The URL can be used to link to this page

008-21 - Ordinance - Amending Ordinance No. 014-16 to Adopt the 2020 Amendment to the 2016 General Sewer PlanORDINANCE NO. 008-21 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PORT ORCHARD, WASHINGTON, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 014-16 TO ADOPT THE 2020 AMENDMENT TO THE 2016 GENERAL SEWER PLAN; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and development regulations, the City Council updated its General Sewer Plan in 2016 via Ordinance No. 014-16; and WHEREAS, at the direction of the City Council, the City conducted a comprehensive review of the General Sewer Plan, including new system modeling, and has identified necessary updates to portions of its 2016 General Sewer Plan due to increased development that likely necessitates the construction of new infrastructure; and WHEREAS, the necessary updates were incorporated into a 2020 Amendment to the 2016 General Sewer Plan, attached to this Ordinance as Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, a State Environmental Policy Act Checklist for the proposed amendments herein was prepared by City staff and on July 16, 2020, the City's SEPA Official issued a Determination of Non - Significance (DNS); and WHEREAS, on July 20, 2020, a draft of the 2020 Amendment to the 2016 General Sewer Plan was provided to the Washington State Department of Ecology for its review and comment, and they issued an approval on October 12, 2020; and WHEREAS, a duly noticed Public Hearing before the City Council on the proposed amendments was held on February 23, 2021; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the 2020 Amendment to the 2016 General Sewer Plan serves the public health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of Port Orchard; and WHEREAS, the City Council also finds that the 2020 Amendment to the 2016 General Sewer Plan is consistent with the goals and policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan and with the Growth Management Act, Chapter 36.70A RCW; now, therefore, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PORT ORCHARD, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS SECTION 1. Amendment. Ordinance No. 014-16 is hereby amended in part, as the City's 2016 General Sewer Plan is hereby amended to read as set forth in Exhibit A (2020 General Sewer Plan Amendment) attached hereto and incorporated by this reference. Ordinance No.008-21 Page 2 of 80 SECTION 2. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity of constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance. SECTION 3. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect five (5) days after posting and publication as required by law. A summary of this Ordinance may be published in lieu of the entire ordinance, as authorized by State 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 23rd day of February 2021. Robert Putaansuu, Mayor ATTEST: Bkin-J;-Rinearson, MMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Sponsored bv: Charlotte A. Archer, City Attorney Cindy icarelli, Councilmember PUBLISHED: February 26, 2021 ,j15�1111i111i{f{t ��`'pF pDRTR�'��f�, EFFECTIVE DATE: March 3, 2021=��or`po�'+a�;9•.� _ - SEAL Exhibit A to Ordinance No. 008-21 CITY OF PORT ORCHARD Public Works 216 Prospect Street, Port Orchard, WA 98366 Phone: (36o) 876-4991 • Fax: (36o) 876-4980 www.cityofportorchard.us General Sewer Plan Amendment May, 2020 FORWARD Recent land development activity in the area identified as Basin 7 Subarea of the City of Port Orchard's Sewer Collection System has created the need to identify additional Capital Improvement Projects in order to provide adequate sewer collection service. The Public Works Department contracted with BHC Consultants for modeling of the current system and evaluation of projects required to provide the necessary infrastructure. Additionally, the City contracted with Katy Isaksen and Associates to provide a financial analysis of the Improvements. The following is amended material for the Executive Summary, Section 7 — Conveyance System Analysis, and Section 8 — Collection Facility Improvements of the General Sewer Plan Update of June 2016. CONTENTS Executive Summary Section 7 Section 8 SEPA Checklist pages ES-1 thru ES-6 pages 7-1 thru 7-32 pages 8-1 thru 8-20 pages 1 thru 16 City of Port Orchard 2016 General Sewer Plan Update Amendment Executive Summary ESA Introduction (Chapter 1) The City of Port Orchard's (City) General Sewer Plan Update (Plan) provides a summary of the City's current sewage capacities and an analysis of the impact of projected growth on the City's sewage collection and conveyance system, and proposes a Capital Improvement Program to alleviate system deficiencies. It also documents the utility's policies, operation and maintenance practices, and financial condition. The City is located in Kitsap County and is bounded to the north by Sinclair Inlet. The location is shown on Figure 1-1. The surrounding area is a combination of rural and suburban lands in unincorporated Kitsap County. The City was incorporated in 1890 as the Town of Sidney, and was renamed in 1903 as the City of Port Orchard. The City is primarily residential with some commercial areas and industrial activity. The current population within the existing City limits was estimated by the Washington State Office of Financial Management to be 13,150 in 2014. As of 2015, approximately 11,550 are within the City's sewer service area. Residents outside of the City's service area are served by the West Sound Utility District (WSUD) or by individual septic tanks. The City owns, operates, and maintains existing wastewater collection and conveyance facilities that provide sewer service to the City's current service area of approximately 2,100 acres. The collection system consists of gravity sewers, pump stations, force mains, Septic Tank Effluent Pump (STEP) systems in McCormick Woods, and grinder pump systems that convey wastewater to the South Kitsap Water Reclamation Facility (SKWRF). The SKWRF is owned jointly by the City and WSUD, and operated and maintained by WSUD. Over the next twenty years the population within the Urban Growth Area (UGA) in the City's sewer service area is expected to grow to over 24,000 people. The City's sewer service area is expected to grow to approximately 5,700 acres. This Plan evaluates future facilities required to accommodate both existing and future wastewater collection needs. This Plan complies with the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) regulations for general sewer plan (Washington Administrative Code [WAC] 173-240-050) as shown in Table E-1. June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) ES-1 BHC Consultants, LLC City of Port Orchard 2016 General Sewer Plan Update Amendment Table E-1 Comprehensive Sewer Plan Requirements per WAC 173-240-050 Location in Plan WAC 173-240-050 Description of Requirement Reference Paragraph Section 1.2 3a Purpose and need for proposed plan 3b Section 1.3 Who owns, operates, and maintains system Existing and proposed service boundaries 3c Chapter 5 Layout map showing boundaries; existing sewer facilities; proposed sewers; Figures 3-3, 3-5, 5-1, 3d topography and elevations; streams, and 8-4 lakes; and other water bodies; water systems 3e Population trends Chapter 4 3f Existing domestic and/or industrial Figure 1-1 wastewater facilities within 20 miles 3g Infiltration and inflow problems Section 6.4 Section 5.7 3h Treatment systems and adequacy of such treatment 3i Identify industrial wastewater sources Section 6.7 3j Discussion of water systems Section 3.9 3k Discussion of collection alternatives Chapter 7 31 Define construction cost and O&M costs Chapter 8 3m Compliance with water quality Section 3.7 manage ent plan 3n SEPA compliance Appendix A ES.2 Policies and Standards (Chapter 2) The City manages and operates their sewer system in accordance with state, local, and federal regulations. The policies and standards described in the Plan provide a framework for the planning, design, operation, and management of the system to maintain the desired level of service to sewer utility customers. These policies are limited to the sewer system and its design and operation. The City's policies and criteria summarized in Chapter 2 include the following: • Design standards • Construction standards • Pretreatment • Developer sewer system extensions and upgrades • Septic to sewer conversion ES.3 Service Area Characteristics (Chapter 3) The City is located along the south shore of Sinclair Inlet, which is an arm of Puget Sound. June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) ES-2 BHC Consultants, LLC City of Port Orchard 2016 General Sewer Plan Update Amendment A number of streams flow north into Sinclair Inlet. The more prominent creeks within the City sewer service area are Blackjack Creek, Ross Creek, and Anderson Creek. The soils in the City consist primarily of glacial outwash, glacial till, glacial drift, volcanic ash, and glaciomarine soil. There are critical areas throughout the City which will limit development. Most of these areas are wetlands, floodplains, geologically sensitive areas, and aquifer protection areas. Several species of fish are also present, of which the Puget Sound Evolutionary Significant Unit Chinook is a State Candidate for endangered species and considered threatened by the Federal Government. In addition, other species that are State Candidates for endangered species and considered threatened by the Federal Government include bald eagle, marbled murrelet, Steller sea lion, and bull trout. A majority of the City's water supply comes from 6 active wells. There is also an intertie with the City of Bremerton. ESA Population (Chapter 4) The projected population for the City over the planning horizon of this Plan is presented in Table E-2. Kitsap County provided 2015 residential population estimates and the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) provided 2013 Covered Employment estimates. The build out scenario is for modeling purposes only and does not reflect population growth goals or constraints. The City's service area is shown on Figure 5-1. Table E-2 Service Area Population and Employment Estimates Year Sewered Population Employment 4,779 5,114 2016 11,837 2022 13,558 2026 14,706 5,338 2036 17,575 1 5,898 Build Out 24,074 8,343 ES.5 Existing Sewer Facilities (Chapter 5) The City of Port Orchard owns, operates, and maintains approximately 70 miles of sewer pipes ranging from 2-inch to 24-inch diameter. This includes approximately 49 miles of gravity sewers, 8 miles of force mains, and 14 miles of STEP mains. There are 16 pump stations within the City's sewer system. 17 mini -basins were defined within the City's sewer service area, shown on Figure 5-1. ES.6 Wastewater Flows (Chapter 6) The unit and projected flows used to model the City's collection system are presented in Table E-3. June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) ES-3 BHC Consultants, LLC City of Port Orchard 2016 General Sewer Plan Update Amendment Table E-3 Unit and Projected Flows Residential Employment Average Ill Peak Day Peak Hour Year Flow Flow Annual (gpd/acre) Flow Flow (gpcdl)edZ Flow an d an d an d 2016 78 32 1.08 1,046 3.53 6.52 2022 78 32 1.22 1,046 3.92 7.26 2026 78 32 1.32 1,046 4.16 7.68 2036 78 32 1.56 1,046 4.75 8.74 Build Out 78 32 2.14 1,046 6.13 11.18 Notes: 1) Gallons per capita per day. 2) Gallons per employee per day. ES.7 Sewer System Analysis (Chapter 7) The existing wastewater conveyance system was analyzed using the InfoSWMM modeling platform. The projected populations and their distributions are the basis for establishing future system requirements. Model files were developed from AutoCAD files of the sewer system from 2002 provided by the City which had manhole depths, and were supplemented with LIDAR obtained from PACE to determine manhole rim elevations and as-builts. Some elevations were still missing after this process, including some of the smaller pump stations. Estimates for depths, pipe slopes, wet well sizes, and pump operation elevations were made to develop a functional model that reasonably represents the sewer system. A truncated model was used consisting of all pump stations and the major sewer mains within the City's collection system. The model can be expanded in the future as needed and when budget allows. The design capacity of the gravity mains is considered to be 100 percent depth (1.0 d/D ratio, where d is the flow depth and D is the pipe diameter). The maximum design capacity of STEP mains and force mains are exceeded when flow velocities are greater than 8 feet per second. The firm capacity of a lift station is defined as the capacity of the lift station with the largest pump out of service. When model simulation results exceed these design capacities in piping or in lift stations, they are identified as deficient and system improvements are identified to resolve them. Where pipe sections were identified as requiring an upgrade, the proposed upgrade was sized to provide capacity equal to or greater than the estimated build -out flows according to the design criteria above. At lift stations where the estimated peak hour flows were shown to exceed the current firm capacity, the build out flow capacity was estimated and incorporated into the model for the improved system model runs. This enabled the impact of the increased flow on the downstream sewer network to be investigated. It is unlikely that the mechanical and electrical improvements to the lift stations will be sized for the build -out conditions. June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) ES-4 BHC Consultants, LLC City of Port Orchard 2016 General Sewer Plan Update Amendment ES.8 Capital Improvements Plan (Chapter 8) The 6 year capital improvement projects as determined by model results and the City desired improvements are presented in Table E-4. Actual costs can and will differ from the opinions of probable costs. Volatility in the bidding climate, the number of contractors bidding on a project, and their approach to bidding and completing the work will all impact actual project costs. Table E-4 Opinion of Probable Project Costs, 6-Year CIP (2020-2025) CIP Project Opinion of Probable Opinion of Probable No. Construction Cost�'��Z� $13,000,000 $975,000 Project Cost'>(3) $15,000,000 _ $1,300,000 6-1 Marina Pump Station Improvements 6-2 Bay Street Pump Station Improvements McCormick Lift Station 2 $4,500,000 6-3 $3,200,000 6-4 Eagle Crest Generator Set $225,000 $300,000 6-5A Bravo Terrace Lift Station and 3,750,000 $5,000,000 Force Main 6-513 South Sidney Lift Station $1,875,000 $2,500,000 6-5C North Sidney Lift Station $1,875,000 $2,500,000 6-51D Sidney Second Force Main $1,200,000 $1,600,000 6-6 McCormick Woods Lift Station 3 $750 ,000 $1,000,000 Estimated City Total $7,470,000 Notes: 1) All costs are in 2020 dollars. 2) The opinion of probable construction cost includes the costs to build the various components, sales tax, and contingency. The construction costs are assumed to be 75-percent of total project costs, except for CIP 6-3 which is currently under construction in 2020. 3) Opinions of probable project costs include planning, surveying, engineering services, permitting, bid advertisement, contract award, construction, and services during construction, in addition to theprobable construction cost. ES.9 Financial (Chapter 9) The financial analysis for the sewer system was performed by Katy Isaksen & Associates as part of the "City of Port Orchard Utility Gap Analysis" and is included as Appendix H. ES.10 Operations and Maintenance (Chapter 10) Chapter 10 summarizes general operations and maintenance activities and staffing needs. The City has approximately 0.95 maintenance staff per 100,000 If of pipe and 0.22 maintenance staff per pump station, which is similar to other sewer utilities in this region of similar size. June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) ES-5 BHC Consultants, LLC City of Port Orchard 2016 General Sewer Plan Update Amendment ES.11 Reclaimed Water (Chapter 11) Only one reclaimed water customer was being served by the WSUD. The costs to provide reclaimed water to this customer were higher than what the customer is charged, resulting in the City and WSUD subsidizing the reclaimed water customer. Reclaimed water was provided to this customer until the end of 2015, at which point reclaimed water distribution was ceased. Reclaimed water is blended with effluent from the secondary clarifiers prior to discharge. If water system demands increase to the point that reclaimed water is necessary to adequately address water demands in the area, the reclaimed water distribution system will be placed back into service. June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) ES-6 BHC Consultants, LLC City of Port Orchard 2016 General Sewer Plan Update Amendment Section 7 Conveyance System Analysis 7.1 Introduction Analysis of the City's wastewater conveyance system is a critical component in determining the ability of the existing infrastructure to accommodate future growth. This section describes the analysis necessary for strategic, long-term infrastructure planning and development of the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). The City's conveyance system was analyzed using a truncated model, simulating only trunk and interceptor gravity mains and all pump stations. This allows for an accurate representation of the most critical components of the City's conveyance system, and the simultaneous analysis of both gravity and pressure systems. The system was analyzed for existing conditions (2016), a 6-year planning horizon (2022), a 10-year planning horizon (2026), a 20-year planning horizon (2036), and the theoretical build -out conditions. 7.2 Model Software InfoSWMM 12.0 by Innovyze was the hydraulic modeling software used to model the City sewer system. InfoSWMM 12.0 is a dynamic hydraulic model that uses the EPA SWMM 5.0 computer program for the hydraulic analysis calculations. The model is designed specifically for modeling urban sanitary and combined sewer systems. The current version operates within an ArcGIS (ArcMap) platform. 7.3 Model Development Model files were developed from AutoCAD files of the sewer system from 2002 provided by the City which had manhole depths, and were supplemented with LIDAR obtained from PACE to determine manhole rim elevations and as-builts. Some elevations were still missing after this process, including some of the smaller pump stations. Estimates for depths, pipe slopes, wet well sizes, and pump operation elevations were made to develop a functional model that reasonably represents the sewer system. A truncated model was used consisting of all pump stations and the major sewer mains within the City's collection system. The model can be expanded in the future as needed and when budget allows. The following information was used in developing the hydraulic model of the existing sewer collection system. Additional detail on the existing sewer system is included in Section 6. 7.3.1 Gravity Sewers Elevations were obtained using LIDAR for rim elevations and depth to invert provided by the City in an AutoCAD file to calculate invert elevations. Record drawings were used to evaluate pipe invert elevations in areas where abnormal or adverse grades were present. Where no elevation data was available, reasonable estimates based on pipe slopes and depths were used. 7.3.2 Lift Stations Lift stations were imported to the model from the AutoCAD file provided by the City. Pump curves were added to simulate pump operation. Wet wells are modeled based on lift station data sheets maintained by O&M staff. Depth to volume relationships and pump on/off set points were also added. Modeled pumping rates were compared against factory pump curve data when available to ensure model accuracy and that the model outputs were within a range of reasonably expected values. June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 7-1 BHC Consultants, LLC City of Port Orchard 2016 General Sewer Plan Update Amendment Data for some of the smaller lift stations were unavailable. Reasonable estimates were used for depth, wet well size, and pump curves. Because these smaller lift stations represent a fraction of the flows, this will not significantly impact the results of the model. These lift stations can be updated in the future. 7.4 Model Loading Meaningful modeling results can only be obtained if the quantity of flows and the location where they enter the system in the model reflect actual conditions. Wastewater flow consists of two separate elements: sanitary sewer flow and infiltration and inflow (1/1). Sanitary sewer flow is typically referred to as Dry Weather Flow (DWF) in the model (DWF in the collection system usually includes a minor amount of base 1/1 that is accounted for in the model 1/1 loading). 1/1 is loaded into the model as an external source of flow. All flow is loaded to model "nodes", which are manholes in gravity systems. 7.4.1 Sanitary Sewer Flows Existing and projected sanitary sewer flow rates were developed for each basin on a gpd/acre basis using the following information: ■ Population and employment data and projections (described in Section 4) • Existing measured flow rates (described in Section 5) • Unit sewer flows (described in Section 5) • Diurnal curves (described in Section 5) • Mini -basin areas (described in Section 6) Model loading is assigned on a flow per unit area basis for nodes identified in each basin. The model assigns flow to the nodes, based on the amount of contributing area calculated for each node using the Thiessen polygon method. 7.4.2 Infiltration and Inflow (1/1) Existing and projected 1/1 rates were developed on a gallons/acre basis using the following information: • 1/1 (described in Section 5) • Diurnal curves (described in Section 5) • Mini -basin areas (described in Section 6) • Sewered areas (described below) Total 1/1 for each basin was calculated using the unit 1/1 rates described in Section 5 and approximate area contributing to the sewer system. The existing sewered area was derived from the area of parcels and rights -of -way adjacent to existing sewers, and was adjusted based on engineering judgment and knowledge of the sewer system. Build -out sewered area was calculated by taking the existing sewered area and adding the net developable area from the Kitsap County Updated Land Capacity Analysis (ULCA) plus 54 percent for right-of-way and public and quasi -public facilities based on assumptions in the ULCA. Sewered areas for 2022, 2026, and 2036 were interpolated between existing and build -out sewered areas by calculating the change in sewered area divided by the change in population between existing conditions and build -out conditions, which is approximately 3,300 sf per person and includes parcels, right- of-way, and other public facilities. June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 7-2 BHC Consultants, LLC City of Port Orchard 2016 General Sewer Plan Update Amendment Model 1/1 loading was assigned to nodes based on the ratio of contributing area calculated for each node using the Thiessen polygon method to total basin area. Determining how 1/1 is projected into the future as the collection system expands and ages is a key issue. Based on the King County Regional Infiltration/Inflow Control Program, a widely accepted assumption in Western Washington is to increase the 1/1 component of sewer flow by 7 percent per decade, up to a maximum of 28 percent. Much of the City's existing sewer collection system was built 40 years ago or more, and has reached the maximum 1/1 rate. Newer infrastructure typically has lower rates of 1/1. As the sewer system expands with new construction, it is likely that the 1/1 rate will remain the same or drop due to improved materials and construction. Therefore, a constant 1/1 rate was assumed for future 1/1 projections. For future model runs, the 1/1 curve is shifted to maximize flows to the system, effectively increasing the peak hour factor. This is a conservative approach since a major storm flow may occur at any time of the day. Existing model runs were used for calibration purposes and do not utilize the shifted 1/1 curve. 7.5 Model Calibration The model was calibrated using the flow meters at the SKWRF for average flows and MPS for peak day flows. 7.5.1 Calibration to Recorded Flow Data Average Annual Flow Calibration The first step in calibrating the model was to compare predicted sanitary flows calculated in Section 5 to measured average annual flow data. After the modeled sanitary sewer volumes were verified, diurnal flow patterns were loaded and adjusted until the variations in simulated flow throughout the day reasonably matched the measured average annual flow conditions. Peak Day Flow Calibration Peak day 1/1 was loaded into the model and simulation results were compared with the peak day flow at the MPS. The modeled flow volume was compared with the measured flow volume during peak days to ensure model loading reasonably matched the field data. Peak Hour Flow Calibration There was not sufficient data available to calibrate peak hour flow. The peak day flow occurred in 2012, for which only total daily flow volumes were available. Therefore, an 1/1 curve was developed using the peak day flow from 2014, which was the second largest peak day flow, and applied to the peak day flow of 2012. Based on the calibration of the average annual flow, peak day flow, and sanitary sewer diurnal curve, this gives a reasonable result. As more data is made available, the peak hour flow calibration may be revisited. For future model runs, the 1/1 curve was shifted to align peak sanitary and peak 1/1 flows to simulate peak flows to the system. This is a conservative approach since a major storm flow may occur at any time of the day. Existing model runs were used for calibration purposes and do not utilize the shifted 1/1 curve. June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 7-3 BHC Consultants, LLC City of Port Orchard 2016 General Sewer Plan Update Amendment 7.5.2 Calibration Results The model was calibrated to SKWRF flow meter data for average annual flow and MPS flow monitoring data for peak day flow. Average annual flows were calibrated to within 3 percent and peak day flows to within 2 percent. This is within the accuracy limits of the flow meters used and is acceptable. 7.6 Future Sewer System Expansion Future sewer system expansion was modeled by adding flow from all future population growth into the existing system model. Sewer extensions were not sized, but as the need arises, the model can be updated to ensure that the new sewer systems are constructed with adequate capacity for future growth. It is anticipated that most of the future infrastructure into unsewered areas will be constructed by developers. Due to the topography, some new developments may require pump stations. 7.7 Modeling Scenarios Five scenarios were developed to analyze the City's wastewater conveyance system utilizing the population and unit flow projections described in Sections 4 and 5 and are summarized in Table 7-1. Flow Table 7-1 Projected Wastewater Flows (mgd) 2016 2022 2026 2036 Build -Out Average Annual 1.08 1.22 1.32 1.56 2.14 Peak Day 3.53 3.92 4.16 4.75 6.13 Peak Hour 1 6.52 7.26 7.68 1 8.74 11.18 7.8 Hydraulic Modeling Analysis 7.8.1 Design Capacity The design capacity of the gravity mains is considered to be 100 percent depth (1.0 d/D ratio, where d is the flow depth and D is the pipe diameter). The maximum design capacity of STEP mains and force mains are exceeded when flow velocities are greater than 8 feet per second. The firm capacity of a lift station is defined as the capacity of the lift station with the largest pump out of service. When model simulation results exceed these design capacities in piping or in lift stations, they are identified as deficient and system improvements are identified to resolve them. Modeling results for all scenarios are included in Appendix G. 7.8.2 Existing System -Results The existing system model results for peak day flow are shown on Figure 7-1. The gravity sewer and pump station capacity deficiencies are summarized in Table 7-2 and Table 7-3. The modeled surcharging in the McCormick Woods Drive SW gravity sewer has not been confirmed by the City. The City will monitor the sewer to verify if there are capacity issues in that pipeline. June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 7-4 BHC Consultants, LLC City of Port Orchard 2016 General Sewer Plan Update Amendment Table 7-2 2016 Gravity Sewer Deficiencies Map Location ID m Diam. Length Upstream Downstream (in) (If) nhole Manhole McCormick 1 Woods 10 1,130 506-2-2-0060 506-2-2-0030 Drive SW Table 7-3 2016 Pump Station Deficiencies Flooding Surcharge (gallons) (d/D) 0 2.2 Map pump Stations Lag Pump Runtime PS Capacity PS Peak Inflow Flooding ID (minutes) (gpm) (gpm) (gallons) A Flower Meadows 22 104 230 0 7.8.3 2022 Scenario —Results The 2022 model results for peak day flow are shown on Figure 7-2. The gravity sewer and pump station capacity deficiencies are summarized in Table 7-4 and Table 7-5. The City will monitor the McCormick Woods Drive SW gravity sewer to verify if it surcharges. Orchard Avenue and Bay Street surcharge due to insufficient capacity in the MPS. Map Location ID McCormick 1 Woods Drive SW 2 Orchard Avenue 3 Bay Street 4 Bay Street Table 7-4 2022 Gravity Sewer Deficiencies Diam. Length Upstream Downstream Flooding Surcharge (in) (If) Manhole 1 Manhole (gallons) (d/D) 10 2,420 506-2-2-0100 506-2-2-0030 0 4.5 30 110 115-2-2-0020 Marina PS 0 1.3 24 1.170 115-2-2-0190 115-2-2-0020 0 1.5 18 1,620 313-2-2-0060 115-2-2-0190 0 2.2 June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 7-5 BHC Consultants, LLC Map ID pump Stations A Flower Meadows B Albertsons C Marina D McCormick Woods 1 City of Port Orchard 2016 General Sewer Plan Update Amendment Table 7-5 2022 Pump Station Deficiencies Lag Pump Runtime (minutes) PS Capacity (gpm) 103 243 245 104 176 3,800 150 1,000 PS Peak Inflow Flooding (gpm) (gallons) 285 0 193 0 4,800 0 1,750 0 June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 7-6 BHC Consultants, LLC ' ' .,,.�• r�, j South Kltaep Water Reclamation '' 'rr„r•' �' /~ Facility " 114 � _'� t� %�r W,1n. aBy it � 1 � 4lrn,• r " _ � 1 - , • L 1 t- r`t.. E.iY Crir 7.5 17 Yr,. 1�. � nen.n,�. � �- ti'1 •" 1 ...�: Iif I �•B a �" y T y� .. B• • C.N., o� 9 w sa . 3 ' � r ,'! ' . �• � M1.,wf M1 ",�. ! ' - GreW1Y. No 3uMerBlnB Legend p rre.B..m Pi.m i '•� 1 j 1 .• jj I �1 rr� anoi P.nom,.m :-.,-..r-•.-..,,...-..-..r....i/ ^1 r1 ; ; , w�� _ W.aswnauoa..nd.,y 31' Papa. - Wr.r c.rrn r �.. Existing Peak Day Flow FqB„ �.. 4 General Sewer Plan Update 7-1 Clty of Part Orchard, Washington City of Port Orchard 2016 Oanaral *ww" Pl.n Update Anwmtr nt PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 7-8 BHC Censullanls, LLC South Klteap Water Reclamation Facility y tl }� i7 ►� .�� i .Y y i 14 ' {'.i 4 r • �i.eni li.. r.,11a. + �� J r�(rv• .� .�J..w�i� C.nu . 9 M..Jv.• 1 1 Day � Low fM 2022 Peak Flow Fig.._ General Sewer Plan Update City of Part Orchard, Washington 7-2 City of Part Orchard 2016 Gam-1 6a"r Plan Update Rmandm"t PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 7-10 BHC Consultants, LLC City of Port Orchard 2016 General Sewer Plan Update Amendment 7.8.4 2026 Scenario —Results The 2026 model results for peak day flow are shown on Figure 7-3. The gravity sewer and pump station capacity deficiencies are summarized in Table 7-6 and Table 7-7. The McCormick Woods Drive SW gravity sewer may not surcharge. The City will monitor the sewer to verify if there is a capacity issues in that pipeline. Orchard Avenue and Bay Street surcharge due to insufficient capacity in the MPS, and Albertsons surcharges due to insufficient capacity in the Albertsons Pump Station. Map Location ID McCormick 1 Woods Drive SW 2 Orchard Avenue Table 7-6 2026 Gravity Sewer Deficiencies Diam. Length Upstream Downstream Flooding Surcharge (in) (If) Manhole Manhole (gallons) (d/D) 10 , 2,420 506-2-2-0100 506-2-2-0030 905 V 4.9 30 110 115-2-2-0020 Marina PS 0 3 1 Bay Street 1 24 1 1,170 115-2-2-0190 1 115-2-2-0020 1 0 4 1 Bay Street 1 18 1 1,900 1 313-2-2-0070 1 115-2-2-0190 1 0 5 1 Albertsons 8 1 570 1 507-2-2-0040 1 Albertson PS 1 0 Table 7-7 2026 Pump Station Deficiencies 1.3 1.6 2.3 12 Map ID Pump Stations Flower Meadows Lag Pump Runtime (minutes) 134 PS Capacity (gpm) 104 PS Peak Inflow (gpm) Flooding (gallons) 0 A 295 B Albertsons 441 176 228 0 C Marina 305 3,800 5,243 0 D McCormick Woods 1 229 1,000 2,046 0 June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 7-11 BHC Consultants, LLC City of Port Orchard 2016 General Sewer Plan Update Amendment 7.8.5 2036 Scenario —Results The 2036 model results for peak day flow are shown on Figure 7-4. The gravity sewer and pump station capacity deficiencies are summarized in Table 7-8 and Table 7-9. Table 7-8 2036 Gravity Sewer Deficiencies Map Diam. Length Upstream Downstream Flooding Surcharge Location ID (in) (If) Manhole Manhole (gallons) (d/D) McCormick 1 Woods Drive 10 2,420 506-2-2-0100 506-2-2-0030 7,915 4.9 SW 2 Orchard 30 110 115-2-2-0020 Marina PS 0 3.5 Avenue 3 Bay Street Bay Street 24 1,170 115-2-2-0190 313-2-2-0100 115-2-2-0020 115-2-2-0190 2,693 4.2 40,611 6.0 4 18 2,620 5 Albertson 8 570 507-2-2-0040 Albertson PS 37,473 13 6 Bay Street 8 120 313-2-2-0110 313-2-2-0100 0 4.6 7 Bay Street 30 40 115-2-2-0030 115-2-2-0020 11 3.1 8 Bay Street 24 10 115-2-2-0040 115-2-2-0030 0 3.3 9 Bay Street 18 230 115-2-2-0070 1115-2-2-0040 39 4.0 10 Bay Street 15 950 115-2-2-0090 115-2-2-0050 0 4.2 11 Bay Street 12 840 115-2-2-0110 115-2-2-0090 0 2.4 F12 Port Orchard 12 890 114-2-2-0040 115-2-2-0200 0 7.0 Boulevard June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 7-12 BHC Consultants, LLC i n • t l �, ^ ,1• 4 South Kltsap / f „r •� Wetar Reclamation 1 1 : ? •- Facility i IleJ14 — 75 17r1 I i� r • to r 1 rr..r.i y 1 N.1 r! e � � rtir RWs• ' Crwe u.pNl $ .aen.. r I r.ai Ili ' �SIi7 ye R l Legend ' � rl+r. w�-+'-F_ 3 1 !1 �.I ; i 1 • NO Fbotlln0 t I Ll .. i I i 1 J�J ■ Flooenp r.y arc N,. r. 7 wa�ai .J f / o I� �•. r /r GrevNy. No our Aerging L ! ry _ f ♦' i Y • t i �w...[ ; i � , rl �OrtM'. suMtRing $ F � y-.'t , f.� Purtaa�.�n i_l.y r ] n, t . t O slma.aC. -Y 1 — I l . 0 r.art..t R.M 1 •�..� _ �. ! •'� ,.. Ciro aP.rl oae.M '.•r. ' � � I � ' l l �� Pal OrNeM NGP ff �ru.r.. w.......y..Fa•r� •..: r _ _` watt s.u.a uo e...eay •3�.. !r , P.— f 1. _••r i•• / - � +! tirr� .t r! Welereoelm 1 —� — Weler Caurw. _ ,.� ,.,._ -, - 2026 Peek Day Flow Fly.. w •—+»'--: �"• {l. }y�y General Sewer Plan Update 7-3 ,� ^iri •� City or Port Orchard, Washington DS,L•"„"". H U� City of Port Orchard 201e General Hewer Pion Update Amendment PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 7-14 BHC Conau0anta, LLC 5 South Klteap Water Reclamation Facility drlulrlald _ � � , ■YJ � 4 � s �a [ I ._ ' ... ,� 11 a • � 71 EypYrru 14 r+ u...y n•m rnf r�.,w�...,. �rr� 1 I � YcConRurweaa•.e _�" "7 I 4 � 1 t Legend � f i �� i Oa G.dd.ay 1 � a Fl.•dn9 'i t t}y�f.rtyw.f• !'1 J � `� •} Ir `� 1r.�. � �i -- Face MNn � d.+wr fie 1 �Ga ty. auMv r .wf. _ hd �''^•• e ! + y �'{..d f ! —paletlon s d.m c.p.ey Pi..l 1 ■ � � 1 44 1 �.+ pcd ocaam ucn ^r•""'� w.ma.pmuoem.d.y D * 2086 Peak Day Flow Fig.. Ganori Sywar t Um Update r0V11 ... e.„ .a „ N „, Ctty of Port Orchard, Washington 7-4 City of Port Orchard 2014 6o noral ■owes Pirn Vcdwor Amendnennt PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 7-16 BHC Consultants, LLC City of Port Orchard 2016 General Sewer Plan Update Amendment 7.8.6 Build -Out Scenario —Results The build -out model results for peak day flow are shown on Figure 7-5. The gravity sewer, pump station capacity, and force main deficiencies are summarized in Table 7-10, Table 7-11, and Table 7-12. Map—� Location ID McCormick 1 Woods Drive SW 2 Orchard Avenue Bay Street Bay Street 3 4 5 ' Albertson 6 Bay Street Bay Street 7 8 Bay Street 9 Bay Street 10 Bay Street 11 Bay Street Port Orchard 12 Boulevard 13 f Port Orchard I Boulevard Table 7-10 Build -Out Gravity Sewer Deficiencies Diam. Length Upstream Downstream Flooding Fcharge (in) (if) Manhole Manhole (gallons)d/D) 10 2,620 506-2-2-0100 506-2-2-0020 56,344 4.9 30 110 115-2-2-0020 Marina PS 0 3.6 24 18 1,170 115-2-2-0190 115-2-2-0020 115-2-2-0190 Albertson PS 313-2-2-0100 115-2-2-0020 51,233 284,218 146,123 0 35 4.4 6.0 13 4.8 3.1 2,620 313-2-2-0100 570 507-2-2-0040 8 8 120 313-2-2-0110 30 40 115-2-2-0030 24 10 115-2-2-0040 115-2-2-0030 0 3.3 18 230 115-2-2-0070 115-2-2-0090 115-2-2-0110 114-2-2-0090 114-2-2-0170 115-2-2-0040 115-2-2-0050 115-2-2-0090 115-2-2-0200 114-2-2-0100 207 0 0 55,869 0 4.0 4.2 3.7 7.2 5.8 15 950 12 840 12 1,670 10 1,620 June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 7-17 BHC Consultants, LLC City of Port Orchard 2016 General Sewer Plan Update Amendment Table 7-11 Build -Out Pump Station Deficiencies Map Pump Stations Lag Pump Runtime PS Capacity PS Peak Inflow Flooding ID (minutes) (gpm) (gpm) (gallons) A Flower Meadows 505 104 449 448 1,930 B Albertsons 1,384 176 0 C Marina 742 3,800 7,142 0 D McCormick Woods 1 731 1,000 3,221 0 E McCormick Woods 2 372 1,000 2,500 0 F Eagle Crest 365 100 313 831 Table 7-12 Build -Out Force Main Deficiencies Map pump Station Diam. Length ID (in) (If) 20 Marina Pump Station 18 8,200 Peak Velocity Time Exceeding 8 fps (fps) (minutes) 8.81 1 92 June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 7-18 BHC Consultants, LLC , � ,f i South KIIsap •f •� Water Reclamation ' 1 Facility Vji rig �•� 13 �• n • ! 1��.1 �, 17 14 McGe� ie. Wedx V� J I A ; , �� rn.Reu. •T c.a. w 9�w. M � � � 6 3.�,.r Ao,r�en S 1 ti• 7 � , 1 i I A'� ' • Build -Out Peak Day Flow,,. l] General Sewer Plan Update did, H ,„, �..- Clly of Port Orchard, Washington 7_5 City of Port Orchard 20+0 aanarar hewer Pion Updala Amondmimm PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 7.20 BHC Consuhanls, LLC City of Port Orchard 2016 General Sewer Plan Update Amendment 7.9 Sedgwick Subarea Analysis The City and WSUD are currently investigating changing the service area boundary between the two sewer utilities in Basin 8 to more accurately reflect how parcels in that area would be served. The resulting changes under build -out conditions are shown in Table 7-13. Table 7-13 Sedgwick Subarea Basin 8 Build -Out Changes Scenario Population Employment Area Average Annual Peak Day (acre) Flow (mgd) Flow (mgd) Current Boundary 1,193 993 529 0.125 0.201 Revised Boundary 1 1,299 1,061 323 0.135 0.218 The updated build -out peak day flows were loaded into the model to determine additional deficiencies as a result of the service area boundary change. The peak hour flow to the Bravo Terrace Pump Station (BTPS, also known as the Sedgwick Pump Station) is approximately 250 gpm, which exceeds the rated capacity of 180 gpm. However, the model results indicate that the actual capacity may be up to 290 gpm based on the pump curve. It is recommended that a draw down test be performed at the station as flows to the station approach the rated capacity of the pump station. As development occurs, developers will need to obtain a Certificate of Reservation, which will include a capacity analysis. If sewer flows from the development exceed the capacity of the Sedgwick Pump Station, the developer will be required to make capacity upgrades to the station. The Sedgwick Subarea Analysis build -out model results for peak day flow are shown on Figure 7-6. The gravity sewer, pump station capacity, and force main deficiencies are summarized in Table 7-14, 7-15, and 7-16. June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 7-21 BHC Consultants, LLC City of Port Orchard 2016 General Sewer Plan Update Amendment Table 7-14 Sedgwick Subarea Build -Out Gravity Sewer Deficiencies Map Location Diam. Length Upstream Downstream Flooding Surcharge ID (in) (If) Manhole Manhole (gallons) (d/D) McCormick 1 Woods Drive 10 2,620 506-2-2-0100 506-2-2-0020 54,221 4.9 SW 2 Orchard 30 110 115-2-2-0020 Marina PS 0 3.6 Avenue 3 Bay Street 24 1,170 115-2-2-0190 115-2-2-0020 18,735 4.4 4 Bay Street 18 2,620 313-2-2-0100 507-2-2-0040 115-2-2-0190 Albertson PS 354,451 6.0 5 Albertson 8 570 134,335 13.0 6 Bay Street 8 120 313-2-2-0110 0 4.8 313-2-2-0100 40 115-2-2-0030 7 Bay Street 30 115-2-2-0020 93 3.1 8 Bay Street 24 10 115-2-2-0040 115-2-2-0030 0 3.3 9 Bay Street 18 230 115-2-2-0070 115-2-2-0040 184 4.0 10 Bay Street 15 950 115-2-2-0090 115-2-2-0050 9 4.2 11 Bay Street 12 840 115-2-2-0110 114-2-2-0090 115-2-2-0090 115-2-2-0200 0 3.7 12 Port Orchard 12 1,670 19,014 7.2 Boulevard 13 Port Orchard 10 1,620 114-2-2-0170 114-2-2-0100 0 5.8 Boulevard Table 7-15 Sedgwick Subarea Build -Out Pump Station Deficiencies Map ID Pump Stations Lag Pump Runtime (minutes) PS Capacity (gpm) PS Peak Inflow (gpm) Flooding (gallons) A Flower Meadows 500 104 449 1,834 B Albertsons 1,353 176 448 0 C Marina 655 3,800 7,571 0 D McCormick Woods 1. 709 1,000 31230 0 E McCormick Woods 2 365 1,000 2,468 0 F Eagle Crest 355 100 300 770 June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 7-22 BHC Consultants, LLC City of Port Orchard 2016 General Sewer Plan Update Amendment Table 7-16 Sedgwick Subarea Build -Out Force Main Deficiencies Map Diam. Length Peak Velocity Time Exceeding 8 fps ID Pump Station (in) (If) (fps) (minutes) 20 Marina Pump Station 1 18 8,200 9.32 133 June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 7-23 BHC Consultants, LLC City of Port Orchard 2016 General Sewer Plan Update Amendment PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 7-24 BHC Consultants, LLC South Kits WM., RLLlRmatio. i � Facility i I _ 1 • y , i t-t Y t 5 ;,,'^',,;,"r,•,'�•" ` •I Sedgwiek Subarea Alternative ■ F =d-out Peak Day Flow >� --�Y. w�'•'— General Sewer Plan Update Ct5y� � """—" �• +� L '• City of Port Orchard, Washington %-�1 City of Port Orchard 7676 Gonsrai Se"r plan tdpdsle AmmndmeM PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 7-26 BHC Consultants, LLC City of Port Orchard 2016 General Sewer Plan Update Amendment 7.10 Basin 7 Subarea Analysis This section has been added to the General Sewer Plan (Plan) as part of the Basin 7 and CIP Amendment project. The purpose of this section is to document analysis performed to determine required upgrades to the City's sewer collection system to provide adequate service to additional developments proposed in the area after the finalization of the 2016 Plan. The model has been updated to reflect several projects since the completion and approval of the 2016 General Sewer Plan. McCormick LS1 has been upgraded with larger capacity pumps. McCormick LS2 is currently under construction, and Marina PS is under design. Although McCormick LS2 and Marina PS are not completed, the upgrades are included in the model because they are anticipated to be completed prior to construction of the new Basin 7 sewer infrastructure. Conversations with the City and developers have resulted in a decision by the City to allow two new pump stations to be constructed in order to serve the area and in order to allow the developers to build more quickly while minimizing total pump station maintenance for the City. Proposed locations of these facilities are shown in Figure 7-7. The City's Planning Department provided the estimated number of residential units and areas of commercial space proposed in Basin 7, and these are included in Appendix D. These also include estimated capacity for parcels that do not currently have development plans but have potential to be developed in the future. These flows were added to the estimated current flows from the 2022 model runs previously performed. The estimated flows are shown in Table 7-17. Table 7-17 Estimated Basin 7 Build -Out Flows Area of Basin Tributary to Average Annual 1/1 Flow Peak Hour Pump Station Flow (gpm) (gpm) Flow (gpm) I Southwest of Sidney and Sedgwick Sidney South 176 176 609 North of Sedgwick, Sidney South 25 34 105 South of Ruby Creek North of Ruby Creek, Sidney North 68 30 157 South of SR-16 North of SR-16 I Pottery j 3 1 1 1 7 The updated build -out peak day flows were loaded into the 2022, 2026, 2036, and build -out models to determine if there will be additional deficiencies as a result of the proposed developments. Two new pump stations (Sidney South Pump Station and Sidney North Pump Station) and associated piping improvements were also added. Although the Basin 7 flows increased by approximately 820 gpm, the downstream system did not experience additional deficiencies beyond those identified in the previous build -out analysis. It did cause some deficiencies to occur earlier than previously projected. Figure 7-8 shows under which model run the downstream system exceeds capacity, assuming Basin 7 is fully built out. The Basin 7 Analysis build -out model results for peak day flow are shown on Figure 7-8, with callouts showing when downstream capacity is exceeded. June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 7-27 BHC Consultants, LLC City of Port Orchard 2016 General Sewer Plan Update Amendment PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 7-28 BHC Consultants, LLC B a: i� y. Legend Futlue Sewer 6yalem A... . O' N.p SVmpn --� Farts Melne 1 I � — hewer Plpae 1 ELLttlnp Sewer 6yekm y O Pump Station —�� Forte Meln . — Seiner Plpee y aee Leyert � j cln dpmora,em +e © Poeormem UGA — wem sepeeuo eopneery Percale wmereodiea r � xaier cw„ee Future Basin 7 Upgrades Sn...,, !. r, Update City of Port Orchard, Washington Flgure 7-7 City of Port Orchard 20,16 Oomral Sewer Ptan Update Am"dmant PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 7-30 BHC Consudants, LLC r seem e[x+.v vnry.steryAArsn Fpplp' i q � m6 L wume.r B,Ye ' - r xwa e a f _ • a • mxa I s eaples!' 101" s 15 17 r 14 jf +1 Ui [remen[ J 1 �` i ll ! f •r,fen Ct � C4m •r•_ • 1 Y 11 ',.l Legend r I •• k. hnN . •J. �„Y _ . • Furore srwar 9Yrkm r . ■ aor. y� ---- F—N.nr 4 rn. s1 Yk na• r.d,r�w l�l 9 C '•� ' 2 % ' o N. FbWmg r e — r0"Fern F r e naadmg reap 1' ss a l � - i e nrrJY. Nntw.i.-fro • ' 5 16 Ywr' L — GrevAY. SurtlieryMg PumP&ellon 5 "' ssan:y aysm. • f ' fu:l.vrRr wmcl.m crrenr s 7 � ;dNrrFera B ' � - - � Excxdc Cepady _ ' '� Q TrwMait Plenl Br.r Y.Y.re SFr �`� r � CMyNPmI OrMeN B"6k-4 r r.Y Md Ordied UBR Sower t WW—d U0e .d.ry � Pv it 1 Wrl—WI. ' � Weler Coureec � I • � Swnalo � + OeAtlenry Owrc i Build43ut Peak Day Flow M ♦ y- • - with Basin 7 Upgrades Freer General Sewer Plan Update a._../5.� 5 �� „•......e....�..„.e..a„ N ,„i T117 City of Port Orchard, Washington %„8 ❑❑❑Pa�111111117 LLLTTTAARNNN ii.IIII •r a:a City of Port Orchard 2019 Ganond lawor P1rn Update Ar dint PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 7-32 BHC Consultants, LLC City of Port Orchard 2016 General Sewer Plan Update Amendment Section 8 Collection Facilities Improvements 8.1 Introduction This section provides a compilation of specific projects, improvements, and programs the City should implement to alleviate the deficiencies identified in Section 7. These projects are derived primarily from the system analysis and discussions with the City's operations and engineering staff. Each project is accompanied by a planning level opinion of probable cost and a schedule identifying when the project is anticipated to begin and end. The City should review the CIP periodically to adjust for significant changes in the priority of each project, its cost, and scope. Collection facilities improvement projects for the City wastewater system are categorized into the following five categories: • Capacity: Improvements classified as insufficient in capacity are determined based on whether or not the infrastructure can effectively convey the incoming flow. Gravity sewer pipes are considered to have insufficient capacity when the pipe is full or surcharged. Force mains are considered to have insufficient capacity when the velocities exceed 8 feet per second. Pump stations are considered to have insufficient capacity when inflow exceeds the flow produced by the pump station with the largest pump out of service. As described in Section 7, the conveyance system was evaluated using existing flows and flows projected for 2022, 2026, 2036, and build -out conditions. The evaluations determined system deficiencies when subjected to these existing and future flow conditions. Following identification of system deficiencies, the computer model was used to evaluate and select system improvements to alleviate the system deficiencies. • Operations & Maintenance (O&M): O&M projects will rehabilitate or replace facilities identified by the City O&M staff as having unacceptably high maintenance requirements, both in terms of frequency and in magnitude. • Obsolescence: Improvements classified as obsolete are based on the age of the infrastructure. Mechanical and electrical equipment is expected to have a typical usable life of 25 years. Structures are expected to have a typical usable life of 50 years. Pipes are expected to have a typical usable life of 100 years. • General: General improvement projects are those identified by City staff for various reasons that do not fall within any of the remaining four categories. These projects may be needed to simplify system operation, ease O&M efforts and reduce O&M costs, consolidate and/or eliminate redundant facilities, reduce or eliminate non -critical O&M concerns, or to meet ongoing sewer system management needs. • Developer: Projects identified as developer dependent are needed to serve new developments but are not needed to provide continuation of service to existing customers. When possible, system improvement projects should be coordinated with other utilities to minimize disruption and reduce associated costs such as road and surface restoration. June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 8-1 BHC Consultants, LLC City of Port Orchard 2016 General Sewer Plan Update Amendment 8.2 Six -Year Capital Improvement Program 8.2.1 Project Descriptions CIP 6-1: Marina Pump Station Improvements The high flow pumps are reaching the end of their useful life, and are projected to have insufficient capacity for peak hour flows within the 6-year planning horizon. The sea wall protecting the controls building is failing and needs to be replaced along with a seismic retrofit of the controls building. The existing pump station dry well and wet well will remain in place. The existing two high -flow and one low -flow pumps will be replaced with three larger pumps. One existing Vaughan Chopper pump will remain in place. The existing control building will be demolished and replaced with a new control facility to house electrical equipment and odor control. The existing corroding control building foundation will be replaced and retrofited with an observation area connected to pedestrian path. Odor control ducting from new control facility to existing wet well will be installed. The existing 200 kw interior generator will be replaced with a 450-kw exterior generator and fuel storage. The existing bathroom and pump station entrance will be demolished and replaced with a multi -use facility for diesel -driven pump, pump station entrance, public restroom, oil spill response trailer storage, and garbage and recycling receptacles. Emergency storage structure will be built adjacent the existing pump station. Construction of emergency storage structure may need to be delayed to spread out the cost to meet the City's capital budgeting. CIP 6-2: Bay Street Pump Station Improvements The pumps, mechanical, and electrical components have reached the end of their useful life. There is no generator set on site. There is some structural degradation in the wet well riser. The structure should be evaluated to determine requirements to convert the dry well to a non - confined space. Replace dilapidated wet well riser; replace dry well access with flush hatch; coat interiors of wet well and dry well; replace existing constant speed dry pit pumps with new constant speed dry pit pumps; replace all mechanical components; replace all electrical components; improve ventilation to six air exchanges per hour; evaluate revision to dry well layout to allow for retrieval; reroute gravity main from the west around the north side of dry well; install generator set; relocate sidewalk to provide better access for wet well manhole lid. CIP 6-3: McCormick Pump Station 2 The pumps, mechanical, and electrical components have reached the end of their useful life. There is significant corrosion on the mechanical equipment. Construct new pump station with a wet well, dry well, three chopper pumps with VFDs, backup generator, diesel pump, pig launch vault, emergency storage, electrical equipment housed in a new controls building, and odor control. CIP 6-4: Eagle Crest Generator Set The Eagle Crest pump station does not have an on -site generator set. June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 8-2 BHC Consultants, LLC City of Port Orchard 2016 General Sewer Plan Update Amendment This project would install a generator set and related equipment necessary for the proper function of the generator set, and would include site grading, equipment pads, and an automatic transfer switch. CIP 6-5A: Bravo Terrace (Sedgwick) Lift Station and Force Main The pumps, mechanical, and electrical components have reached the end of their useful life. Flows are expected to exceed pump station capacity as new development occurs. This project will include a new wet well, three Vaughan chopper pumps with a firm capacity of 1,000 gpm, generator, and a diesel backup pump. There is an existing storage tank on site that will be evaluated for use during pre -design. If it cannot be used, additional storage will be provided for a reasonable response time in the event of a station failure. A new 4,100 If 10-inch inside diameter force main will also be required for the additional flows. This pump station replacement and new force main will be funded by connection charges or built by a developer. CIP 6-5B: South Sidney Lift Station A new 1,000 gpm lift station will be constructed south of Ruby Creek to provide sewer service to the portion of Basin 7 south of Ruby Creek. It will be a submersible station equipped with three Vaughan chopper pumps, VFDs, an emergency generator, and diesel backup pump. Pumps shall be sized to operate concurrently with the North Sidney Lift Station. CIP 6-5C: North Sidney Lift Station A new 350 gpm lift station will be constructed north of Ruby Creek to provide sewer service to the portion of Basin 7 north of Ruby Creek. It will be a submersible station equipped with three Vaughan chopper pumps, VFDs, an emergency generator, and diesel backup pump. Pumps shall be sized to operate concurrently with the South Sidney Lift Station. CIP 6-5D: Sidney Second Force Main The existing 6-inch force main serving the Albertsons Pump Station does not have sufficient capacity to serve the projected Basin 7 flows. A new 4,800 If 10-inch inside diameter force main will be needed to provide sufficient capacity and will be shared by the South and North Sidney Lift Stations. CIP 6-6: McCormick Woods Lift Station 3 A new lift station will be constructed to provide sewer service to new development in the McCormick Woods area. It will be a submersible station equipped with Vaughan chopper pumps, VFDs, and an emergency generator. 8.2.2 Summary The projects recommended for the 6-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) are described in Table 8-1 and illustrated on Figure 8-1. The project order was developed with the City. June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 8-3 BHC Consultants, LLC City of Port Orchard 2016 General Sewer Plan Update Amendment PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 8-4 BHC Consultants, LLC City or Port Orchard 2016 Oenerel Sewer Plan Update Amendment Table 6-1 6-Year CIP(2016-2021) g No. Project e C e Project Description al 0 c m O a O tl O t7 m O • Existing pump station dry well and wet well to remain in place. The existing two high -flow and 1 low -flow pumps will be replaced with three larger pumps. The 1 existing Vaughan Chopper pump to remain in place. • Construct a second 24-inch force main for primary use by 2036 and the existing 16-inch force main to remain in place as a backup. • Demolish the existing control building and construct new control facility to house electrical equipment and odor control. • Retrofit or replace existing corroding control building foundation and replace with observation area 6-1 Marina Pump Station Improvements 0 0 0 connected to pedestrian path. • Install odor control ducting from new control facility to existing wet well • Replace existing 200 kw interior generator with 450 kw exterior generator and fuel storage • Demolish existing bathroom and pump station entrance. Replace with multi -use facility for diesel -driven pump, pump station entrance, public restroom, oil spill response trailer storage, and garbage and recycling receptacles. • Emergency storage structure built adjacent the existing pump station, Construction of emergency storage structure may need to be delayed to spread out the cost to meet the City's capital budgeting • Replace dilapidated wet well riser • Replace dry well access with gush hatch • Coal interiors of existing wet well and dry well • Replace existing constant speed dry pit pumps with new constant speed dry pit pumps • Replace all mechanical components 6-2 Bay Street Pump Station Improvements 0 0 • Replace all electrical components • Reroute gravity main from the west around the north side of dry well • Install generator set • Relocate sidewalk to provide better access for wet well manhole lid • Site paving/restoration • Install fencing around site • New wet well and dry well • New electrical and controls located in a new building • Three chopper pumps with VFDs and a backup diesel pump 6-3 McCormick Pump Station 2 - Construction 0 0 0 • Backup generator • Pig launch vault • Emergency storage • Odor control. June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 6-s BHC Cansusanis, LLC City of Port Orchard 2016 OvnaraE Se"r dart Update Amendment Table 6-1 6-Year CIP (2016-2021) c NoP Project ,�• v w C e Project Description U O O O o 6A Eagle Crest Generator Set 0 ® • Install new generator set, equipment pad, automatic transfer switch, and any other appurtenances necessary for proper function of generator set • Replace existing pump station • Submersible triplex pumps with a fine capacity of 1,000 gpm • New wet well • New electrical equipment 6-5A Brava Terrace Lift Station and Farce Main 0 0 0 • Now meelhanical copmont • Reuse existing emergency storage or install new emergency storage • New generator set • New diesel pump sized for full build -out flow • New 10-inch force main • New submersible pumps with a firm rapacity of 1,000 gpm • New wet well 6-5B South Sidney Lift Station 0 0 • New electrical equipment • New mechanical equipment • New generator set • New diesel pump sized for full build -cut flow • New submersible pumps with a firm capacity of 350 gpm • New wet well 6-5C North Sidney Lift Station 0 0 • New electrical equipment • New mechanical equipment • New generator set • New diesel pump sized for full build -out flow 6-5D Sidney Second Force Main 0 0 • Construct new 10-inch force main to serve the South Sidney and North Sidney lift stations • Submersible triplex pumps with a firm capacity as determined by the Developer and confirmed by the City • New wet well 6 McCormick Woods Lift Station 3 0 • New electrical equipment • New mechanical equipment • New generator set • New diesel pump sized for full build -out flow June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) BHC Consuflanrs, LLC , Yb1r+Re�ailen J _I i . •1 i r i.eilax r > r 13! �� t.rl e•w. 15 /1. 14. S,1 4 �^'"+�� ell �dYv Ceeu •bF $ ,4 } 1 Legend i A4CSrdpwva Or up n•i•i•ce I H4fedi e] Sldti�) I Y • MnM1de S ry "n f r r ! Greer Mein be} ! �,.. o PumPGbtion .. ' , � • •• Q TruLnenl PleM Base Larirs © CM WPm GrdiaM { ,. ! Q Pm-dcGA N. -d L)a Boundary 11 i , �+r J _ WelarBmie. i Welercmr,ec M r „,„•.,,,,,,�,,,.,� Y &Year CIP Fewe SLIM�f .....-ry..� pry er.�.. • `- �s General Sewer Plan UpdakWashe 7 � - Citywy of Part Orchard, Weshinglan I ❑ n>avzazo 8-1 City of Port Orchard 2016 General Sewer Ai.n Upd.t. Jk--d—.1 PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) BA BHC Consulfanls, LLC City of Port Orchard 2016 General Sewer Plan Update Amendment 8.3 10-Year Capital Improvement Program 8.3.1 Project Descriptions C/P 10-1: McCormick Woods Drive SW Gravity Sewer Upgrades If development occurs in Basin 6, the existing gravity sewer could surcharge and flood during peak hour conditions. It is recommended that the pipe be upsized as necessary to prevent surcharging. This project will be funded by developers. C/P 10-2: Flower Meadows Pump Station The pumps, mechanical, and electrical components have reached the end of their useful life. Replace pumps, controls and panels, level sensors, rails, and reducers connecting to existing discharge elbows. Provide free standing roof structure above the pump control panel with integrated lights to illuminate area and to protect workers from the rain with a design similar to the McCormick Ridge installation. Replace check valves, plug valves and saddles downstream of the pump station in kind. Install odor control facilities. C/P 10-3: Bay Street Gravity Sewer Upgrades The existing gravity sewer between Port Orchard Boulevard and the Marina Pump Station is projected to be under capacity within the 20-year planning horizon. The pipe should be upsized, or a parallel gravity sewer should be installed, to ensure sufficient hydraulic capacity and to prevent flooding and surcharging during peak hour conditions. C/P 10-3: Port Orchard Boulevard Gravity Sewer Upgrades The existing gravity sewers in Port Orchard Boulevard are projected to be under capacity within the 20-year planning horizon. The pipes should be upsized to ensure sufficient hydraulic capacity and to prevent flooding and surcharging during peak hour conditions. Because there are two parallel pipes, pipe bursting or pipe reaming may be used to minimize costs and disruptions during construction. 8.3.2 Summary The projects recommended for the 10-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) are described in Table 8-2 and illustrated on Figure 8-2. June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 8-9 BHC Consultants, LLC City of Port Orchard 2016 General Sewer Plan Update Amendment PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 8-10 BHC Consultants, LLC City of Port Orchard 2010 tlenorst $owes flan Update Arn—d-1, Table 6-2 10-Year CIP (2022-2026) CIP No. Project ,' c m C 0 Project Description 13 O f O 8 m 0 • Replace 1,390 6 of 10-inch pipe with 15-inch pipe from manhole 115-2-2-0200 to manhole 115-2-2-0020 10-1 McCormick Woods Drive SW Gravity Sewer Upgrades ® p • May not be necessary depending on future development patterns • Replace pumps 10-2 Flower Meadows Pump Station El ® • Replace all electrical equipment • Replace all mechanical equipment • Clean and re -coat wet well 10-3 Bay Street Gravity Sewer Upgrades ® • Replace 1,330 If of 1&inch pipe with 30-inch pipe from manhole 115-2-2-0200 to manhole 115-2-2-0020 ® 10-4 Port Orchard Boulevard Gravity Sewer Upgrades • Replace 5,760 6 of 12-inch pipe with 15-inch pipe from manhole 312-2-2-0220 to manhole 115-2-2-0200 June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 0.11 BHC ConsuOenfs, LLC City of Port Orchard 2016 General Sewer Plan Update Amendment PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) B-12 SHC Consultants, LLC I r A .�'^••r� �wNKlNap � 2 �• � wnu K.el.a>anla I t ►..r..r sr T' EagN Cny( 15.�•� r_ �1• IIIJJJ i* �_" 17 _•:r' , f 1 14 f •` • �w•� ��1N l �r I' � � NacwlA... w=ae. a •. - T _�" Ir •any � " a .9t � tyea.� :oar 9 ...aa.. .il� 1 .. c ;!1 ' 21 jYyty r• � :f �i..rw�,y,�� F � S I .�. T+rAL�L�TJ General Sewer Plan Updele 0 5 L N 5 ••^ M •�-•- •+••.•• N ... city or Port Orchard, Washington PPPd�� May M20 rl City of Port Orchard 2010 General Sarar Ran Liodde ■n a dm l PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 6-14 BHC Cansuttan(s, LLC City of Port Orchard 2016 General Sewer Plan Update Amendment 8.4 20-year Capital Improvement Program No additional capital projects are currently projected to be needed for the 20-year capital improvement program. 8.5 Opinions of Probable Cost Opinions of probable project costs for the 6-year CIP are listed in Table 8-3. These projects have been defined only to a preliminary level of design with approximate dimensions. All projects will require further definition and design refinement as part of the design process. Construction costs were estimated were provided by the City and are in 2020 dollars. The opinion of probable construction cost includes the costs to build the various components, sales tax, and contingency. Opinions of probable project costs include planning, surveying, engineering services, permitting, bid advertisement, contract award, and services during construction. No costs are included for financing, easements, right-of-way, or property acquisition. Actual costs can and will differ from the opinions of probable costs. Volatility in the bidding climate, the number of contractors bidding on a project, and their approach to bidding and completing the work will all impact actual project costs. Table 8-3 Opinion of Probable Project Costs, 6-Year CIP (2020-2025) CIP Opinion of Probable Opinion of Probable Project No. Construction Cost'.Z Project Cost',3 6-1 Marina Pump Station Improvements $13,000,000 $15,000,000 6-2 Bay Street Pump Station Improvements $975,000 $1,300,000 6-3 McCormick Lift Station 2 $3,375,000 $4,500,000 6-4 Eagle Crest Generator Set $225,000 $300,000 6-5A Bravo Terrace Lift Station and Force Main 3,750,000 $5,000,000 6-51B South Sidney Lift Station $1,875,000 $2,500,000 6-5C North Sidney Lift Station $1,875,000 $2,500,000 6-51D Sidney Second Force Main $1,200,000 $1,600,000 6-6 McCormick Woods Lift Station 3 $750 ,000 $1,000,000 Estimated City Total $33,700,000 Notes: 1) All costs are in 2020 dollars and were provided by the City. 2) The opinion of probable construction cost includes the costs to build the various components, sales tax, and contingency. The construction costs is assumed to be 75 percent of total project costs, except for 6-3 which has already being designed and is currently under construction in 2020. 3) Opinions of probable project costs include planning, surveying, engineering services, permitting, bid advertisement, contract award, construction, and services during construction. June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 8-15 BHC Consultants, LLC City of Port Orchard 2016 General Sewer Plan Update Amendment Additional improvements required as development occurs will be funded by developers under a less definite time frame. Some further sewer extensions from the existing system will also be required to serve specific parcels within the various developments. These extensions are not included in the CIP and cannot be identified until the development plan is defined, which may occur in several phases. The City -funded 6-year capital improvement program schedule is shown as Table 8-4. June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 8-16 BHC Consultants, LLC City of Port Orchard 2016 General Sewer Plan Update Amendment Table 8-4 6-Year Capital Improvement Program (2020-2025) in 2020 Dollars CIP Project Project Costs per Year' Total 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 No. 6-1 Marina Pump Station Improvements $15,000,000 $1,000,000 $7,000,000 $7,000,00 0 6-2 Bay Street Pump Station Im rovementsz $1,300,000 $1,300,000 6-3 McCormick Lift Station 22 Eagle Crest Generator Sett $4,500,000 $4,500,000 6-4 $300,000 $300,000 6-5A Bravo Terrace Lift Station and Force Main $5,000,000 $1,250,000 $3,750,000 6-5B South Sidney Lift Station 3 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 6-5C North Sidney Lift Station 3 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 6-51) Sidney Second Force Main 3 $1,600,000 $400,000 $1,200,000 6-6 McCormick Woods Lift Station 33 $1,000,000 $250,000 $750,000 City Costs $10,800,000 $5,000,000 $5,800,000 Developer Costs $10,600,000 $2,650,000 $7,950,000 Total $21,400,000 $7,650,000 $13,750,000 Notes: 1) Opinions of probable project costs include planning, surveying, engineering services, permitting, bid advertisement, contract award, construction, and services during construction. 2) To be funded and built by the City. 31To be funded and built by Developers. June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 8-17 BHC Consultants, LLC City of Port Orchard 2016 General Sewer Plan Update Amendment 8.6 Sewer Extensions into Undeveloped Basins New sewer extensions will be needed to serve new developments expected in unsewered areas of the City as shown on Figure 8-3. Specific plans for the sewer extensions have not been prepared and will be the responsibility of the developer. Some of the developments shown will require local pump stations. Major land developers will be preparing site -specific plans for street layouts, residential lot distribution, commercial parcels, sensitive area delineations, required setbacks with buffers, and other land use intentions for approval by the permitting authorities. These land use decisions, and the timing of when specific parcels are developed will influence the sewer collection facilities within these basins. The City has decided that no additional STEP units will be allowed. Coordination between the City and the West Sound Utility District will be required as properties are developed along the fringes of their two sewer service areas to establish which agency will serve which properties. These sewer extensions are not expected to require significant financial investment by the City. June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) 8-18 BHC Consultants, LLC e+Dr c L 15 ! 14 ��w�M►�=OexaT Pea_p" s South Kllaap Water Reclamation - FacIIRy � � r .y 11 Fyrr rl ,1 1 _ 1 r Legend FUWn Sewn Ems�tlon t' pump SleOon —� Pone Mtln � areNb AbW Exlelnp Sewer System �{... t' iVmp 6letion - p .meoneni pi.ni rrY GreMy Alebt Bue�eyere ciydpwo—m r Lj fWl Ordimd UDA �. WW SaumI IlD Boundary 1§mtlb Water Botlies Weser Courses N r � ,„P ".T -i� }'•-• Future Sewer Extenelonr Fli '11 Siena+d � c+wnn Update City of Port Orchard, Washington 8-3 City of Port Orchard 2016 general Sewer Plan Update Amendment PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK June 2016 (May 2020 Amendment) B-20 BHC Consultants, LLC SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Purpose of checklist. Governmental agencies use this checklist to help determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant. This information is also helpful to determine if available avoidance, minimization or compensatory mitigation measures will address the probable significant impacts or if an environmental impact statement will be prepared to further analyze the proposal. Instructions for applicants: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Please answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. You may need to consult with an agency specialist or private consultant for some questions. You may use "not applicable" or "does not a I " only when you can explain why it does not appiv and not when the answer is unknown. You may also attach or incorporate by reference additional studies reports. Complete and accurate answers to these questions often avoid delays with the SEPA process as well as later in the decision - making process. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. Instructions for Lead Agencies: Please adjust the format of this template as needed. Additional information may be necessary to evaluate the existing environment, all interrelated aspects of the proposal and an analysis of adverse impacts. The checklist is considered the first but not necessarily the only source of information needed to make an adequate threshold determination. Once a threshold determination is made, the lead agency is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of the checklist and other supporting documents. Use of checklist for nonproject proposals: For nonproject proposals (such as ordinances, regulations, plans and programs), complete the applicable parts of sections A and B plus the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). Please completely answer all questions that apply and note that the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proponent," and "affected geographic area," respectively. The lead agency may exclude (for non -projects) questions in Part B - Environmental Elements —that do not contribute meaningfully to the analysis of the proposal. A. Background 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: City of Port Orchard — 2020 Amendment to 2016 General Sewer Plan; also referred to as `Amendment' in the following portions of this checklist. 2. Name of applicant: SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 1 of 16 City of Port Orchard Public Works Department 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: City of Port Orchard Public Works Department 216 Prospect Street Port Orchard, WA 98366 (360)876-4991 Contact. Jacki Brown, Utility Manager 4. Date checklist prepared: June, 2020 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Port Orchard Planning Department Washington State Department of Ecology 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): The proposed date for adoption of the 2020 Amendment to 2016 General Sewer Plan is expected to be July, 2020. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. This is a non -project action amending the 2016 General Sewer Plan. In addition to the City's General Sewer Plan and the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), incremental sanitary sewer facilities may be constructed in conjunction with private development, as they occur. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. City of Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan Update, 2018 City of Port Orchard General Sewer Plan Update, 2016 City of Port Orchard 2017 Water System Plan Update (adoption pending) 2016 Kitsap County Comprehensive Plan West Sound Utility District Sewer Comprehensive Plan 2007 West Sound Utility District Water System Plan 2013 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. Property owners have and are expected to apply for approval of development that will require sanitary sewer service. These developments are not addressed specifically in the Amendment. The Amendment provides for necessary public sewer collection improvements necessary to support such development in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and development codes. All project -level improvements will be subject to environmental review at the time of their application. No pending proposal will affect this non -project application. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 2 of 16 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. The Amendment must be approved by the Washington State Department of Ecology. Review by other jurisdictions and agencies include Kitsap County, West Sound Utility District, The City of Bremerton, the City of Port Orchard City Council, Kitsap County Health District, and The Washington State Department of Health, Office of Drinking Water. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) As needed for for demonstrating compliance with the Growth Management Act (GMA), this proposal involves adoption of amendments to the 2016 City of Port Orchard General Sewer Plan. The amendments identify three categories of action: Pro yramniatic — Updating the General Sewer Plan to address a revised 25-year population forecast for the urban growth area which has been expanded since the 2016 Plan. This will enable the City to address future needs for sanitary sewer service within the defined urban growth area. Capital Pro'ects — Updating the list of specific capital projects that are necessary to implement the General Sewer Plan. These will be included in the Comprehensive Plan Capital Improvement Program Element. Subsequent project -level environmental review will be conducted at the time these projects are proposed for implementation. Operation, Maintenance, & Repair — Day-to-day and periodic projects necessary to maintain the current and future sewer system in working order are described in the General Sewer Plan as further addressed in the sewer utility operations and maintenance standards and procedures. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The service area covered by the 2016 General Sewer Plan Update includes area within the current City of Port Orchard municipal limits and portions of the designated Urban Growth Area (UGA), which includes established boundaries of Kitsap County ULID #6, as agreed upon by Kitsap County, the City of Bremerton, and West Sound Utility District. Port Orchard is located on the Kitsap Peninsula, south of Sinclair Inlet. The main body of Puget Sound is to the east. B. Environmental Elements 1. Earth SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 3 of 16 a. General description of the site: (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other The City of Port Orchard is characterized by shoreline adjacent to Sinclair Inlet. The topography is generally hilly with some flat areas. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? There are steep slopes within the City (100% in places), however, this non -project action will not impact slopes generally, and any project proposed under this ordinance will be reviewed separately for SEPA compliance where required. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any agricultural land of long-term commercial significance and whether the proposal results in removing any of these soils. Soils and soil types are not generally impacted by this non -project action. An extensive discussion of the soils and their properties can be found in the USDA Sail Survey of Kitsup Countv. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. Unstable soils and steep slopes do exist but will not generally be impacted by this non - project action. Separate site -specific review will determine impacts to soils and slopes and SEPA compliance. e. Describe the purpose, type, total area, and approximate quantities and total affected area of any filling, excavation, and grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. No filling or grading is proposed as part of this non -project action. Fill or grading related to site -specific proposals under this ordinance will be reviewed separately for SEPA compliance. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. No clearing or construction is proposed as part of this non -project action. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? No construction is proposed as part of this non -project action. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: No specific measures are proposed as part of this non -project action. Each project will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review for compliance with SEPA and other regulations in the Port Orchard Municipal Code. 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal during construction, operation, and maintenance when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Sewer odors have been reported for a few locations in the past. The General Sewer Plan SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 4 of 16 lists future projects that will address odors. This non -project action will have no impact on air quality. Air quality will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. This non -project action will have no impact on air quality. Air quality will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: The Six -year Capital Improvement Program includes improvements to McCormick Woods Pump Station No. 2 that will specifically address odor. This non -project action will have no impact on air quality. Air quality will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. 3. Water a. Surface Water: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. Port Orchard is bordered on the north by the waters of Puget Sound. There are numerous wetlands, streams and creeks. Impacts on shoreline, surface water, seasonal streams and wetlands will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. This non -project action will not require any work over, in or adjacent to these waters. Impacts on wetlands, surface water, seasonal streams and shoreline will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. This non -project action will not require any filling or dredging. Impacts as a result of filling or dredging will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. This non -project action will not require any surface water withdrawals or diversions. The proposed permit, policy, and ordinances will provide additional protection for all water bodies. Impacts of this type will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. Some areas of the City are identified as lying within the 100-year flood plain (as defined in the Federal Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973.) This non -project action does not SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 5 of 16 impact flood areas specifically. Any proposal involving flood areas will comply with Chapter 20.170, Flood Damage Prevention, of the Port Orchard Municipal Code and will be evaluated as part of site -specific review and SEPA analysis. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. This non -project action will not require discharge of materials to surface waters. The proposed ordinance will prohibit the discharges of waste materials and provide additional protection for all water bodies. Impacts of this type will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis b. Ground Water: 1) Will groundwater be withdrawn from a well for drinking water or other purposes? If so, give a general description of the well, proposed uses and approximate quantities withdrawn from the well. Will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. This non -project action will not require any withdrawal of groundwater or discharge to groundwater. Impacts of this type will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals... ; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. This non -project action will not require any discharge of waste material to groundwater. Existing health regulations control the location, type and density of development which utilizes septic tanks. c. Water runoff (including stormwater): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. This non -project action will not impact surface and stormwater. Stormwater flow and outfall will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. This non -project action will not impact ground or surface waters and the goals to minimize the effects of discharge of waste materials. Possible contamination of ground or surface waters with waste materials will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. 3) Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If so, describe. This non -project action will not have an effect on drainage patterns. Possible impacts of drainage patterns will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 6 of 16 d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water, and drainage pattern impacts, if any: This non -project action will not have effect on surface, ground or runoff waters. Possible surface, ground, and runoff water impacts will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. 4. Plants a. Check the types of vegetation found on the site: X deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other X evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other X shrubs X grass X pasture X crop or grain Orchards, vineyards or other permanent crops. wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other X other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? This non -project action will have no effect on vegetation removal or alteration. Vegetation removal and enhancement will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. c. List threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. This non -project action will have no impact on threatened or endangered species. Flora will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: No landscaping is proposed as part of this non -project action. Open space and planting regulations will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site. This non -project action will have no impact on noxious weeds and invasive species. Flora will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. 5. Animals a. List any birds and other animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site. birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other; mammals: deer, bear, beaver, sea lion, raccoon, other; fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other. b. List any threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. This non -project action will not have an effect on wildlife. Effects of proposals on wildlife SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 7 of 16 will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Puget Sound, including Port Orchard, is an important nesting place, feeding area, and wintering ground for thousands of birds in the Pacific Flyway. This non -project action will have no effect on migration patterns. Effects on wildlife will be evaluated as part of site - specific project review and SEPA analysis. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: This non -project action will not have an effect on animals or birds. Effects of individual proposals on wildlife will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site. This non -project action will not have an effect on animals or birds. Effects of individual proposals on wildlife will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. No energy is required for this non -project action. Energy consumption will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis and in accordance with the Washington State Energy Code which the City has adopted. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. This non -project action will have no effect on solar access. Solar access will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: None. The City uses the Washington State Energy Code to enhance electricity conservation. Energy conservation features will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. This non -project action not effect threats of environmental health hazards. Environmental health hazards will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. 1) Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 8 of 16 No possible contamination has been identified as part of this non -project action. Possible contamination will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. 2) Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development and design. This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines located within the project area and in the vicinity. No hazardous chemicals have been identified as part of this non -project action. Possible hazardous chemicals/conditions will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. 3) Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored, used, or produced during the project's development or construction, or at any time during the operating life of the project. No toxic or hazardous chemicals will be stored, used, or produced as part of this non -project action. 4) Describe special emergency services that might be required. No special emergency measures will be required as part of this non -project action. 5) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: No measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards are necessary as part of this non -project action. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Existing noise types and levels have no impacts on this non -project action. Existing noise types of individual proposals will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indi- cate what hours noise would come from the site. This non -project action will have no effect on noise levels. Noise impacts of individual proposals will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Noise levels in Port Orchard are regulated under Chapter 9.24 (Offenses Against Public Order) of the Port Orchard Municipal Code. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Will the proposal affect current land uses on nearby or adjacent properties? If so, describe. Land uses in Port Orchard are primarily residential and commercial, with some industrial, SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 9 of 16 light Manufacturing, recreation, and open space. b. Has the project site been used as working farmlands or working forest lands? If so, describe. How much agricultural or forest land of long-term commercial significance will be converted to other uses as a result of the proposal, if any? If resource lands have not been designated, how many acres in farmland or forest land tax status will be converted to nonfarm or nonforest use? Not applicable to this non -project action. Conversion of agriculture or forest lands will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. 1) Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal business operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides, tilling, and harvesting? If so, how: Not applicable to this non -project action. Impacts on agriculture or forest lands will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. c. Describe any structures on the site. The proposal is a non -project action and includes no specific development activity. Any structures in individual proposals will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? This non -project action requires no demolition. Any future proposed demolition will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? Zoning in Port Orchard is according to the currently adopted Zoning Map, which is available at the Department of Planning and Community Development. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Comprehensive Plan designations are according to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map in accordance with GMA requirements. The Land Use Map is available at the Department of Planning and Community Development. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? The proposal is a non -project action and includes no specific development activity. Any individual proposals that have current shoreline master program designation will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. h. Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area by the city or county? If so, specify. Critical Areas in Port Orchard include wetlands, aquifer recharge areas, geologically hazardous areas, continuous and seasonal streams and waters including the waters of Puget Sound, and fish and wildlife habitat. These areas are inventoried in the City's Comprehensive Plan and are regulated under Chapter 20.162, Critical Areas Regulations, of the Port Orchard Municipal Code. Environmentally sensitive areas will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 10 of 16 i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Not applicable to this non -project action. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? Not applicable to this non -project action. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Not applicable to this non -project action. L. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: This non -project action will have no effect on existing and projected land uses and plans. m. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts to agricultural and forest lands of long-term commercial significance, if any: This non -project action will have no impact to agricultural and forest lands of long-term commercial significance. 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, mid- dle, or low-income housing. Not applicable to this non -project action. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. No units will be eliminated by this non -project action. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Not applicable. 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? This non -project action has no effect on building and structure height. Building and structure height are regulated in the Zoning Code. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? This non -project action will have no impact on views. View alteration and obstruction is regulated by the Zoning Code and the Shoreline Management Master Program. Views will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Not applicable. 11. Light and Glare SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 11 of 16 a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? This non -project action will not produce any light and/or glare. Light and glare will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? This non -project action will not produce any light and/or glare. Light and glare will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? This non -project action will not be affected by any light and/or glare. Off -site sources of light and glare will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Not applicable. 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Not applicable to this non -project action. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. This non -project action will not displace any existing recreational uses. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: Not applicable. 13. Historic and cultural preservation a. Are there any buildings, structures, or sites, located on or near the site that are over 45 years old listed in or eligible for listing in national, state, or local preservation registers ? If so, specifically describe. Not applicable to this non -project action. Archeological and historic resources are recorded at the State of Washington Departments of Community, Trade and Economic Development, Office of Archeology and Historic Preservation. Cultural resources will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. b. Are there any landmarks, features, or other evidence of Indian or historic use or occupation? This may include human burials or old cemeteries. Are there any material evidence, artifacts, or areas of cultural importance on or near the site? Please list any professional studies conducted at the site to identify such resources. Not applicable to this non -project action. Archeological and historic resources are recorded at the State of Washington Departments of Community, Trade and Economic Development, Office of Archeology and Historic Preservation. A map and listing of all the historic resources are available at the City of Port Orchard Department of Community Development, 720 Prospect Street, Port Orchard, WA 98366. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 12 of 16 c. Describe the methods used to assess the potential impacts to cultural and historic resources on or near the project site. Examples include consultation with tribes and the department of archeology and historic preservation, archaeological surveys, historic maps, GIS data, etc. Not applicable to this non -project action. Cultural resources will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. d. Proposed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for loss, changes to, and disturbance to resources. Please include plans for the above and any permits that may be required. Not applicable to this non -project action. Cultural resources will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site or affected geographic area and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. State Route 16 connects the City with the balance of the Kitsap Peninsula. The City has an extensive system of arterials, suburban and local public streets. Location of, and access to, public streets and highways will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. b. Is the site or affected geographic area currently served by public transit? If so, generally describe. If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? The City is served by Kitsap Transit. Kitsap Transit operates a commuter system which is coordinated with the ferry schedules in neighboring communities in addition to a dial -a - ride service. Location of, and access to, public transit will be evaluated as part of site - specific project review and SEPA analysis. c. How many additional parking spaces would the completed project or non -project proposal have? How many would the project or proposal eliminate? This is a non -project action. Parking requirements are contained in Chapter 20.124, Development Standards — Parking and Circulation, of the Port Orchard Municipal Code. d. Will the proposal require any new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian, bicycle or state transportation facilities, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). This non -project action will not create the need for any new or improved streets. Transportation facilities will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. e. Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. The various modes of transportation will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 13 of 16 How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project or proposal? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur and what percentage of the volume would be trucks (such as commercial and nonpassenger vehicles). What data or transportation models were used to make these estimates? This non -project action will have no direct impact on vehicular trips. Trip generation and the cumulative impact will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. g. Will the proposal interfere with, affect or be affected by the movement of agricultural and forest products on roads or streets in the area? If so, generally describe. This non -project action will have no impact on agricultural or forest land operations. Agricultural or forest land operations impacts will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: This non -project action will have no direct impact on transportation. Transportation impacts will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, public transit, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. This non -project action will have little effect on public services, except as would normally be required for individual proposals. The need for public services will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. This non -project action will have no effect on public services. 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. c. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. This non -project action will not directly affect public utilities. The provision of utilities for individual proposals will be evaluated as part of site -specific project review and SEPA analysis. C. Signature The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: Name of signer SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 14 of 16 Position and Agency/Organization Utility Manager: City of Port Orchard Date Submitted: June 12. 2020 D. Supplemental sheet for nonproject actions (IT IS NOT NECESSARY to use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; pro- duction, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? This non -project action will have no effect on discharges to water bodies. No negative impacts will occur in terms of emissions to air; production or storage of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: Effects on discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise will be reviewed as part of site -specific review and SEPA analysis. 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? This non -project action will have no effects to plants, animals, fish or marine life. All specific effects to plant, animal, fish and other marine life will be evaluated as part of site - specific project review and SEPA analysis. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: Effects of individual proposals on wildlife and marine life will be reviewed as part of site - specific review, and SEPA analysis. 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? This non -project action will not affect energy or natural resources. Effects of individual proposals on energy or natural resources will be reviewed as part of site -specific review, and SEPA analysis. Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: Construction of individual projects is reviewed under the Washington State Energy Code, adopted under Chapter 20.200, Building Code, of the Port Orchard Municipal Code. 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 15 of 16 This non -project action will not impact environmentally sensitive areas or other areas designated for protection. Effects of individual proposals on environmentally sensitive areas or other protected areas will be reviewed as part of site -specific review, and SEPA analysis. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: Impacts of individual proposals on environmentally sensitive areas or other protected areas will be reviewed as part of site -specific review, and SEPA analysis. 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? This non -project action will not affect land or shoreline use. Impacts of individual proposals on land or shoreline use will be reviewed as part of site -specific review, and SEPA analysis. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: Impacts of individual proposals on land or shoreline use will be reviewed as part of site - specific review, and SEPA analysis. 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? This non -project action will have no effect on the demand for transportation or public service and utilities. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: None. Projects approved under this ordinance are subject to review by the City Planning Department, Public Works Department, and the local Health District. 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. This non -project proposal is consistent with all local, state and federal requirements for the protection of the environment. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 16 of 16