Strategy by Level of Service Level of Service 1 Level of Service 2 Level of Service 3 Drawdown of Existing Reserves $640,000 $530,000 $- Rate Funded Capital $19,900,000 $17,240,000 $23,350,000 Debt (Borrowing) $15,300,000 $29,700,000 $33,800,000 Grants & General Fund $28,550,000 $19,480,000 $500,000 Total $64,390,000 $66,950,000 $57,650,000 �� FCS GRDUP www.fcsgroup.com City of Port Orchard Stormwater Utility Rate Study December 2022 page 12 Revenue Requirement for Level of Service 1 Exhibit 13 graphically represents the LOS 1 revenue requirement forecast through 2041. The stacked columns represent the costs and obligations of the utility such as operating expenses and annual rate spending for capital projects, while the lines represent utility revenues. • Solid black line: Revenue at existing rates. » Stormwater rate revenue is expected to be roughly $1.8 million in 2022 and is expected to grow at a varying rate ranging from 1.2%-2.5% per year with customer growth. • Dashed black line: Revenues with rate increases. ............................ » Rate revenue must increase to allow the utility to cover its financial obligations. • I0 . - , = 2022-24 budgets plus inflation. » Operating expenses are based on the adopted 2022-2024 budgets and increase with the annual cost escalation assumptions previously discussed. • � Additional FTEs and operating costs associated with each LOS. » Level of Service 1 incorporates funding for 1.7 FTEs and the other operational needs identified in Exhibit 9. • - Existing debt service. » The stormwater utility has two loans with annual debt service totaling $177,000 per year. • W 0 Net debt service. » Annual principal and interest resulting from this borrowing are expected to be $1.2 million per year by 2041. • - - .. Rate Funded Capital (i.e., cash available for capital). » Rates cannot support annual rate funded capital until the first scheduled increase in 2024. With rate increases, this amount is projected to increase to $1.4 million by 2041. Exhibit 13: Level of Service 1: Annual Revenue Requirement Forecast 2022-2041 $12,000,000 Data label legend: Increase 124-26 average monthly increase of $3.60 $10,000,000 Monthly Rate perlSU $8,000,000 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3/ $36$38.64 .42 $37.52 $1.13 3% $34.33 $35.36 $1.06 $1.09 $6,000,000 3% 3% 3� $27/91 $28.75 $ 9.61 $0089 $092 $0.94 $1.00 $1.03 • 21 % $26.31 $27.10 $0.84 $0.86 21 % $24.80 $25.55 $0.77 $0.79 $0.81 $4,000,000 21% $20.So $4.30 $0.74 • $16.94 $3.56 • - $14.00 $14.00 $2.94 • $2,000,000 � 0&M Expense � New Debt Service • • • Revenue with Increases � LOS Additional Operating Existing Debt Service � Rate Funded Capital Revenue @ 2022 Rates •:;> FCS GRDUP www.fcsgroup.com City of Port Orchard Stormwater Utility Rate Study December 2022 page 13 Revenue Requirement for Level of Service 2 Exhibit 14 graphically represents the LOS 2 revenue requirement forecast through 2041. • Solid black line: Revenue at existing rates. » Stormwater rate revenue is expected to be roughly $1.8 million in 2022 and is expected to grow at a varying rate ranging from 1.2%-2.5% per year with customer growth. • Dashed black line: Revenues with rate increases. ............................ » Rate revenue must increase to allow the utility to cover its existing financial obligations while also funding capital improvement projects. These rate increases start in 2024. • I� . .. 2022-24 Budgets plus Inflation » Operating expenses are based on the adopted 2022-2024 budgets and increase with the annual cost escalation assumptions previously discussed. • Green bar] Additional FTEs and Operating Costs from LOS. » Level of Service 2 incorporates funding for 4.7 FTEs and the other operational needs identified in Exhibit 9. • - Existing debt service. » The stormwater utility has two loans with annual debt service totaling $177,000 per year. • - Net debt service. » Annual principal and interest resulting from this borrowing are expected to be $2.4 million per year by 2041. • Rate Funded Capital (i.e., cash available for capital). » Rates cannot support meaningful annual rate funded capital until 2025. With rate increases, this amount is projected to increase to $1.2 million by 2041. Exhibit 14: Level of Service 2: Annual Revenue Requirement Forecast 2022-2041 $12,000,000 Data label legend: % Increase 2024-26 average monthly increase of $5.82 $10,000,000 Monthly Rate per ISU 3% 3% 3% 3% $47.61 $4.4 3 $8,000,000 3% 3% $44. 7 $16 5 $1.3: $1.43 ° 3% $42.30 $43.57 3/0 $41.07 $1.27 3% 3% 3% 3% $39.87 $1.23 • 0 3% 3/0 $35.42 $36.49 $37.58 $38.71 $1.16 $1.20 $6,000,000 31% 3/° $33.o $34.39 $1.03 $1.06 $1.09 $32.42 $1.00 $31.47 $0.94 $0.97 31% $7.45 • $4,000,000 31% $2.• $18.34 $569 69 $4.34 $2,000,000 , 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 � 0&M Expense � LOS Additional Operating � Existing Debt Service � New Debt Service � Rate Funded Capital Revenue @ 2022 Rates - - - Revenue with Increases ��> FCS GRDUP www.fcsgroup.com City of Port Orchard Stormwater Utility Rate Study December 2022 page 14 Revenue Requirement for Level of Service 3 Exhibit 15 graphically represents the LOS 3 revenue requirement forecast through 2041. • Solid black line: Revenue at existing rates. » Stormwater rate revenue is expected to be roughly $1.8 million in 2022 and is expected to grow at a varying rate ranging from 1.2%-2.5% per year with customer growth. • Dashed black line: Revenues with rate increases. ............................ » Rate revenue must increase to allow the utility to cover its existing financial obligations while also funding capital improvement projects. These rate increases start in 2024. • 2022-24 Budgets plus Inflation » Operating expenses are based on the adopted 2022-2024 budgets and increase with the annual cost escalation assumptions previously discussed. • Green bar] Additional FTEs and Operating Costs from LOS. » Level of Service 3 incorporates funding for 5.5 FTEs and the other operational needs identified in Exhibit 9. • - Existing debt service. » The stormwater utility has two loans with annual debt service totaling $177,000 per year. • - Net debt service. » Annual principal and interest resulting from this borrowing are expected to be $2.7 million per year by 2041. • Rate Funded Capital (i.e., cash available for capital). » Rates cannot support meaningful annual rate funded capital until 2025. With rate increases, this amount is projected to increase to $2.2 million by 2041. Exhibit 15: Level of Service 3: Annual Revenue Requirement Forecast 2022-2041 $12,000,000 - Data label legend: average2024-26 monthly ° o % Increase increase of , 1.5% $58°� $5$ g8 Monthly Rate per ISU 0 1.5 , 1.5% 1.5% $57.15 $10,000,000 1.5/0 $55.47 $56.30 $0.84 $0.86 $0.87 0 1.5% 1.5% $53 84 $54.65 0 3.0% 3.0% $52.26 $53.05 $0.80 $0.81 3.0% 48 /o $49.99 $51.49 $8,000,000 0 3.0% $47.12 $1.41 $1.50 3.0% $45.75 $1.41 $1.46 45.5% $44.42 $1.33 • $43.12 $1.29 $13.49 • � $6,000,000 - 45.5% $29.64 $9.27i 45.5% $4,000,000 $6.37 $14.00 $14.00 , $2,000,000 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 � 0&M Expense LOS Additional Operating � Existing Debt Service � New Debt Service � Rate Funded Capital Revenue @ 2022 Rates - - - Revenue with Increases �� FCS GRDUP www.fcsgroup.com City of Port Orchard Stormwater Utility Rate Study December 2022 page 15 Section IV. CAPITAL FACILITY CHARGES Introduction Capital Facility Charges (CFCs) are one-time fees, paid at the time of development, intended to recover a share of the cost of system capacity needed to serve growth. As part of the rate study, the City tasked FCS GROUP with calculating a CFC for the City's stormwater utility. As noted previously, some of the capital cost elements vary based on the level of service which results in a unique CFC for each level of service. CFCs serve two primary purposes: • to provide equity between existing and new customers; and • to provide a source of funding for system capital costs, as growth occurs. The CFC is an upfront charge imposed on growth and is primarily a charge on new development, although also applicable to expansion or densification of development when such actions increase requirements for utility system capacity. Charges imposed on redevelopment should be net of any existing developed area on the site. The City of Port Orchard has water and sewer CFCs but does not currently have a stormwater CFC. This report documents the methodology and resulting CFC for the City's consideration. Legal Basis There are a variety of approaches that are used in the industry to establish a defensible capital facility charge. The City is authorized to assess such charges under Section 35.92.025 of the Revised Code of Washington (RCW). It is important that the City's methodology to determine cost -based CFCs is consistent with RCW 35.92.025 and applicable case law. Additionally, under RCW 35.67.010, "system of sewerage" is defined to include stormwater facilities. RCW 35.92.025: "Cities and towns are authorized to charge property owners seeking to connect to the water or sewerage system of the city or town as a condition to granting the right to so connect, in addition to the cost of such connection, such reasonable connection charge as the legislative body of the city or town shall determine proper in order that such property owners shall bear their equitable share of the cost of such system." RCW 35.92.025 is silent regarding specific methodology to be used in the charge calculation. However, language contained in the Special District RCW 57.08.005 (11) does provide some guidance regarding specific methodology. While this guidance does not legally apply to municipal stormwater utilities, there are elements that help inform the methodology used for stormwater CFCs. Since the calculated charges represent the maximum allowable charge, the City may choose to implement a charge at any level up to the calculated charge. Methodology Exhibit 16 shows the recommended approach for the CFC calculation. Under this methodology, all capital costs (existing assets and future projects net of provisions for retirement) are divided by the estimated future customer base. This calculation is like a simple buy -in charge (which consists of ��> FCS GRDUP www.fcsgroup.com City of Port Orchard Stormwater Utility Rate Study December 2022 page 16 existing costs divided by existing customers), except that it is projected into a future year after the planned capital projects are completed and after incorporating estimated customer growth. The resulting CFC is generally stable over time. The main policy emphasis here is on intergenerational equity — there is no cost advantage for either existing or new customers. Exhibit 16: CFC Calculation Methodology Capital Facility Charge Existing Future Cost Basis Cost Basis Applicable System Capacity (Customer Base) The capital costs used in the CFC calculation can be separated into two major categories: • Existing system costs: These costs represent the net investment in assets that currently provide service to customers (and that presumably have some amount of capacity to serve growth). • Future capital costs: These costs refer to capital improvement projects that the utility plans to undertake within a period of time specified in the system planning documents. A provision for capital retirement — a calculation to account for the original value of the assets any new capital projects are repairing or replacing — is deducted from the total future capital projects. The existing estimated system capacity is measured in impervious service units (ISUs). Existing Cost Basis The existing cost portion of the calculation is intended to recognize the current ratepayers' net investment in the original cost of system assets. The main provisions of the calculation include the following elements: • Utility Plant -In -Service: The existing cost basis is comprised of the original cost of plant -in- service, as documented in the fixed asset schedule of the stormwater utility. » The City's records as of the end of 2021 identify $13.3 million in stormwater-related assets. • Plus: Construction -Work -in -Progress: Projects that the City is currently constructing are eligible to be included in the cost basis, similar to an existing asset. » As of the end of 2021, the City had $3.0 million in construction -work -in -progress. • Less: Contributed Capital: Assets funded by developers, grants, or from any agency other than the City of Port Orchard are excluded from the cost basis on the premise that the CFC should only recover costs actually incurred by City ratepayers. » The City's records identified $5.0 million in stormwater grants and contributions in aid of construction (developer donations) received by the utility. • Plus: Interest on Non -Contributed Plant: The RCW and subsequent legal interpretations provide such charges can include interest on an asset at the rate applicable at the time of construction. Interest can accumulate for a maximum of ten years from the date of construction for any particular asset. Conceptually, this interest provision attempts to account for the opportunity ��> FCS GRDUP www.fcsgroup.com City of Port Orchard Stormwater Utility Rate Study December 2022 page 17 costs that the City's customers incurred by supporting investments in infrastructure rather than having it available for other needs. » Accumulated interest on non -contributed assets adds approximately $2.4 million to the existing cost basis. • Less: Net Debt Principal Outstanding.: Another adjustment to the existing cost basis is to deduct the net liability of outstanding utility debt, since that new customers will bear a proportionate share of annual debt service through ongoing utility rates. Outstanding debt represents assets that have been placed into service, but that today's ratepayers have not yet paid for. » The City currently has two outstanding loans relating to its stormwater utility, with $1.8 million in debt principal outstanding. As of the beginning of 2022, however, beginning cash balances total $2.5 million. Since cash balances exceed the outstanding debt, no deduction is made from the cost basis as cash could theoretically be used to reduce the debt principal. The sum of these elements results in a total existing cost basis of $13.6 million. Exhibit 17: Stormwater Utility Existing Cost Basis Utility Capital Assets $13,264,328 Less: Contributed Capital (5,010,051) Plus: Interest on Non -Contributed Plant 2,353,859 Plus: Construction -Work -in -Progress 2,976,234 Less: Net Debt Principal Outstanding - Total Existing Cost Basis ■ 13,584,371M Future Cost Basis The future cost basis is intended to recognize the ratepayers' net investment in the projects to be completed in the future. The main elements of the calculation include the capital improvement plan, and in some cases, offsetting grants. One additional adjustment to these numbers is a provision for capital retirements, which is also discussed below. Exhibit 18 summarizes these elements for each level of service. Each level of service has a unique future cost basis. • Capital Improvement Plan: A utility capital improvement plan (CIP) includes projects that address many needs, including system expansion, upgrades and the repair and replacement of infrastructure. In some cases, a single CIP project can serve more than one of these purposes. The City's CIP covers years 2022 through 2041 and project costs are in 2022 dollars. Note: We do not escalate capital projects in a CFC for a couple of reasons. First, we do not know with certainty when projects will be constructed or what inflation will be. Second, we prefer to use the original cost in the calculation, and then the City can increase the charges with the Engineering News -Record Construction Cost Index or another inflator to accomplish the same thing with more accuracy. ��> FCS GRDUP www.fcsgroup.com City of Port Orchard Stormwater Utility Rate Study December 2022 page 18 • Less: Developer Contributions/Grants: Projects or portions of projects assumed to be funded by grants may be excluded from the calculation. It is assumed that without the level of grant funding noted, corresponding projects would not be executed. » All levels of service include $500,000 in assistance from the general fund, as listed in the City's 2023 budget. Our understanding is that this is a contribution from the general fund for a portion of a multi -purpose property acquisition. • Less: Provision for Capital Retirement: Many capital projects are replacing existing assets. To avoid including the value of these projects twice — once in the existing assets and again in the capital plan — a provision for capital retirement is used on projects or portions thereof that are deemed repair and replacement (R&R). The provision for capital retirement determines the approximate original cost of the asset the R&R project is replacing, using the useful life of the new project and the historic ENR Construction Cost Index. The sum of the provision for capital retirement calculations is then removed from the future capital project total. In simple terms, if a retention pond expected to last 50 years is being installed in 2018 (and replacing an existing pond), the provision for retirement determines how much that asset cost in 1968 and removes that portion of the project cost from the calculation. Exhibit 18: SWM Utility Future Project Costs Summary by LOS (2022 $) • • • _ * Total Citywide Projects (uninflated, before grants) $44,150,628 $46,950,628 $45,010,628 Less: Assumed Grants (19,365,000) (13,250,000) - Less: General Fund Contribution (500,000) (500,000) (500,000) Less: Provision for Repair & (3,487,088) (3,797,339) (3,584,445) Replacement Total Future Cost Basis $20,798,540 $29,403,289 $40,926,183 Estimated Customer Base (System Capacity) So far, the report has discussed the numerator in the CFC, with its two main components: the value of existing assets and future capital costs. The denominator in the CFC calculation is the projected number of impervious surface units, or ISUs. The same time horizon for both the capital improvement plan and assumed customer growth is used in the CFC calculation — 2022 through 2041. This ensures that the numerator and the denominator cover the same period. ��> FCS GRDUP www.fcsgroup.com City of Port Orchard December 2022 Exhibit 19: Estimated Customer Base by 2041 0 Existing ISUs as of 8/2022 Estimated ISUs added from 8/2022 through 12/2022 Additional ISUs with Growth 2023-2041 Projected ISUs by 2041 CFC Results Stormwater Utility Rate Study page 19 10,376 250 3,300 AL6. 13,926 The following exhibit shows summary calculations for the City's stormwater CFC for each level of service. Per the City's municipal code, one impervious surface unit (ISU) is defined as a single- family residential account (including mobile homes) or 3,000 impervious square feet of ground cover for all other developed parcels. It is assumed that the City would use the same definition when administering a stormwater capital facility charge if a stormwater CFC were to be implemented. Exhibit 20: CFC Calculation Existing Cost Basis Fut Cost Basis Total Cost Basis $13,584,371 $13,584,371 29,403,289 $13,584,371 40,926,183 54,510,554 Future System Capacity �ff 13,926 ISUs ' 13,926 ISUs 13,926 ISUs Calculated Maximum CFC per IN I $2,469 $3,087 $3,914 As noted previously, these charges reflect the maximum defensible CFC by level of service. The Council could adopt, by policy, a CFC that is lower than the indicated amounts and / or choose to phase -in to a targeted level over a multi -year period. �k6 20,798,540 34 283 911 42 987 660 •*;4 FCS GROUP www.fcsgroup.com City of Port Orchard Stormwater Utility Rate Study December 2022 page 20 Section V. SUMMARY Exhibits 21, Exhibit 22, and Exhibit 23 detail the rate plans that support each defined level of service. These increases allow the utility to accomplish the following: • Fund existing and forecasted operating expenses, plus cost escalation; • Cover existing and future debt service obligations; • Allow the utility to fund $36 to $58 million in capital projects from 2022-2041, net of grants; • Generate $1.4 to $2.2 million per year for rate -funded capital by 2041; and • Maintain utility reserves at recommended levels throughout the forecast. Exhibit 21: Level of Service 1: Rate Increases 2025 1 2026 1 2027 1 2028 1 2029 Monthly Rate I ISU $14.00 $16.94 $20.50 $24.80 $25.55 $26.31 $27.10 $27.91 $28.75 Change in Monthly Rate $2.94 $3.56 $4.30 $0.75 $0.76 $0.79 $0.81 $0.84 Exhibit 22: Level of Service 2: Rate Adjustments Monthly Rate I ISU $14.00 $18.34 $24.03 $31.47 $32.42 $33.39 $34.39 $35.42 $36.49 Change in $4.34 $5.69 $7.44 $0.95 $0.97 $1.00 $1.03 $1.07 Monthly Rate Exhibit 23: Level of Service 3: Rate Adjustments Monthly Rate I ISU $14.00 $20.37 $29.64 $43.12 $44.42 $45.75 $47.12 $48.54 $49.99 Change in $6.37 $9.27 $13.48 $1.30 $1.33 $1.37 $1.42 $1.45 Monthly Rate Capital Facility Charge The recommended maximum CFC is $2,469 per ISU for Level of Service 1, $3,087 for Level of Service 2, and $3,914 for Level of Service 3. It is recommended that the CFC be revisited every few years to ensure that the charge is keeping pace with the utility's capital investments and that the adopted charge be indexed for inflation. Single -Family Residential Rate Comparison As a resource to the City and its customers, a rate survey of western Washington stormwater utilities was performed. Exhibit 24 shows monthly single-family residential stormwater bills for a few ��> FCS GRDUP www.fcsgroup.com City of Port Orchard December 2022 Stormwater Utility Rate Study page 21 neighboring jurisdictions. It also features Port Orchard's existing rate as well as potential rates for each level of service in 2024. Exhibit 24: Regional Jurisdictional Survey - Monthly Single Family Stormwater Rates $35 $30 - $ 2 5 ORCHARD $25.06 $20.36 $20.37 $20.88 Li $20 $17.54 $18.34 a' $15.67 $16.94 $17.00 $17.01 N $15 $12.65 $13.93 $14.00 T $10.80 $10.83 $12.08 o $10 $5 $0 Pierce Kitsap Pierce Pierce Pierce Port Gig Harbor Port Bainbridge Port Bremerton Port Gig Harbor Port Poulsbo Gig Harbor County County County County County Orchard (Small) Orchard - Island Angeles Orchard - (Medium) Orchard - (2023) (Large) (Base) (2023) (Base + (Base + (Base + LOS 1 (2023) LOS 2 LOS 3 (2023) Water River) WQ & (2024) (2024) (2024) Quality) (2023) River) (2023) (2023) Exhibit 25 shows a wider range of jurisdictions from around western Washington in case that type of comparison is helpful to the City or its customers. Exhibit 25: Western Washington Jurisdictional Survey - Monthly Single Family Stormwater Rates $35 $30 $25 $20.37 ca$20 $18.34 - $16.94 CM $15 $14.00 T L O $10 $5 $0 o�mti ry ryoti 5mm mo �� mc ry 3m rym°a m \Q�m z& m ya 5 ry g Qi `timF eati`,Aa o pR 4IV-° O�A 4c m�o\o soO a em oCi m ctim mi2°�m��y��m�ym,FmF mF � Q� oJc CPJ 0m Q°� Q m� Q ��> FCS GRDUP www.fcsgroup.com City of Port Orchard Stormwater Utility Rate Study December 2022 page 22 Single -Family Stormwater CFC Comparison FCS GROUP also conducted a survey of western Washington stormwater CFCs. The three potential CFCs of $2,469 for Level of Service 1, $3,087 for Level of Service 2, and $3,914 for Level of Service 3 are on the higher end of charges in the area, but it is important to remember these are simply legal maximums, not required charges. By policy, the City could adopt a charge at any amount up to the calculated charge. Note that some cities, such as Bothell and Redmond, have basin - specific charges that range from $6,000 to $15,000. Exhibit 26: Western Washington Jurisdictional Survey — Single Family Stormwater CFC Redmond Poulsbo Olympia Issaquah Bothell - Auburn Downtown Redmond Downtown Bothell overtake subbasin CFC adds $10,929 Bremerton Gig Harbor Sammamish Renton Des Moines (2023) Port Orchard - LOS 1 $2,469 Kent Mountlake Terrace Port Orchard - LOS 2 $3,087 Kenmore Port Orchard - LOS 3 $3,914 $0 $500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 $3,000 $3,500 $4,000 $4,500 Updating This Study's Findings It is recommended that the City revisit the study findings during the forecast period to check that the assumptions used are still appropriate and no significant changes have occurred that would alter the results of the study. The City should use the study findings as a living document, routinely comparing the study outcomes to actual revenues and expenses. Any significant or unexpected changes will require adjustments to the rate strategy proposed in this report. ��> FCS GRDUP www.fcsgroup.com City of Port Orchard December 2022 MODEL APPENDICES Stormwater Utility Rate Study page 23 •:;> FCS GROUP www.fcsgroup.com Port Orchard Utility Rate Study: Stormwater Utility Summary Level of Service 1 Rate Revenues Under Existing Rates $ 1,766,827 $ 1,816,709 $ 1,866,592 $ 1,916,474 $ 1,941,415 $ 1,966,356 $ 1,991,297 $ 2,016,238 $ 2,041,179 $ 2,066,120 $ 2,091,061 $ 2,116,003 $ 2,140,944 $ 2,165,885 $ 2,190,826 $ 2,215,767 $ 2,240,708 $ 2,265,649 $ 2,290,590 $ 2,315,531 Non -Rate Revenues 201,380 72,892 66,976 67,861 68,475 70,184 70,559 74,266 74,737 77,394 77,900 81,858 82,402 89,650 90,234 93,730 94,358 100,068 100,742 105,055 Total Revenues $ 1,968,207 $ 1,889,601 $ 1,933,567 $ 1,984,334 $ 2,009,890 $ 2,036,540 $ 2,061,856 $ 2,090,504 $ 2,115,917 $ 2,143,514 $ 2,168,962 $ 2,197,860 $ 2,223,345 $ 2,255,535 $ 2,281,060 $ 2,309,497 $ 2,335,066 $ 2,365,717 $ 2,391,332 $ 2,420,586 Expenses Cash Operating Expenses $ 1,610,383 $ 1,974,677 $ 1,957,605 $ 2,041,830 $ 2,218,577 $ 2,245,086 $ 2,318,786 $ 2,395,059 $ 2,474,002 $ 2,555,716 $ 2,640,307 $ 2,727,883 $ 2,818,558 $ 2,912,450 $ 3,009,683 $ 3,110,383 $ 3,214,685 $ 3,322,726 $ 3,434,652 $ 3,550,611 Existing Debt Service 177,047 177,877 176,883 177,604 178,251 177,075 177,612 178,077 178,468 177,036 189,615 16,525 16,525 16,525 16,525 8,263 - - - - New Debt Service 24,088 24,088 168,615 168,615 264,966 264,966 417,522 417,522 714,606 714,606 843,074 843,074 1,067,894 1,067,894 1,228,479 1,228,479 Total Expenses $ 1,787,429 $ 2,152,554 $ 2,134,488 $ 2,219,434 $ 2,420,916 $ 2,446,249 $ 2,665,013 $ 2,741,750 $ 2,917,436 $ 2,997,718 $ 3,247,444 $ 3,161,931 $ 3,549,689 $ 3,643,581 $ 3,869,282 $ 3,961,720 $ 4,282,579 $ 4,390,620 $ 4,663,131 $ 4,779,090 Net Surplus (Deficiency) $ 180,778 $ (262,953) $ (200,921) $ (235,099) $ (411,026) $ (409,710) $ (603,158) $ (651,247) $ (801,519) $ (854,204) $ (1,078,482) $ (964,070) $ (1,326,343) $ (1,388,046) $ (1,588,222) $ (1,652,222) $ (1,947,512) $ (2,024,903) $ (2,271,798) $ (2,358,504) Additions to Meet Coverage (45,169) (72,770) (65,918) (141,254) (122,588) (176,114) (157,428) Total Surplus (Deficiency) $ 180,778 $ (262,953) $ (200,921) $ (235,099) $ (411,026) $ (409,710) $ (603,158) $ (651,247) $ (801,519) $ (854,204) $ (1,078,482) $ (964,070) $ (1,371,513) $ (1,388,046) $ (1,660,992) $ (1,718,141) $ (2,088,766) $ (2,147,491) $ (2,447,913) $ (2,515,932) ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Annual Rate Increase 0.00 % 21.00 % 21.00 % 21.00 % 3.00 % 3.00 % 3.00 % 3.00 % 3.00 % 3.00 % 3.00 % 3.00 % 3.00 % 3.00 % 3.00 % 3.00 % 3.00 % 3.00 % 3.00 Cumulative Rate Increase ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 0.00 % 21.00 % 46.41 % 77.16 % 82.47 % 87.94 % 93.58 % 99.39 % 105.37 % 111.53 % 117.88 % 124.42 % 131.15 % 138.08 % 145.23 % 152.58 % 160.16 % 167.96 % 176.00 Revenues After Rate Increases $ 1,766,827 $ 1,816,709 $ 2,258,576 $ 2,805,909 $ 3,439,335 $ 3,588,025 $ 3,742,541 $ 3,903,099 $ 4,069,923 $ 4,243,242 $ 4,423,299 $ 4,610,339 $ 4,804,621 $ 5,006,411 $ 5,215,984 $ 5,433,625 $ 5,659,630 $ 5,894,306 $ 6,137,969 $ 6,390,946 Additional Taxes from Rate Increase 26,459 60,037 101,110 109,463 118,209 127,363 136,940 146,956 157,426 168,368 179,798 191,736 204,198 217,205 230,777 244,934 259,698 275,090 Net Cash Flow After Rate Increase $ 180,778 $ (262,953) $ 164,604 $ 594,299 $ 985,785 $ 1,102,497 $ 1,029,878 $ 1,108,252 $ 1,090,284 $ 1,175,963 $ 1,096,329 $ 1,361,899 $ 1,157,536 $ 1,260,744 $ 1,232,738 $ 1,348,430 $ 1,240,633 $ 1,358,819 $ 1,315,882 $ 1,441,820 Coverage After Rate Increase: Bonded Debt n/a n/a n/a n/a 54.16 59.32 8.77 9.39 6.20 6.59 4.35 4.61 2.81 3.04 2.63 2.77 2.28 2.41 2.18 2.30 Coverage After Rate Increase: Total Debt 2.03 0.22 2.57 4.96 6.45 7.10 4.27 4.56 3.70 3.95 2.99 4.43 2.74 2.97 2.58 2.74 2.28 2.41 2.18 2.30 Sample Residential Bill (1 ISU) $14.00 $14.00 $16.94 $20.50 $24.80 $25.55 $26.31 $27.10 $27.91 $28.75 $29.61 $30.50 $31.42 $32.36 $33.33 $34.33 $35.36 $36.42 $37.52 $38.64 Increase ($) $0.00 $2.94 $3.56 $4.30 $0.74 $0.77 $0.79 $0.81 $0.84 $0.86 $0.89 $0.92 $0.94 $0.97 $1.00 $1.03 $1.06 $1.09 $1.13 Operating Reserve -421 Beginning Balance $ 2,116,332 $ 706,309 $ 443,357 $ 482,697 $ 509,989 $ 561,850 $ 578,514 $ 598,746 $ 619,710 $ 641,433 $ 663,943 $ 687,270 $ 711,446 $ 736,502 $ 762,472 $ 789,391 $ 817,294 $ 846,220 $ 876,206 $ 907,295 plus: Net Cash Flow after Rate Increase 180,778 (262,953) 164,604 594,299 985,785 1,102,497 1,029,878 1,108,252 1,090,284 1,175,963 1,096,329 1,361,899 1,157,536 1,260,744 1,232,738 1,348,430 1,240,633 1,358,819 1,315,882 1,441,820 less: Transfer of Surplus to Capital Fund (1,400,000) (125,264) (567,007) (933,924) (1,085,833) (1,009,646) (1,087,288) (1,068,561) (1,153,452) (1,073,002) (1,337,723) (1,132,480) (1,234,774) (1,205,819) (1,320,527) (1,211,707) (1,328,832) (1,284,793) (1,409,587) less: Transfer to Stabilization Fund (190,800) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ending Balance $ 706,309 $ 443,357 $ 482,697 $ 509,989 $ 561,850 $ 578,514 $ 598,746 $ 619,710 $ 641,433 $ 663,943 $ 687,270 $ 711,446 $ 736,502 $ 762,472 $ 789,391 $ 817,294 $ 846,220 $ 876,206 $ 907,295 $ 939,528 Actual Days of O&M 160 days 82 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days Minimum Balance Requirement $ 264,720 $ 324,605 $ 321,798 $ 339,993 $ 374,567 $ 385,676 $ 399,164 $ 413,140 $ 427,622 $ 442,628 $ 458,180 $ 474,297 $ 491,001 $ 508,315 $ 526,261 $ 544,863 $ 564,146 $ 584,138 $ 604,863 $ 626,352 Maximum Balance Requirement $ 397,081 $ 486,907 $ 482,697 $ 509,989 $ 561,850 $ 578,514 $ 598,746 $ 619,710 $ 641,433 $ 663,943 $ 687,270 $ 711,446 $ 736,502 $ 762,472 $ 789,391 $ 817,294 $ 846,220 $ 876,206 $ 907,295 $ 939,528 Capital Reserve - 423 Beginning Balance $ 94,014 $ 1,488,130 $ 872,113 $ 615,290 $ 863,525 $ 1,198,860 $ 102,570 $ 1,193,566 $ 263,157 $ 1,056,229 $ 291,318 $ 978,651 $ 440,433 $ 3,318,433 $ 530,307 $ 1,146,633 $ 608,192 $ 1,382,360 $ 732,259 $ 1,507,343 plus: Transfers from Operating Fund 1,400,000 - 125,264 567,007 933,924 1,085,833 1,009,646 1,087,288 1,068,561 1,153,452 1,073,002 1,337,723 1,132,480 1,234,774 1,205,819 1,320,527 1,211,707 1,328,832 1,284,793 1,409,587 plus: Transfers From General Fund - 500,000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - plus: Assumed Capital Grants - 883,761 665,231 2,409,798 356,306 1,106,330 2,385,524 493,803 511,087 2,644,873 1,021,979 1,057,748 5,911,754 1,359,703 628,256 4,551,713 502,509 1,560,291 plus: CFC Revenue - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - plus: Revenue Bond Proceeds - - - - 300,000 - 1,800,000 - 1,200,000 - 1,900,000 - 3,700,000 - 1,600,000 - 2,800,000 - 2,000,000 - plus: Interest Earnings 2,115 33,483 19,623 13,844 19,429 26,974 2,308 26,855 5,921 23,765 6,555 22,020 9,910 74,665 11,932 25,799 13,684 31,103 16,476 33,915 Total Funding Sources $ 1,496,130 $ 2,021,613 $ 1,900,760 $ 1,861,371 $ 4,526,677 $ 2,667,973 $ 4,020,854 $ 4,693,233 $ 3,031,443 $ 2,744,533 $ 5,915,747 $ 3,360,372 $ 6,340,570 $ 10,539,625 $ 4,707,761 $ 3,121,215 $ 9,185,297 $ 3,244,805 $ 5,593,819 $ 2,950,845 less: Capital Expenditures (Before Grants) (8,000) (1,149,500) (1,285,470) (997,846) (3,327,817) (2,565,402) (2,827,287) (4,430,076) (1,975,214) (2,453,215) (4,937,096) (2,919,939) (3,022,137) (10,009,319) (3,561,128) (2,513,023) (7,802,937) (2,512,546) (4,086,476) (2,095,526) Ending Capital Fund Balance $ 1,488,130 $ 872,113 $ 615,290 $ 863,525 $ 1,198,860 $ 102,570 $ 1,193,566 $ 263,157 $ 1,056,229 $ 291,318 $ 978,651 $ 440,433 $ 3,318,433 $ 530,307 $ 1,146,633 $ 608,192 $ 1,382,360 $ 732,259 $ 1,507,343 $ 855,318 Minimum Target Balance $ 132,723 $ 144,218 $ 148,235 $ 151,562 $ 160,742 $ 182,833 $ 200,042 $ 220,488 $ 235,302 $ 254,723 $ 277,645 $ 296,625 $ 316,269 $ 357,245 $ 379,259 $ 398,106 $ 430,619 $ 450,719 $ 475,981 $ 496,936 Combined Beginning Balance $ 2,210,346 $ 2,194,439 $ 1,315,470 $ 1,097,987 $ 1,373,514 $ 1,760,710 $ 681,085 $ 1,792,313 $ 882,867 $ 1,697,662 $ 955,261 $ 1,665,921 $ 1,151,879 $ 4,054,935 $ 1,292,779 $ 1,936,024 $ 1,425,486 $ 2,228,580 $ 1,608,465 $ 2,414,638 Combined Ending Balance $ 2,194,439 $ 1,315,470 $ 1,097,987 $ 1,373,514 $ 1,760,710 $ 681,085 $ 1,792,313 $ 882,867 $ 1,697,662 $ 955,261 $ 1,665,921 $ 1,151,879 $ 4,054,935 $ 1,292,779 $ 1,936,024 $ 1,425,486 $ 2,228,580 $ 1,608,465 $ 2,414,638 $ 1,794,847 Ending Total Days of Operating Expenditures 497 days 243 days 202 days 239 days 277 days 106 days 268 days 128 days 237 days 129 days 217 days 145 days 494 days 152 days 220 days 156 days 236 days 165 days 239 days 171 days Combined Minimum Target Balance 397,444 468,823 470,033 491,554 535,308 568,509 599,206 633,628 662,924 697,352 735,826 770,922 807,270 865,559 905,519 942,969 994,765 1,034,857 1,080,844 1,123,288 PREPARED BY FCS GROUP Port Orchard Stormwater Rate Study v32 425-867-1802 Summary - Page 1 of 1 12/14/2022 Port Orchard Utility Rate Study: Stormwater Utility Summary Level of Service 2 Rate Revenues Under Existing Rates $ 1,766,827 $ 1,816,709 $ 1,866,592 $ 1,916,474 $ 1,941,415 $ 1,966,356 $ 1,991,297 $ 2,016,238 $ 2,041,179 $ 2,066,120 $ 2,091,061 $ 2,116,003 $ 2,140,944 $ 2,165,885 $ 2,190,826 $ 2,215,767 $ 2,240,708 $ 2,265,649 $ 2,290,590 $ 2,315,531 Non -Rate Revenues 201,380 72,892 66,976 71,854 76,234 84,666 85,304 89,504 90,084 95,925 96,548 99,543 100,212 111,746 112,465 117,908 118,681 128,514 129,345 135,625 Total Revenues $ 1,968,207 $ 1,889,601 $ 1,933,567 $ 1,988,328 $ 2,017,649 $ 2,051,021 $ 2,076,601 $ 2,105,742 $ 2,131,263 $ 2,162,045 $ 2,187,610 $ 2,215,545 $ 2,241,156 $ 2,277,631 $ 2,303,291 $ 2,333,675 $ 2,359,389 $ 2,394,164 $ 2,419,935 $ 2,451,157 Expenses Cash Operating Expenses $ 1,610,383 $ 1,974,677 $ 2,079,445 $ 2,385,850 $ 2,614,565 $ 2,658,705 $ 2,785,932 $ 2,879,022 $ 2,975,388 $ 3,075,152 $ 3,178,443 $ 3,285,391 $ 3,396,137 $ 3,510,822 $ 3,629,596 $ 3,752,613 $ 3,880,035 $ 4,012,029 $ 4,148,769 $ 4,290,437 Existing Debt Service 177,047 177,877 176,883 177,604 178,251 177,075 177,612 178,077 178,468 177,036 189,615 16,525 16,525 16,525 16,525 8,263 - - - - New Debt Service 256,937 256,937 562,049 562,049 714,606 714,606 947,455 947,455 1,051,835 1,051,835 1,533,592 1,533,592 1,742,353 1,742,353 2,143,817 2,143,817 2,384,695 2,384,695 Total Expenses $ 1,787,429 $ 2,152,554 $ 2,513,265 $ 2,820,391 $ 3,354,865 $ 3,397,829 $ 3,678,150 $ 3,771,704 $ 4,101,310 $ 4,199,643 $ 4,419,892 $ 4,353,752 $ 4,946,254 $ 5,060,939 $ 5,388,474 $ 5,503,229 $ 6,023,852 $ 6,155,846 $ 6,533,464 $ 6,675,132 Net Surplus (Deficiency) $ 180,778 $ (262,953) $ (579,698) $ (832,063) $ (1,337,216) $ (1,346,808) $ (1,601,549) $ (1,665,963) $ (1,970,047) $ (2,037,597) $ (2,232,283) $ (2,138,207) $ (2,705,098) $ (2,783,308) $ (3,085,183) $ (3,169,554) $ (3,664,463) $ (3,761,682) $ (4,113,529) $ (4,223,975) Additions to Meet Coverage (110,588) (248,804) (141,863) (295,871) (279,605) (407,182) (379,925) (462,461) (438,203) Total Surplus (Deficiency) $ 180,778 $ (262,953) $ (579,698) $ (832,063) $ (1,337,216) $ (1,346,808) $ (1,601,549) $ (1,665,963) $ (1,970,047) $ (2,037,597) $ (2,232,283) $ (2,248,795) $ (2,953,902) $ (2,925,171) $ (3,381,053) $ (3,449,159) $ (4,071,645) $ (4,141,608) $ (4,575,990) $ (4,662,179) ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Annual Rate Increase 0.00 % 31.00 % 31.00 % 31.00 % 3.00 % 3.00 % 3.00 % 3.00 % 3.00 % 3.00 % 3.00 % 3.00 % 3.00 % 3.00 % 3.00 % 3.00 % 3.00 % 3.00 % 3.00 Cumulative Rate Increase ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 0.00 % 31.00 % 71.61 % 124.81 % 131.55 % 138.50 % 145.65 % 153.02 % 160.62 % 168.43 % 176.49 % 184.78 % 193.32 % 202.12 % 211.19 % 220.52 % 230.14 % 240.04 % 250.25 Revenues After Rate Increases $ 1,766,827 $ 1,816,709 $ 2,445,235 $ 3,288,861 $ 4,364,477 $ 4,553,164 $ 4,749,243 $ 4,952,989 $ 5,164,686 $ 5,384,627 $ 5,613,116 $ 5,850,469 $ 6,097,010 $ 6,353,079 $ 6,619,024 $ 6,895,209 $ 7,182,007 $ 7,479,808 $ 7,789,013 $ 8,110,039 Additional Taxes from Rate Increase 39,058 92,636 163,557 174,610 186,161 198,231 210,837 223,999 237,739 252,076 267,034 282,636 298,903 315,862 333,538 351,956 371,144 391,129 Net Cash Flow After Rate Increase $ 180,778 $ (262,953) $ (40,113) $ 447,688 $ 922,290 $ 1,065,391 $ 970,235 $ 1,072,558 $ 942,623 $ 1,056,910 $ 1,052,033 $ 1,344,183 $ 983,934 $ 1,121,250 $ 1,044,112 $ 1,194,026 $ 943,299 $ 1,100,521 $ 1,013,750 $ 1,179,403 Coverage After Rate Increase: Bonded Debt n/a n/a 1.97 3.94 3.14 3.47 2.75 2.92 2.30 2.44 2.29 2.42 1.73 1.89 1.68 1.77 1.50 1.59 1.48 1.56 Coverage After Rate Increase: Total Debt 2.03 0.22 1.17 2.33 2.38 2.64 2.20 2.33 1.93 2.05 1.94 2.39 1.71 1.87 1.66 1.77 1.50 1.59 1.48 1.56 Sample Residential Bill (1 ISU) $14.00 $14.00 $18.34 $24.03 $31.47 $32.42 $33.39 $34.39 $35.42 $36.49 $37.58 $38.71 $39.87 $41.07 $42.30 $43.57 $44.87 $46.22 $47.61 $49.03 Increase ($) $0.00 $4.34 $5.69 $7.45 $0.94 $0.97 $1.00 $1.03 $1.06 $1.09 $1.13 $1.16 $1.20 $1.23 $1.27 $1.31 $1.35 $1.39 $1.43 Operating Reserve -421 Beginning Balance $ 2,116,332 $ 706,309 $ 443,357 $ 403,244 $ 597,923 $ 667,529 $ 695,900 $ 729,997 $ 755,799 $ 782,536 $ 810,244 $ 838,958 $ 868,717 $ 899,559 $ 931,526 $ 964,660 $ 999,004 $ 1,034,605 $ 1,071,510 $ 1,109,768 plus: Net Cash Flow after Rate Increase 180,778 (262,953) (40,113) 447,688 922,290 1,065,391 970,235 1,072,558 942,623 1,056,910 1,052,033 1,344,183 983,934 1,121,250 1,044,112 1,194,026 943,299 1,100,521 1,013,750 1,179,403 less: Transfer of Surplus to Capital Fund (1,400,000) (253,009) (852,684) (1,037,019) (936,139) (1,046,756) (915,886) (1,029,202) (1,023,319) (1,314,424) (953,092) (1,089,283) (1,010,979) (1,159,682) (907,698) (1,063,616) (975,492) (1,139,740) less: Transfer to Stabilization Fund (190,800) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ending Balance $ 706,309 $ 443,357 $ 403,244 $ 597,923 $ 667,529 $ 695,900 $ 729,997 $ 755,799 $ 782,536 $ 810,244 $ 838,958 $ 868,717 $ 899,559 $ 931,526 $ 964,660 $ 999,004 $ 1,034,605 $ 1,071,510 $ 1,109,768 $ 1,149,431 Actual Days of O&M 160 days 82 days 71 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days Minimum Balance Requirement $ 264,720 $ 324,605 $ 341,826 $ 398,615 $ 445,019 $ 463,933 $ 486,664 $ 503,866 $ 521,691 $ 540,163 $ 559,306 $ 579,145 $ 599,706 $ 621,017 $ 643,107 $ 666,003 $ 689,737 $ 714,340 $ 739,845 $ 766,287 Maximum Balance Requirement $ 397,081 $ 486,907 $ 512,740 $ 597,923 $ 667,529 $ 695,900 $ 729,997 $ 755,799 $ 782,536 $ 810,244 $ 838,958 $ 868,717 $ 899,559 $ 931,526 $ 964,660 $ 999,004 $ 1,034,605 $ 1,071,510 $ 1,109,768 $ 1,149,431 Capital Reserve - 423 Beginning Balance $ 94,014 $ 1,488,130 $ 872,113 $ 1,510,083 $ 133,992 $ 2,056,291 $ 229,746 $ 796,932 $ 271,269 $ 1,130,438 $ 413,309 $ 1,335,328 $ 489,843 $ 5,187,353 $ 606,715 $ 1,641,433 $ 743,861 $ 1,899,834 $ 852,586 $ 1,875,278 plus: Transfers from Operating Fund 1,400,000 - - 253,009 852,684 1,037,019 936,139 1,046,756 915,886 1,029,202 1,023,319 1,314,424 953,092 1,089,283 1,010,979 1,159,682 907,698 1,063,616 975,492 1,139,740 plus: Transfers From General Fund - 500,000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - plus: Assumed Capital Grants - 589,174 443,487 1,606,532 1,722,145 1,044,867 318,070 1,646,011 729,985 755,534 4,222,681 971,217 418,837 3,034,476 358,935 1,114,494 plus: CFC Revenue - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - plus: Revenue Bond Proceeds - - 3,200,000 - 3,800,000 - 1,900,000 - 2,900,000 - 1,300,000 - 6,000,000 - 2,600,000 - 5,000,000 - 3,000,000 - plus: Interest Earnings 2,115 33,483 19,623 33,977 3,015 46,267 5,169 17,931 6,104 25,435 9,299 30,045 11,021 116,715 13,651 36,932 16,737 42,746 19,183 42,194 Total Funding Sources $ 1,496,130 $ 2,021,613 $ 4,680,909 $ 2,240,556 $ 6,396,223 $ 4,861,722 $ 4,115,921 $ 2,179,688 $ 5,739,270 $ 2,185,075 $ 2,745,927 $ 3,409,782 $ 8,209,490 $ 10,616,033 $ 5,202,561 $ 3,256,884 $ 9,702,771 $ 3,365,132 $ 5,961,755 $ 3,057,212 less: Capital Expenditures (Before Grants) (8,000) (1,149,500) (3,170,826) (2,106,564) (4,339,932) (4,631,977) (3,318,989) (1,908,419) (4,608,832) (1,771,767) (1,410,599) (2,919,939) (3,022,137) (10,009,319) (3,561,128) (2,513,023) (7,802,937) (2,512,546) (4,086,476) (2,095,526) Ending Capital Fund Balance $ 1,488,130 $ 872,113 $ 1,510,083 $ 133,992 $ 2,056,291 $ 229,746 $ 796,932 $ 271,269 $ 1,130,438 $ 413,309 $ 1,335,328 $ 489,843 $ 5,187,353 $ 606,715 $ 1,641,433 $ 743,861 $ 1,899,834 $ 852,586 $ 1,875,278 $ 961,686 Minimum Target Balance $ 132,723 $ 144,218 $ 170,035 $ 186,666 $ 214,000 $ 243,098 $ 265,839 $ 281,743 $ 311,371 $ 329,088 $ 343,194 $ 365,094 $ 387,760 $ 445,626 $ 471,526 $ 492,467 $ 540,152 $ 561,688 $ 591,408 $ 612,363 Combined Beginning Balance $ 2,210,346 $ 2,194,439 $ 1,315,470 $ 1,913,327 $ 731,915 $ 2,723,820 $ 925,646 $ 1,526,928 $ 1,027,068 $ 1,912,974 $ 1,223,553 $ 2,174,286 $ 1,358,560 $ 6,086,912 $ 1,538,241 $ 2,606,093 $ 1,742,865 $ 2,934,439 $ 1,924,096 $ 2,985,046 Combined Ending Balance $ 2,194,439 $ 1,315,470 $ 1,913,327 $ 731,915 $ 2,723,820 $ 925,646 $ 1,526,928 $ 1,027,068 $ 1,912,974 $ 1,223,553 $ 2,174,286 $ 1,358,560 $ 6,086,912 $ 1,538,241 $ 2,606,093 $ 1,742,865 $ 2,934,439 $ 1,924,096 $ 2,985,046 $ 2,111,116 Ending Total Days of Operating Expenditures 497 days 243 days 330 days 108 days 358 days 119 days 188 days 122 days 219 days 135 days 232 days 140 days 607 days 148 days 242 days 156 days 254 days 161 days 241 days 165 days Combined Minimum Target Balance 397,444 468,823 511,861 585,281 659,019 707,031 752,504 785,608 833,062 869,251 90Z500 944,239 987,466 1,066,644 1,114,632 1,158,470 1,229,889 1,276,028 1,331,253 1,378,650 PREPARED BY FCS GROUP Port Orchard Stormwater Rate Study v32 425-867-1802 Summary - Page 1 of 1 12/14/2022 Port Orchard Utility Rate Study: Stormwater Utility Summary Level of Service 3 Rate Revenues Under Existing Rates $ 1,766,827 $ 1,816,709 $ 1,866,592 $ 1,916,474 $ 1,941,415 $ 1,966,356 $ 1,991,297 $ 2,016,238 $ 2,041,179 $ 2,066,120 $ 2,091,061 $ 2,116,003 $ 2,140,944 $ 2,165,885 $ 2,190,826 $ 2,215,767 $ 2,240,708 $ 2,265,649 $ 2,290,590 $ 2,315,531 Non -Rate Revenues 201,380 72,892 66,976 76,023 82,864 119,173 120,132 134,666 134,636 136,737 137,417 138,482 139,212 139,925 140,663 141,426 142,215 143,032 143,877 144,752 Total Revenues $ 1,968,207 $ 1,889,601 $ 1,933,567 $ 1,992,497 $ 2,024,279 $ 2,085,529 $ 2,111,429 $ 2,150,904 $ 2,175,816 $ 2,202,858 $ 2,228,478 $ 2,254,485 $ 2,280,156 $ 2,305,810 $ 2,331,488 $ 2,357,192 $ 2,382,923 $ 2,408,681 $ 2,434,467 $ 2,460,283 Expenses Cash Operating Expenses $ 1,610,383 $ 1,974,677 $ 2,146,526 $ 2,455,346 $ 2,725,819 $ 2,770,589 $ 3,029,991 $ 3,008,164 $ 3,109,179 $ 3,213,759 $ 3,322,039 $ 3,434,158 $ 3,550,259 $ 3,670,492 $ 3,795,014 $ 3,923,987 $ 4,057,578 $ 4,195,964 $ 4,339,325 $ 4,487,853 Existing Debt Service 177,047 177,877 176,883 177,604 178,251 177,075 177,612 178,077 178,468 177,036 189,615 16,525 16,525 16,525 16,525 8,263 - - - - New Debt Service 529,932 529,932 2,055,495 2,055,495 2,633,603 2,633,603 2,697,837 2,697,837 2,713,895 2,713,895 2,713,895 2,713,895 2,713,895 2,713,895 2,713,895 2,713,895 2,713,895 2,713,895 Total Expenses $ 1,787,429 $ 2,152,554 $ 2,853,341 $ 3,162,882 $ 4,959,565 $ 5,003,159 $ 5,841,206 $ 5,819,843 $ 5,985,483 $ 6,088,632 $ 6,225,549 $ 6,164,578 $ 6,280,679 $ 6,400,913 $ 6,525,435 $ 6,646,144 $ 6,771,473 $ 6,909,859 $ 7,053,221 $ 7,201,748 Net Surplus (Deficiency) $ 180,778 $ (262,953) $ (919,774) $ (1,170,385) $ (2,935,286) $ (2,917,630) $ (3,729,777) $ (3,668,938) $ (3,809,667) $ (3,885,774) $ (3,997,071) $ (3,910,094) $ (4,000,523) $ (4,095,103) $ (4,193,946) $ (4,288,952) $ (4,388,550) $ (4,501,178) $ (4,618,753) $ (4,741,465) Additions to Meet Coverage (234,568) (27,737) (372,042) (356,472) (381,437) (373,694) (370,751) (542,673) (541,336) (539,218) (536,382) (541,112) (544,988) (539,774) (538,391) (532,933) Total Surplus (Deficiency) $ 180,778 $ (262,953) $ (919,774) $ (1,170,385) $ (3,169,854) $ (2,945,367) $ (4,101,819) $ (4,025,410) $ (4,191,104) $ (4,259,468) $ (4,367,822) $ (4,452,766) $ (4,541,859) $ (4,634,321) $ (4,730,328) $ (4,830,064) $ (4,933,538) $ (5,040,951) $ (5,157,145) $ (5,274,398) ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Annual Rate Increase 0.00% 45.50% 45.50% 45.50% 3.00% 3.00% 3.00% 3.00% 3.00% 3.00% 1.50% 1.50% 1.50% 1.50% 1.50% 1.50% 1.50% 1.50% 1.50% Cumulative Rate Increase ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 0.00% 45.50% 111.70% 208.03% 217.27% 226.79% 236.59% 246.69% 257.09% 267.80% 273.32% 278.92% 284.60% 290.37% 296.23% 302.17% 308.20% 314.32% 320.54% Revenues After Rate Increases $ 1,766,827 $ 1,816,709 $ 2,715,891 $ 4,057,223 $ 5,980,085 $ 6,238,617 $ 6,507,280 $ 6,786,447 $ 7,076,508 $ 7,377,865 $ 7,690,935 $ 7,899,408 $ 8,112,405 $ 8,330,015 $ 8,552,328 $ 8,779,436 $ 9,011,433 $ 9,248,414 $ 9,490,478 $ 9,737,722 Additional Taxes from Rate Increase 57,328 144,501 272,610 288,378 304,829 321,989 339,885 358,543 377,991 390,380 403,074 416,079 429,401 443,048 457,024 471,337 485,992 500,998 Net Cash Flow After Rate Increase $ 180,778 $ (262,953) $ (127,803) $ 825,864 $ 830,774 $ 1,066,254 $ 481,377 $ 779,282 $ 885,777 $ 1,067,428 $ 1,224,811 $ 1,482,932 $ 1,567,865 $ 1,652,949 $ 1,738,155 $ 1,831,670 $ 1,925,151 $ 2,010,251 $ 2,095,142 $ 2,179,728 Coverage After Rate Increase: Bonded Debt n/a n/a 1.31 3.24 1.54 1.76 1.29 1.41 1.44 1.51 1.56 1.60 1.63 1.66 1.69 1.73 1.76 1.79 1.82 1.86 Coverage After Rate Increase: Total Debt 2.03 0.22 0.98 2.43 1.42 1.62 1.21 1.32 1.35 1.41 1.46 1.59 1.62 1.65 1.68 1.72 1.76 1.79 1.82 1.86 Sample Residential Bill (1 ISU) $14.00 $14.00 $20.37 $29.64 $43.12 $44.42 $45.75 $47.12 $48.54 $49.99 $51.49 $52.26 $53.05 $53.84 $54.65 $55.47 $56.30 $57.15 $58.01 $58.88 Increase ($) $0.00 $6.37 $9.27 $13.49 $1.29 $1.33 $1.37 $1.41 $1.46 $1.50 $0.77 $0.78 $0.80 $0.81 $0.82 $0.83 $0.84 $0.86 $0.87 Operating Reserve -421 Beginning Balance $ 2,116,332 $ 706,309 $ 443,357 $ 315,554 $ 619,563 $ 707,750 $ 750,378 $ 818,228 $ 816,902 $ 846,041 $ 876,241 $ 907,541 $ 939,982 $ 971,664 $ 1,004,441 $ 1,038,352 $ 1,073,438 $ 1,109,743 $ 1,147,312 $ 1,186,191 plus: Net Cash Flow after Rate Increase 180,778 (262,953) (127,803) 825,864 830,774 1,066,254 481,377 779,282 885,777 1,067,428 1,224,811 1,482,932 1,567,865 1,652,949 1,738,155 1,831,670 1,925,151 2,010,251 2,095,142 2,179,728 less: Transfer of Surplus to Capital Fund (1,400,000) (521,855) (742,587) (1,023,626) (413,527) (780,607) (856,638) (1,037,228) (1,193,511) (1,450,491) (1,536,182) (1,620,172) (1,704,244) (1,796,583) (1,888,846) (1,972,682) (2,056,263) (2,139,491) less: Transfer to Stabilization Fund (190,800) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ending Balance $ 706,309 $ 443,357 $ 315,554 $ 619,563 $ 707,750 $ 750,378 $ 818,228 $ 816,902 $ 846,041 $ 876,241 $ 907,541 $ 939,982 $ 971,664 $ 1,004,441 $ 1,038,352 $ 1,073,438 $ 1,109,743 $ 1,147,312 $ 1,186,191 $ 1,226,428 Actual Days of O&M 160 days 82 days 54 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days Minimum Balance Requirement $ 264,720 $ 324,605 $ 352,854 $ 413,042 $ 471,833 $ 500,252 $ 545,485 $ 544,602 $ 564,028 $ 584,161 $ 605,027 $ 626,655 $ 647,776 $ 669,627 $ 692,234 $ 715,625 $ 739,829 $ 764,875 $ 790,794 $ 817,618 Maximum Balance Requirement $ 397,081 $ 486,907 $ 529,280 $ 619,563 $ 707,750 $ 750,378 $ 818,228 $ 816,902 $ 846,041 $ 876,241 $ 907,541 $ 939,982 $ 971,664 $ 1,004,441 $ 1,038,352 $ 1,073,438 $ 1,109,743 $ 1,147,312 $ 1,186,191 $ 1,226,428 Capital Reserve - 423 Beginning Balance $ 94,014 $ 1,488,130 $ 872,113 $ 3,956,693 $ 177,050 $ 9,366,409 $ 408,055 $ 1,024,008 $ 555,376 $ 907,701 $ 602,456 $ 598,923 $ 602,920 $ 641,599 $ 712,251 $ 813,826 $ 953,372 $ 1,129,682 $ 1,135,692 $ 1,322,869 plus: Transfers from Operating Fund 1,400,000 - - 521,855 742,587 1,023,626 413,527 780,607 856,638 1,037,228 1,193,511 1,450,491 1,536,182 1,620,172 1,704,244 1,796,583 1,888,846 1,972,682 2,056,263 2,139,491 plus: Transfers From General Fund - 500,000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - plus: Assumed Capital Grants plus: CFC Revenue - - - - - plus: Revenue Bond Proceeds - - 6,600,000 - 19,000,000 - 7,200,000 - 800,000 - 200,000 - - - - - - - - - plus: Interest Earnings 2,115 33,483 19,623 89,026 3,984 210,744 9,181 23,040 12,496 20,423 13,555 13,476 13,566 14,436 16,026 18,311 21,451 25,418 25,553 29,765 Total Funding Sources $ 1,496,130 $ 2,021,613 $ 7,491,735 $ 4,567,573 $19,923,621 $10,600,779 $ 8,030,764 $ 1,827,656 $ 2,224,510 $ 1,965,353 $ 2,009,522 $ 2,062,890 $ 2,152,668 $ 2,276,207 $ 2,432,521 $ 2,628,720 $ 2,863,668 $ 3,127,782 $ 3,217,508 $ 3,492,124 less: Capital Expenditures (Before Grants) (8,000) (1,149,500) (3,535,043) (4,390,523) (10,557,212) (10,192,724) (7,006,755) (1,272,279) (1,316,809) (1,362,897) (1,410,599) (1,459,970) (1,511,069) (1,563,956) (1,618,695) (1,675,349) (1,733,986) (1,992,090) (1,894,639) (1,960,951) Ending Capital Fund Balance $ 1,488,130 $ 872,113 $ 3,956,693 $ 177,050 $ 9,366,409 $ 408,055 $ 1,024,008 $ 555,376 $ 907,701 $ 602,456 $ 598,923 $ 602,920 $ 641,599 $ 712,251 $ 813,826 $ 953,372 $ 1,129,682 $ 1,135,692 $ 1,322,869 $ 1,531,173 Minimum Target Balance $ 132,723 $ 144,218 $ 179,569 $ 223,474 $ 329,046 $ 430,973 $ 501,041 $ 513,764 $ 526,932 $ 540,561 $ 554,667 $ 569,266 $ 584,377 $ 600,017 $ 616,204 $ 632,957 $ 650,297 $ 670,218 $ 689,164 $ 708,774 Combined Beginning Balance $ 2,210,346 $ 2,194,439 $ 1,315,470 $ 4,272,247 $ 796,614 $10,074,159 $ 1,158,433 $ 1,842,236 $ 1,372,279 $ 1,753,743 $ 1,478,696 $ 1,506,464 $ 1,542,902 $ 1,613,264 $ 1,716,692 $ 1,852,178 $ 2,026,810 $ 2,239,425 $ 2,283,004 $ 2,509,060 Combined Ending Balance $ 2,194,439 $ 1,315,470 $ 4,272,247 $ 796,614 $10,074,159 $ 1,158,433 $ 1,842,236 $ 1,372,279 $ 1,753,743 $ 1,478,696 $ 1,506,464 $ 1,542,902 $ 1,613,264 $ 1,716,692 $ 1,852,178 $ 2,026,810 $ 2,239,425 $ 2,283,004 $ 2,509,060 $ 2,757,600 Ending Total Days of Operating Expenditures 497 days 243 days 708 days 112 days 1,226 days 138 days 202 days 150 days 186 days 151 days 149 days 147 days 149 days 153 days 160 days 169 days 181 days 179 days 190 days 202 days Combined Minimum Target Balance 397,444 468,823 532,422 636,516 800,879 931,225 1,046,526 1,058,365 1,090,959 1,124,721 1,159,694 1,195,921 1,232,153 1,269,644 1,308,438 1,348,582 1,390,126 1,435,092 1,479,958 1,526,392 PREPARED BY FCS GROUP Port Orchard Stormwater Rate Study v32 425-867-1802 Summary - Page 1 of 1 12/14/2022 December 2022 t,i HERRERA City of Port Orchard Stormwater and Watersheds Comprehensive Plan CITY OF PORT ORCHARD DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 216 Prospect Street, Port Orchard, WA 98366 Ph.: (36o) 874-5533 • FAX: (36o) 876-4980 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No: 5(c) Meeting Date: October 3, 2023 2023 Comprehensive Plan Prepared by: Nick Bond, Development Director Subject: Amendments Summary: This staff report presents the proposed 2023 Comprehensive Plan Amendments related to the City of Port Orchard Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and Capital Facilities Plan (CFP). These amendments are essential to ensuring that the City's long-term planning remains responsive to the community's evolving needs. The Comprehensive Plan Amendment item was introduced to the Planning Commission at the August 1, 2023, Planning Commission meeting. The Comprehensive Plan amendments under consideration are permitted through exceptions provided in Port Orchard Municipal Code 20.04.020, which allow for revisions to the Comprehensive Plan and associated documents through the City's budget process. The TIP serves as a critical component of the City of Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan. It is designed to advance transportation infrastructure projects that align with the Comprehensive Plan's goals, specifically those related to traffic flow, safety, and sustainable development. The CFP is another integral part of the Comprehensive Plan, focusing on the City's physical development. It outlines the strategic acquisition, construction, and maintenance of public facilities to support the City's growth while maintaining a high quality of life for its residents. Summary of Proposed TIP Amendments: The City of Port Orchard initiated these amendments to the 2022-2041 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) in conjunction with the City budget adoption process. The amendments are summarized as follows: 1. TIP 1.18 Tremont Phase 2 and 3: This project was moved from the outer years into the 6-year TIP due to the City receiving grant funding (no match) for study and design. 2. TIP 1.2 BSPP Segments 6 to 11 CN: The program year for CN was delayed to 2024 due to design and permitting issues. 3. TIP 1.4 Old Clifton/ Anderson Hill Intersection: The project schedule was modified, giving it less priority compared to other funded projects. 4. TIP 1.8 and 1.9 Bethel Phase 1: Due to the City passing a sales tax measure, the project schedule has been accelerated. 5. TIP 1.13 Lippert Sidewalk Retrofit and Road Repair: This project was completed and has been removed from the TIP. 6. TIP 1.14 Sidney Road Sidewalk: The project received a grant, and funding sections have been updated accordingly. 7. TIP 1.16 SR166/ Bay Street Reconstruction: Grants were received for this project, resulting in updated funding allocations. 8. TIP 1.17 Street Lighting Improvements: This project received a grant for some of the programmed work. The schedule was updated to program awarded dollars in the near term and other work at future dates eligible for additional grant funding. 9. TIP 1.19 SR160/ Sedgwick Phase 2a: This project was added to acquire right of way for a future RAB that is needed to support development along the corridor. City of Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan Capital Facilities Element: The City of Port Orchard's Comprehensive Plan's Capital Facilities Element outlines the long-term strategy for the development, maintenance, and enhancement of essential public facilities and infrastructure within the city. This includes transportation systems, water and sewer services, parks, public buildings, and other major infrastructure projects critical for the community's wellbeing and growth. The purpose of the Capital Facilities Element is to establish a clear vision and framework for the provision and efficient management of infrastructure and facilities that meet the needs of the community while aligning with broader goals of sustainable growth, economic vitality, and environmental stewardship. Description of Capital Facilities Element Amendment: In addition to the TIP amendments, a new amendment is proposed for the Capital Facilities Element related to property acquisition. This amendment involves the allocation of $4 million for the acquisition of property intended for future City of Port Orchard facilities. The purpose of this amendment is to allow the City of Port Orchard to proactively acquire properties within its corporate limits for future development of essential public facilities. This strategic approach will support the city's long-term planning and development goals to accommodate the City's anticipated growth and service needs, as outlined in the City of Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan. Notice of Public Hearing: A Notice of Public Hearing regarding the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments was issued on September 19, 2023, in accordance with Port Orchard Municipal Code 20.25. This notice was published in local newspapers, posted on the City's website, and distributed to interested parties. As of the date of this report, no public comments have been received. Relationship to the City of Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan: The proposed amendments are in direct alignment with the City of Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan's vision. They are designed to enhance transportation infrastructure, accommodate population growth, and promote sustainable development within the City. These amendments support the Comprehensive Plan's goals related to transportation and capital facilities. In conclusion, the proposed 2023 Comprehensive Plan Amendments related to the Transportation Improvement Program and Capital Facilities Element are consistent with the City's long-term vision and have followed the 2 necessary legal procedures. As of the date of this report, no public comments have been received. It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve these amendments, which will support the City's continued growth and development. Recommendation: The Department of Community Development recommends the approval of the proposed 2023 Comprehensive Plan Amendments, which include revisions to the Transportation Improvement Program and Capital Facilities Element. These amendments are consistent with the City's commitment to responsible growth and infrastructure development. Suggested Motion: "I move that the Planning Commission recommend approval of an Ordinance approving the 2023 Comprehensive Plan Amendments related to the Transportation Improvement Program and Capital Facilities Element as presented." Attachments: Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments - Transportation Improvement Program and Capital Facilities Element 3 City of Port Orchard Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program For 2024-2029 TIER 1 (Reasonably Constrained) Proj# Road Name Total Federal State (TIF Begin Termini Project Total Est. Spent Prior to Future Phase Funding Fund Fund Proj#) Project Title/Project Description End Termini Length Cost 2023 2023 Expenditures 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Start Year Status Phase Code Federal Funds Code State Funds Local Funds Capital Projects 1.1 Bay Street Ped. Pathway ROW Phase PO Shoreline: Add 14-ft Multi -Modal (bikes & pedestrians) Sidney Ave. Foot 1.2 2,280,000 1,140,000 1,140,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2013 S ROW STP(U) 1,923,590 0 300,212 waterfront pathway & cantilevered retaining wall Ferry to Annapolis 3,000,000 3,000,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2018 P ROW 0 581,000 following historic Mosquito Fleet trail and pedestrian Foot Ferry N/A bridge across Black Jack Creek. 1.2 Bay Street Pedestrian Pathway Construction (S#1, S#6-11) The CN phase for the 14-ft Multi -Modal (bike & ped) 1.2 1,115,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2018 650,000 465,000 S CN waterfront pathway/cantilevered retailing wall 3,000,000 0 3,000,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2024 S CN following the historic Mosquito Fleet trail. Includes the demolition/removal of (5) overwater structures. N/A Inrli irioc Cco tR Ari Roariu r)nr Pron 1.3 Bay Street Pedestrian Pathway West Port Orchard Blvd Situational study and Bay St: Ft Ferry 1.5 566,474 0 2023 490,000 0 76,474 to Tremont 0 566,474 0 0 0 0 0 0 P PL N/A 1.4 Old Clifton/ Anderson Hill Intersection Improvements Old Clifton Rd / Intersection Improvements (roundabout) as identified Anderson Hill Rd. 0 258,000 0 0 258,000 0 258,000 0 0 2027 S PE 0 258,000 in the McCormick Urban Village Trans Plan and Intersection 1,738,000 0 0 1,738,000 0 0 0 1,738,000 0 2028 P CN Grant? 1,213,000 525,000 TIF 1.4 partially funded by Bayside Mit Funds. 1.5 Old Clifton Rd Non -Motorized Improvements Old Clifton Road: Rodway Improvements identified in the McCormick Campus PKWY to 0.75 450,000 150,000 0 450,000 0 450,000 0 0 0 2026 P PE 0 450,000 Urban Village Trans Plan. Design and Construction. Anderson Hill Rd. 2,000,000 2,700,000 2027 P CN STP(U), TIB/CS TIF 1.5, 2.07 Seperated pathway and shoulder facilities. RCO 1.7 Bethel/Sedgwick Phase 5a - Bethel/Lincoln RAB Bethel/Lincoln/Lunb Safety and capacity improvements to intersection and erg/ Mitchell 0 3,674,000 326,000 474,000 2021 S PE 800,000 reconfiguration of approaches. 0 0 3,200,000 3200000 2022 S CN HSP 1,S00,000 TIB UAP 1,100,000 700,000 TIF 2.04e 1.8 Bethel/ Sedgwick Cooridor Phase la - Blueberry RAB Bethel Road: blueberry Phase la. Bethel/ Blueberry RAB 60% PE in 2022 0 3,341,000 0 250,000 285,000 160,000 125,000 2022 S PE 0 0 535,000 and start ROW for Phase la/b. Intersection 268,000 134,000 134,000 2024 S ROW 0 268,000 2,788,000 2788000 2026 P CN TIB/ 0 2,788,000 UAP/CS IF 2.04a I I I et e e gwrc orrr or ase - a mon erry Bethel Road: Salmonberry intersection Phase 1b. Bethel/ Salmonberry RAB Round and roadway segment design from Blueberry to Salmonberry. 60% PE in 2022. 0 11,467,000 0 375,000 891,000 497,000 394,000 2023 P PE 0 0 1,272,000 3,206,000 1,603,000 1,603,000 0 2024 P ROW 0 3,206,000 7,370,000 7,370,000 2026 P CN TIB/UAP/ 0 7,370,000 rlF 2.04a CS 1.10 Val lair Ct Connector Bethel Road / Road extension and intersection improvements Walmart Drive 0.25 1,000,000 0 0 1,000,000 0 0 0 0 1,000,000 0 2027 P PE & ROW 0 0 1,000,000 previously included in the Bethel Road Corridor ROW Intersection 1,000,000 0 0 1,000,000 0 0 0 0 0 1,000,000 2028 P CN 0 TIB 0 1,000,000 TIF 1.7 & Construction project. 1.11 Sidney Road SW Design - 60% Sedgwick Rd. to Berry Lake Rd. Sidney Avenue is currently two lanes wide, it needs to 0.95 500,000 500,000 2027 0 0 500,000 be widened to three lanes (additional TWTL) including 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 500,000 p pL TIB bike lanes, sidewalks, traffic calming, and stormwater TIF 2.05 system improvements. (COMPLETE STREET). 9/15/2023 Page 1 of 8 U:\A1_Long Range Projects\2023\02 - Plans\LR23-PLAN-03 - 2023 Comprehensive Plan Amendments\01 -Working Folder\2022-2041 TIP.8_14_2023.draftsincolor City of Port Orchard Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program For 2024-2029 TIER 1 (Reasonably Constrained) Proj# Road Name Total Federal State (TIF Begin Termini Project Total Est. Spent Prior to Future Phase Funding Fund Fund Proj#) ProiectTitle/Project Description End Termini Length Cost 2023 2023 Expenditures 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Start Year Status Phase Code Federal Funds Code State Funds Local Funds 1.12 Sedgwick Road West Study - 30% Design SR16 to Sidney Rd. Establish alignments and cross sections. Develop mitigation alternatives and identify right-of-way 300,000 0 0 300,000 300,000 2023 P Study BuildAm 300,000 TIF needs for roadway and identify potential sites to accommodate stormwater run off and mitigation for TIF 2.02,2.03 filling wetlands. Include stormwater element for 1.13 Lippert Sidewalk Retrofit and Pavement Repair Sidney Rd. S. to ADA ramp and driveway retrofits, sidewalk reparis, Pottery 0.95 35,000 0 35,000 0 2021 S PE 35,000 pavement repairs, stormwater retrofit. In house des 778,000 0 2022 S CN CDBP 244,000 544,000 with consulted survey & basemap N/A 788,000 1.14 Sidney Road Sidewalk Sidney Glen Elementary Sidewalk Address gap in sidewalk along school frontage 0.95 1,895,000 0 0 0 235,000 2023 P PE 173,000 62,000 1,660,000 2024 P CN SRTS 1,222,000 438,000 TIF 2.05 1.15 Pottery Avenue Non Motorized Improvements SR16 to Lippert Dr. Address sidewalk gap from Sunset to Clay near Tremont. Road diet and road widening to provide bikeable shoulders and sidewalk improvements. 0.95 840,000 0 35,000 0 2022 P PE 35,000 150,000 2022 P 150,000 655,000 655,000 2024 S CN TIB CS 644,000 0 Safety enhancement at Pottery Lippert Intersection TIF 2.14 and School Crossing. 1.16 SR166/ Bay Street Reconstruction SR166 from Geiger to Frederick Raise street to address sea level rise and improve to current standard in accordance with redevelopment plans. Amount shown does not include water and 3,891,000 200,000 0 1,135,000 1,135,000 0 0 2022 P PE CDS 1,000,000 135,000 2,649,000 2,649,000 2026 P CN KRCC 2,000,000 649,000 sewer utility improvments. N/A City wide corridors, 1.17 Street Lighting Improvements highest priority locatoins Currently funded work includePottery, Sidney Rd. Future applications to be submitted for Tremont 1,100,000 0 0 100,000 0 100 2023 P PE HSIP 0 0 210,000 1,000,000 0 0 1,000,000 2024 P CN HSIP 210,000 0 N/A 1.18 Tremont Phase 2 and 3 Port Orchard Blvd to Sidney Ave. Non motorized connectivity study and design of elements for future ROW and/or CN application 732,000 0 0 732,000 732,000 2023 P PE Ped Bike 732,000 0 P ROW 0 2.12 & 2.30 1.19 SR160/Sedgewick Phase 2a New Intersection New Round About mid way between SR16 and Bethel Rd. Needed to support development on the corridor. City to compelte 60% DN and ROW acquisition for two 1,550,000 0 0 600,000 600,000 2027 P PE BuildAm 600,000 950,000 950,000 2028 P ROW BuildAm 950,000 TIF lane RAB that will be innitially constructed as one 2.046 Total Capital 44biU4/4 L4bb000 1U4CP54/4 JJU/buuu 6J51000 4bbb10U 1bW/0U0 E55ES000 Sbk5C000 1500000 1UIJB!IUU LSISUUU LbbZ/bub Maintenance Projects Total 2,023 Future Exp 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 1.51 Annual Pavement Maintenance Includes patching, crack -sealing, striping, and other 666,000 53,000 56,500 556,500 56,500 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 On going S CN 556,500 activities 1.52 * Annual Sidewalk & ADA Upgrade Program 9/15/2023 Page 2 of 8 U:\A1_Long Range Projects\2023\02 - Plans\LR23-PLAN-03 - 2023 Comprehensive Plan Amendments\01 -Working Folder\2022-2041 TIP.8_14_2023.draftsincolor City of Port Orchard Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program For 2024-2029 TIER 1 (Reasonably Constrained) Proj# Road Name Total Federal State (TIF Begin Termini Project Total Est. Spent Prior to Future Phase Funding Fund Fund Proj#) Project Title/Project Description End Termini Length Cost 2023 2023 Expenditures 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Start Year Status Phase Code Federal Funds Code State Funds Local Funds Repair and replace concrete sidewalks and curb 976,000 38,000 38,000 900,000 180,000 180,000 180,000 180,000 180,000 0 On going S CN 900,000 ramps as identified in the program 1.53 ** Annual Pavement Management System Paving Projects Pavement replacement projects as identified in the 2,935,000 300,000 535,000 2,100,000 350,000 350,000 350,000 350,000 350,000 350,000 On going 5 CN 2,100,000 pavement management system program 1.55 Overlay Pavement preparation and overlay. Tremont: PO Tremont Str./ Lund 1.2 1,000,000 0 0 1,000,000 0 0 1,000,000 0 0 0 2025 P PE,CN KRCC 865,000 135,000 Blvd. to Bridge, Old Clifton: SR16 to City Limits, Old Ave./ Old Clifton Rd. Clifton Anderson Hill to McCormick Woods Dr. Total Maintenance Projects 5,577,000 391,000 629,500 4,556,500 586,500 630,000 1,630,000 630,000 630,000 450,000 865,000 0 3,691,500 * Per 2016 ADA transition plan: $180,000 annually over 20 years to comply on arterial streets. ** Per 2016 Pavement Management Analysis Report: $1.45 million annually to maintain network condition (PCI of 70), $500k to keep network PCI above 65 after 5 years. 9/15/2023 Page 3 of 8 U:\A1_Long Range Projects\2023\02 - Plans\LR23-PLAN-03 - 2023 Comprehensive Plan Amendments\01 -Working Folder\2022-2041 TIP.8_14_2023.draftsincolor City of Port Orchard Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) For 2030-2043 TIER 2 (Unconstrained) Road Name Total Phase Priority Begin Termini Project Start Funding Federal State Fund Number Project Title/Project Description End Termini Length Total Est. Cost 2029-2034 2035-2042 Year Status Phase Fund Code Federal Funds Code State Funds Local Funds Capital Projects 2.01 Sidney Avenue (North of SR 16) Tremont Street to 1 3,750,000 3,750,000 0 2029 P PE/RW STP(U) 0 0 3,750,000 The design, permitting, right-of-way acquisition Fireweed 6,750,000 6,750,000 0 2031 P CN STP(U) 0 0 6,750,000 and construction for this project with bike lanes, storm drainage and sidewalks. (COMPLETE TIF 2.01 STREET) 2.02A Sedgwick Road West - Design, Permitting & ROW SR 16 Interchange to 0.4 462,428 462,428 0 2029 P PE STP(U) 400,000 0 62,428 The design, permitting and right-of-way Sidney Avenue 693,642 693,642 0 2030 P RW STP(U) 600,000 0 93,642 acquisition phase for this widening project with 3 lanes (continuous TWTL), bike lanes, sidewalks and box culvert across Blackjack Creek.) TIF 2.02 2.02B Sedgwick Road West - Construction SR 16 Interchange to 0.4 3,468,208 3,468,208 0 2031 P CN STP(U) 3,000,000 0 468,208 The construction phase for this widening project Sidney Rd. with 3 lanes (continuous TWTL), bike lanes, sidewalks and box culvert across Blackjack Creek.) TIF 2.02 2.04A.2 Ramsey Road Widening Sedgwick Road to Widen road to two travel lanes with bike lanes, Salmonberry Road 0.5 2,500,000 0 21500,000 2029 P ALL 0 0 0 sidewalks and stormwater system improvements. TIF 2.04A Bethel/Sedgwick Corridor Phase 2 - Design, Sedgwick Road: SR-16 2.0413 ROW and Construction interchange to Bethel 1,110,000 1,110,000 0 2030 P PE 0 0 1,110,000 Design, ROW acquisition and construction of the 0.7 2,802,000 2,802,000 0 2031 P RW 0 0 2,802,000 second phase of the street improvements per the 12,757,000 12,757,000 0 2032 P CN 12,725,000 0 0 Bethel/Sedgwick Corridor Plan (2018). TIF 2.04E Bethel/Sedgwick Corridor Phase 3 - Design, Bethel Road: Blueberry 2.04C ROW and Construction to Sedgwick 422,000 422,000 0 2032 P PE 0 0 422,000 Design, ROW acquisition and construction of the 0.25 541,000 541,000 0 2033 P RW 0 0 541,000 third phase of the street improvements per the 4,859,000 4,859,000 0 2034 P CN 4,859,000 0 0 Bethel/Sedgwick Corridor Plan (2018). TIF 2.04C Bethel/Sedgwick Corridor Phase 4 - Design, Bethel Road: Lund to 2.04D ROW and Construction Salmonberry 616,000 0 616,000 2034 P PE 0 0 616,000 Design, ROW acquisition and construction of the 0.5 1,041,000 0 1,041,000 2035 P RW 0 0 1,041,000 fourth phase of the street improvements per the 7,087,000 0 7,087,000 2036 P CN 7,087,000 0 0 Bethel/Sedgwick Corridor Plan (2018). TIF 2.04D Bethel/Sedgwick Corridor Phase 5 - Design, Bethel Road: Mile Hill 2.04E ROW and Construction Drive to Lund 720,000 0 720,000 2036 P PE 0 0 720,000 Design, ROW acquisition and construction of the 1.1 1,532,000 0 1,532,000 2037 P RW 0 0 1,532,000 fifth phase of the street improvements per the 8,283,000 0 8,283,000 2038 P CN 8,283,000 0 0 Bethel/Sedgwick Corridor Plan (2018). TIF 2.04E 9/15/2023 PIaIg)p64cd&g Range Projects\2023\02 - Plans\LR23-PLAN-03 - 2023 Comprehensive Plan Amendments\01- Working Folder\2022-2041 TIP.8_14_2023.draftsincolor City of Port Orchard Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) For 2030-2043 TIER 2 (Unconstrained) Road Name Total Phase Priority Begin Termini Project Start Funding Federal State Fund Number Project Title/Project Description End Termini Length Total Est. Cost 2029-2034 2035-2042 Year Status Phase Fund Code Federal Funds Code State Funds Local Funds 2.05 Sidney Road SW Widening Sidney Road SW: Sidney Avenue is currently two lanes wide, it SR 16 Overpass to 0.95 500,000 500,000 0 2028 P PE 0 0 500,000 needs to be widened to three lanes (additional Sedgwick Road 5,761,850 5,761,850 0 2029 P CN STP(U) 3,600,000 TIB 1,600,000 561,850 TWTL) including bike lanes, sidewalks, traffic calming, and stormwater system improvements. TIF 2.05 (COMPLETE STREET). 2.06 Pottery Avenue Widening Pottery Avenue: Widen road to two travel lanes with bike lanes, Tremont Place to 0.22 1,600,000 1,600,000 0 2029 P ALL 0 0 1,600,000 sidewalks and stormwater system improvements. Melcher Street TIF 2.06 2.07 Old Clifton Rd Shoulder & Pedestrian Improvements Old Clifton Road: Design and construction of shoulder widening, Anderson Hill to 1.35 2,700,000 2,700,000 0 2028 P CN 0 0 2,000,000 street lighting, watermain extension and grade- Westerly City Limits seperated Pedestrian Path as identified in the TIF 2.07 McCormick Urban Village Trans Plan. 2.08 O. Clifton Rd & McC. Woods Dr. Intersection Old Clifton Rd/ Design and construction of intersecion McCormick Woods Dr. 0 250,000 0 250,000 2032 P PE 0 0 250,000 (roundabout) improvements including street Intersection 750,000 0 750,000 2033 P CN 0 0 750,000 lighting, as identified in the McCormick Urban TIF 2.08 Village Trans Plan. 2.09 Melcher Street Widening Melcher Street West is currently a narrow two- Melcher Street: 0.4 600,000 0 600,000 2032 P ALL 0 0 750,000 lane road. The reconstruction would widen the Pottery Avenue to road to allow two safe travel lanes, bike lanes, Sherman Avenue sidewalks and a stormwater system. TIF 2.09 2.10 Fireweed Road Widening Fireweed is currently a narrow two lane road. The Fireweed Road: 0.25 375,000 0 375,000 2035 P ALL 0 0 750,000 reconstruction would widen the road to allow for Sidney Avenue to safe travel lanes, bike lanes, sidewalks and a South Flower Avenue TIF 2.10 stormwater system. 2.11 Sherman Avenue Widening Sherman Avenue: Sherman Avenue is currently a narrow two-lane Fireweed Road to 0.35 525,000 0 525,000 2032 P ALL 0 0 750,000 road. The reconstruction would widen the road to Terminus at SR 16 allow two safe travel lanes, bike lanes, sidewalks and a stormwater system. TIF 2.12 2.12 Tremont St Widening - Port Orchard Blvd (Ph. 2) Port Orchard Blvd. Construct roundabouts at Tremont Street/PO Blvd. Tremont Street to 1.1 and Bay Street (SR166)/PO Blvd. and curb, gutter, Ba Street SR166 Y ( ) 809,250 0 809,250 2033 P PE STP(U) 700,000 0 109,250 bike lanes, sidewalks, street lighting, storm 520,231 0 520,231 2035 P RW STP(U) 450,000 0 70,231 drainage and Schedule 74 Undergrounding. 7,225,434 0 7,225,434 2037 P CN STP(U) 6,250,000 0 975,434 TIF 2.13 2.13 Pottery Avenue Widening Tremont to SR16 Pottery Avenue Pottery is currently a two-lane road, it needs to be Tremont Street 0.95 500,000 500,000 0 2030 P PE STP(U) 432,500 67,500 widened to a four -lane road, with sidewalks, SR 16 Overpass traffic calming and upgrades to the stormwater 750,000 750,000 0 2031 P RW STP(U) 648,750 101,250 TIF 2.14 system. 2,950,000 2,950,000 0 2033 P CN STP(U) 2,292,250 0 657,750 9/15/2023 PNg)0acd&g Range Projects\2023\02 - Plans\LR23-PLAN-03 - 2023 Comprehensive Plan Amendments\01- Working Folder\2022-2041 TIP.8_14_2023.draftsincolor City of Port Orchard Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) For 2030-2043 TIER 2 (Unconstrained) Road Name Total Phase Priority Begin Termini Project Start Funding Federal State Fund Number Project Title/Project Description End Termini Length Total Est. Cost 2029-2034 2035-2042 Year Status Phase Fund Code Federal Funds Code State Funds Local Funds 2.14 Old Clifton Berry Lake Road Intersection 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Intersection Improvement by Kitsap County 2.15 Blueberry Road Widening Geiger Road to Bethel Widen road to two travel lanes with bike lanes, Road 0.4 600,000 0 600,000 2036 P ALL 0 0 0 sidewalks and stormwater system improvements. TIF 2.16 2.16 Geiger Road Widening Sedgwick Road to Widen road to two travel lanes with bike lanes, Blueberry Road 0.25 375,000 0 375,000 2034 P ALL 0 0 0 sidewalks and stormwater system improvements. TIF 2.17 2.17 Salmonberry Road Widening Ramsey Road to Bethel Widen road to two travel lanes with bike lanes, Road 0.15 225,000 0 225,000 2028 P ALL 0 0 0 sidewalks and stormwater system improvements. TIF 2.18 2.18 Piperberry Way Extention Geiger Road to Ramsey Provide an extetion of Piperberry from Ramsey to Road 0.25 575,000 0 575,000 2034 P ALL 0 0 0 Geiger and a new street connection to the proposed round about on Sedgwick. TIF 2.19 2.19 Old Clifton & Feilgly Intersection Feigly intersection Complete streets improvemets indentified in the 0 2,800,000 0 21800,000 2040 P ALL 0 0 0 McCormicks Urban Village Transportation Plan. Continuation of 1.5A TIF 2.21 2.20 Bay Street Pathway - West Tremont to Footferry Continuation of project following study in 1.8 0 4,000,000 4,000,000 0 2030 P ALL 0 0 0 2.21 Walmart to Salmonberry Connector Salmonberry Complete roadway connnection 0 800,000 0 800,000 2040 P ALL 0 0 0 TIF 2.04A 2.22 Downtown Bay Street Study Port Orchard Blvd to Study main street in downtown port orchard for Mile Hill Dr intersection 0 1,000,000 0 11000,000 2033 P ALL 0 0 0 complete streets with bikelanes and streetscape with Bay Street. for pedestrians and storefronts. Study to address traffic cirulcation and raising streets for seal level rise and assocated stormwater and other utility imnrnvpmantc 2.23 Bay Street Improvements Port Orchard Blvd to Complete Street and utlitiy improvements. Refer Mile Hill Dr intersection 0 10,000,000 0 10,000,000 2040 P ALL 0 0 0 to Study. with Bay Street. 2.24 Bay St. & Port Orchard Blvd Intersection Bay Street at Port 9/15/2023 Pllg\AELcd&g Range Projects\2023\02 - Plans\LR23-PLAN-03 - 2023 Comprehensive Plan Amendments\01- Working Folder\2022-2041 TIP.8_14_2023.draftsincolor City of Port Orchard Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) For 2030-2043 TIER 2 (Unconstrained) Road Name Total Phase Priority Begin Termini Project Start Funding Federal State Fund Number Project Title/Project Description End Termini Length Total Est. Cost 2029-2034 2035-2042 Year Status Phase Fund Code Federal Funds Code State Funds Local Funds Single Lane Round About to address safety and Orchard Bulivard 0 3,000,000 0 31000,000 2040 P ALL 0 0 0 capacity. Bay Street Pathway crossing. Assumed creek is not impacted by project/ no major mitigation. 2.25 Bay St. & Kitsap Street Intersection Improvement Bay Street at Kitsap Re -align Kitsap intersection to addres safety and Street 0 2,000,000 0 2,000,000 2040 P ALL 0 0 0 capacity. Cline to end at Kitsap. Relocate flag pole. Signalized Intersection? 2.26 Bay St. & Mitchell and Wetzil Bay Street at Mitchell Reconfigure intersections to address safety and Avenue and Guy Wetzil 0 2,500,000 0 2,500,000 2040 P ALL 0 0 0 capacity. Rd. 2.27 Sidney Avenue Improvements Prospect St. to the Sidewalk and streetscape improvements. Waterfront 0 1,500,000 0 1,500,000 2040 P ALL 0 0 0 Developer Imrpovements? 2.28 Harrison Avenue Improvements Bay Street to the Sidewalk and streetscape improvements. Signal Waterfront 0 1,000,000 0 1,000,000 2040 P ALL 0 0 0 replacement? Developer Project? 2.28 Fredrickson Ave Impr. Cline St. to Sidney Ave. Convert to two way street with angled parking. 0 1,500,000 0 1,500,000 2040 P ALL 0 0 0 Provide sidewalk and streetscape impr. 2.29 New Waterfront Street Cline Street to Harrson Sidewalk and streetscape improvements. "Shared Avenue 0 2,500,000 0 21500,000 2040 P ALL 0 0 0 Street" concept. Developer Improvement? Port Orchard Blvd. to 2.30 Tremont St Widening - Port Orchard Blvd (Ph. 3) Sidney Ave. Center median, bike lane, sidewalk, and 0 5,000,000 0 51000,000 2041 P ALL STP(U) 0 FIB, Ped Biki 0 0 streetscape improvements on Tremont and Sidney. Round about at the Tremont/ Sidney intersection for non -motorized safety. Total Tier 2 Capital Projects 86,986,043 52,377,128 34,608,915 51,327,500 1,600,000 29,801,543 9/15/2023 PI1g)02cd&g Range Projects\2023\02 - Plans\LR23-PLAN-03 - 2023 Comprehensive Plan Amendments\01- Working Folder\2022-2041 TIP.8_14_2023.draftsincolor City of Port Orchard Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) For 2030-2043 TIER 2 (Unconstrained) Road Name Total Phase Priority Begin Termini Project Start Funding Federal State Fund Number Project Title/Project Description End Termini Length Total Est. Cost 2029-2034 2035-2042 Year Status Phase Fund Code Federal Funds Code State Funds Local Funds Maintenance Project 2.51 Cline Avenue Repairs Replace sidewalk and parking strip. Cline Avenue: 0.13 200,000 0 0 P ALL 200,000 Kitsap Street to Dwight Street Total Tier 2 Maintenance Projects 200,000 0 0 0 0 200,000 9/15/2023 PNg)0acd&g Range Projects\2023\02 - Plans\LR23-PLAN-03 - 2023 Comprehensive Plan Amendments\01- Working Folder\2022-2041 TIP.8_14_2023.draftsincolor Chapter 9: Capital Facilities Chapter 9. Capital Facilities 9.1. Introduction This Capital Facilities Element of the 2016 Comprehensive Plan provides information about the City's existing public facilities, and the need for future facilities to address the requirements of a growing population. The Capital Facilities Element, in conjunction with the City's Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) and Capital Improvements Program (CIP), provide guidance for the City to achieve its goals of providing the appropriate public facilities and desirable levels of public services to its residents and businesses. Capital Facilities Vision Provide outstanding community facilities that serve the needs of a growing and changing city. Maintain existing community facilities and develop additional facilities to address the city'sgrowth and evolving needs. New facilities should address multiple objectives, such as creating new open space and enhancing neighborhood Ensuring that public facilities are available when growth occurs is critical to the quality of life for Port Orchard's residents. The implementation of the Capital Facilities Element and related plans will help realize the community's vision for outstanding community facilities, as well as the vision and goals of the Land Use Element. This Element also functions in coordination with the Comprehensive Plan's Utilities, Parks and Transportation elements and functional system plans for water, wastewater and stormwater. These are discussed in more detail in Section 9.3. character, even as they serve basic The state requires the City to demonstrate that all functional requirements. capital facilities serving its population have been considered and that planning is done in a coordinated and comprehensive fashion. The Public Facilities and Services Goal of the Growth Management Act (GMA) requires that the level of service ("LOS") of public facilities and services necessary to support development shall be adequate to serve the development at the time the development is available for occupancy and use, without decreasing current service levels below locally established minimum standards ("the concurrency requirement"). Kitsap County's Countywide Planning Policies also require the City to ensure that its growth plans are consistent with the CIP and that adequate public facilities and services are or will be available to serve the City's population allocation through the planning period. If limited funding or other circumstances would prevent the city from providing adequate facilities and services, the Growth Management Act requires the city to re-evaluate the Land Use Element and make sure that capital facilities plans and land use plans are consistent. The City of Port Orchard owns and manages a variety of capital facilities, including roads, parks, utility systems, police facilities, and administrative buildings. In addition to the facilities owned and managed by the City, there are publicly -owned capital facilities managed by other entities which meet some of Port Orchard's capital facility needs. These include, but are not limited to, schools, library, sewage treatment, and public transit. Privately owned utilities (electrical, natural gas, and telecommunications) conduct their own planning processes and maintain their own system plans. The City influences private system Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan Adopted: June 2016 Revised: ***, 2021JF;T 2MNovember 2023 Chapter 9: Capital Facilities planning through its authority to regulate land uses and its obligation to develop and maintain a Comprehensive Plan. The City uses its capital facilities and functional plans, with guidance from the Comprehensive Plan, to make planning and budgetary decisions about the need and timing for construction of new facilities, improvements to existing facilities, the levels of service provided by those facilities, and how to fund and maintain these needs. Planning decisions should also address the evolving and adaptive role of technology in the provision of capital facilities. The complete list of capital facility improvements planned in the next seven years is provided in the City's Capital Improvements Program (CIP), which is described in Section 9.3. The CIP and the functional plans provide a complete facility inventory, as well as needs, projected costs, and funding sources. 9.2. Inventory and Identified Needs 9.2.1 Administration and Service Facilities Facility Location Size (sq ft) City Hall (includes Police Station and Municipal Court) 216 Prospect Street 28,370 Public Works Shop 1535 Vivian Court 6,000 South Shed 2051 Sidney Avenue 3,811 Active Club 1026 Tacoma Avenue 7,500 Police Shooting Range 1278 Lloyd Parkway N/A Library 87 Sidney Avenue 8,586 Community Development Department Building 720 Prospect Street 2,925 Property Acquisition for City Various Administration Offices and Public and City Employee Parking Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan Adopted: June 2016 Revised: ***, 20211july 2MNovember 2023 Chapter 9: Capital Facilities The City's Capital Facilities Plan provides a detailed description and analysis of the City's current capital facilities, as summarized below: A City Hall The primary municipal building is the City Hall, which was built in 1999. It contains all of the City's departments and staff, except for the Public Works crew. The UP established the level of service for administrative space (including police and courts) at 2,408 sq ft per 1,000 residents. The state's Office of Financial Management estimated the City's 2015 population at 9,950. The City's 2036 target population allocation is 20,558. City Hall also requires some maintenance and improvements, as identified in the CFP. In 2016, the City contracted with Rice Fergus Miller, Inc to prepare a facilities space analysis for the City Hall. This analysis, which has been included in Appendix B of the City's Comprehensive Plan (Plans Adopted by Reference), found that the Port Orchard City Hall's net usable area was approximately 64% of the area provided in the city halls for Gig Harbor and Poulsbo, which are smaller cities. The analysis recommended that approximately 10,592 gross square feet be added to City Hall through 2025, based on the City's projected population growth, in order to maintain and improve work space and customer service. Parking should also be provided for an expansion. The Police Department currently occupies approximately 5,500 sq ft on the ground floor of City Hall. The Police Department has indicated that it requires approximately 10,000-15,000 additional square feet of office space with 3,000-5,000 sq ft of storage to meet its needs for the next 20 years. The City should review options for providing the additional space needed to maintain an appropriate level of police services. Public Works — Shop and South Shed The Public Works shop houses this department's foreman and crew and a majority of the City's maintenance vehicles and equipment. The shop has sufficient capacity to support staff throughout the capital facilities planning period. There is a current level of service for enclosed maintenance facilities of 833 sq ft per 1,000 residents. However, there is not enough covered parking for City vehicles and equipment, and the City has identified the need for a second four -bay carport to cover and protect City vehicles and equipment from the elements. The south shed is anticipated to continue being used as a storage facility and staging area through the planning period. No construction, remodeling or expansion need is anticipated. Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan Adopted: June 2016 Revised: ****,'z in 29aMNovember 2023 Chapter 9: Capital Facilities Active Club The Active Club is the only community recreational building owned by the City. It provides space for a number of recreational, sports and civic organizations to conduct activities. Police Shooting Range The police shooting range provides a convenient and safe location for officers to train and practice with firearms. Library The library building is owned by the City and houses the local branch of the Kitsap Public Library. 9.2.2 Parks and Recreational Facilities The City has a number of parks and recreational facilities, listed below. Current Parks Facilities Park Name Size Facilities Van Zee 8.3 Acres Picnic Areas and shelters, trails, two baseball diamonds, playground, sports field, lighted tennis courts, horseshoe court, restroom Clayton Park 1.4 Acres Picnic tables, playground, sports field, basketball court, picnic shelter Givens Field 6.7 Acres 2 Baseball Diamonds (under lease, not available for public use), lighted tennis courts, lighted horseshoe courts, restrooms, picnic area, playground, Active Club Lundberg Park 4.8 Acres Not open to the public, no facilities Paul Powers, Jr. 3.75 Acres Field, playground, basketball court Park Boat Ramp 0.3 Acres Municipal boat ramp, restroom, parking DeKalb 4.1 Acres 169 feet of pier, 359 feet of floats, picnic tables Pedestrian Pier Etta Turner Park 0.6 Acres Gazebo, benches, view of Sinclair Inlet, trail connection McCormick 28.6 Acres Trails, restrooms Village Park Seattle Ave 1.88 Acres Trail connection Waterway *tidelands Property included Waterfront Park 1.9 Acres Sidewalks, picnic table, bench, viewing platform Westbay N/A Trail connection, beach access Easements Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan Adopted: June 2016 Revised: ****,'z 2MNovember 2023 Chapter 9: Capital Facilities Bethel South 5.3 Acres Not open to the public, no facilities; a portion planned for Property construction of dog park In addition to the properties in the above table, which are owned and operated by the City, Port Orchard residents also have a number of non -City parks and private facilities that are available for public recreational use. The City's Parks Plan provides a comparison of current recreational facilities and services within the City against the recommended levels of service used by the state's Interagency Council for Outdoor Recreation and by Kitsap County. This comparison is used to establish the LOS for recreational needs of the City's existing and future population. City -owned, non -City publicly owned, and private recreational facilities are all considered by the City when determining levels of service. In general, the City has adequate park and recreational facilities to serve the population during the planning period, with existing deficits in bike paths, boat launches and pedestrian trails, and projected deficits in community and neighborhood parks. Additional information on the City's parks and more detailed planning strategies can be found in the City's Parks Plan and in the Parks Element of this Comprehensive Plan. 9.2.3 Utilities and Transportation The City owns, maintains and manages its water system and wastewater collection system. It is also responsible for City roads and other aspects of the City's transportation system. More information on these facilities is provided in the City's functional plans and other Elements of the Comprehensive Plan (Utilities, Transportation). Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan Adopted: June 2016 Revised: ****,'z 2MNovember 2023 Chapter 9: Capital Facilities 9.3. Planning and Policy Connections A complete list of capital facility improvements planned in the next seven years is included in the city's Capital Improvements Program (CIP), which is described in this section. The CIP and the functional plans listed in the following table identify facility inventories, needs, projected costs, and funding sources. Capital improvement recommendations are drawn primarily from functional plans specific to each capital facility or City department. Utilities such as water, sewer, and stormwater have specific requirements according to state and federal law. Each City department forecasts needed improvements for at least a twenty-year. Each plan contains an inventory of the system and a forecast of system demand and capacity based on population and regulatory mandates. The functional plans identify capital investments required to meet future demand and to replace or maintain existing facilities for continued service. The plans also define the customer service level for each facility provide and system -specific operating policies. The CIP uses many revenue sources to fund the capital improvement projects identified in the plan, including sales tax, business and occupation tax, utility rates, state revenues, bonds, and grants. Impact feesl and other specific revenues allowed under the Growth Management Act also offer potential funding sources. Coordinating City Functional Plans and Capital Improvements Program Capital Improvements Program Funding: plan updated biennially. This is the city's seven-year financing and implementation plan in which needed capital improvements to the city's public facilities and infrastructure are identified and prioritized. Water System Plan Functional Plan: updated on a 6-10 year cycle, as This plan provides a basis for capital improvement needed. planning for six years and forecasts anticipated needs to a 20-year planning horizon. Wastewater System Plan Functional Plan: updated on a 6-10 year cycle, as This plan addresses aging infrastructure, system needed. expansion to accommodate development, revised policies and practices, data, finances, revised growth forecasting, and recommended improvements. Storm and Surface Water System Plan Functional Plan: updated on a 6-10 year cycle, as This plan establishes the city's storm and surface water needed. policy. Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan Adopted: June 2016 Revised: ***, 20211oF;T 2MNovember 2023 Chapter 9: Capital Facilities Parks Plan Functional Plan: updated on a 6-10 year cycle, as This plan is the primary tool to guide the long-term needed. growth and development of Bellevue's parks and open space system. The core of the plan is a set of 20-year capital project recommendations, which are reviewed and updated approximately every six years. Transportation Plan Functional Plan: updated every two years. This six -year plan indicates needs for maintenance and improvement of the City's transportation network. 9.4. Future Needs A key feature of the capital facilities planning process is asset management, which continually monitors the condition of existing facilities and infrastructure, identifies the levels of maintenance needed, and determines when facilities need to be replaced. The city's capital facilities policies ensure that the city plans in advance for maintenance and infrastructure replacement to maintain levels of service. These policies also tie capital facilities planning to land use, making sure that assumptions about future growth are consistent. The City of Port Orchard owns, operates, and maintains over $3.5 billion of infrastructure to provide drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater and surface water services to its residents and businesses. Continued investment in this infrastructure is necessary for continued delivery of utility services that are critical for human health and safety, economic development, as well as supporting a sustainable, healthy environment. Capital facility investment helps to ensure that the City can continue to deliver the high quality municipal utility services customers expect. The City of Port Orchard has a rapidly growing population. To provide adequate capital facilities, the City is working to address substandard infrastructure and comply with new regulations. While there are unique challenges to specific capital facility services, several issues apply broadly to Port Orchard: Accommodating Increased Demand. Increased demand will require investment for building and maintaining facilities for services like water, wastewater, stormwater, parks, fire, police, transportation, and municipal buildings. Non -city providers, such as school districts, libraries and solid waste processors, will also experience increased demand for services and will need to plan for new or improved facilities. Aging Infrastructure. Some of Port Orchard's capital facilities are aging or inadequate for current service needs, and will require repairs and replacement over the next twenty years. The costs of replacing utility infrastructure and roads are substantial and take years for planning and implementation. Likewise, facilities such as parks and municipal buildings require ongoing maintenance, improvements, or replacement. City departments maintain plans and strategies for funding and building necessary improvements, which are scheduled and assigned funding in the city's seven-year CIP. Compliance with New Laws and Regulations. Changing state and federal mandates governing capital facilities systems require the city to monitor and review its systems to ensure compliance. For Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan Adopted: June 2016 Revised: ***, 220211oA:T 2MNovember 2023 Chapter 9: Capital Facilities example, compliance with the city's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Municipal Stormwater Permit (NPDES), a Federal Clean Water Act mandate that affects programs citywide, will have significant long-term impacts on the way the city does business, on city expenses, and on private development costs. In February 2010, stormwater regulations were significantly expanded under the NPDES Phase II permit. These new regulations, along with associated stormwater requirements that must be incorporated into City code by 2017, places significant additional requirements on the City's planning and regulatory functions. The City of Port Orchard benefits from its proximity to centers for recreation, open space, and sports fields outside City Limits and/or held by other agencies or groups, such as the South Kitsap School District and Kitsap County. Creating and strengthening regional partnerships will enable Port Orchard and its partners to provide greater facilities and opportunities than would be possible alone. The City of Port Orchard is already working with Kitsap County and other nearby jurisdiction to create and expand a regional water trail including shoreline access with launch points, rest areas, parking facilities. 9.5. Goals and Policies Goal I. Provide an efficient distribution and mixture of public facilities, including parks, parking areas, non -motorized transportation connections, and other facilities and services. Policy CF-1 The City should explore opportunities for acquisition of surface parking areas within the downtown core to serve the general public and municipal purposes. Policy CF-2 The City should consider development of multi -use facilities that can serve more than one public need. The City should coordinate with other jurisdictions and agencies that also provide public facilities, such as Kitsap County, Kitsap Transit and the Port of Bremerton, to encourage cooperative planning of future facilities and reduce redundancy. The City should also explore opportunities for public/private partnerships and funding sources that could provide a mix of public facilities and other uses such as commercial and residential within the same development, where appropriate. Policy CF-3 Encourage public awareness and consider public input when considering the need for and proposed locations of new public facilities. Develop public facilities according to the specific needs, locations and levels of service identified in the City's functional plans and capital improvements program. Policy CF-4 Encourage thejoint use of utility corridors for open space and non -motorized pathways and trails, provided that such joint use is consistent with limitations prescribed by applicable law and prudent utility practice. Policy CF-5 Encourage private property owners and developers to donate public trail access and parcels for park development in areas identified for future municipal parks and trail connections. Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan Adopted: June 2016 Revised: ***, 2021JF;T 2MNovember 2023 Chapter 9: Capital Facilities Goal 2. The City shall establish minimum levels of service for provision of urban services (i.e. fire, police, garbage disposal, parks, library, and other appropriate services). Policy CF-6 It is the City's intent that adequate school facilities be provided for the community. Individual school levels of service should be maintained as adopted and funded by the South Kitsap School District School Board. Goal 3. Ensure that infrastructure, facilities, and services are adequate to serve new projects at the time buildings are available for occupancy and use, without decreasing service levels below locally established minimum standards. Policy CF-7 Require that urban level facilities and services are provided prior to or concurrent with development. These services include, but are not limited to, transportation infrastructure, parks, potable water supply, sewage disposal, stormwater and surface water management, and solid waste management. Policy CF-8 Facilitate adequate planning for services and facilities by coordinating with utility providers on annual updates of population, employment and development projections. Policy CF-9 Regularly monitor and update LOS standards for public facilities to reflect community preferences for quality of service delivery. Policy CF-10 Encourage providers to improve accessibility to public services by making information available, convenient and complete. Policy CF-11 Maintain an inventory of existing capital facilities owned by public entities. Policy CF-12 The City should acquire property sufficient to provide capital facility services at established levels of service, according to the identified deficiencies and future needs for such services as provided in the City's functional plans. Goal 4. Ensure that the provision of capital facilities meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. • Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan Adopted: June 2016 Revised: ****,'�;y 29a�November 2023 Chapter 9: Capital Facilities Policy CF-13 Provide public facilities and services conveniently and equitably throughout the community and do not unduly affect any one group of people or geographic area by the siting or expansion of essential public facilities. Policy CF-14 Ensure that the provision of capital facilities is environmentally sensitive, safe and reliable, aesthetically compatible with surrounding land uses, and economical to consumers. Policy CF-15 Ensure that new growth and development pay a fair, proportionate share of the cost of new facilities needed to serve such growth and development. Policy CF-16 Direct growth within the community where adequate public facilities exist or can be efficiently provided. Policy CF-17 Seek to reduce the per unit cost of public facilities and services by encouraging urban intensity development within the City and adjacent Urban Growth Areas. Policy CF-18 Coordinate the construction of public facility improvements such as utility and road improvements to help minimize project costs. Policy CF-19 Ensure the efficient and equitable siting of capital facilities through cooperative and coordinated planning. Policy CF-20 Coordinate and cooperate with other jurisdictions in the implementation of multijurisdictional utility facility expansions and improvements. Policy CF-21 Provide meaningful opportunities for community involvement in the planning of capital facilities. Goal 5: Support provision of adequate, timely and efficient fire protection and emergency medical service within the City. Policy CF-22 Coordinate with South Kitsap Fire and Rescue on planning for the location of new fire stations to ensure that they are dispersed throughout the City and located near areas of high population concentration. Policy CF-23 Encourage consolidation of duplicate services between Fire Districts to use resources more effectively. Goal 6: Reduce crime risks within the City. Policy CF-24 Design and locate capital facility improvements to optimize public safety through increased visibility at joint use facilities (e.g., streets, public buildings, etc.) Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan Adopted: June 2016 Revised: ***, 2021 JF;T 2MNovember 2023 Chapter 9: Capital Facilities Policy CF-25 Ensure that there are enough commissioned officers and support staff to support the established LOS in the City. Goal 7. Coordinate land use and school district capital facilities planning. Policy CF-26 Recognize that schools provide a unifying social and physical amenity that are key foci for successful neighborhoods. Encourage elementary schools to be located in or near neighborhood centers and middle schools, junior high schools and senior high schools to be located near community centers. Policy CF-27 Coordinate with the South Kitsap School District to develop strategies to ensure that students are not forced to attend a school outside their neighborhood. Policy CF-28 Coordinate with the South Kitsap School District to develop strategies to provide and enhance safe multi -modal access to the schools. Policy CF-29 Review and update school impact fees at least every 4 years. Policy CF-30 Explore opportunities to develop joint use facilities with the South Kitsap School District, such as recreational and community center facilities. Goal 8: Develop and maintain adequate and convenient parks, recreation, and open space areas and facilities for all age groups to serve both the existing and future population of Port Orchard and surrounding areas. Policy CF-31 Preserve open space considered scenic in value by a. enhancing and expanding park facilities. b. discouraging obstructions of scenic views. Policy CF-32 Increase the size and number of parks and open spaces by: a. establishing partnerships with other agencies to jointly utilize public facilities. b. promoting through public and private investments, the acquisition of open space facilities and assuring proper maintenance thereof. c. providing for public input when developing plans for public parks. Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan Adopted: June 2016 Revised: ***, 2021 JF;T 2MNovember 2023 Chapter 9: Capital Facilities d. providing for a mixture of active and passive open spaces within residential and commercial areas with consideration of nearby public facilities. e. providing input on development plans for public parks within Port Orchard's Urban Growth Boundary. Policy CF-33 Monitor and maintain the LOS for park facilities as established in the City's comprehensive Parks Plan. Policy CF-34 The Active Club should continue to be maintained and improved. Policy CF-35 Reevaluate the City's established park impact fee at least every four years to ensure that the fee is appropriate based on the City's LOS for parks acquisition, improvement and maintenance. Policy CF-36 Correct LOS deficiencies in park facilities through capital improvements. Policy CF-37 Collaborate with Kitsap Countyto explore formation of a Municipal Parks District to help fund and develop community and neighborhood scale parks throughout the city and the Urban Growth Area. Policy CF-38 Develop neighborhood parks adjacent to school sites whenever possible in order to promote facility sharing. Facilities on the neighborhood park site should supplement uses that the school does not provide such as trails, open space, picnic areas, playground equipment, and multi -purpose paved sport courts. Policy CF-39 Encourage implementation of the County's Greenways Plan that outlines a citywide system of trails that will serve park, recreation, and open space needs. Link a system of trails between neighborhoods and parks, school sites, and other public property. Utilize public lands and existing rights -of -way for trail purposes whenever feasible. Policy CF-40 Place interpretive signs along trails to encourage community, historical, and environmental awareness and place distance markers along the trail for walkers and runners. Policy CF-41 The City should maximize the use of state and federal grants for future parks improvements whenever possible. Policy CF-42 Create new parks in recently annexed areas or update existing parks within newly annexed portions of the City. Policy CF-43 In conjunction with partners, develop the South Kitsap Community Events Center as a recreational and civic amenities hub for Port Orchard and the South Kitsap region. Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan Adopted: June 2016 Revised: ***, 2021 JF;T 2MNovember 2023 Chapter 9: Capital Facilities Goal 9. Ensure that an adequate water supply is available to support the level of population growth and land development projected within the City. Policy CF-44 Maintain drinking water quality in accordance with State and Federal standards to ensure the quality of drinking water delivered to customers of the water system. Policy CF-45 Provide high quality domestic and fire protection service to all areas within the retail service area. Policy CF-46 Utilize City -owned and operated sources of supply to maximize efficiency and cost effectiveness of the water system. Policy CF-47 Maintain water system facilities to ensure a high level of service is provided to all customers and maximize the life of facilities to protect the investment of ratepayers. Policy CF-48 Construct new facilities as required to serve the existing and future populations of the established water service area and South Kitsap Urban Growth Area. Policy CF-49 Interconnect the City's main water system with the independent facilities serving the City's 580 and 660 Pressure Zones (McCormick Woods System). This will allow for combining the two existing systems under one water system identification number. Policy CF-50 Implement and maintain water use efficiency and conservation programs to discourage water waste, promote the prudent use of water resources and support protection of habitat and the environment. Policy CF-51 Work with neighboring water utilities, participate in regional water planning efforts to establish common goals of uniform water system standards and facilitate coordination of efforts toward the adequate provision of water service throughout the region. Policy CF-52 Conduct water system operations in a manner that insures high quality service in accordance with all applicable rules and regulations, at the lowest reasonable cost. Policy CF-53 Encourage land uses and programs that promote water conservation. Policy CF-54 Revise water service boundaries in cases where the designated water service provider cannot provide timely or reasonable service. Policy CF-55 Ensure that land uses permitted in aquifer recharge areas do not lead to contamination of water resources. Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan Adopted: June 2016 Revised: ***, 2021 JF;T 2MNovember 2023 Chapter 9: Capital Facilities Policy CF-56 Encourage new developments adjacent to properties with private wells or existing septic systems to connect to the City's water system or, if not feasible, ensure that adverse impacts to existing wells or septic systems from new development is avoided or mitigated. Goal 10. Provide safe, reliable and timely sewer service to consumers at a fair and reasonable price. Policy CF-57 Coordinate construction of sewage improvements with other utilities. The City shall require all new development to connect to public sewer and water systems, unless physically or financially infeasible. Goal I I. Ensure that all utility infrastructure expansion provides an adequate level of public service to support new development consistent with the City's policies, criteria, and standards. In addition, utility expansion should also be consistent with current land use plans and development regulations of the State of Washington, Kitsap County, and appropriate local planning agencies. Policy CF-58 Utilize best construction methods and practices and innovative techniques in the design and construction of utilities. Policy CF-59 Whenever possible, utility construction should be scheduled to minimize disruption of access to area residences and businesses. Policy CF-60 Schedule utility construction activities to avoid sensitive times in the lifecycle offish and wildlife, such as spawning, nesting, and migration. Goal 12. Minimize development related impacts to existing hydrologic conditions and functions, and strive to correct current deficiencies resulting from past development practices such as sto rmwate r- related flooding. Policy CF-61 Identify areas within and adjacent to the City and its UGA which are highly sensitive to changes in hydrologic conditions and functions. Within these highly sensitive areas, establish standards that provide for near zero change in hydraulic and hydrologic function on a property, such as no net increase in the peak flow or volume of runoff or erosion products leaving a site post- development. Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan Adopted: June 2016 Revised: ***, 2021 JF;T 2MNovember 2023 Chapter 9: Capital Facilities Policy CF-62 Ensure development regulations adequately prevent new development from increasing flooding and minimize the possibility of damage from flooding events. Policy CF-63 Encourage Low Impact Development (LID) strategies for stormwater management through incentives and flexibility in application of regulatory requirements. Policy CF-64 Utilize new inventories of flood hazard -prone properties in the decision making process to prioritize stormwater system improvements. Policy CF-65 Coordinate the basin planning process with the community planning process to address surface water runoff and flooding issues. Policy CF-66 Integrate public regional stormwater detention and retention facilities into the natural environment. Policy CF-67 Recognize that regional facilities can provide aesthetics, recreation, and fish and wildlife habitat in a community park -like or open space setting. Policy CF-68 Implement planned activities and continue current activities in the 2014 Stormwater Management Plan. Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan Adopted: June 2016 Revised: ***, 2021july 2MNovember 2023 CITY OF PORT ORCHARD DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 216 Prospect Street, Port Orchard, WA 98366 Ph.: (36o) 874-5533 • FAX: (36o) 876-4980 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No: 5(d) Meeting Date: October 3, 2023 Revisions to POMC 20.132 — Prepared by: Nick Bond, Development Subject: Temporary Signage Director Issue: The current regulations allow temporary signage as defined in Port Orchard Municipal Code (POMC) 20.132.290 to be placed within public right-of-way outside of the roadway provided the temporary signage placement is consistent with the regulations of POMC 20.132.270. The Planning Commission discussed temporary signage regulations at the September, October, November and December Planning Commission meetings in 2022, and again at the August and September 2023 meetings. At the September Planning Commission meeting, the Planning Commission reviewed photo documentation collected beginning in late 2022 and continuing through the end of July 2023 showing a proliferation of temporary signs throughout the city. Additionally, the Planning Commission reviewed publicly available historic street -view photography at the locations which included several years of photographic evidence documenting temporary signage at the specific locations. In September, staff presented crash data, provided by the Port Orchard Police Department, at the locations of the photographic record demonstrating a correlation between the existence of temporary signage and reported crash data. This data was presented to the Planning Commission in the Memorandum dated August 26, 2023 - A Report on Temporary Signs in Port Orchard which indicates a nexus between crash data and the proliferation of temporary signs in t five of the seven study areas. Based on the data, the Planning Commission provided feedback regarding the placement of temporary signage in public right-of-way. The attached Ordinance is a result of the Department of Community Development's documentation effort and the Planning Commission's guidance on the location requirements for temporary signage. The proposed Ordinance establishes specific location requirements related to the public's general welfare and safety. If adopted, temporary signs would be allowed outside of intersections, adjacent to pedestrian facilities and in "zones", primarily along the City's major transportation corridors. Public notice for the October 3, 2023, public hearing was provided consistent with the requirements of POMC 20.25 on September 19, 2023. As of the date of publication of this Staff Report the Department of Community Development has not received any comments on the proposed amendment. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendments to POMC 20.132. Suggested Motion: "I move to recommend that the City Council approve an ordinance amending Port Orchard Municipal Code 20.132, as presented. Attachments: Ordinance ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PORT ORCHARD, WASHINGTON, RELATING TO THE CITY'S DEVELOPMENT CODE WITH REGARD TO THE CITY SIGN CODE AND TEMPORARY SIGNS; AMENDING SECTION 20.132.270 OF THE PORT ORCHARD MUNICIPAL CODE; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, CORRECTIONS, AND PUBLICATION; AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, it is within the City's police power to regulate City rights -of -way and other public spaces; and WHEREAS, a 2015 decision of the United States Supreme Court (Reed v. Town of Gilbert) necessitated a review of the City's sign regulations; and WHEREAS, the Reed decision ruled that, in most instances, local government sign regulations must be "content neutral"; and WHEREAS, on June 27, 2017, the City Council adopted Port Orchard Municipal Code (POMC) 20.132, Ord. 024-17, containing the City of Port Orchard's development standards for permanent and temporary signage; and WHEREAS, the Department of Community Development documented the location and amount of temporary signs in seven study areas between November 2022 and August 2023; and WHEREAS, the Department of Community Development documented the location and amount of temporary signs in seven study areas through reliance on historical street -view photography between October 2012 and August 2022 WHEREAS, the amount of temporary signs in the study areas has significantly increased in the five-year period following the adoption of Ord. 024-17; and WHEREAS, the Department of Community Development analyzed Port Orchard Police reported crash data for the five-year period previous to the adoption of Ord. 024-17 and the five-year period following the adoption of Ord. 024-17; and WHEREAS, the Port Orchard Police reported crash data for the five-year period following the adoption of Ord. 024-17 shows an increase in reported crash frequency within five of the seven study areas; and WHEREAS, based on the data, a nexus exists between an increase in the frequency of reported crashes and the location of temporary signage; and 10743209.1 - 366922 - 0021 Ordinance No. Page 2 of 7 WHEREAS, POMC 20.132.270, does not currently make adequate provision for safety related to the location of temporary signs; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend POMC Section 20.132.270 to amend location standards for temporary signs; and WHEREAS, on September 27, 2023, the City's SEPA official issued a determination of nonsignificance for the proposed amendment, which was published and provided to the public in accordance with POMC 20.160.190 and WAC 197-11-510, and there have been no appeals; and WHEREAS, this Ordinance was submitted to the Department of Commerce for 15-day expedited review September 27, 2023 which was granted by Commerce and the requisite time has now passed to allow this ordinance to be adopted; and WHEREAS, on September 26, 2023, the City issued a Notice of Public Hearing for the proposed amendment to POMC 20.132.270, which was published and provided to the public in accordance with POMC 20.25.050; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the substance of this Ordinance on October 3, 2023, and recommended adoption by the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council, after careful consideration of the recommendation from the Planning Commission, all public comment, and the Ordinance, finds that this Ordinance is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and development regulations, the Growth Management Act, Chapter 36.70A RCW, and that the amendments herein are in the best interests of the residents of the City and further advance the public health, safety, and welfare; now, therefore, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PORT ORCHARD, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Port Orchard Municipal Code, Section 20.132.270 is hereby amended to read as follows: 20.132.270 Temporary signs. (1) No Permit Required. A temporary sign does not require a sign permit but shall comply with the fellewiRg standards-- set forth in this section. (2) Removal. Temporary signs shall be removed if the sign is in need of repair, is worn, dilapidated or creates a public nuisance. Any temporary sign in the right-of-way that is dilapidated or a nuisance shall be removed by the person responsible for placement of the sign. 10743209.1 - 366922 - 0021 Ordinance No. Page 3of7 Temporary signs on public property or within a public right of way that do not comply with this chapter will be removed by city personnel. Those removed signs which are not dilapidated or nuisance signs will be stored by the City for up to 7 calendar days for retrieval. (3) Materials. See POMC 20.132.100, Sign materials, and the definition of "temporary sign" in POMC 20.132.290, Definitions. (4) City Property (Excluding City Right -of -Way). Temporary signs on city -owned property (excluding city right-of-way) are allowed only in conjunction with an approved special event permit. (5) C#y Public Right -of -Way Requirements. (a) Location. Temporary signs are prohibited from being placed within roundabouts: medians: shoulders: travel lanes: and areas of the public right-of-way that are not accessible by a sidewalk or pedestrian walking path. Signs shall not be located within 50 feet of an intersection. Signs shall not be located in rights -of -way adjacent to (on the same side of the street as) city facilities or parks, or any other government -owned facilities and properties. Placement shall only be allowed along the following corridors in locations that otherwise comply with this section: nllei.y d- enl„ h +,.,eeR the r p rty line and the h-,,.I, Af +hp r„-,rg (I) Tremont Street (ii) Lund Ave (iii) SR-160 (iv) Sedwick Street West (v) Sidney Road Southwest (vi) Pottery Avenue (vii) Sidney Avenue (viii) Old Clifton Road (ix) Mile Hill Road (x) Bethel Avenue (xi) Glenwood Road (xii) Hull Avenue xiii) Bay Street West of Kitsap Street. (b) Approval of Abutting Owner. Approval of the abutting owner is recommended. 10743209.1 - 366922 - 0021 Ordinance No. Page 4 of 7 (c) Type. Signs on stakes that can be manually pushed or hammered into the ground are allowed. All other signs are prohibited, unless specifically allowed by a street use permit. (d) Size and Height. Limited to four square feet ems, and three feet in height. (fe) Other Signs. The city may allow permanent or oversize signs in city rights -of - way with a street use permit. f) Safety. All temporary signs shall be placed in a manner that is safe for all users of the public right-of-way. Temporary signs shall not block access to structures, parked cars. block vehicular sight distance views at corners, intersections, driveways, or block pedestrian walking paths. No temporary sign shall mimic, or be attached to, governmental signs or power op les. (6) Residential Zones. Temporary signs may be placed on rip vate property residentially zoned in accordance with the requirements of this section and the following: (a) Window Signs. Limited to no more than one temporary window sign per residential unit, not to exceed four square feet. (b) Freestanding Signs (Includes Post -Mounted, Stake and Portable Signs). (i) Single -Family Zones. Each temporary freestanding sign shall not exceed four square feet in size and five feet in height, if the sign is mounted on the ground, and not to exceed three feet in height if the sign is stake -mounted or portable. No more than 32 square feet of temporary freestanding signage may be located on any one site. (ii) Multifamily Zones. Each temporary freestanding sign shall not exceed six square feet in size and five feet in height if the sign is post -mounted on the ground, and not to exceed three feet in height if the sign is stake -mounted or portable. No more than 32 square feet of temporary freestanding signage may be located on any one site. (iii) Developments. One post -mounted sign of up to eight feet in height and 32 square feet shall be allowed on -site in association with a residential subdivision, during the period of active site development and construction. Such sign may not be permanently installed, and shall be removed upon completion of construction of all homes in the associated subdivision. If site development or construction ceases or is suspended for a period of more 10743209.1 - 366922 - 0021 Ordinance No. Page 5 of 7 than 180 days, the sign shall be removed until construction or development resumes. (c) Surface -Mounted Signs. Limited to sites two acres or larger: (i) Size. The total amount of temporary signage on a site, whether in one sign or multiple signs, must equal no more than 32 square feet. (ii) Location. Must be flatly affixed to walls below the fascia or parapet line, or flatly affixed to on -site fences either facing or abutting the street, or facing inward to the subject site. Signs shall not be attached or tethered to other site improvements. (7) Nonresidential Zones. Temporary signs are allowed on nonresidentially zoned property in accordance with the requirements of this section and the following: (a) Window Signs. Limited to 25 percent of the window area, subject to the window sign requirements of POMC 20.132.280, Window signs. (b) Freestanding Signs (Including Post -Mounted, Stake and Portable Signs). One sign per street frontage meeting the following conditions: Size/height: limited to four square feet and five feet in height if the temporary sign is mounted on the ground,,and not te- exEeed- three feet ;n height ;f the tempeFaFy sigR as peFta-ble. (c) Surface -Mounted Signs. (i) Size. The total amount of temporary signage on a site, whether in one sign or multiple signs, must equal no more than 30 square feet. (ii) Location. Must be flatly affixed to walls below the fascia or parapet line, or flatly affixed to on -site fences either facing the abutting street, or facing inward to the subject site. Signs shall not be attached or tethered to other site improvements. (8) Temporary Signs on Large Properties, Residential or Nonresidentially Zoned Properties. The following temporary signs may be placed on any site at least two acres in size, in accordance with the requirements of this section and the following: (a) Type. Any type. (b) Number/Size/Height. One sign per street frontage. Not to exceed 32 square feet and up to eight feet above ground level. 10743209.1 - 366922 - 0021 Ordinance No. Page 6 of 7 (c) Exclusivity. The sign allowed under this subsection is in lieu of and shall not be displayed with or be in addition to other temporary signs allowed by this section. SECTION 2. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance should be held to be unconstitutional or unlawful by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance. SECTION 3. Corrections. Upon the approval of the city attorney, the city clerk and/or code publisher is authorized to make any necessary technical corrections to this ordinance, including but not limited to the correction of scrivener's/clerical errors, references, ordinance numbering, section/subsection numbers, and any reference thereto. SECTION 4. Publication. This Ordinance shall be published by an approved summary consisting of the title. SECTION 5. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force and effect five days after publication, as provided by law. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Port Orchard, APPROVED by the Mayor and attested by the Clerk in authentication of such passage this day of 2023. rila1*11 Robert Putaansuu, Mayor SPONSOR: Brandy Wallace, MMC, City Clerk , Councilmember APPROVED AS TO FORM: Charlotte A. Archer, City Attorney PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: 10743209.1 - 366922 - 0021 Ordinance No. Page 7 of 7 10743209.1 - 366922 - 0021 From: Nick Bond To: Jim Fisk Subject: FW: Planning for Bethel Road Roundabout at Salmonberry Road Date: Tuesday, September 19, 2023 9:20:59 AM Make sure this goes to the PC. Nick From: Glen Walker <walker.7173.bz@wavecable.com> Sent: Monday, September 18, 2023 5:32 PM To: Planning Mailbox <Planning@portorchardwa.gov> Subject: Planning for Bethel Road Roundabout at Salmonberry Road TO: Port Orchard Planning Commission Subject: Planning for Bethel Road Roundabout at Salmonberry Road I just read the article in the Kitsap Sun about the changes in planning for the Bethel Corridor and I cant believe what I read. No egress to Bethel Road from Salmonberry Road? An entrance from Bethel to Salmonberry only? That makes no sense whatsoever. A one million dollar difference for a normal connection versus an entrance only? That sounds like creative math to justify a desired outcome. When Andasio Village was proposed, The City of Port Orchard hosted a public meeting asking for input on the impacts of the new development. I attended that meeting as did several others from my neighborhood and we spoke of the traffic problems we expected to see and what improvements we thought would be needed. During that meeting after the public comments, I could tell that our comments were not going to be considered. This was painfully evident when Councilman John Clauson actually stated that the burden of traffic improvements could not be placed on the developers. I was shocked. Who then is left? The City and the Taxpayers of course. We all know there is no great desire by the City or funds available for this kind of road and traffic mitigation, so, as usual it appears that nothing is going to happen there. The appearance is that the important consideration for the Mayor and the majority of the City council seems to be maximizing the profitability and well being of the real estate developers. While looking at the background of the Mayor and City Council members I see that the majority have a history tying them to real estate interests. What a coincidence. Lets make the political donors that put these people in office happy, so they can be reelected. Would placing the costs of traffic mitigation on the developers cause an increase in the cost of new houses being built? Of course it would. Where could it be better placed. The new residents are the ones causing the over all traffic increases in the county (as it is everywhere of course). Why not assign the burden to the people causing the problem. So now that Andasio Village of about 9 acres and 64 home has been built out, the next development of about 27 acres and 100 homes is nearing completion. In addition, there is the Gieger Road Residential Plat, another 9 acres and 51 homes is well under way. Obviously this is not the end either. I see more land surrounding us owned by investment groups waiting to develop and build. More recently, construction of the apartment project at Bethel and Salmonberry has begun. It appears that the access for these units will be via Blueberry Road. Since the construction of Andasio Village began, little has been done to improve the surrounding traffic congestion, causing frustration to existing residents of Blueberry Road and those living West of Bethel Road off Salmonberry Road. The only changes to the local roadways has been a Bethel Road northbound left turn lane to Blueberry Road and a widening of Blueberry Road to the entrance to Andasio Village. Those changes add nothing to the ability of residents to get into traffic on Bethel Road or Sedgwick Road. There are 56 homes requiring requiring access to Bethel and Sedgwick via Salmonberry Road and a narrow track, "not quite a road" - Ramsey Road. These 55 homes are on Salmonberry Road, Belford Lane, Coronet Place, LaDonna Court, Redemption Avenue, Ramsey Road and a short un-named private road. Ramsey, for most of its length between Blueberry and Salmonberry, is not wide enough for two opposing vehicles to pass without one or the other pulling partially off the road let the other get by. Please! I would like the Mayor, the City Council, the Department of Community Development, and the Planning Department to come to our neighborhood and drive around, Look at the problems, experience the issues, drive up and down Ramsey Road from blueberry Road to Salmonberry Road. Try exiting the area from Salmonberry and Blueberry and risk the entry to Bethel during busy times and see what we are dealing with on a daily basis. After this step back and make an honest evaluation of the situation and reconsider the planning. When it rains heavily, Salmonberry gets flooded by the runoff which covers the road making the City of Port Orchard place road closed signs and barriers up preventing use of Salmonberry for access in or out under those conditions. Has the City considered the difficulty of fire and ambulance vehicles to access the Salmonberry residences? When we had the tornado rip through it went across Ramsey, Have City planners even discussed emergency access with the emergency services agencies? During the aftermath of the tornado, dozens of trees were down completely covering Ramsey for 200 feet. Salmonberry had several trees down and live wires across the road in multiple places, My wife needed to get to the doctor for non storm related reasons and could not get out. Others could not get to their houses to check on their families after the storm until myself and about 10 neighbors, got our chainsaws and pickup trucks and cut up the trees. Some trees were two feet in diameter, we dragged them off the road and cleared off all the branches. It took us about two hours to make the road passable. We called but got no help from the city. Left turns to Bethel Road and Sedgwick Road during day time and early evening hours is difficult and dangerous because of the high volume of traffic both north and south bound on Bethel Road. Increased danger of accidents and injury due to frustration of drivers waiting for a break in traffic causes drivers to take chances when attempting to enter Bethel Road or Sedgwick Road. Right turns are also difficult at these locations. I often have to turn right and then make a U-turn through a parking lot to go north where I need to go. The City has made it even more difficult because Geiger Road has been made one way for some unfathomable reason. That portion of Geiger is wider than Ramsey. Go figure. Please do the right thing for the people and require the developers to provide the necessary improvements to traffic safety and improved flow. Thank you you for you attention to this important matter, Glen Walker 1346 SE Salmonberry Rd Port Orchard WA, 98366