Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutord2014-007 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL NO. 2013-345 CLEARANCES Initial Date Date Received in Council Office Agenda Date Assigned to: Originator: M.A. 10/712013 10/22/2013 Introduction Matt Aamot Division Head JJJ73 p Mark Personius NMI) -.I) 11/12/2013 Planning&Development Comm.and Council Dept.Head: ' Sam Ryan ('ft, le fl CC 5 2;313 1/28/2014 Council Prosecutor: Royce Buckingham *'$< /0 (3 /\ELOM C 0 LI N y Purchasing/Budget: COUNCIL Executive: Jack Louws i; 11.1113 TITLE OF DOCU NT: Capital Facility Planning—Special Purpose Districts. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Cover letter 2. Proposed Ordinance and Exhibits 3. Planning Commission Findings of Fact and Reasons for Action 4. Draft Planning Commission Minutes SEPA review required? ( X ) Yes ( ) NO Should Clerk schedule a hearing? ( ) Yes ( X') NO SEPA review completed? ( X ) Yes ( ) NO Requested Date 'The Council must hold a hearing if they want to change the Planning Commission's recommendation IWCC 2.160.100(B)I. SUMMARY STATEMENT OR LEGAL NOTICE LANGUAGE: (If this item is an ordinance or requires a public hearing,you must provide the language for use in the required public notice. Be specific and cite RCW or WCC as appropriate. Be clear in explaining the intent of the action.) Amending provisions of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan and Foothills Subarea Plan relating to special purpose districts and capital facility planning. Amendments include adopting by reference or incorporating information from the Columbia Valley Water District, Water District 13, Mount Baker School District and Fire District 8 plans into the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan and making related changes. NOTE:Final approval of these amendments would occur as part of concurrent review of comprehensive plan amendments in early 2014. COMMITTEE ACTION: COUNCIL ACTION: 11/12/2013: Forwarded for concurrent review 10/22/2013: Introduced 11/12/2013: Council forwarded for concurrent review 6-0, Kremen absent 1/28/2014: Council Adopted 5-0-2, Buchanan & Browne abstained Ord. 2014-007 Related County Contract#: Related File Numbers: Ordinance or Resolution Number: AB2013-088 and PLN2013-00001 Ord. 2014-007 Please Note: Once adopted and signed, ordinances and resolutions are available for viewing and printing on the County's website at: www.co.whatcom.wa.us/council. 10-7-2013 SPONSORED BY: Consent PROPOSED BY: PDS INTRODUCTION DATE: 10/22/2013 ORDINANCE NO. 2014-007 ADOPTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS RELATING TO CAPITAL FACILITY PLANNING FOR SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICTS WHEREAS, The Whatcom County Council initiated the subject amendments for review in 2013; and WHEREAS, the Columbia Valley Water District approved a water plan in 2013, Water District 13 approved a water plan in 2012, the Mount Baker School District approved a capital facilities plan in 2013, and Fire District 8 approved a capital facilities plan in 2013; and WHEREAS, The Whatcom County Planning Commission held a public hearing relating to incorporating these plans and/or information from these plans into the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan on September 26, 2013; and WHEREAS, The Whatcom County Planning Commission recommended approval of the comprehensive plan amendments on September 26, 2013; and WHEREAS,The County Council hereby adopts the following findings of fact: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The subject amendments to the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan are as follows: a. Amending Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan Chapter 2(Land Use)to recognize that the Evergreen Water and Sewer District has changed its name to the Columbia Valley Water District. b. Amending Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan Chapter 4 (Capital Facilities) to adopt the Columbia Valley Water District 2013 Water System Plan Update,the Water District 13 Small Water System Plan and Mount Baker School District Capital Facilities Plan by reference and making related changes. c. Amending the Foothills Subarea Plan to provide information relating to the Columbia Valley Water District, Water District 13 and the Mount Baker School District. d. Amending the Whatcom County 20-Year Capital Facilities Plan to incorporate information from the Columbia Valley Water District 2013 Water System Plan Update, incorporate information from the Water District 13 Small Water System Plan and making related changes. 1 e. Amending the Whatcom County 20-Year Capital Facilities Plan to incorporate information from the Mount Baker School District Capital Facilities Plan and making related changes. f Amending the Whatcom County 20-Year Capital Facilities Plan to incorporate information from the Fire District 8 Capital Facilities Plan and making related changes. 2. Notice of the subject amendments was submitted to the Washington State Department of Commerce on August 9, 2013. 3. A determination of non-significance was issued under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) on August 12, 2013. 4. Notice of the Planning Commission hearing was posted on the County website on August 12, 2013. 5. Notice of the Planning Commission hearing was sent to the City of Bellingham, special purpose districts, and citizen, media and other groups on the County's e-mail list on September 5, 2013. 6. Notice of the Planning Commission hearing for the subject amendments was published in the Bellingham Herald on September 13, 2013. 7. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the subject amendments on September 26, 2013. 8. Pursuant to WCC 2.160.080, in order to approve the proposed comprehensive plan amendments the County must find all of the following: a. The amendment conforms to the requirements of the Growth Management Act, is internally consistent with the county-wide planning policies and is consistent with any interlocal planning agreements. b. Further studies made or accepted by the Department of Planning and Development Services indicate changed conditions that show need for the amendment. c. The public interest will be served by approving the amendment. In determining whether the public interest will be served, factors including but not limited to the following shall be considered: 2 i. The anticipated effect upon the rate or distribution of population growth, employment growth, development, and conversion of land as envisioned in the comprehensive plan. ii. The anticipated effect on the ability of the county and/or other service providers, such as cities, schools, water and/or sewer purveyors, fire districts, and others as applicable, to provide adequate services and public facilities including transportation facilities. iii. Anticipated impact upon designated agricultural, forest and mineral resource lands. d. The amendment does not include or facilitate spot zoning. e. Urban growth area amendments that propose the expansion of an urban growth area boundary are required to acquire development rights from a designated TDR sending area, with certain exceptions. Growth Management Act 9. The Growth Management Act (GMA) establishes planning goals in RCW 36.70A.020 to guide adoption of comprehensive plan amendments. 10. GMA Planning Goal 1 is to "Encourage development in urban areas where adequate public facilities and services exist or can be provided in an efficient manner" (RCW 36.70A.020(1)). 11. GMA Planning Goal 12 is to "Ensure that those public facilities and services necessary to support development shall be adequate to serve the development at the time the development is available for occupancy and use without decreasing current service levels below locally established minimum standards" (RCW 36.70A.020(12)). 12. The subject amendments include updating the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan to incorporate the Columbia Valley Water District 2013 Water System Plan Update and. the Water District 13 Small Water System Plan (2012). These districts serve the Columbia Valley UGA and surrounding areas. 13. The subject amendments include updating the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan to incorporate the Mount Baker School District Capital Facility Plan (2013). The District serves the Columbia Valley UGA, Acme, Deming, Kendall, Maple Falls, Glacier and surrounding areas. 14. The subject amendments include updating the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan to incorporate information from the Fire District 8 Capital Facilities Plan (2013). The District serves the western portion of the Bellingham UGA, including the Bellingham International Airport, a portion of the Lummi Reservation, and surrounding areas. 3 15. The GMA, at RCW 36.70A.070(3), requires that a comprehensive plan must include a capital facilities plan element consisting of: a. An inventory of existing capital facilities owned by public entities, showing the locations and capacities of the capital facilities. b. A forecast of the future needs for such capital facilities. c. The proposed locations and capacities of expanded or new capital facilities. d. At least a six-year plan that will finance such capital facilities within projected funding capacities and clearly identifies sources of public money for such purposes. e. A requirement to reassess the land use element if probable funding falls short of meeting existing needs and to ensure that the land use element, capital facilities plan element, and financing plan within the capital facilities plan element are coordinated and consistent. 16. The capital facilities plans generally contain inventories, forecasts of future needs, proposed capital facilities, and financing plans. County-Wide Planning Policies 17. County-Wide Planning Policy E-4 states "The County shall assure that there are plans to provide appropriate levels of urban facilities and services within non-city Urban Growth Areas. These plans should be developed by special purpose districts . . ." 18. The Columbia Valley UGA is not associated with a city. 19. The Columbia Valley Water District and Water District 13 are generally planning capital improvements to serve the portions of the Columbia Valley UGA within their respective service areas. 20. The Mount Baker School District Capital Facilities Plan projects that the schools serving the Columbia Valley UGA (Kendall Elementary, the Junior High School and the High School) will have adequate capacity over the planning period. Interlocal Agreements 21. An Interlocal Agreement between Whatcom County and Columbia Valley Water District was signed in 2010. 22. An Interlocal Agreement between the City of Bellingham and Whatcom County concerning Planning, Annexation and Development within the Bellingham UGA was signed in 2012. 4 23. An Interlocal Agreement between Fire District 8 and the City of Bellingham for the provision of administrative services was signed in 2013. 24. There are no provisions in the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan amendments that are inconsistent with these interlocal agreements. Further Studies/Changed Conditions 25. The Columbia Valley Water District and Water District 13 have studied facilities needed to serve existing and planned development and formulated new water system plans. 26. The Mount Baker School District has studied facilities needed to serve existing and planned development and formulated a new capital facilities plan. 27. Fire District 8 has studied facilities needed to serve existing and planned development and formulated a new capital facilities plan. 28. Further study and formulation of plans by the Columbia Valley Water District, Water District 13,Mount Baker School District and Fire District 8 constitute changed conditions that warrant amendments to the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan. Public Interest 29. The comprehensive plan amendments will serve the public interest by adopting new or updated water, school and fire protection capital facility plans to serve planned growth in Whatcom County. These special purpose district plans will serve planned land uses, will enhance provision of public facilities and services, and will not harm resource lands. Spot Zoning 30. The subject proposal does not involve rezoning property. CONCLUSIONS The subject comprehensive plan amendments are consistent with the approval criteria of WCC 2.160.080. 5 NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT ORDAINED by the Whatcom County Council that: Section 1. The Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan Chapter 2 (Land Use) is hereby amended as shown on Exhibit A. Section 2. The Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan Chapter 4 (Capital Facilities) is hereby amended as shown on Exhibit B. Section 3. The Foothills Subarea Plan is hereby amended as shown on Exhibit C. Section 4. The water provisions of the Whatcom County 20-Year Capital Facilities Plan are hereby amended as shown on Exhibit D. Section 5. The school provisions of the Whatcom County 20-Year Capital Facilities Plan are hereby amended as shown on Exhibit E. Section 6. The fire protection provisions of the Whatcom County 20-Year Capital Facilities Plan are hereby amended as shown on Exhibit F. Section 7. Adjudication of invalidity of any of the sections, clauses, or provisions of this ordinance shall not affect or impair the validity of the ordinance as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so declared to be invalid. ADOPTED this 28th day of January , 2014. ®®® -4 ® ®a CI WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL AT' Z'A" ® ��{ WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON ® ®ca Dana®l pwn©15wis9Ce� ncWl $ rk Carl Weimer, Council Chair rf ////llfilllll%\`®® APPROVED as to form: Approved ()Denied or Jack Lo s, Executiv. Date: / _? 0 — 6 Exhibit A - Comp Plan Chapter 2 Amendments Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 Exhibit A Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan Amendments (Chapter 2) NOTE: For brevity and ease in viewing the proposed changes, portions of the Comprehensive Plan that are not being modified by this ordinance are not shown below. The text, goals, policies and maps that are not shown below are retained as previously adopted. 1 Exhibit A- Comp Plan Chapter 2 Amendments Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 Amend the Land Use Chapter of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan (Chapter 2) as follows: Paradise Lakes has public roads and continues to utilize septic systems for sewage disposal. The Columbia Valley Water District (formerly Evergreen Water-Sewer District) provides public water service to residential and camper lots within the Paradise Lakes divisions. Peaceful Valley has private roads and a water and sewer system managed by Water District 13. 30. Establish on-going communications link with Whatcom County Water District 13, Columbia Valley Water District, and Community Associations to work towards mutually beneficial infrastructure solutions including combined services in the Columbia Valley UGA. 2 Exhibit B - Comp Plan Chapter 4 Amendments Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 Exhibit B Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan Amendments (Chapter 4) NOTE: For brevity and ease in viewing the proposed changes, portions of the Comprehensive Plan that are not being modified by this ordinance are not shown below. The text, goals, policies and maps that are not shown below are retained as previously adopted. 1 Exhibit B - Comp Plan Chapter 4 Amendments Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 Amend the Capital Facilities Chapter of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan (Chapter 4) as follows: Goal 4N: Adopt special district and County capital facility plans for unincorporated UGAs into this plan by reference when consistent with the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan. Policy 4N-1: The Birch Bay Water and Sewer District Comprehensive Water System Plan, dated March 2009, is adopted by reference into the comprehensive plan. Policy 4N-2: The Birch Bay Water and Sewer District Comprehensive Sewer System Plan, dated May 2009, is adopted by reference into the comprehensive plan. Policy 4N-3: The Birch Bay Comprehensive Stormwater Plan, dated July 2006, is adopted by reference into the comprehensive plan. Policy 4N-4 The North Whatcom Fire and Rescue Capital Facilities Plan, dated August 2009, is adopted by reference into the comprehensive plan. Policy 4N-5: The Public Utility District No. 1 Comprehensive Water System Plan, dated October 2004, is adopted by reference into the comprehensive Plan. Policy 4N-6: The Columbia Valley Water District 2013 Water System Plan Update is adopted by reference into the comprehensive plan. This water system serves a portion of the Columbia Valley UGA. Policy 4N-7: The Water District No. 13 Small Water System Plan, dated August 2012, is adopted by reference into the comprehensive plan. This water system serves a portion of the Columbia Valley UGA. Policy 4N-8 The Water District No. 13 Comprehensive Sewer Plan, dated August 2012, is adopted by reference into the comprehensive plan. This sewer system serves a portion of the Columbia Valley UGA. Policy 4N-9: The public stormwater facilities sections relating to the Columbia Valley UGA in the Water Quantity and Quality Report Foothills Subarea (Aspect Consulting, July 18, 2008, pp. 2-3, 36-39, and 55-56) are adopted by reference into the comprehensive plan. 2 Exhibit B- Comp Plan Chapter 4 Amendments Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 Policy 4N-10: The Whatcom Fire District No. 14 Capital Facilities Plan, dated July 2012, is adopted by reference into the Comprehensive Plan. Policy 4N-11: The Mount Baker School District Capital Facilities Plan, dated May 2013, is adopted by reference into the Comprehensive Plan. Policy 4N-12: The Whatcom County Fire District No. 7 Capital Facilities Plan, dated May 2011, is adopted by reference into the Comprehensive Plan (except that the UGA boundaries shown in the Fire District No. 7 Capital Facilities Plan are not adopted by reference). 3 Exhibit C- Foothills Subarea Plan Amendments Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 Exhibit C Foothills Subarea Plan Amendments NOTE: For brevity and ease in viewing the proposed changes,portions of the Foothills Subarea Plan that are not being modified by this ordinance are not shown below. The text and maps that are not shown below are retained as previously adopted. Exhibit C- Foothills Subarea Plan Amendments Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 Amend the Foothills Subarea Plan, Chapter 1,Introduction and Population Projections as follows: As of the beginning of the 2012 school year,the Mount Baker School District had experienced a drop in school enrollment over the last ten years. Amend the Foothills Subarea Plan, Chapter 2, Land Use as follows: In the Columbia Valley UGA,the subarea plan allows for development of public land uses within the Planned Town Center. These will be land uses that provide governmental or other institutional services to the UGA's residents. The East County Regional Resources Center has developed facilities in the Columbia Valley. In addition,the UGA will eventually need sanitary sewer service for its entirety, possibly requiring the dedication of additional land for wastewater treatment. There is now some land set aside for the existing treatment facility,but an expanded system may require more. That could take the form of either an expanded facility at the existing site or a new facility at a separate location. Amend the Foothills Subarea Plan, Chapter 5, Utilities as follows: Water District 13 was established in 1975 to serve the Peaceful Valley development. According to the State Department of Health drinking water database,Water District 13 is approved for 1,338 total connections and served 361 existing connections as of September 2013. This leaves capacity for 977 additional approved connections. Additionally,Water District 13 installed meters in 2005-07. In other areas around the County,water usage has come down when meters are installed and a rate structure implemented that charges more when additional water is used. These measures lead to repairing leaky pipes and generally result in water conservation. The District's engineer has estimated that the District may be able to gain approval for about 300 additional water connections,with their existing water rights, because of conservation measures. Water District No. 13 has two tanks with a total storage capacity of 300,000 gallons. The District draws groundwater from two wells to serve its customers. Potable water has not been treated in the past. The predecessor of the Columbia Valley Water District(formerly known as Evergreen Water-Sewer District No. 19),the Paradise Lakes Country Club water association, operated the water system from its inception in 1971 until 2003,when Evergreen Water-Sewer District took over the system. The Columbia Valley Water District provides water service to the Paradise Lakes Country Club subdivision and the Camper's Paradise recreational development. The Columbia Valley Water District 2013 Water System Plan Update estimates that the District serves 974 equivalent residential units(ERUs)in 2013 and will serve 1,242 ERUs by 2030(p. 36),which would be an increase of 268 ERUs. The Water System Plan finds that the District will have adequate water to serve development through the 2030 planning horizon (pp.45-47 and 53). The Columbia Valley Water District has four tanks with a total storage capacity of 2 Exhibit C - Foothills Subarea Plan Amendments Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 762,000 gallons. The District draws groundwater from three wells to serve its customers. Potable water is chlorinated immediately after drawing it from the source.There is no other treatment of the water. Table 5.1 —Additional Water connections to serve the UGA District Additional Connections Water District 13: 977 Columbia Valley Water District: 268 Total: 1,245 Amend the Foothills Subarea Plan, Chapter 10, Community Facilities, Schools, Sheriff, Fire Protection, Emergency Medical Services and Solid Waste Management as follows: Schools The Foothills Subarea is served by the Mount Baker School District. The District's Capital Facilities Plan(May 2013) states: "The Mount Baker School District has adequate classroom space to serve the students of the District over the next 20-year planning period(through the year 2036). Specifically,the schools serving the Columbia Valley Urban Growth Area(Kendall Elementary School,the Junior High School and the High School)have surplus capacity to house the students anticipated over the planning period. Therefore,the District is not planning any new or expanded classroom facilities"(p. 12). Amend the Foothills Subarea Plan, Chapter 13, Kendall Rural Community Master Plan as follows: School capacity—The Kendall School is a prominent component of the Rural Community. The Kendall master plan must provide the District with the flexibility it needs to provide adequate school capacity. 3 Exhibit C- Foothills Subarea Plan Amendments Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 Amend the Foothills Subarea Plan,Appendix A, Bibliography as follows: ECONorthwest: Foothills Subarea Population Forecast,December 1,2006 ECONorthwest: Foothills Subarea Economic Analysis,June 12,2007 Foothills Subarea,a component of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Land Use Plan,November 1988 Foothills Subarea Plan Advisory Committee:Records of Decisions&Recommendations, March 2006— May 2010 Studio Cascade: Vision Week Evaluative Summary,July 2006 Studio Cascade:Foothills Subarea Plan Questionnaire Report, January 2007 Columbia Valley Water District 2013 Water System Plan Update, 2013 Whatcom County Water District#13 Small Water System Plan, Revised August 2012 4 Exhibit D - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 Exhibit D Whatcom County 20-Year Capital Facilities Plan Amendments (Water System Provisions) NOTE: For brevity and ease in viewing the proposed changes,portions of the Whatcom County 20-Year Capital Facilities Plan that are not being modified by this ordinance are not shown below. The text and maps that are not shown below are retained as previously adopted. i Exhibit D - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 Amend the "Executive Summary"of the Whatcom County 20-Year Capital Facilities Plan (Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan Appendix E)as follows: Water Systems A comparison of the water system plans of urban water systems in Whatcom County shows that most of the water systems plan for populations greater than that projected for their service area as part of the Whatcom County 2029 capital facility planning process. This indicates that these water systems generally plan conservatively for drinking water needs,particularly given the time it takes to seek new water supplies to serve growth. Water District 13,City of Everson,City of Nooksack, City of Sumas,Water District 7,and Lake Whatcom Water and Sewer District all plan for populations lower than that found in the Whatcom County 2029 CFP projections,potentially indicating a need to update their analysis with updated population and employment figures as part of their planning for water system needs. Birch Bay Water and Sewer District's Plan identified a near-term need for additional water sources,and is actively working with its partner,the City of Blaine,to obtain new water sources. In addition,when the Ecology water rights calculation for the City of Lynden of 1,110 gpm is considered,instead of the City's source capacity estimates, then the City of Lynden experiences water deficits in the planning period. Other urban area water purveyors identify storage and/or distribution projects that will be needed to continue providing service at adequate levels over the planning period. For those service providers with plans,a variety of short and long-term projects are identified to address deficiencies(see Urban Water Systems Capital Project and Funding Section). Amend the "Water Systems"chapter of the Whatcom County 20-Year Capital Facilities Plan (Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan Appendix E)as follows: Water Systems This section identifies current water supply and transmission inventories within the County. Public water systems are classified into two categories,Group A and Group B systems. Group A water systems serve 15 or more connections or 25 or more people/day for 60 or more days/year. A Group B water system is a public water system that serves less than 15 connections or fewer than 25 people/day for 60 days or more/year. A full description of Groups A and B water systems can be found in WAC 246-290-010. For purposes of this Capital Facilities Plan,water systems are divided into those that serve urban growth areas(Urban Water Systems) and those that provide 50 or more connections located outside of UGAs(Rural Area Water Systems). A summary of the countywide water planning process encompassed in the Whatcom County Coordinated Water System Plan is presented first 2 Exhibit D - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 followed by inventories of urban water service providers. Information about rural water service providers is included in Appendix 3. Whatcom County Coordinated Water System Plan (CWSP) The CWSP was prepared by the Whatcom County Water Utility Coordinating Committee (WUCC)representing individual water utilities located throughout the County. The CWSP was developed to ensure that County water purveyors meet state and federal laws governing potable water supply in conjunction with the Washington State Department of Health (DOH)and State Department of Ecology(Ecology). The Whatcom County CWSP(February 2000)presents an assessment of municipal and industrial water supply needs in the County and a program to effectively provide water supply and service to customers throughout the area. The CWSP represents the continued efforts of the County in managing the County's potable water resources according to all applicable State and County public policy. The current CWSP provides further refinement of process and strategy for existing water utilities to define their role in a program consistent with adopted land use policies and projected growth strategy. The CWSP establishes agreed upon water system service boundaries, and identifies future population growth that waters systems must plan on providing over the long-term. The County is responsible for updating,maintaining,and implementing the CWSP. The February 2000 Whatcom County CWSP identified 186 Group A water systems and 183 Group B water systems that constitute the public drinking water systems currently found within Whatcom County. This Capital Facilities Plan inventories water facilities owned by public and private entities in Whatcom County,including all Group"A"Community Water Systems with 50 or more connections located within the County as identified by the State Department of Health. Urban Water Systems (within UGAs) Overview There are 14 systems that provide primary service to the County's UGAs. Inventory of Current Facilities This section of the CFP inventories each of the major 14 Group A Water Systems that provides water service to Whatcom County's UGAs. Table 49 provides an inventory of water systems that identifies the name of each water system,the portion of the County population the system serves, and the existing DOH approved connections. The inventory identifies both existing connections, as identified by DOH records,as well as an equivalent residential unit(ERU)number of connections. This is helpful to note if a water system has commercial or industrial connections that use larger amounts of water than a typical residential unit. 3 Exhibit D - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 Level of Service Capacity Analysis Water system purveyors provide a LOS standard,generally expressed in water consumption of gallons per capita(or per connection)per day. When applying this standard to existing and future population,household,and employment estimates,and comparing to the water source capacity noted in the inventory table above,a water system provider can obtain a sense for how planned growth will affect water service into the future. Each water service provider is required to prepare a water system plan(WSP) and a program of capital improvements that address the system's anticipated needs within their designated water service area, consistent with local land use plans. When the utility is requested to provide water service,it will identify that portion of the planned capital facilities as well as other installations which are necessary to provide the service necessary. As growth occurs,the full level of water service will eventually be provided throughout the service area of the utility in a planned development plan program which meets governmental requirements and minimizes overall costs to the customers. More detail on planned improvements for urban water service providers is provided under Capital Projects and Funding,below. Table 50 identifies both water system plan LOS standards,or in the absence of an LOS standard identified in the individual water system plan, a comparable Countywide standard for urban water systems identified in the Whatcom County Coordinated Water System Plan. 4 Exhibit D - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 Table 49. Water System Inventory (Serving UGAs) Connections Water Rights 1 Capacity Service Area System Name Existing Approved Qa(afy) Qi(gpm) Qi(cfs) Source Storage Population Existing System Owner or Operator Capacity Capacity Served 2 Connections (gpm) (MG) (ERU) City of Bellingham 26,259 unspecified Not 125 25,000 25.4 85,538 51,845 3 City of Bellingham determined Water District 2 552 821 See 4 See 4 See 4 1,100 26.3 1,472 N/A Water District 2 Water District 7 634 1,145 See 4 See 4 See 4 500 0.33 1,991 634 Water District 7 Lake Whatcom Water 3,719 5 unspecified 1,758.3 1,946 4,074 5 2.5 5 10,881 3,7195 Lake Whatcom Water &Sewer System City of Blaine 2,421 unspecified 2,560 2,170 3,044 4.6 4,676 8,695 6 City of Blaine Birch Bay Water 4,583 unspecified See 7 See 7 See 7 800 3.1 6,168 5,877 Birch Bay Water and Sewer System District Columbia Valley 427 400 Columbia Valley Water Water District 1,362 8 unspecified 400 0.76 2,257 974 8 District Water District 13 1,338 454 450 900 0.3 Water District 13 3619 795 3749 City of Everson 789 unspecified 601 800 1,700 0.48 2,300 801 City of Everson City of Ferndale 4,696 unspecified 2,055 2,870 5,800 2.7 10,902 N/A City of Ferndale PUD 1 N/A N/A 49,923.8 10 83 11 24,684 0.03 3212 N/A PUD 1 City of Nooksack 448 unspecified See 13 See 72 See t3 316 0.7 1,103 315 City of Nooksack City of Sumas 496 unspecified 3,744 14 3,910 14 5,100 0.5 1,300 400 City of Sumas City of Lynden 4,400 unspecified 1,792 15 11.7 15 2,917 4.2 11,445 3,820 16 City of Lynden Qa=Annual Quantity;Qi=Instantaneous Quantity;afy=acre feet per year;gpm=gallons per minute;cfs=cubic feet per second,N/A=Not Available. Exhibit D — 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council —January 28, 2014 1 Water rights are as provided by Department of Ecology comment letter from Doug Allen to David Stalheim,June 22,2009. Columbia Valley Water District instantaneous quantity(Qi)is from the District's 2013 Water System Plan Update(p.45). 2 Population source: Berk&Associates,2009. For the Columbia Valley Water District,population served is from the Water Facilities Inventory Form on the Washington State Department of Health website:https://fortress.wa.gov/doh/eh/portal/odw/si/Intro.aspx,accessed June 21,2013. For Water District 13,population served is from the Water Facilities Inventory Form on the Washington State Department of Health website:! ps://fortress.wa.gov/doh/eh/portal/odw/si/Intro.aspx,accessed July 12,2013. 3 Source: City of Bellingham Water System Plan,June 2009,page 2-9. 4 Purchases water from City of Bellingham(Department of Ecology,June 22,2009). 5 Lake Whatcom Water and Sewer District Water System Comprehensive Plan(August 2009). Note: Source and storage capacity consists of compilation of the component systems found on District's Water Facilities Inventory forms located in Section 10 of Plan. 6 Source; Blaine Water System Plan(July 2008),Table 2.7 ERU estimate for the year 2006. 7 Purchase water from City of Blaine(Department of Ecology,June 22,2009). 8 The number of connections is from the Water Facilities Inventory Form on the Washington State Department of Health website:https://fortress.wa.gov/doh/eh/portal/odw/si/Intro.aspx,accessed June 21,2013. ERUs are from the Columbia Valley Water District 2013 Water System Plan Update(p.36). 9 For Water District 13,existing connections are from the Water Facilities Inventory Form on the Washington State Department of Health website: https://fortress.wa.gov/doh/eh/portal/odw/si/Intro.aspx,accessed July 12,2013. ERUs were derived from the Water Facilities Inventory Form and the Whatcom County Water District#13 Small Water System Plan(2012),pp.13-14. 10 Of this amount,6,264 afy is for irrigation supply only(Department of Ecology,July 22,2009). 11 Source is from Whatcom County Coordinated Water System Plan's System Assessment and Inventory(March 1999). 12 Population for PUD 1 is only 32 because the majority of the PUD service area consists of commercial and industrial customers. 13 Purchases water from City of Sumas(Department of Ecology,June 22,2009) 14 Of these amounts,422.2 afy/299 gpm is to be used for streamflow mitigation only(Department of Ecology,June 22,2009) 15 Lynden also holds a surface water right for 70 afy/0.57 cfs to serve(only)the EDB and 1,2 DCP contaminated area west of the City(Department of Ecology,June 22,2009). Note: per Department of Ecology comment letter of June 22,2009,City of Lynden asserts that they have 6,623.5 afy for Qa and 14,734 gpm for Qi. DOE believes,supported by state Attorney General review,that Lynden has 1,792 afy and 11.7 cfs(5,251 gpm). DOE is currently entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with Lynden that precludes enforcement on their continued exceeded of their water right,until such time as DOE and Lynden resolve the dispute over their rights,the City acquires more rights,or City work within their existing rights in city planning and development(Department of Ecology,June 22,2009). 16 City of Lynden Water System Plan,August 2008,p.1-4,Table 1-1. Sources: Unless otherwise noted,Washington Department of Health,Washington Department of Ecology(water rights),and individual water system plans. Exhibit D - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 Table 50.Water Level of Service (LOS) Standards Service Provider LOS Standard(Average Daily Demand) City of Bellingham 199 gallons/day/ERU 1 Water District 2 210 gallons/day/ERU 2 Water District 7 221 gallons/ERU/day Lake Whatcom Water and Sewer(formerly 219 gallons/day/ERU 3 Water District 10) City of Blaine 300 gallons/household/day Birch Bay Water and Sewer District 140 gallons/capita/day° Columbia Valley Water District 215 gallons/day/ERU5 Whatcom County Water District 13 205 gallons/day/ERU6 City of Everson 300 gallons/ERU/day City of Ferndale 140 gallons/capita/day° PUD 1 140 gallons/capita/day° City of Lynden 235 gallons/day/ERU City of Nooksack 250 gallons/day/ERU' City of Sumas 225 gallons/day/residential connection 1 City of Bellingham Water System Plan,Tables 2-8 and 2-11 (June 2009). 2 Whatcom County Water District#2,Draft Water System Plan,August 4,2009,page 2-5. 3 Lake Whatcom Water and Sewer District Water System Comprehensive Plan(August 2009). Based on water demand forecast for the combined Geneva/Sudden Valley portion of the District(Appendix B of Water System Plan). 4 Where an LOS standard was not specifically identified in a water system plan,the average daily water consumption figure for urban water systems was taken from the CWSP,Table 3-4,page 3-5(February 2000). Other LOS standards found in Table 50 are provided in gallons/ERU/day or gallons/household/day rather than gallons/capita/day noted in the Whatcom County CWSP. 5 Columbia Valley Water District,2013 Water System Plan Update,2013,pp.36 and 61. 6 Whatcom County Water District#13 Small Water System Plan,2012,p.18. 7 Personal communication.Email from Erin Osborn to Matt Aamot,July 14,2009. Table 51 provides an overview of the planning horizon year and horizon year population for the latest urban water system plans in comparison to Whatcom 2029 population projections. As can be seen by a review of the table,most urban water systems plan conservatively for drinking water needs,particularly given the time it takes to seek new water supplies to serve growth. The Water District 13 WSP projected population of 1,170 is lower than the population of 1,665 projected in this CFP for 2029. The City of Everson's WSP projected population of 3,114 is lower than the population of 3,337 projected in this CFP for the 2029 horizon year. Nooksack's WSP projected population is lower than the 2,047 population projected in this CFP's horizon year. Sumas' WSP projected population of 1,625 is lower than the 2,095 anticipated in the city by 2029. Although Lake Whatcom Water District's 2027 horizon year population is lower than that projected for the district by 2029 in this CFP,the district's plan also includes a build-out population which is more conservative than the district's 2029 horizon population considered in this CFP. 7 Exhibit D - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 Table 51 also identifies each urban water system's horizon year average daily demand(ADD)in millions of gallons per day. The table shows that most of the water systems are proactively planning in a long-range and conservative fashion in order to be prepared to obtain future water resources,as needed. As can be seen from a review of individual water system descriptions in the next section,most districts have identified capital improvement projects in both the near-term and long-term planning in order to be prepared for future population growth in their districts. Birch Bay Water and Sewer District's Plan identified a near-term need for additional water sources,and is actively working with its partner,the City of Blaine,to obtain new water sources. In addition,if the DOE water rights calculation for the City of Lynden of 1,110 gpin is considered,instead of the City's source capacity estimates,then the City is expected to experience a future water deficit. Capital Projects and Funding Capital Project Funding Water services and capital improvements are funded primarily by the users of the system through water rates and general facilities charges.Water rates can be adjusted to match the funding required for capital and operational needs. Connection fees are usually charged to developers when a development necessitates expansion of the district's capacity. Improvements and new infrastructure that will benefit the majority of the district are funded through water rates,capital improvement fees,revenue bonds,or state or federal programs. These programs include the Public Works Trust Fund,a revolving loan fund designed to help local entities through low- interest loans; and the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund,which involves low-interest, federally funded loans. Table 51. Population Comparison: Water Plans and 2029 Population Projection Service Provider Horizon year of Capital Plan Horizon Year ADD 2029 Population Capital Plan Population (mgd) Projection Birch Bay Water/ 2035 14,326 2.39 9,616 Sewer City of Bellingham 2028 122,672 18.3 107,648 City of Blaine 2027 11,587 3.45 8,647 City of Everson 2022 3,114 0.46' 3,337 City of Ferndale 2026 19,334 1.84 17,550 City of Lynden 2027 20,120 4.0 15,312 City of Nooksack 2022 1,881 N/A 2 2,047 City of Sumas 2018 1,625 N/A 2 2,095 Columbia Valley 2030 N/A3 0.29 3,584 Water District 8 Exhibit D - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 Service Provider Horizon year of Capital Plan Horizon Year ADD 2029 Population Capital Plan Population (mgd) Projection PUD 1 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 32 Lake Whatcom Water 2027 10,8555 0.87 6 11,368 and Sewer(W.C. Water Dist. 10) W.C.Water Dist.2 2029 N/A' 0.25 8 1,646 2031 1,1709 0.13 10 1,665 W.C.Water Dist. 13 W.C.Water District 7 2027 2,100 11 0.20 8 2,719 N/A=Not Available All figures in this table,unless noted below,are population figures. Employment or residential equivalents are not considered in this table unless specifically noted. 1 Based on system design standard of an ADD of 300 gpd/ERU,and a horizon year estimate of 1,540 ERUs. 2 Latest WSP does not identify a horizon year ADD. 3 The Columbia Valley Water District 2013 Water System Plan Update does not include a specific 20-year population projection. A household projection of 1,149 has been derived from the Water System Plan. This is lower than the 1,249 households projected in this CFP. However,in the 2013 Water System Plan Update,the District's water service area has been reduced in size and will serve fewer households. 4 Since PUD1 provides retail water service only to areas characterized by and designated for industrial and commercial uses, the district's 2004 WSP does not provide population projections or a horizon year. PUD 1 also owns and operates the Grandview potable water supply system—retail(Jilk,Stephan,PUD 1,memorandum to Matt Aamot commenting on Whatcom County 10-Year Urban Growth Area review documents,April 20,2009). 5 Although Lake Whatcom Water and Sewer District's 2027 horizon year anticipates a population of 10,855,the plan indicates a"build-out"population of 15,192. 6 Lake Whatcom Water and Sewer District,Water System Comprehensive Plan(August 2009). See Appendix B for forecast to 2027. Also,there is a build-out forecast of 1.2 MGD. 7 Water District 2 August 2009 Draft Water System Plan does not identify population. The plan indicates that the District plans to serve a total of 1,175 ERUs,or 797 service connections(Whatcom County Water District 2 Draft Water System Plan, August 4,2009,Tables 2-9 and 2-10. Applying the City of Bellingham average household size of 2.5 and occupancy rate of 94.4%to the 797 projected water connections results in a future population of 1,881 in 2029. 8 Based on analysis of ADD/ERU compared to projected number of ERUs in WSP. 9 Whatcom County Water District#13 Small Water System Plan,2012,p.14. Water District 13 could potentially serve a total of 1,338 connections(Water System Plan,p.14). Applying the"Whatcom County Foothills"UGA average household size of 2.80 and occupancy rate of 78.4%(U.S.Census,2010)results in approximately 2,937 people that could be served by the 1,338 connections. 10 Whatcom County Water District#13 Small Water System Plan,2012,p.15. 11 Water District 7 only identifies connections rather than population. The district plans to serve 888 connections by 2027. Applying the Bellingham average household size of 2.5 and occupancy rate of 94.4%results in approximately 2,100 people served by the 888 connections in 2027. However,Water District 7 is approved to serve up to 1,145 residential service connections(State Department of Health letter from Richard Rodriguez and John Thielmann to James Trowbridge dated January 5,2009). Therefore the District could serve a population of about 2,700. Any plans involving funding mechanisms not mentioned above are explained below: • Birch Bay Water System-The District will institute Latecomer's Agreements to help fund any water main that serves property beyond that owned by the developer financing the project. • City of Everson-The City plans to pursue Community Development Block Grants and Community Investment Fund Grants to finance major water system improvements. If these applications are unsuccessful,then the low-interest loans listed above will be used. • City of Ferndale-The City may,under certain conditions,construct new infrastructure for specific areas as Utility Local Improvement Districts. 9 Exhibit D - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 • City of Lynden-In addition to the funding mechanisms listed above,the City expects to receive between$125,000 and$51,000 annually from interest income through the year 2013. Birch Bay Water and Sewer The Birch Bay Water and Sewer District obtains its water supply from the City of Blaine(well field). The district's Comprehensive Water Plan(2009) indicates that existing water supply is only sufficient through 2011 (page ES-3). The district's plan states that additional water supply, including use of surplus storage,and/or conservation will be necessary to meet the demand beyond that time. The district's 2009 Comprehensive Water Plan includes several new supply and distribution projects expected to address supply deficiencies. Besides its residential and commercial customers,the district provides water supply to BP Cherry Point Refinery through a wholesale agreement with PUD 1 (see below). The district plan's 2035 population projection of 12,913 is greater than the population projection considered for the district's water service area by 2029 in this CFP. Birch Bay's Comprehensive Water Plan indicates that it will extend future service areas to areas within the district boundaries and provides future connection policies. However,it does not provide a map identifying future major service lines. The District is bounded on the east by the Bell Bay Jackson Water Association which served approximately 231 households in 2008,mostly outside of the UGA. City of Bellingham The City of Bellingham provides retail water service to the city limits and portions of the Bellingham UGA that are not served and identified as a service area by other water purveyors. The city's water service area overlaps with that of other water districts within the UGA. The WSP does not assume that the city will take over other districts with retail water service areas identified in the Whatcom County CWSP. Instead,the city assumes that it will be the retail water purveyor for areas within its UGA that are not served by other service providers. The City of Bellingham has adequate water rights and water plant capacity to provide water service to its retail service area under all future growth scenarios listed. The City's 2009 water comprehensive plan,provides for water storage and distribution systems to all of the current city UGAs and has been adequately sized to serve the projected 2028 population of 122,672. The city anticipates that any additional storage required to accept population greater that the 2028 projection can be addressed in the next planning cycle. Future reservoir projects can be up sized to serve additional population load. The city's WSP identifies future service lines extending into the city's UGA. City of Blaine The City of Blaine's Comprehensive Water System Plan(CHS Engineers 2008)provides a city population projection of 11,587 by 2027,larger than anticipated for the city water service area by 2029 in this CFP. The city provides water to both the Birch Bay Water and Sewer District and the Bell Bay Jackson Water Association. The 2008 WSP notes that the city has adequate supply to meet projected demand through the 2027 planning period considered(City of Blaine Comprehensive Water System Plan,CHS Engineers,July 2008). The Comprehensive Water Plan 10 - Exhibit D - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 shows a series of capital improvements needed in the planning period to 2027 to maintain capacity and provide adequate distribution. The city's WSP does not appear to show water service extensions to areas within the city or UGA that are not currently served. However,the city's future service policies indicate that the city is planning to serve those areas. City of Everson The City of Everson's 2005 WSP addresses anticipated growth through the year 2022,including a city population of 3,114. The Everson water system is also addressed in the Capital Facilities Element of the Everson Comprehensive Plan,which anticipated growth through 2024,including a projected population of 4,202. Source I Water Rights The City of Everson holds water rights authorizing a maximum instantaneous pumping rate of 800 gallons per minute and a maximum annual withdrawal of 601 acre feet. Given adequate storage,which Everson has developed,the annual withdrawal maximum is the system limiting factor in terms of source of supply.The Everson WSP uses the figure of 300 gallons per day per equivalent residential unit(ERU)to analyze the system capacity. On this basis,the Everson source is equivalent to 1,788 ERUs. In 2002 the Everson water system served 1,147 ERUs of which 440 went to serve two large water association customers and 707 went to regular City customers.Assuming a total increase of 15 ERUs for the water associations from 2002 to 2029 would leave 626 ERUs of capacity to serve new growth within the City service area for a total of 1,333 ERUs for the City. For 2008 the City estimates that the Everson water system is serving 1,238 ERUs(440 ERUs for the water associations and 798 ERUs in the City). The CFP population projection equates to an 45%increase in population over the 21-year period from 2008 through 2029. Using the 2008 City ERU estimate of 798 and applying an 45%increase would result in the need for a total of 1,157 ERUs in 2029. This represents an increase of 359 ERUs.This number of ERUs falls within the non-water association capacity of 1,333. It is important to note that the above analysis includes the City's continuing to supply 455 ERUs to the two water associations. In 2004 the City instituted a series of rate increases that are intended to reduce water consumption by the associations. Under the terms of their supply agreements,the City also has the ability to reduce the total volume of water supplied to the associations. Given the above factors and considering the fact that the Everson water system plan utilized a relatively conservative 300 gallons per day per ERU,the City concludes that it has adequate source capacity to accommodate anticipated growth through the 2029 CFP horizon year. Storage In 2006 the City constructed a third water storage reservoir. The system analysis completed in 2007 indicated that total storage is equivalent to 1,900 ERUs. Adding the 455 ERUs noted above for the water associations to the 1,157 ERUs calculated previously as being necessary to supply the City's future needs in 2029 yields a total of 1,612 ERUs. This total is less than the ERUs 11 Exhibit D - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 supported by the storage capacity; therefore,the City concludes that it has more than enough storage to accommodate anticipated growth through 2029. Improvements and Financing In the past few years the city has completed two major capital projects.These include construction of a third water storage reservoir and installation of a manganese treatment facility that allows full use of the city's deep well(and full instantaneous pumping capacity). The new reservoir was paid for out of capital reserves and the manganese plant is being financed through a low-interest loan from the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund. Payment on this loan will be covered by revenue from existing water rates.The city anticipates that all new extensions to serve new development will be provided by developers. The only exception to this might be the installation of a new trunk line in conjunction with construction of a major east-west connector to serve the city's industrial zone. If the city were to participate in construction of such a facility,it is anticipated that state CERB funding and County EDI funding would be utilized. The Everson Comprehensive Plan shows the locations of some but not all of the system extensions necessary to serve new development in the Everson UGA. The city's WSP indicates that the City will serve areas of the city and its UGA that are not currently served,though the Plan does not map future service lines into these areas at this time. City of Ferndale The City of Ferndale 2006 WSP indicates that the city has adequate water rights and contracts to meet water system demands to the end of its 2026 planning period(City of Ferndale 2006). As noted in Table 51 above,the city is planning to serve a retail water service population greater than the CFP population projection to 2029. The city has identified water storage capacity improvements that will be needed in the 20-year planning period,as well as near-term distribution improvements needed to meet fire flow requirements(City of Ferndale 2006). The city has some neighboring small water associations which are surrounded by the city water service area on many sides. These include the Central Water Association,Ferndale Mobile Village,Northwest Water Association,and the Mountain View Water Association among others. These water associations each serves between 50 and 200 households in 2008. They all experience additional growth through the 2029 planning horizon because they are located mostly within the Ferndale UGA. There does not appear to be any plan for the City of Ferndale to take over these smaller water services. City of Lynden The City of Lynden WSP (Gray&Osborne,2008)indicates that the city has adequate water supply to meet the needs of population growth over the 20 year period. However,the City of Lynden and Ecology have an existing dispute over the city water rights. Where the City of Lynden indicates that it has 5.91 million gallons per day(MGD)in water rights,Ecology believes that the city only has approximately 1.599(MGD)in water rights(Fabiniak and Rodriguez,pers. Comm.). The city has entered into a memorandum of agreement(MOA)with Ecology to address long-standing water right issues between the city and Ecology. Resolution of water supply issues 12 Exhibit D - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 for City of Lynden is important for future planning in the city's water service area. Using water rights amounts that Ecology believes the city possesses,it is expected that the city will experience water supply deficits based on the Whatcom 2029 of this CFP. The city's water plan also identifies capital projects needed in the 6-year planning period,as well as some longer term projects. Six-year planning capital projects include construction of a new treatment plant with additional capacity,acquisition of land for a new reservoir,and a variety of distribution improvements to improve fire flow. The city's WSP includes a map showing future water extensions within the city limits,but not extending into the surrounding unincorporated UGA. The city borders several water associations,including five associations that receive wholesale water from the city: Berthusen Water Association,the Twin Ditch Water Association,the Meadowbrook Water Association,the EDB Service Area,and the Stickney Island Association. The Berthusen Water Association has a service area overlap with Lynden in its western UGA. The city's water system plan addresses service policies in its western UGA,and indicates that many of the five water associations mentioned above may be annexed to the city's water system if they are within the city's retail water service area. City of Nooksack The Nooksack water system is addressed in the Nooksack WSP that was approved by the Washington Department of Health on February 22,2006.The Nooksack WSP addresses the 20- year period through 2022. This includes a 2022 population of 1,881.The Nooksack water system is also addressed in the 2004 update of the Nooksack Comprehensive Plan. The Nooksack Comprehensive Plan addresses the 20-year period ending in 2024 and includes a 2024 population of 2,039. Source The City of Sumas provides the source of supply to the Nooksack water system. The City of Sumas provides up to 199 acre feet of water annually to Nooksack per the terms of a mutual supply agreement between the two cities and the Nooksack Valley Water Association(NVWA). The City of Sumas has indicated a willingness to supply an increased quantity of water to the City of Nooksack if necessary to support growth,and the City of Sumas has more than adequate water rights to be able to provide such an increased supply. Storage The City of Nooksack shares storage with the Nooksack Valley Water Association. Combined storage includes three reservoirs totaling 700,000 gallons. The Nooksack WSP indicates that the City has enough storage capacity to serve a population of 1,881. The CFP projects a 2029 population allocation of 2,047 for the City of Nooksack. Although the total storage described above is jointly owned,NVWA utilizes more than 70%of the total storage.Additional analysis will be necessary to determine whether enough additional storage capacity is available or can be made available to accommodate growth under the CFP projections without constructing additional storage capacity.However,if additional storage capacity is needed,the City is 13 Exhibit D - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 prepared to participate in such a project to ensure that new growth under the CFP can be fully accommodated through 2029. Improvements and Financing All system expansions necessary to serve new development will be paid for by developers.The City is currently preparing construction plans for a new booster pump that will increase system pressures to well above State minimum standards throughout the entire system. This improvement will be paid for out of capital reserves. Similarly,if construction of a new 500,000 gallon water storage reservoir is necessary,the City will share the costs with NVWA and will pay its share out of capital reserves. The Nooksack WSP shows the locations of some but not all of the system extensions necessary to serve new development in the Nooksack UGA. City of Sumas The Sumas water system is addressed in the Sumas WSP that was approved by the Washington Department of Health on December 4,2000. The Sumas WSP covers the 20-year period from 1998 to 2018 including a 2018 population of 1,625. The City is currently in the process of updating its WSP. In addition to municipal customers,the City of Sumas supplies wholesale water to the Sumas Rural Water Association,the Nooksack Valley Water Association and the City of Nooksack. Source I Water Rights The City of Sumas owns and operates seven wells located in two major well fields(Sumas well field and May Road well field).These wells provide a significant quantity of water on both an instantaneous and annual basis. The City holds numerous water rights that allow a total withdrawal of approximately 3,322 acre feet of water annually.Based on past and ongoing analyses,the Sumas well fields and water rights provide a source of supply well in excess of the future needs of the City's retail and wholesale customers through the year 2029.For example,the existing Sumas WSP indicates that in 2018,with conservation included,the Sumas water system would still have over 1,000 acre feet of excess capacity. Storage The City of Sumas owns a 500,000 gallon storage reservoir that provides storage for both the City and the Sumas Rural Water Association(SRWA).The Sumas WSP indicates that the Sumas reservoir provided sufficient capacity to meet the City's needs through 2018.However,the WSP also indicates that to serve both the City and the SRWA systems an additional 60,000 gallons of storage would be needed by 2005 and an additional 160,000 gallons of storage would be needed by 2019. In 2002 the SRWA constructed an additional 500,000 gallon reservoir that provides storage to both SRWA and the City. The City of Sumas is in the process of updating its water system plan.The preliminary storage analysis indicates that the City's 500,000 gallon reservoir is sufficient to meet the City's needs through 2029 and the combined storage of 1,000,000 gallons is sufficient to meet the needs of the combined systems. 14 — — Exhibit D - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 Improvements and Financing System extensions required to serve new development will be provided by developers.A system of new water mains will be extended into the City's UGA as new developments are approved following annexation.The City does not have any plans for major City-funded water system improvements. Ongoing operation and maintenance costs are covered by existing water rates. Columbia Valley Water District The Columbia Valley Water District's WSP(2013) indicates that the district has sufficient supply to meet the district's water needs to its 2030 planning horizon and beyond so long as unaccounted water loss can be reduced. The district's capital projects include water main and pressure zone improvements to help meet growing demand expected within the district's boundaries. The district also has plans to address unaccounted water loss,which should enable the district to utilize water more efficiently. The district's plan generally shows a schematic representation of future water lines in the north service area. PUD 1 PUD 1 provides water service to both the Grandview industrial/commercial service area north of Ferndale,as well the Cherry Point UGA(an industrial area). PUD l's Comprehensive Water Plan(Donald E.Wright 2004) does not measure water demand in population as most other WSPs do. The majority of the district's water service customers are industrial and commercial customers. The PUD's Comprehensive Water Plan indicates that it has sufficient water supply to meet the district's needs to the end of the district plan's 20-year planning period(2024). The plan includes a series of capital improvements including the acquisition of other potable water system treatment plants and water distribution and storage improvements. Although the district's plan does not include maps showing future water service extensions,portions of the narrative on future water service indicate the district's future water service plans to serve its entire district. Lake Whatcom Water and Sewer District (Water District 10) The Lake Whatcom Water and Sewer District Water System Comprehensive Plan(2009) indicates that the district has adequate supply to meet its 20-year planning needs. The district takes water supply and provides service to four separate areas: Sudden Valley,Geneva,North Shore/City,and North Shore/Wells. City of Bellingham water is provided to most of these subareas. The North Shore/City subarea is served partially by City of Bellingham water and partially by well water,while the North Shore/Wells subarea is served exclusively by well water. A review of population projections found in Table 51 indicate that the district is planning for less growth by 2027 than projected in this CFP to 2029. However,the district's build-out plans are for a population of 15,192,which is larger than the CFP 2029 horizon year population projections for the district. The district's plan identifies a number of capital improvement projects for maintaining system reliability and distribution with expected growth. The district does not specifically identify future water service lines within the district. 15 Exhibit D - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 Water District 2 Water District 2's Draft WSP (2009)includes plans to serve approximately 797 connections by 2029. When translating this to population,the district is planning for a population that is slightly larger than that being projected to 2029 for the district in this CFP. The district's plan identifies capital improvements needed by the district over the 20-year period ending in 2029. These improvements include the systematic replacement of the district's water distribution system over the 20-year period which in many cases will address fire flow issues. Additional projects necessary to provide fire flow in the Bellingham UGA have also been identified and are likely to be paid for by developers. The plan indicates that the district has enough water supply for its planning period. The district's plan does not specifically identify future water service lines within the district. Water District 2 and City of Bellingham have an overlap in service areas south of the Bellingham Airport according to the County's CWSP. Water District 13 Table 51 indicates that Water District 13's WSP (2012)anticipates a smaller population than the district population being considered under the CFP 2029 horizon year. However,the WSP also indicates that the State Department of Health has approved more connections than needed to serve the population growth projected by the District(p. 14). The Water District 13 Water System Plan indicates that it has adequate water supply to serve its service area by the district's planning horizon year of 2031. The district's capital improvement plan identifies a variety of projects that are needed to ensure adequate water service. The district's plan does not show future service extensions within its service area. Water District 7 The Whatcom County Water District 7 WSP(Reichardt&Ebe 2008)indicates that the district has enough water supply to serve its customers in the 20-year period ending in 2028. However, the District does not plan for as large a population as is being projected under the CFP 2029 horizon for population projections(see Table 51). The district's plan indicates a need for a new storage facility in one of the pressure zones to improve water pressure, as well as a variety of distribution system improvements in order to maintain adequate water service in the district's planning period. The district's plan shows future service extensions in figures found within the water system's service area. Capital Projects and Funding The urban water service providers have identified capital projects as noted in Table 52 below, broken down by service provider,to accommodate the future needs of urban water service in Whatcom County. Note that specific revenue sources are not identified in Table 52 below. Water district providers obtain their revenue from a variety of sources,including but not limited to connection charges,as noted at the beginning of this section. 16 Exhibit D - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 Table 52. Urban Area Water Projects Project 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016- Total Costs/Revenue 2029 (thousands$) %veil ys ��4� \ Jv"`.. !, `�lFj$:\y��\`�.�ISTAIR,R i,�/%/ ?/.. "r.:xe.�� �`���v��\1,.. "� -t \\\�. \� �l��e .� �y',� r T��G/ m .F. :L\ .) .:•�^ i\ Blrc s> Styr �t&Seer b t sJ a `\ t % i/,f i ���ws ztk t 4yt,4 0v �\\\� •j�.,..;fz s ,�,,��.'ry 3 a>:::,;.\� t r,,..:?rvzki,��t� mod/,�. :� !U',��r�;Z'������\� \.,��iz,�,.��.,s' /j/./J�,�;..�.,... New Booster Pump Station- Portal Way at Blaine Connection (SU-3) Cost 446 446 General Facilities 446 446 Charge New Source and 10"Transmission Main at Portal Way(SU-4) Cost 1,260 1,260 General Facilities 1,260 1,260 Charge 16"Transmission Main from Blaine Rd Booster Pump Station along Hall and Dearborn to Drayton Harbor Rd.(SU-5) Cost 791 791 General Facilities 791 791 Charge Local Facilities Charge 14"Transmission Main on Blaine Rd from Double R Ranch to Alderson Rd.(SU-6) Cost 688 688 Booster Pump Station Upgrade at Blaine Rd.(SU- 7) Cost 526 526 18"Transmission Main on Blaine Rd from Blaine meter to Blaine Rd Booster Pump Station(SU-8) 17 Exhibit D - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 Project 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016- Total CostslRevenue 2029 (thousands$) Cost 1,178 1,178 Replace Birch Point Reservoir at existing site(ST- 2) Cost 1,400 1,400 General Facilities 1,400 1,400 Charge Rates Kickerville Reservoir upgrades at existing site(ST- 3). Cost 667 667 Rates 667 667 Replacement Semiahmoo Reservoir(ST-4) Cost 1,018 1,018 General Facilities 1,018 1,018 Charge Rates Point Whitehorn Reservoir at Point Whitehorn(ST-5) Cost 606 606 General Facilities 606 606 Charge 3"Distribution Main Replacement along Birch Bay Drive(T-4) Cost 366 366 Rates 366 366 Abandon Distribution Main from Loft Lane to Gemini St.(T-5) Cost 3 3 Rates 3 3 18 Exhibit D - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 Project 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016- Total Costs/Revenue 2029 (thousands$) Waste Water Treatment Plant Meter Relocations to Pt.Whitehorn Booster Pump Station area(T-6) Cost 45 45 Rates 45 45 Point White horn Booster Pump Station at Pt. Whitehorn(T-7) Cost 122 122 General Facilities 122 122 Charge Replace Distribution Main from Pt. Whitehorn Booster Pump Station to Pt. Whitehorn Rd.(T- 8) Cost 137 137 General Facilities 137 137 Charge Birch Point Booster Pump Station at existing site(T-9) Cost 526 526 General Facilities 526 526 Charge 12"Transmission Main from Birch Point Booster Pump Station to replacement Semiahmoo Reservoir(T-10) Cost 785 785 General Facilities 785 785 Charge Semiahmoo Booster Pump Station(T-11) 19 Exhibit D - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 Project 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016- Total CostslRevenue 2029 (thousands$) Cost 395 395 General Facilities 395 395 Charge 10"Transmission Main generally at Birch Point along Birch Point Rd and along southeast side of Cannery Hill(T- 12) Cost 2,566 2,566 General Facilities 2,566 2,566 Charge Local Facilities Charge Main Replacement at multiple locations in District(T-13) Cost 500 500 Rates 500 500 � IVv, r .U/i W - !c �N: W4PI\ N VR ors� � � i,/ /,y � ii U, t w otkent- ham .,0 �E mt� za ,s,a, A %/�0 /r % `9f \f / King Mountain Reservoir(ST-2) (1.9 MG) Cost 450 5,890 6,340 Upper Yew Reservoir(1.35 MG)(ST-1) Cost 5,919 5,919 Padden Reservoir 457 South Pressure Zone (ST-3)(2.5 MG) Cost 8,997 8,997 730 Alabama Hill Pressure Zone Reservoir(1.5 MG)(ST-4) Cost 4,858 4,858 519 Dakin&Yew Pressure Zone Reservoir(2.2 MG)(ST-5) 20 Exhibit D - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 Project 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016- Total Costs/Revenue 2029 (thousands$) Cost 5,937 5,937 New 40`h Street Pump Station (PS-1) Cost 2,664 2,664 New Kerney Road Pump Station (PS-2) Cost 300 3,950 4,250 Consolidated Pump Station Upgrade(PS-3) Cost 1,295 1,295 Reveille Street Pump Station Upgrade(PS-4) Cost 1,503 1,503 New 950 Zone Constant Pressure Pump Station located near Upper Yew Reservoir(PS-5) Cost 1,705 1,705 New James Street Pump Station (PS-6) Cost 2,980 2,980 870 Upper Yew Reservoir West Connection(PL-1) Cost 1,702 1,702 870 Upper Yew Reservoir East Connection(PL-2) Cost 1,689 1,689 King Mountain Reservoir West Connection(PL-3) Cost 2,853 2,853 21 Exhibit D - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 Project 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016- Total Costs/Revenue 2029 (thousands$) Transmission Main Extension to 950 Rezone Area (located near Upper Yew Reservoir)(PL-4) Cost 459 459 Yew Street Transmission Main Extension (PL-5) Cost 2,060 2,060 Annual Main Replacement(PL- 6) Cost 600 2,600 1,600 1,600 1,600 8,000 Mt. Baker Highway Replacement II (PL-8) Cost 100 400 400 900 Hydraulic Model 3-year updates (PN-1) Cost 100 100 Metering Program (M-1)(throughout service area) Cost 2,000 2,000 2,000 3,000 9,000 Nooksack Diversion Passage(DV-1) Cost 10,000 10,000 New Source: Prospecting for new wells and water rights(SU- 1) Cost 200 200 New Source: Completion of Well#8.1 (SU-8) Cost 210 210 22 Exhibit D - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 Project 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016- Total Costs/Revenue 2029 (thousands$) Telemetry System Upgrades including system for Well#9(SU-9) Cost 20 20 40 Replacement of Chlorination Treatment System and associated building(SU-10) Cost 250 250 Rehabilitate or reconstruct Well 2 and other wells in well field(SU-11) Cost 50 50 Replace transmission main from Birch Bay Water District north to Hughes Avenue and east to I-5(T/D-4) Cost 1,250 1,250 Construction of 630-zone Booster Pump Station (BPS-1) Cost 1,500 1,500 Sweet Road Water Main Upsizing East toward well field- Phase 1 (T/D-5) Cost 1,250 1,250 Sweet Road Water Main Upsizing East toward well field- Phase 2(T/D-6) Cost 1,250 1,250 Sweet Road Water Main Upsizing East toward well field- Phase 3(T/D-7) Cost 1,250 1,250 23 Exhibit D - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 Project 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016- Total CostslRevenue 2029 (thousands$) E Street Replacement of 6" main with 8"main and associated pipe on E Street between 6th and 12th Streets(T/D- 13) Cost 145 145 11th Street Pipe Replacement between H Street and B Street(T/D- 14) Cost 250 250 Addition of Standby Power Generator at Lincoln Park for Booster Pump Stations#2 and #5(BPS-3) Cost 115 115 Water Distribution Extension(East Blaine)Local Improvement Districts Cost 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 2,000 8,000 Reservoir#1 Replacement(ST- 1)(location to be determined in conjunction with project SU-1) Cost 500 4,000 4,500 Construction of Additional Reservoir for 330 Zone(ST-4) (location to be determined) Cost 500 5,100 5,600 Construction of East Blaine Reservoir for 630 Zone(ST-3) Cost 2,500 2,500 24 Exhibit D- 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 Project 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016- Total Costs/Revenue 2029 (thousands$) Water System Plan Update(P-2) Cost 60 60 G C ol o \ \\ g � � %3 ��\ v�PN � \� (, i l/� v�?Sr \\\ � � y of eroon r lA \ \\aze / f�t-4 _ ;,k /lAt ` 4\.. Miscellaneous Capital Projects Cost 23.9 24.7 48.6 Mission Road Expansion Project Cost TBD TBD z ''vyv ?"”5"``Ei.`� / n �\ ,041�t�^\ -- ry' //s '���\\,�� c\`mreop , t\�c�\" n'i'1 1 r; 'yor 3� \\�\\l 1 .'y7' ,z: i"'� ,ec5`'\\��j.,r',�y 2'0 i9%, ��\\ f if'1 \ 4 \\� '°fir �`z \ ys'`��\r. /� c �� .1. ✓,.- fie. � /"- �5%�xt�;r \ �': ../��.�. �� ... �: �/// \.\\\ u �\ � .1.v Upgrade Pipe in Labounty,Sunset to 1-5(ref#38) Cost 365 365 Upgrade Pipe in Pacific Place(ref# 39) Cost 85 85 Upgrade the Axton Pressure Zone by Moving Pressure Reduction Valves and Pipe in Deer Creek Drive(ref# 43&44) Cost 115 115 Water System Plan Update(no ref#) Cost 100 100 New Tank, Booster Station& Connecting Pipeline North of Smith(ref#40& 41) Cost 3,185 3,185 I \�\ \�� o l:� r\\m '�L i," % /ass ro f/// ri \ /N r `� \` ,mitts/// / U.\, o ➢tort'.' rider �s e rah %v �, '�� L4 //"' r /s// �� Additional Treatment Plant Upgrade(WS-2) 25 Exhibit D - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 Project 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016- Total Costs/Revenue 2029 (thousands$) Cost 2,000 12,000 7,000 21,000 Site and Construct 1.0 MG Reservoir in northeastern part of service area(ST-1) Cost 250 250 Replace undersized water mains along Glenning Street and 14th Street(D- 3) Cost 425 425 Replace undersized water mains along British Columbia Avenue(D-4) Cost 103 103 Replace undersized water mains along Garden Drive and Garden Circle(D- 5) Cost 576 576 Replace undersized water mains along Line Road for fire flow (D-6) Cost 83 83 Install water main along 8th Street between Grover Street and Liberty Street(D-7) Cost 105 105 Replace undersized water mains along South Prairie Drive and Park View Drive east of Depot Road(D-8) Cost 238 238 26 Exhibit D - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 Project 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016- Total Costs/Revenue 2029 (thousands$) Replace undersized water mains along East Badger Road for fire flow(East)(D- 9) Cost 536 536 Replace undersized water mains along East Badger Road for fire flow(Center) (D-10) Cost 118 118 Replace undersized water mains along East Badger Road for fire flow(West) (D-11) Cost 770 770 Replace pipes in Benson Road for improved fire flow (D-12) Cost 160 160 Replace undersized water mains along Cedar Drive and West Park Street to Cedar Court and along West Park Street north of Cedar Drive(D- 13) Cost 259 259 Install water main connecting Woodcreek Road and Double Ditch Road(D-14) Cost 125 125 Replace undersized water mains along South Meadow Lane and Meadow Lane(D-15) 27 Exhibit D - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 Project 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016- Total CostslRevenue 2029 (thousands$) Cost 209 209 Install a water main connecting 19`h Street Court and South Pine Court(D-16) Cost 41 41 Expansion of water system to Northeastern part of service area (M-1) Cost 926 926 f✓/X z la/ ii/i//;,,�� SzjNat1t,�, ��\ 3^ r�. '� `yi/y ✓/x 11:: 1 -��`��\\q\' i. .,l F„t'7 i i uity crdk'tack#M.r? C o y g yr�G i/ y j/"tea \� \tkM I - V Ax 0 0✓ a \*-�. „-stw._,�, ..,tm irk it , a- , ✓ ✓ r,-i,_�r, , , t,/.f��.,, �'.tAA�., w �y� F' .r r.. oaS,x,,,r a�1',, New Booster Pump at Gillies Road(south of city limits) Cost 250 2 Cash Reserves m7 Vaik- aR �Wa f.i/...Ef OVWP 3 t � s..... sue.tai-f✓v i+/✓..r/ /',✓i#010 ea�r\h\�* :`hZ\v"S:.' 9 L/�y1 \.,[ \..u�,,.:,. fsLG /.✓iy �yd } �� ��.,'�" `�,£¢ %ly�y ,�/��r%��-y z "aN��\ \�-\.�1�i�� ;.. r%„/1 -1.�1i ..i33R�S � i �,ly ' ��✓%%fi /��'7y \ � ✓ ��\w�. No Projects currently planned 3 zr€3\'�,q f�\\\N_.p I �S e-�r,� OV r / \1 �, �,�,��P2l i r ASV"��\\���.�\�\\��ri\.` 4,,,f :1 y� UtAt 2 ..�fir- //i. ✓,,,ryi s t i�3 MMVSP n:�w %4:t,•s. VIAR \... ���\AW*I "- ��\A.,. ./i > �. : ✓/ Y.. :.may wa ,^✓i ✓iy ,ff'.3 r`:3:<ut y �1�:.z-,t, Y Cross Connection Control Program (OP-1) Cost 2 Emergency Response Program(OP-6) Cost 7.5 Water Conservation Program(OP-7) Cost 5 Grandview- Northgate Supply Reliability(IMP-1) Cost 20 28 Exhibit D - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 Project 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016- Total Costs/Revenue 2029 (thousands$) Grandview- Northgate Chlorination Reliability(IMP-2) Cost 1 Water System Telemetry and Alarms-Phase 2 Cost 70 Meter Testing and Replacement (IMP-4) Cost 2.5 Grandview- Northgate Emergency Power (IMP-5) Cost 15 Grandview- Northgate Reservoir Piping (IMP-6) Cost 5 Cherry Point Potable System Acquisition(EXP- 1) Cost 100 Cherry Point Potable Water System Storage (EXP-1.1) Cost 250 Cherry Point Potable Water System Treatment (EXP-1.2) Cost 10 Cherry Point Water System Transmission System Cost 500 29 Exhibit D - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 Project 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016- Total Costs/Revenue 2029 (thousands$) Cherry Point Potable Water System Emergency Power (EXP-1.4) Cost 75 Expansion of Water System to Unserved Areas of Grandview- Northgate Distribution System(EXP 2) Cost 1,000 Grandview- Northgate Additional Storage (OP-101) Cost 75 Grandview- Northgate Ferndale Intertie (IMP-101) Cost 10 Cherry Point Potable Water System Storage (IMP-102) Cost 750 Cherry Point Potable Water System Treatment (IMP-103) Cost 400 Grandview- Northgate Water Distribution Expansion(EXP- 101) Cost 500 Cherry Point Potable Water Distribution Expansion(EXP- 102) Cost 500 30 Exhibit D - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 Project 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016- Total Costs/Revenue 2029 (thousands$) 1 r .5,'..x- ��,z-mi ,s iii �' `R Z r o pmq-\�ti tmt4\ \\�\\`wie w\�� 0�\sww; f/F ow ww s-✓l 3 zr rx La�(evvhateo m tt euite'`.1Jis tut fort'ra ri h ate Disftict i11]]�\�\ z r. ,M 11 a � \ E.: .c.. Y � r� �, r-._ i r- r//. �;. �t ��\o� w��\.\\�. �� .._\\x�a::�:::�.�o :F.�\ rl'�yr r�j�„ �a......�....,_��.....aa'G'�``a.....,,fi�,�.r..�� r.�✓-r.:e r .__.�.�<,�.. ,,�_.a...�,.a, nro...,,�...�,...e�a.A�v.�-��_ ._...�-v v�,._„�.�a_ _�_�A� `\_1\a.�3.�� Engineering reports benefiting future customers Cost 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 21.6 54 Computers(office server)-Replace hardware, network security,and operating system Cost 5.6 5.6 5.6 11.2 28 Computers(staff workstations)- Replace/Update Hardware, operating system, and software Cost 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 21.6 54 Meter Reading Handheld Data Collectors Cost 10.4 10.4 Computers- Replace Utility Billing Printer Cost 2.0 2.0 2.0 6 Sudden Valley Water Treatment Plant-Replace Generator Transfer Switch Cost 54 54 Sudden Valley Water Treatment Plant-Raw Water Pump Emergency Bypass Port Cost 5.4 5.4 Water Service Rebuilds Cost 50.4 50.4 50.4 151.2 Replace Pressure Reduction Valves (PRVs) 31 Exhibit D - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 Project 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016- Total Costs/Revenue 2029 (thousands$) Cost 14 14 28 Smoke Blower Cost 5.6 5.6 Trailerable Genset Cost 33.6 33.6 Replace Backhoe Cost 134.6 134.6 Sudden Valley Water Treatment Plant- Emergency Generator Upgrade Cost 325 325 Replace Office Staff Vehicle Cost 17.9 17.9 35.8 Sudden Valley Water Treatment Plant-Raw Water Pump Motors Cost 29.1 29.1 Blow-off Installations at Dead Ends Cost 33.6 33.6 Reservoirs- Inspection and Maintenance Cost 24.2 24.2 Replace Camera Equipment Cost 33.6 33.6 Replace Tool Truck Cost 56 56 56 168 Division 22 Reservoir(0.5 MG) Cost 664.7 664.7 32 Exhibit D - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 Project 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016- Total Costs/Revenue 2029 (thousands$) Replace Meter Reading Van Cost 22.4 22.4 Eagleridge Fire Pump Control Upgrade Cost 56 56 Sudden Valley Replace AC and 2"PVC Water Lines Cost 82.4 82.4 Lowell&Oriental P RVs Cost 185 185 Sudden Valley Water Treatment Plant Clearwell Overflow Drain Cost 80.9 80.9 Agate Heights Water Treatment Plant-Additional Capacity Cost 300 300 Geneva Area Water Main Replacement Cost 158.6 907.9 1,066.5 Geneva Street Water Main Replacement Cost 232 232 Sudden Valley Water Treatment Plant-Transfer and Transmission Pump Cost 425 425 Replace Sudden Valley Water Treatment Plant Filters Cost 17.9 17.9 35.8 33 Exhibit D - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 Project 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016- Total Costs/Revenue 2029 (thousands$) Replace Small Dump Truck Cost 75.7 75.7 Replace Mini Excavator Cost 58.2 58.2 Replace Light Truck Cost 28 28 Replace Fire Hydrants Cost 403.5 403.5 Inspection and Maintenance of Reservoirs Cost 24.2 24.2 Replace Dump Truck(used) Cost 53.9 53.9 r&immem ��I4ii—. * \,:" a ._.n 11 �-_ 1- .'�.ayv�a.,S� .��,� i yne\, Y"a\� .. <h��\�c� �.. Fort Bellingham Rd,replace 4" pipe with 8"pipe Cost 62 Olympic View Drive, replace 4" with 8"pipe Cost 50 50 Howard Street, replace 4"pipe with 8"pipe Cost 32 32 Bancroft RD, replace 4"pipe with 8"pipe Cost 62 62 Marine Drive, replace 8"with 16" pipe Cost 704 34 Exhibit D - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 Project 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016- Total Costs/Revenue 2029 (thousands$) Update Water System Plan Cost 15 15 i /" F.. .:rte ���/iyz:�;�. '7!!a \\\\`ti�..Y<�:�:�����C::y....�'���::s"y"z-""'/�� .,,r::. ,�.. \ �� -...� E i ! �..:�'. Qii��V�i to rRall.�?'ti`�f,'.f ,-,emu iF _ , O\\ �..��y.\x ITAns.�� s //z� ���'< ��ti� x,z�u-� � �,,. ,-.. ,. t e�i kt*Vt.a;SraV1<a- A.��"C�vi.4tIVIOf;ac✓/.., z,.tl%,. ,.h,ka. Upgrade Britton Road Pump Station Cost 60 60 Install 8"Main on Emerald Lake Way Cost 220 220 Construct Emerald Lake Tank Cost 200 200 Upgrade Roma Road Pump Station Cost 40 40 Construct Academy Booster Pump Station Cost 180 180 Upgrade the Pumps and Pressure Reducing Valve in the Sapphire Trail Pump Station Cost 65 65 Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition System Cost 75 75 Upgrade the Pressure Reducing Valve in Control Vault A to 6" Cost 15 15 35 Exhibit D - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 Project 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016- Total Costs/Revenue 2029 (thousands$) Upgrade the Pressure Reducing Valve in Control Vault B to 6" Cost 15 15 Remove the Woodlake Meadows Pressure Reducing Valves Cost 15 15 Replace Ex.4" water main on Emerald Lake Way&Swamp Creek Road with 8" Cost 180 180 Replace Ex.4" Transmission Main on Emerald Lake Way with 8" Cost 145 145 Replace 6"Main on Hillsdale with 10" Cost 180 180 Connect Wildhaven Crest with Vineyard Road Cost 125 125 Install 8"Main along Toad Lake Road& Squalicum Mt.Rd. Construct new pump station. Cost 300 300 36 Exhibit D - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 Columbia Valley Water District Project Costs(thousand $) 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016-29 Total Replace AC 1,103 1,103 Mains Replace cul-de-sac 122 1,931 2,053 Lines Residential Meter 8 27 28 28 224 315 Replacement Service Line 139 139 Replacement Fire Hydrant 10 11 11 86 118 Replacement Water Main 10 11 11 86 118 Emergency Repairs Financial Plan/ 8 8 Rate Study Update Vulnerability 11 11 Assessment Update Future Water 8 8 Supply Study Comprehensive Water 49 49 System Plan Update Telemetry System 136 136 Upgrade/Replacement Demo abandoned 51 51 Reservoir#1 Campers Tanks Debris 46 46 Removal and Channel Solar Retrofit 71 71 for Office Reservoir 9 9 Maintenance Leak Detection 11 11 &Audit Well Head 3 3 Security Fencing Booster Pump 196 196 Replacements Well Pump 59 59 Replacements Retrofit Campers 21 21 Tanks Santa Fe Pressure-Tests, 27 27 Analysis and Design 37 Exhibit D — 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council — January 28, 2014 Columbia Valley Water District Project Costs(thousand$) 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016-29 Total Santa Fe Pressure Issue 72 72 Construction New Office/Shop 403 403 Facility Replace Well/Source 13 13 Flow Meters Replace Full-Size 7 7 Pick-up(used) Staff Communications 1 1 Upgrade Back-up Generator 6 6 for Office Water District No. 13 53 53 Emergency Tie Water.District No 135 Project Costs 2013 2010 2011 2012 201201 .. ... (thousand$) 4 2015 2016-2029 Total Emergency Backup 100 Power at Well sites Storage Tank Piping 50 Modifications Replace/add Valves 2 2 2 2 28 36 at System Junctions Install 8" Loop from Well 86 # 1 to Fall Valley Rd. Install 8" Loop-Clear Valley 90 Dr. to Boulder Valley Ln. Rate Study 25 25 1 City of Lynden,City's Water System Plan rolls up years 2014-2027. Projects found in 2014-2027 timeframe are shown in total column only. 2 City of Nooksack's Water System Plan does not include projects within the timeframe of the Whatcom County CFP. This specific project actually going to bid in 2009. (Personal communication email Erin Osbom email to Matt Aamot,July 14, 2009.) 38 Exhibit D - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Water Systems) Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 3 City of Sumas'Water System Plan does not include projects within the timeframe of the Whatcom County CFP. No projects are currently shown in the City's 6-year or 20-year planning periods(Personal communication email Erin Osborn to Matt Aamot,July 14,2009.) 4 PUD#1 Water System Plan does not include a specific year of improvement for capital projects. Projects are prioritized by near term(2004-2010)and long term(2011-2023)projects(October 2004 Comprehensive Water Plan,Public Utility District #1,Donald C.Wright,Consulting Engineer,Chapter 9). For purposes of this CFP,all projects are only listed in the total column. 5 Some projects in the Whatcom County Water District#13 Small Water System Plan(2012)do not have implementation dates. Amend the "References"section of the Whatcom County 20-Year Capital Facilities Plan (Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan Appendix E)as follows: Columbia Valley Water District. 2013 Water System Plan Update. (WA) 2013. Whatcom County Water District#13. 2012. Whatcom County Water District# 13 Small Water System Plan. (WA) Revised August 2012. 39 Exhibit E - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Schools) Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 Exhibit E Whatcom County 20-Year Capital Facilities Plan Amendments (School Provisions) NOTE: For brevity and ease in viewing the proposed changes, portions of the Whatcom County 20-Year Capital Facilities Plan that are not being modified by this ordinance are not shown below. The text and maps that are not shown below are retained as previously adopted. Exhibit E - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Schools) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 Amend the "Schools"chapter of the Whatcom County 20-Year Capital Facilities Plan (Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan Appendix E)as follows: Schools Overview This section evaluates the seven public school districts that serve Whatcom County. Inventory of Current Facilities Inventories of the school districts' existing facilities located in Whatcom County are presented in this section. The inventories are summarized below. Each inventory lists the schools in alphabetical order for each level of school(i.e.,elementary,middle/junior high)and high/senior high school). The inventory also includes the number of students that each school can accommodate(i.e.,its enrollment capacity). Where detailed information is available,enrollment capacity has been broken down into permanent enrollment capacity and portable enrollment capacity(temporary or moveable facilities). Bellingham School District The Bellingham School District is the largest school district in the County. The current enrollment capacity of the Bellingham School District can be found in Table 53 below. 2 Exhibit E - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Schools) Adopted by the County Council-January 28, 2014 Table 53. Bellingham School District Current Enrollment Capacity School Current Enrollment Portable Enrollment Total Enrollment Capacity Capacity Capacity ��'�:� c ���\\a� �. . .,�� / �����. �� �\Z°may„„�r...;° �//..� //l :L a� \�\\��' t5��:��,y<:tt.. s..\ �\::.V�a�a�����=s��. �_ G...� ?3�,r„� �.. ..�\��\�...�.,\\,..._t�'��_�..,Jif, /��%r.. Jl k;.�.,,�\,� .�\\\_ Alderwood 338 45 383 Birchwood 203 113 315 Carl Cozier 360 0 360 Columbia 225 0 225 Geneva 450 45 495 Happy Valley 338 90 428 Larrabee 158 68 225 Lowell(temporarily closed) 293 0 293 Northern Heights 405 0 405 Parkview 338 23 360 Roosevelt 405 0 405 Silver Beach 405 0 405 Sunnyland 270 90 360 Wade King 450 0 450 Subtotal 4,635 473 5,108 } •,6�.':f /. �r✓��. „�. .. ` •,`Y*, a k �\�\t:. �[ ��I�1���J/rye-- �,>���1�(--,f [� #�k'� ..'” ��`a`� s���\ 4ar`rom''..•.-` .i F.�r/r/,/°. 1 #s,,..{{.7 11�����.�s,' z i f/�, r�.� �,.=,�`e ,�:'s`.\;��\�;.;.�,,,•�-� � ��ii /��� /�a r3i � ���'��. .�\��.�,,_a�` � .�-.. .,ate �'�7 %./f rr��i.�;�l @s iii�L,ic�Pi�iS�/� �', '�:.`.. �`-�\��� ..z�y��j/�S�',���A��%�ii/���r��������r:�'.�'\.'0�.�`�.��\v\�.�...�e .y��r��ji1 Fairhaven 650 0 650 Kulshan 650 25 675 Shuksan 525 0 525 Whatcom 450 100 550 Subtotal 2,275 125 2,400 'f\�e*W iMW� �r- 4 .r.N\.\ ,S \� ?r�2fr � ✓ / i g rli i\ U \ tia �s *A«O » . 7JOf��Lk���>;a:.,, v ; \� , ��1�.�� O/. /i�✓ �t�M,�: \ .a' 9?i Bellingham 1,050 0 1,050 Sehome 1,000 25 1,025 Squalicum 1,200 25 1,225 Subtotal 3,250 50 3,300 Total K-12 10,160 648 10,808 Source: Bellingham School District No.501 Capital Facilities Plan 2009-2015(July 2009). 3 Exhibit E - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Schools) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 Blaine School District The Blaine School District encompasses the City of Blaine and its UGA,as well as the Birch Bay UGA, and outlying rural areas. The school district inventory of facilities can be found in Table 54 below. Table 54. Blaine School District Current Enrollment Capacity School Permanent Portable Enrollment Total Enrollment Enrollment Capacity Capacity Capacity N��/-Z StAitafa \\\� mt �lK z v j Fy N\\ i� \\\te r �` ,°-HIV rri iG//�%/��i�"1`�\�\\\ \acs �\��*�''� ;1;:8 �:�,G� � ��\\�.. Vic- \,_ \r�✓e3 r�r1�. c� w \��-a.�t�=:�-'L�, .,����/,��%���`�"';��r�`'„'?S.�\ �.r�c°��M��C� yi o;o z fir;:mmw—otgw ula Nor ..; Raom «..atipMEN MA40; Y g,i�l kl,nu om\a Blaine(P-2) 440 0 440 r::\vgy y lFyrdr� S 3 E -�; tr' roi r�/Js0 i Y -�� �< OW C t y 1' ES2 L y �.��ca cmtg//e44.*l01a{ d.0�F�;2'ew.i\;ILtk�.\ a3 ...'rte O'Aita __�� :a �`��..���;. � �..;.:crc f._l,.r,,.i,:;..,rV.a�� �� -..?��yiddvr..l.�.r��,,`.;?�,�„0�'����..�.t... .\��\��'\a ^;�a"ir�'�/�!��f�kl,wl* Blaine(3-5) 580 0 580 Pt. Roberts(K-2) 60 0 60 3n ie e E P / \ - RO W /� Y M w,t' \ 1 '" Ax!-•a ShOb\ : r s K Ni' f \ - \ i °l{`g o 5,0y/ % � �4t\\ tia a 1 i v? b. . n ri. ra/ S R eR „a a xgib✓ y %/ S`4 , \ 145 eV0,13 Blaine(6-8) 540 0 540 Fret h?a s-wgr �ll �'✓���"W r�/�l�jq,a�' , ��-c \\`\�'....`-.rcr//.%F/- yr%/ 1fc� ,�S �y��\ e h`����\ e rs�3"�/J�jP edit) f C 4 - �� .,r.:�"� ,0% -f'��' bass i\ r a ..p✓j `\ 2� :�� \``� .�N��� fir,3$a '*t,`,a..,r.. \�...: �.,..., V . �/;%tgi/r�rM �U.iW �..e,4 t/,'.✓ /i4g^\.\,bi �(.i.:A : ., i_ Blaine(9-12) 740 0 740 Total K-12 2,360 0 2,360 Source: City of Blaine Comprehensive Plan,Capital Facilities Element(September 2006). Ferndale School District The Ferndale School District encompasses the City of Ferndale,its UGA,and rural areas including the Lummi Reservation and Lummi Island. The Ferndale School District's current enrollment capacity is listed on Table 55 below. a Exhibit E - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Schools) Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 Table 55. Ferndale School District Current Enrollment Capacity School Permanent Portable Current Enrollment Enrollment Enrollment Capacity Capacity Capacity \ fat2f t a W� ,/ ;;� Fr /%ys � f� I 0 \ I N to a t1y % \ �� � %/ 3 \v . h N,N� t A, 11 _ Beach 60 0 60 Central 254 61 315 Custer 500 0 500 Eagleridge 300 200 500 Mountain View 401 99 500 Cascadia 505 0 505 Skyline 500 0 500 Subtotal 2,520 360 2,880 �..,n� ,y a'-�,�° /f/�'ka.rS��a*.,�`„i�.��c.� ,�✓�/��� ��\�7oY".�\.��a��'; •�����1 ��£.������3 ��'�,Y%.'//�3/O��:: k i�liF�iJte`�r ted: jAS ,a-. `�'�� y/✓6y `�gzI k 4 i MAalW C 3\ ���'� _ %�1/g F l ,LET? c �:7_w:.l,/✓,�/j/ci��,t,'Txz raM Q... \�.r.....��i ,f„¢....'4> �`\ �.... .✓://///,./.��.°..��:�\��.� .;�.�,_�:�. &�r „i..;t���<��: Horizon 650 0 650 Vista 650 0 650 Subtotal 1,300 0 1,300 �.r'\ >x``��� ���;„v., "�-rp°�3'Y�s�4s3`t C ��� _.yc�i ✓l,AI �\ f ,;b`/7fY� F""�i ar ��c.•70 r4 y5�„ �t,ii ..�\\��\ �Frs,�'/i,/y',.�\�"- �`t�' ,vla� �a`�\1\� _ u� .��� ,r �� y��\ .£ • y 1 hid����t Ferndale 1,535 0 1,535 Windward(leased facility) 300 0 300 Clearview High School(at North 0 601 60 Bellingham) Subtotal 1,835 60 1,895 Total K-12 5,655 420 6,075 1 Clearview High School also has 1 portable used as an office,and 1 portable used for storage. No student capacity assumed for these 2 portables. Source: Ferndale Schools Capital Facility Plan and School Impact Fee Ordinance(December 2005);and email correspondence from Shawn Flaherty of Ferndale School District(February 27,2009 and March 6,2009). 5 Exhibit E - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Schools) Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 Lynden School District The Lynden School District encompasses the City of Lynden and its UGA along with surrounding outlying rural areas. The school district's current enrollment capacity is listed on Table 56 below. Table 56. Lynden School District Current Enrollment Capacity School Current Enrollment Capacity Erat1quaryr!�f � d Cltefik� �s �.,- w,,�`a� ,�ea vr, a' `a' `y- t 4 \� . �\v '. o..;�°:-a-. ��7/4010t r ,,zY z Bernice Vossbeck Elementary(Grades K-5) 369 Fisher Elementary(Grades K-2)1 360 Isom Intermediate(Grades 3-5)1 390 Subtotal 1,119 -✓�//�y/ IPT-J0�,`3 �'�✓y%�i✓�✓�✓/i'/7ii�%S:. T;.�/ij i✓--./I✓/�rE✓S✓t� 1�!/%j!✓✓ i -__. lr � � / fit X71 r* ; i OW- F��0i f ri o F�%r v/ //3/i i Lynden2 550 Subtotal 550 pr Altak w.. .�;v' -mew" ',r'�r jam/, r-�,}Ij'Fi'✓, . ,r- wvtr % ✓/„zp y r/ii/,✓`'i• Lynden 550 Subtotal 550 Total K-12 2,219 Note: Lynden School District also provides instruction through the Parent Partnership Program(grades K-12). This program is housed in leased facilities and therefore not included in the District's inventory of permanent facilities. 1 Capacity figure includes 1 portable classroom at both Fisher and Isom Elementaries. 2 Enrollment capacity includes 4 portable classrooms. 3 Enrollment capacity includes 6 portable classrooms. Source: Lynden School District No.504 Six Year Capital Facilities Plan(June 2006) 6 Exhibit E - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Schools) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 Meridian School District The Meridian School District is mostly rural with only a portion of its southernmost boundaries contained within a portion of the Bellingham's UGA. The school district's inventory of current enrollment capacity can be found in Table 57 below. Table 57. Meridian School District Current Enrollment Capacity School Permanent Enrollment Portable Enrollment Total Enrollment Capacity Capacity Capacity 'f \\ \e**V z -.n w;-/ 'p �s Z\icy��- *..- '"?:✓?s//✓%ik"'.Lx✓. Irene Reither Primary(grades K-3) 380 100 480 Ten Mile Creek(Grades 4-5) 164 100 264 Subtotal 544 200 744 x � - iES �ikS tN N y ' g VihM \�\\i�,va '3 � l -JA \at aaek\Zl iz�wmOt r �*/ � .4, 1,, ti, . t ! 0s Meridian Middle School 494 0 494 Subtotal 494 0 494 ���.. --ti , .;:� �., �-� s �� � .-.�. .�.. �. �i mo! -s:� �, _�. \�� .��`��.� l'�T .� ,k��/✓� 3�'.; e \.:��\ � �'���.a. �c?'.�"`_•��.":::..<F. ; "``"�plz���f�jf' .r �y °:<..\"���\�Wl ../f;. - \ .�-. �-...., ..::::#t�,...m P.. ii/ i r.�rT a. Men . l easy.. Y ? to jf9 „-:�.,iv:..,:; \s,,:� \`\..�*-1.A Meridian High School 460 50 510 Subtotal 460 50 510 Total K-12 1,498 250 1,748 Source: Meridian School District No.505 Capital Facilities Plan 2009-2015,Adopted June,2009,and personal communication Timothy Yeomans,Meridian School District(July 30,2009). 7 Exhibit E - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Schools) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 Mount Baker School District The Mount Baker School District serves the Columbia Valley UGA and rural areas in eastern Whatcom County. The current enrollment capacity and inventory of facilities is shown in Table 58 below. Table 58. Mount Baker School District Current Enrollment Capacity School Total Enrollment Capacity 2 ... 0 l / / ��' ���J�� � � f �� , 4 E e ' \. �1 rE(@(11e1taIu < \ ` �� Pf�, �� k l trF,� rh M* �k* .- e�w: . \ 1 ` a-Y�f�liayu. � . �zr A�AmnmPArcVA ��5} r , Acme 274 Harmony 407 Kendall 574 Subtotal 1,255 F'f,.:i /i / -f T'C\'w �. -`\\\� Z l\\. .' ``X t //✓'//j/f,/i/F,p.s.@"�', �-' y, �Z� ll��"'� l..ji 4G .,9;` tF.� A t'E71 n.- / s� ✓�5 �k .. F:.����_-� l\ , � ,7s /!f_ _y�_P / n �' o 1 �' o _ l..,/:...�'¢ 1s/,/...:-_g ::� i.,,r„si jTF.�-GS. \�°.:;-..- l��7�'�s�✓���%�!��A✓/�r /::rv'A�, '-7-,3.`,t�,€� \\ ...l..�����YN.a.i.����Y.�.✓�,��,%/��Y't_.,:ZM: Mount Baker 428 Subtotal 428 \ii a VI,Zilf �✓ �-'z "._i/ F yr G'�,: `�.. -r���� `�' e✓ '-1 %✓/''I %!, - \�` `��v ��\ � s//fr1,-rt,`i;i a isiS c�-.,//- /J/$c�/3� ,�y�v��-��`�\�\�i �e .x�`�„ � ✓�,,�i���.�i a'".'..�:.�o�'::�v\��o- t.. .-'�”` _-✓ii' ;-� �a��1� T..1 / ,.5,.er:.,,,�✓ /l;;lv.'y.y.,::, ���\-�� � ..a-.�...„d -wN 'i/l✓lri,�l/,r/���.i��'�Li���� �\\ � �\-�u7. *':�,� � .a'�„" .2.��,,�,-. ;.:.''�i,/�.;;�,r✓ iii% ,��iL,,:��s, :�\`'-\ Y� £.> M�. €f . !//C 1/�.. 1: .:. o.���: \\"` ice £sr< lrsf Mount Baker 944 Subtotal 944 Total K-12 2,627 Source: Mount Baker School District Capital Facilities Plan(May 2013). "Total Enrollment Capacity"does not include portables. 8 Exhibit E - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Schools) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 Nooksack Valley School District The Nooksack Valley School District encompasses the cities of Everson,Nooksack, Sumas,and their associated UGAs,as well as surrounding rural areas. The school district's most recent inventory and enrollment capacity can be found in Table 59 below. Table 59. Nooksack Valley District School District Current Enrollment Capacity School Current Enrollment Capacity Sumas 320 Nooksack 360 Everson 300 Subtotal 980 i q;vr.;Xp �/s,'a' can � ����\�\Y,,,x� "�.,; �����/no \\\ .�`,�,;. � F�i�.rte S:jZ j o sc� : efws,° ✓i?i c rigakt✓111,z to tltau �ti ti \ ` r� ar (.3i raj �`• Fa;.< .`;... itM � .,.:.,..�_�.r/i/.i�,or ,��'„���� _ r,c,r�..: _ ,-�.,„. �r�..wax 5': Nooksack Valley Middle School 762 Subtotal 762 EI s jam;,,: v",w \ www t \\f����", r,'�ir/i/ / a T r t �i; .� �s3`s ,.�, ,.. �//.iv.�,',ryi�..F\���t�N. e i', .�`/yrl..-.,Satik�?c^_.\ �..,.<.... Nooksack Valley High 960 Subtotal 960 Total K-12 2,702 Note: Capacity figures based on ratio of 20 students per room(K-3),25 students per room(4-6),30 students per room(7-12), and 12 handicapped students per room(K-12). Source: Cities of Everson,Nooksack,and Sumas Comprehensive Plan Capital Facilities Element Level of Service Capacity Analysis An LOS capacity analysis was applied to each County school district based on a student to household ratio that was developed by comparing Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction enrollment numbers to estimates of households by school district. The results,expressed in the number of students a school is able to accommodate based on the enrollment capacity inventories noted above are shown in Table 60 and 61 below. Where numbers are shown as positive,a school district is projected to have a net reserve of school capacity in terms of the number of students it can accommodate in existing classroom space. Where numbers are shown in the negative,a school district is projected to have a deficit of school capacity in terms of the number of students it can accommodate in existing classroom space. Enrollment projections are affected by demographic trends(i.e., aging population in many areas, or larger college-age populations in others); and changing trends in alternative school methods including but not limited to home schooling,Running Start program,and online schooling. In order to provide a projection extending to the 2029 time frame,Whatcom County has utilized a straight-line method of projecting forward existing student to household ratios which are more 9 Exhibit E - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Schools) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 likely to provide larger enrollment projections into the future since they do not take into account the factors mentioned above. For example,the 2015 LOS analysis in Table 60 below is predicated on an assumption of increased enrollment in all school districts shown. However,in comparison,the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction(OSPI) six year projections to 2014 indicate that the Bellingham,Ferndale, and Mount Baker school districts should all expect some decrease in enrollment over that time period(OSPI website: http://www.k12.wa.us/ SchFacilities/Programs/EnrollmentProjections.aspx; accessed on July 29,2009). The 2015 LOS analysis shows that Bellingham,Blaine and Lynden school districts experience net capacity deficits within the 2015 timeframe Although Bellingham School District shows a net student capacity deficit in 2015,it should be noted that OSPI projects Bellingham's student enrollment to actually decline between 2009 and 2014,rather than increase(OSPI website,July 2009). The Blaine School District shows a minor projected deficit in 2015 of three students. School Districts can address any deficiencies that they have by providing additional capacity projects,as noted in the next section,by adding temporary classroom spaces(e.g.portable classrooms), or by increasing the number of students accommodated in a classroom(adjusting LOS standards). Table 60. Whatcom County School District 2015 Level of Service Analysis: Student Capacity 1 School District Student/Household Ratio 2015 School Facility LOS(Students) Bellingham 2 0.263 (134) Blaine3 0.372 (3) Ferndale 0.528 181 Lynden4 0.466 (491) Meridian 5 0.565 515 Mount Baker 0.322 790 Nooksack Valley 0.567 888 1 LOS analysis compares the student capacity of school districts to projected enrollment. Where information is available,it includes portable facilities. 2 The LOS analysis for Bellingham School District accounts for the additional 450 student capacity over existing inventory that are included in the district's 6-year capital facilities plan(Bellingham School District,2009). 3 The LOS analysis for Blaine School District accounts for the addition of 180 student capacity resulting from upgrades to the high school building(personal communication,Jim Kenoyer,Blaine School District,August 5,2009). 4 The LOS analysis for Lynden School District accounts for the additional 396 student capacity over existing inventory that are included in the district's 6-year capital facilities plan(Lynden School District). 5 The LOS analysis for the Meridian School District accounts for the additional 324 permanent student capacity over existing inventory that are included in the district's 6-year capital facilities plan(Meridian School District,2009),as well as 400 student capacity in the form of portables(personal communication,Timothy Yeomans,Meridian School District,July 20, 2009). Table 61 below shows school district LOS capacity in 2029. As can be seen by this analysis, deficits are experienced in the same three school districts by 2029,only the deficits are larger. School districts can address deficiencies through additional capacity projects during the planning period,by adding temporary classroom spaces(e.g.portable classrooms),or by increasing the number of students accommodated in a classroom(adjusting LOS standards). 10 Exhibit E - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Schools) Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 Table 61. Whatcom County School District 2029 Level of Service Analysis: Student Capacity 1 School District Student/Household Ratio 2029 School Facility LOS(Students) Bellingham 2 0.263 (2,037) Blaine3 0.372 (282) Ferndale 4 0.528 407 Lynden 5 0.466 (853) Meridian 6 0.565 240 Mount Baker 0.322 596 Nooksack Valley 0.567 434 1 LOS analysis compares the student capacity of school districts to projected enrollment. Where information is available,it includes portable facilities. 2 The LOS analysis for Bellingham School District accounts for the additional 450 student capacity over existing inventory that are included in the district's 6-year capital facilities plan(Bellingham School District,2009). 3 The LOS analysis for Blaine School District accounts for the addition of 180 student capacity resulting from upgrades to the high school building occurring in the six-year planning period,as well as the addition of 600 more student capacity arising from a new elementary school planned for late in the 2029 planning period(personal communication,Jim Kenoyer,Blaine School District,August 5,2009). 4 The LOS analysis for Ferndale School District accounts for the additional 1,750 student capacity over existing inventory that are included in the 7-20 year period in the district's 2005 Capital Facilities Plan(Ferndale School District,2005). There are no capacity projects identified in the 6-year planning period. 5 The LOS analysis for Lynden School District accounts for the additional 396 student capacity over existing inventory that are included in the districts 6-year capital facilities plan(Lynden School District). 6 The LOS analysis for the Meridian School District accounts for the additional 324 permanent student capacity over existing inventory that are included in the districts 6-year capital facilities plan(Meridian School District,2009),as well as 400 student capacity in the form of portables(personal communication,Timothy Yeomans,Meridian School District,July 20, 2009). Capital Projects and Funding Table 62 below outlines the County school district projects planned in the 2010-2015 and the longer term 2016-2029 timeframes. Several of the capital projects below add to individual school district enrollment capacities and are accommodated in the LOS analysis above. However,detail on the capacity increases available,particularly for the latter part of the planning period,is not available from all school districts at this time. Capital Project Funding School Districts in Washington State fund capital improvements with both State and local dollars. Local capital financing is usually achieved through two primary mechanisms.The first is an excess property tax levy,in which residents of the school district vote to finance a capital bond with an increase in property taxes. In this case,the annual bond cost is spread equally over the life of the bond. Therefore,if property values increase over time the levy rate necessarily declines to generate the same annual revenue. The second financing tool is a school impact fee,which is designed to recover costs from new development for the facility improvements necessary because of that development.This fee is 11 Exhibit E - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Schools) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 usually charged to new residential development based on the average students generated per household. Additional comments on the School Districts' Comprehensive Plans are discussed below: • Meridian School District-The District relies heavily on issuing bonds and receiving state matches to fund capital projects.As of May 2006,the District total debt is $3.6 million,and it has $28.5 million in additional borrowing capacity. • Mt.Baker School District-The District relies on reserves,a levy,timber revenue and state grants to fund capital improvements. • Lynden School District-The District is relying heavily on voted bonds and corresponding state matches to fund its capital facilities. • Ferndale School District-The school relies on bonds and state matches to fund capital improvements,but would like to implement school impact fees. • Bellingham School District-Although the District mostly relies on secured local funding,it does sometimes rely on voted bonds to supplement local funding. Bellingham School District According to the Bellingham School District No. 501 2009-2015 Capital Facilities Plan,new growth over the next six years will create the need to complete one new elementary school. The new elementary school is planned on Aldrich Road. This new elementary school is expected to add 450 students to the district's permanent capacity. A 2006 Bond measure approved by the district's voters provided funding for the new elementary school. An extensive review of existing facilities will be conducted as part of any future bond issue. During that process,the district will reevaluate enrollment projections and identify additional capacity enhancement projects (Bellingham School District CFP,July 2009). In addition, Bellingham School District staff reviewed preliminary population and student generation information developed during the planning process. To accommodate a student population in the range of 13,200 to 13,300,which is approximately the number of students associated with the Bellingham population projection,the district estimated that it would need a total of two new elementary schools in addition to the Aldrich Road elementary noted above; one new middle school,and one new high school. The District further estimated that these capital improvements would cost the district approximately$95 million in 2009 dollars(Personal communication,Ron Cowan to Matt Aainot,May 15,2009). The District plans to rely less heavily on portable classrooms than it currently does. Therefore, the additional schools noted in the long-range planning period are expected to accommodate most of additional student capacity,although estimates of the amount of capacity provided by each facility are not currently available. The District will continue to actively monitor enrollment projections and respond by programming additional projects as needed. 12 Exhibit E - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Schools) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 Blaine School District The Blaine School District's December 2007 Study and Survey indicates that the city has plans to purchase a school site in the Birch Bay area that will allow for future expansion of K-12 education facilities beyond the single 38-acre campus that the district owns in Blaine(Kenoyer pers. comm.). The December 2007 Study and Survey also includes projects related to the modernization and expansion of the existing high school(expected to add 23 general classrooms), conversion of primary school playsheds to classrooms,elementary school additions,and gym conversion and modernization for the Middle School. The District expects that improvements to the high school will provide additional capacity of up to 180 students in the six-year planning period(Kenoyer pers. comm.,August 5, 2009). In addition,the District also has longer-term plans for the construction of a new elementary school in the latter part of the District's 20-year planning horizon that will provide capacity for an additional 600 students(Kenoyer pers. comm., August 5,2009). The Study and Survey identifies projects and costs in the six year planning period. Ferndale School District The Ferndale School District does not have any capacity projects identified within the 6-year planning period. However,with portable capacity,the district expects to accommodate its 2015 student population. The Ferndale School District has plans to construct one elementary and one high school during the 7-20 year planning period. These projects are expected add approximately 1,750 classroom capacity spaces and result in the projected enrollment capacity surplus identified in Table 61. Lynden School District The Lynden School District has plans to construct one middle school during the planning period. This project,which occurs in the six-year planning period,will add space for approximately 300 students to the district's enrollment capacity. In addition,the district's Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan(June 2006)identifies an additional capacity of 60 students resulting from the Fisher Elementary modernization project, and an additional 36 students resulting from the Isom Elementary expansion project. Additional capacity for projects outside the six-year planning period are not identified in the district's adopted Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan. However,the district indicates that construction of a middle school to replace the current middle school, and construction of an additional elementary school that could accommodate up to 400 additional students are projects that the district is considering in the long-term(personal communication, Rick Thompson,Lynden School District.July 30,2009). The district is not planning to rely on portable classroom capacity except for emergencies or to accommodate unexpected growth. The district did note that current student enrollment projections for the district are lower than shown in this Plan. However,the district will continue to monitor growth trends and respond to changes in projections accordingly. 13 Exhibit E - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Schools) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 Meridian School District The Meridian School District plans to construct additions to two of its schools during the planning period. The district divides its improvements into Phase 1 (completion in 2-7 years), and Phase 2(completion in 8 to 25 years). Planned additions in Phase 1 include construction of instruction space at Meridian High School,and acquisition of land for a new elementary school. Phase 1 also includes upgrades and modernizations to Meridian High School, Irene Reither Primary School,and Ten Mile Creek. Phase 1 improvements are expected to provide additional capacity for 144 elementary students and 180 additional high school students(Meridian School District No. 505 Capital Facilities Plan 2009-2015,Adopted June 2009,page 7). The District also plans to address additional student capacity needs in the six-year period through acquisition of portables that could accommodate up to 400 additional students(personal communication, Timothy Yeomans,Meridian School District,July 30,2009). Phase 2 improvements,beyond the six-year planning period include a remodel that includes additional classroom space at Meridian Middle School,as well as construction of a new elementary school. Phase 2 also includes upgrade and modernization projects. However,the district's 2009-2015 Capital Facilities Plan does not identify the amount of capacity expected to be provided by these longer term projects. The District will continue to actively monitor enrollment projections and respond by programming additional projects as needed. Mount Baker School District The Mount Baker School District Capital Facilities Plan(May 2013)indicates that the District has adequate classroom space to serve projected student enrollment through the entire 20-year planning period(p. 12). While the District does not plan to add classroom space,it does plans to invest in facility improvements,maintenance and technology upgrades. Nooksack Valley School District The Nooksack Valley School District is currently in the process of updating its 1998 Capital Facilities Plan. The district has no plans for new schools or additional facility capacity at this time. The district has not experienced increases in enrollment capacity in recent years,and the district is currently in process of updating its CFP facilities plan for the first time since 1998. The outcome of the current district planning effort may result in new capital projects which would most likely be improvements to existing facilities in the latter part of the district's 6-year planning period. The Whatcom County 2029 CFP projections will help inform the district's future capital facility planning(Silvas pers. comm.). Table 62. School District Capital Projects Project 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016- Total Costs/Revenue 2029 (thousands$) r t ._. ;,re. r /�_ it//i���'`O��\\:�1��^v,�✓�i'�i���1�i�%/'r .� �i � ii iii ~\ Be11 a fiam Sthoo1 t 4 t cl/ //ji / / s� % iii r,� �// his/%y/,�������_.�°��'a�f/f/i/'�i ���/ ,:.. .....,,:;::'..<.'7�,;-���/✓ /017 2 z f '������ a Aldrich Elementary 14 Exhibit E - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Schools) Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 Project 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016- Total Costs/Revenue 2029 (thousands$) Cost 10,000 4,300 14,300 Revenue 10,000 4,300 14,300 Bonds Portables Cost 300 300 Revenue 300 300 Bonds Impact fees Future Elementary Property Purchase Cost 1,500 1,500 Revenue 1,500 1,500 Bonds .�,�•a r °/�'" ,.27 �. .�:." - c.i' f .,./.�:, /F' v sC:,�.r ✓ /,� //.j r - '\`\\�� '� �.av /fir i0 `i�14`: ia=li/� ./fi„y,.t Tr. ....,..,e-, :,..r�rr,,..i i-i.o��:,.\\�� - �.��� ..,:„z:., yi ✓✓'/ -7 .:`5,fi,,. ps��.yy.,, '� ', .nt £\�.cay ��aa' ;;'._� � /u%i jyvy �kOV •..r-,.. ��� ".�, .,�,�/�iv v,(O�� \�•\ fd;r i i€IA .*a.�.;.�.,a °kg .'l- /. z . .�1 -.r //i SAIAle.M`''-.Mti ...�,,.,..A'� „I C-4,V. .„ ,,. ���. :x�L ��,-�����:s:..,..��s�� ./��r/ :,:ie_�..`\�\\\,..'.r�....w,:.3�i���f�/...yii.s,.:�� � �\�\� .I'' 1��,��.G- 'a��c�r:� High School 30.000 Modernization and Expansion Birch Bay 1,500 Primary/ Elementary School Site Campus Primary/ 4,539 Elementary School Modernization and Expansion Stadium 3,961 Improvements and Pipeline Fields Restrooms and Fields Addition \ ,•i / Gee- W\:','�✓,.:, ce .�..Zaat�`*G\ c�- LHy� ✓/f/ C`� z �:..:c..�: . 1 t1i c tot I/ �Fs.. .\�.. ;• A-AM. a :..., r✓%r s tIg' z A !� •'1 .�aF fti.�.. ✓ l � r'�a*�� ..�:,A,y i.:..G't;Y,..,�,��iZ�?� s,�,�>i����\,\ \�\����:...., Elementary#9- Site Acquisition Cost 1,800 1,800 Revenue 1,800 1,800 Elementary#9 Construction Cost 13,500 13,500 Revenue 13,500 13,500 15 Exhibit E - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Schools) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 Project 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016- Total Costs/Revenue 2029 (thousands$) High School#2 New Construction Cost 41,500 41,500 Revenue 41,500 41,500 %/tzgA i eo p t, ` T 5 ,��l-Af zip s �� \\\i i rA`\,-,O\ \ S-/a�-�,' ✓�''!4114 C 0��`SA . .- ' `i a1 i Jri; \ a L,b :W i✓j%,a-� \\`\ "a\\Z `\\�' \ x:° F a.>. ✓�.//"rat^'M\, .§..�1\��.*; New Middle School Construction (Capacity Costs only) Cost 9,072 9,072 Revenue 9,072 9,072 New Middle School Construction (without new capacity costs) Cost 23,898 23,898 Revenue 23,898 23,898 ✓�/�..Ve.4 4,51 a^=.r .�I� S� P �.�\��-za"a`' �i;"fa 1 a..t.� �y 3�, \�\�V3VO� •`-, `�33 0:77 ,7 y� >✓',4,T, \\ //1���y� ...✓ ..\�\a^ i7.'�.�\��l\ >�,., ✓i/ ":' �\ \mac.�\\\\��c;�:: \��••;•."" �i�/! � "';Y.\ '�`�\a� e L GhoG3 ?astttdt `ZW z " \\13 ... y 7f . � ��:�✓<;�//i;:,.✓�w .FSS'Lz��.,v>c�..•�r..<s<r\....z..,. a>„�.✓ *i ir......"zx��.,�`�n�`-e.�7>.s��.,�<�\..�.�a`�\,��"a�j\.:,�`\.�.. ���.v 4.„,,M, -..oh.sm Elementary Classroom additional and related common area improvement at Irene Reither/Ten Mile Creek Cost 3,980 3,980 Revenue 3,980 3,980 State match, bonds,mitigation/ impact fees High School Addition Cost 20,000 20,000 Revenue 20,000 20,000 State match, bonds,mitigation/ impact fees Various Portables Cost 75 75 16 Exhibit E - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Schools) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 Project 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016- Total Costs/Revenue 2029 (thousands$) Revenue 75 75 Bonds, mitigation/ impact fees 6 ' „ ...nilmmp,„, f%i7's{:;r.,, ����`\\`v ��\: Aav— ,/i��zown\wm ,n om\\\\\. .pRi �,r„ � wesa"�Yx'- �\ n.�. � � � ( j/ F ���� `� ,�r.r iii � �\ \ �i ��\� Facility 1,000 1,000 1,000 4,000 to 7,000 to improvements, 9,000 12,000 maintenance and technology upgrades €nola\zF`z ave G.,,/i.���l:aowm\`.`���\'\ \ vtvkr -yo//�/j4 z,va^�`�^. -\AW--:`V\t�\w;x''\`\ce'�zoo,-;/ „-awA: ismA\ \m ti t`OC c'a ktVai1:e,{y�SC - $ttl RA -�`\ Z:� v .MH ��/.✓,.,,.,a r`�\� ,W, \.`x\\\\��y •I r.ti.✓IAv w§^�\, \l r _\�., ;.;','� !�luve A,�'�..,.3 ��.Q;;.:`�\,'.�e ;:>I mfr� s��'.Svo�i` c,"*I \.�..��\\�\�.n.,r,?Y,'�:}„ "r.;'°✓// ✓ri'x.'E`waggai... �`c No Projects Currently Identified 3 1 The Blaine School District does not have a CFP that identifies project costs and revenues. The district has a State Study and Survey which is described in the narrative above. The State Study and Survey identifies projects and their costs in summary fashion. For that reason,project dollars are only shown in the total column. 2 The Mount Baker School District CFP indicates that the District plans to invest between$7 million and$12 million in capital facility improvements,maintenance and technology projects from 2012-2022. The Mount Baker School District Superintendent indicated on June 18,2013 that approximately$1,000,000 of this amount would be invested each year from 2013-15. 3 The Nooksack School District does not have a CFP. The district has hired someone to prepare a survey of facilities as of July 2009. The district does not have any projects planned,except maintenance,in the foreseeable future. (Personal communication email from Erin Osborn to Matt Aamot,July 14,2009.) 17 Exhibit F- 20-Year CFP Amendments (Fire Protection) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 Exhibit F Whatcom County 20-Year Capital Facilities Plan Amendments (Fire Protection Provisions) NOTE: For brevity and ease in viewing the proposed changes,portions of the Whatcom County 20-Year Capital Facilities Plan that are not being modified by this ordinance are not shown below. The text and maps that are not shown below are retained as previously adopted. 1 Exhibit F- 20-Year CFP Amendments (Fire Protection) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 Amend the "Executive Summary"chapter of the Whatcom County 20-Year Capital Facilities Plan (Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan Appendix E)as follows: Fire Protection Most fire districts in Whatcom County do not have their own adopted capital facility plans. In some cases,districts have recently been reorganized or consolidated into fire protection authorities. However,the cities of Bellingham and Lynden fire departments both have adopted capital facilities plans, and North Whatcom Fire and Rescue,Fire District 7,Fire District 8 and Fire District 14 have adopted CFPs addressing their facility needs. Whatcom County adopted a level of service standard in 2011 based upon response times and fire ratings. There will necessarily be a transition period in which the County will work with the fire districts to develop or amend CFPs in accordance with the new county-wide LOS standards. For capital facility planning purposes,fire districts that have not yet developed or amended CFPs in accordance with the County's adopted LOS standards are evaluated under a square feet per emergency incident method of calculating LOS. The square feet per emergency incident method is utilized for fire protection LOS analysis in this CFP for fire districts that have not yet developed or updated their plans to address the county- wide LOS standards adopted by the County in 2011. Based upon information provided by the County Fire Marshal's Office,all four fire districts serving urban areas that were evaluated under the incident per square foot method are expecting to have a future deficit in capital facilities by 2029. Most fire districts serving rural areas are also expected to have capital facility deficits by 2029 based on this analysis. The exceptions are Fire District 18 and Fire District 5 both of which show small facility surpluses in 2029. The County adopted county-wide fire level of service standards based upon response times and fire ratings in 2011. The Fire District 7,Fire District 8 and Fire District 14 CFPs were developed to meet the new LOS standards. The County may incorporate by reference fire district CFPs as they are adopted or amended in accordance with the new county-wide LOS standards.The Capital Facilities Implementation section of this CFP identifies measures that service providers without adopted or amended CFPs can take to address any identified deficiencies. 2 Exhibit F - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Fire Protection) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 Amend the "Fire Protection"chapter of the Whatcom County 20-Year Capital Facilities Plan (Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan Appendix E)as follows: Fire Protection Overview The County is served by 15 different fire departments or districts, 13 of which serve unincorporated portions of the County: • City of Bellingham • Fire District 7 • Fire District 17 • City of Lynden • Fire District 8 • Fire District 18 • Fire District 1 • Fire District 11 • Glacier Fire District 19 • Fire District 4 • Fire District 14 • North Whatcom Fire and Rescue (Fire District 21) • Fire District 5 • Fire District 16 • South Whatcom Fire Authority The cities of Bellingham and Lynden have their own fire departments. Fire District 7 serves the City of Ferndale and the Cherry Point UGA. North Whatcom Fire and Rescue(Fire District 21) serves the City of Blaine and the Birch Bay UGA. Fire District 14 serves the City of Sumas and the Columbia Valley UGA. Fire District 1 serves the cities of Everson and Nooksack. Each city and fire protection district is assigned a numeric fire protection rating(a Class 1 rating is considered best)by the Washington Surveying and Ratings Bureau. Insurance companies fund the Bureau to perform on-site inspections of fire districts to determine the rating. The Bureau analyzes five areas: average response time,water supply, communication network, schedule of fire inspections,and existing conditions of fire stations. Fire station evaluations focus on the age of vehicles,amount of personnel training,and whether the facilities are staffed or not. Insurance companies use the fire protection rating to help determine insurance rates on all fire insurance policies. Quality of fire service can have a significant impact on fire insurance rates with the greatest impact experienced by commercial occupancies. In addition to fire protection services,the agencies listed here provide responses to medical emergencies. In fact,EMS calls account for 75%of the responses by most fire protection agencies. A countywide 911 dispatch system is jointly operated by the City of Bellingham Fire and Police Departments and administered by a countywide governmental board called"What-Comm Administrative Board"(Boyd pers. comm.). 3 Exhibit F- 20-Year CFP Amendments (Fire Protection) Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 Inventory of Current Facilities Table 74 summarizes the capital facilities for each fire district. It also includes each district's fire rating and service population. Unless otherwise stated,the 2008 population is based on estimates prepared for the CFP update process. Table 74. Fire Facilities Inventory Fire Protection Number Fire Fire Units EMS Service Area Serves UGA Provider of Rating 1 2 Services Population (YIN) Stations (YIN) (2008) City of Bellingham 8 3 3 22 Y 78,500 Y City of Lynden 1 5 6 Y 11,350 Y North Whatcom Fire& 10' N/A 32 Y 28,246 5 Y Rescue(District 21) _._.......-- -...._....._.....-- --.._ _._......_....__-- -------- --.............-- Fire District 1 2 8T 6 10' Y 8,460 Y Fire District 4 3 6 13 Y 8,600 8 Y Fire District 5 2 6 6 Y 1,370 N Fire District 7 6 6/5 9 24 Y 19,530 Y Fire District 8 2 6-8A 10 Y 6,240 Y Fire District 11 1 8 5 Y 1,610 N Fire District 14 3 6-1010 22 Y 9,830 Y Fire District 16 3 N/A N/A Y 1,160 N Fire District 17 2 6 8 Y 1,520 N Fire District 18 2 N/A N/A Y 2,460 N Glacier Fire District 19 1 7 4 Y 1,630 N 11 South Whatcom Fire 6 N/A 12 26 Y 13,000 t3 Y Authority N/A=Not Available;Y/N=Yes or No 1 Fire rating is based upon the Washington Surveying and Ratings Bureau(WSRB). Insurance companies use the Bureau's ratings to help determine insurance rates on all fire insurance policies. 2 Fire units include fire and/or emergency response units such as fire engines,water tenders,and medic units. 3 Two of the 8 stations are medic stations that serve unincorporated areas of the County,one serving northwest and the other north and east of the Bellingham city limits. Station 1 also houses the countywide fire/EMS dispatch center. (Boyd,Bill,Fire Chief, Bellingham Fire Department,personal communication,April 14,2009 email.) 4 Includes 3 career fire stations and 7 volunteer fire stations. Source: North Whatcom Fire and Rescue Capital Facilities Plan, August 2009,Exhibit 1). 5 Source: North Whatcom Fire and Rescue Capital Facilities Plan,August 2009 6 This indicates a tanker rating,which means that the rating is achieved through additional water for fire flow provided from tanker trucks(Personal email communication from Erin Osborn to Matt Aamot,July 14,2009). 7 Per email communication from Erin Osborn to Matt Aamot(July 14,2009),this figure includes 3 fire engines with 1,000 gallon water tanks,2 tanker trucks with 3,000 gallon capacity(water delivery at 1,000 gallons per minute),3 aid cars,and 2 rescue boats. 8 Personal communication,Email from Bill McLaughlin to Matt Aamot,on February 25,2009. 9 Fire rating for Cherry Point is 6 and fire rating for Ferndale is 5(Personal communication between Gary Russell and Alex Cleanthous,July 1,2009) 10 The WSRB ratings vary within Fire District 14 from 6(in Sumas)to 10(in outlying areas),depending on location and type of structure. 11 Although Glacier Fire District 19 does not specifically serve the Columbia Valley UGA,it is part of a mutual aid agreement that would provide back-up to Fire District 14 which does include the Columbia Valley UGA within its service area. 4 Exhibit F - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Fire Protection) Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 12 At time of inventory,the South Whatcom Fire Authority has not received a rating for the whole agency. Agency was formed in January 2009. Currently,Geneva and Sudden Valley communities are rated Class 5;Yew Street Road and Chuckanut Drive areas are rated a Class 6;and the Lake Samish Area is rated Class 8. 13 Personal communication,Email from Bill Hewitt to Matt Aamot,on March 10,2009. Source: Individual district plans and district communications with County staff. Level of Service Capacity Analysis Methods that can be used to determine LOS for fire districts include square feet per emergency incident,response time and fire ratings. Whatcom County adopted a LOS standard tied to response time and fire ratings in 2011. Fire district capital facility plans submitted in 2011 or later will be reviewed against the new county-wide LOS standards. For capital facility planning purposes,a method that ties fire and EMS response incidents to projected population, employment,and/or land use(square feet per incident)is being utilized for fire districts until they develop new capital facility plans that meet the adopted County LOS standard. Whatcom County will consider adoption of fire district capital facility plans by reference into the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan,as they are approved by the districts. Square Feet per Incident This Capital Facilities Plan will rely on analysis based on a square feet per incident for fire districts that have not yet adopted or revised their capital facility plans to meet the County LOS standard. The methodology in the plan is based upon review of records received from the Whatcom County Fire Marshal's Office for Fire Districts. These records include 2008 existing square feet of fire district facilities,and calls for fire and aid service for the years 2006-2008 were used to provide average annual calls for service per district. This information and a LOS methodology are outlined in Table 75 below. A review of the Fire District LOS analysis provided in Table 76a below indicates that all districts serving urban growth areas that were evaluated under the square feet per incident method would have a fire facility deficit by 2029,if new facilities were not added. 5 Exhibit F - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Fire Protection) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 Table 75. Level of Service Standard for Fire Districts: Square Feet per Incident Fire District Total Facility Size(2008) Average Annual Calls For Square Feet Per Incident (Square Feet) Fire and Aid Service (2006-2008) '._1 -/ Vzy�\q• \ \ N / 5/. „4 y l✓” G' 5"/N�. ., .,�..;,.,.,y\,N•W Stt'OtiR-Wre a C tlt [rn835 i Ri°Al rA Pi�ti\ \\ �a\\ • z ,w,w \ awAt`?;ii i✓ !'�`s., � i::�h:t7:'.-"` i i � '\�\` 3Y L \ � t tit . �'z l'�.I-3 ,,-��,.5,.�_ _ne�a.,e, �- � ..��,,,,a Cam.,v�S_..-. .�.......:v'�,d. ,/,o..,,, �_.�v yA��f"c`A � s�7_����3;;�; ..,..�A�:a . .- �,.. P,.,. , Fire District 1 17,008 682.3 24.93 Fire District 4 25,314 531.3 47.64 North Whatcom Fire and 72,422 2,362.3 30.66 1 Rescue South Whatcom Fire 35,418 734 48.25 Authority 3��;c.. c� '� f.��,e�sy��,c„/,/%%���`,.���\\\ �l'. %f�/' s-6`y'���...�\\\c\c\�\�\�y .\ ,°^"/ �✓y�-l'• M�\�\..y'vt c1/i r/i��-i✓ �l ;� iSt74W 4 4 }f l nid.4$ S ti` ✓may t \\tad v �i sxr;; \ ✓ .\ ..•:a\�;.t,...�tr...�.�gw, ..�/ s. ,. \ �, ,/ „^'//��yA�c t��:a\c.a�\�\. i s;✓- ��:a �.1 r. •,,.rf. ,,\ \\ .«�Y:...tt:�;c lyiv.�/.lf£r .,��;.,��`\,�..:\..,, ✓->>,`,�....\. ��.,...�..�.� ��f �.,��,�;,._.,.>;..,;. Fire District 5 8,250 134.0 61.57 Fire District 11 4,200 60.67 69.23 Fire District 16 9,100 121.3 75.0 Fire District 17 6,892 89.7 76.86 Fire District 18 5,400 118.7 45.51 Fire District 19 3,600 84.0 42.86 1 North Whatcom Fire and Rescue prepared a draft Capital Facilities Plan(undated)that was reviewed and evaluated as part of the preparation of the Capital Facilities Plan. This undated version of the District's draft CFP included a square foot per incident measurement as one of many factors reviewed in evaluating the District's ability to respond to emergency incidents, whether fire or medical(Square feet per incident for North Whatcom Fire and Rescue was listed as 35.64 in the undated draft). Since that time,North Whatcom Fire and Rescue has prepared and adopted an updated Capital Facilities Plan(dated August 15,2009)which does not utilize a square footage per incident analysis. The updated methodology relies on response time and fire station geographic coverage to arrive at a number of stations and apparatus needed to maintain recent ratios to existing development. Most fire districts in Whatcom County do not currently have this information. For this reason,and to ensure consistency of analysis,the North Whatcom Fire and Rescue Square Feet per Incident in Table 75 utilizes the information obtained from the Whatcom County Fire Marshal's Office. Source: Whatcom County Fire Marshal's Office,Warner Webb,email to Matt Aamot,April 23,2009. Table 76a indicates that all fire districts serving urban growth areas that were evaluated under the square feet per incident method are projected to experience deficits in 2029. With the exception of Fire District 4,all fire districts serving urban areas also have higher fire facility deficits than their rural counterparts in 2029. All rural fire districts,with the exception of Fire Districts 5,and 18 are expected to have facility deficits in 2029. All fire districts can reduce these anticipated fire facility deficits with capital facility projects that maintain or replace facilities and equipment in the 2009-2029 planning period. Response Time/Fire Rating Whatcom County adopted the following level of service standards in 2011: Urban levels of service for fire protection shall be a response time of 8 minutes 80%of the time when the department covering the urban area has staffed the fire station.When the fire station is not staffed the response time shall be 10 minutes 80%of the time,or a WSRB Rating of a 6. 6 Exhibit F- 20-Year CFP Amendments (Fire Protection) Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 Rural levels of service for fire protection shall be a response time of 12 minutes 80% of the time when the department covering the rural area has staffed the fire station. When the fire station is not staffed the response time shall be 14 minutes 80%of the time,or a WSRB Rating of an 8. Staffed stations shall be a fire station that is staffed 24 hours a day 7 days a week 365 days a year. Staff may be paid,volunteer,or combination of the two. There will necessarily be a transition period in which the County will work with fire districts to develop capital facility plans that meet the adopted LOS standards. Fire district capital facility plans that have been developed utilizing the County LOS are shown in Table 76b below. Table 76a. Fire District Level of Service Analysis-Square Feet Per Incidents Annual Average 2029 Projected Calls For Facility Fire and Aid Total Facility Size Level of Service Reserve/(Deficit) Service Incidents per (2008) Square Feet Per Expressed in Square Fire District (2006-2008) capita(2008) (Square Feet) Incident Feet of Facilities an',�:� ".ff!f �"";n � \S.�£���ti:'\Zd•:C t,�, f,•/. ::'�rr��"�irti v\'\ \\v� '�' -1 s�S b .\ �'' ".i- ,:�•-' w�.s �I f /r/.r.. � �`�\\z�..�n�..�.�,: a•�. .�/:j'f e�F i�\ ..�-:���i��.... �-�,y� rx� s� ��n� \\ \ sit s� :ff.iisr ^P e i\ /f G/+/li ,a F \\ c ,,z zM/�G v _\\\�, �\., \\W W ,21/ l Y n NT,�Jr / �t$trI S SEt`Yt ��q��1d I�����'� S ✓�//�'s�\'\�\���i\\�:\\\��� �Z/ l//�/�F %„�� ' ���x 1�`y�rr��//%frig its.."�,;,..,. ,�!i% P9s..➢1.`>gaAi i\:.:\\\,f`T0,7,:444%,Ol .>>�� `\`c, �-.�\�\y�\}mza,'?o: /n1 0�.,.Vie:•%Sc,;..:F a_.:, vP�;`��1:#4 F Fire District 1 682.3 0.08 17,008 24.93 (4,952) Fire District 44 531.3 0.05 25,314 47.64 (2,428) North Whatcom 2,362.3 0.10 2 72,422 30.66 3 (37,498) Fire and Rescue South Whatcom 734 0.05 35,418 48.25 (3,308) Fire Authority 4 \.:.rg\7lav-? `y W4r%;:%//y�a;�•kt:•j�n`' 4 :ti\�R 1.i///�nn.;z ' R\v.5s�tig sn�.{. v'I // ./ r�,'-\r� \. II .....t\x�S\:,�,\"v&�.s�,„,`,�c`.s��/��/', d/;•?3.f,�,rt�\z3;, :�\�:�,����\\,�� ,,.,�3�r�`, i%rd9�'�! S�\`�\,,1��.�S*6 2���i�;z rls�`l//„�.';�.,,..� '�;.i�`� ,,.��.��::.,:.:,,�vw.'o ^``f Fire District 5 134.0 0.07 8,250 61.57 549 Fire District 11 60.67 0.04 4,200 69.23 (1,164) Fire District 16 121.3 0.12 9,100 75.0 (1,853) Fire District 17 89.7 0.06 6,892 76.86 (2,865) Fire District 18 118.7 0.05 5,400 45.51 85 Fire District 19 84.0 0.05 3,600 42.86 (380) 1 Fire districts that have not developed capital facility plans that incorporate the county-wide level of service standard for fire protection,adopted in 2011,are included in Table 76a.The steps used to calculate the results are as follows: a) Determine incidents per capita:Average calls for service 2006-2008 supplied by Whatcom County Fire Marshal/2008 estimated population(Draft Environmental Impact Statement,10-Year Urban Growth Area Review,May 2009, Appendix D) b) Determine square feet per incident:Current square footage of fire stations supplied by Whatcom County Fire Marshal/ Average calls for service 2006-2008 c) Calculate 2029 incidents:Future 2029 population of each district(Appendix D)x incidents per capita d) Calculate square footage required:2029 estimated incidents x Square feet per incident e) Compare to square footage available:2008 inventory of fire station square footage supplied by Whatcom County Fire Marshal f) Calculate Reserve(Deficit):Square footage available-square footage required 2 The districts own population estimate of 2008 population(28,246)is higher and was developed based on 2000 U.S.Census calculation of district population plus the City of Blaine,which annexed to the district in 2004(District Plan,p.3).Population 7 Exhibit F- 20-Year CFP Amendments (Fire Protection) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 estimates prepared for the CFP analysis indicate a lower population including Blaine of 23,570.If assuming the higher population,the incident per capita would be 0.08.For a conservative analysis the higher 0.10 rate was applied to the future growth numbers.If using the Districts 2008 population as a base and the net increase of each alternative,the results would be 15%lower than the square footage estimates above. 3 North Whatcom Fire and Rescue prepared a draft Capital Facilities Plan(undated)that was reviewed and evaluated as part of the preparation of the Capital Facilities Plan. This undated version of the District's draft CFP included a square foot per incident measurement as one of many factors reviewed in evaluating the District's ability to respond to emergency incidents, whether fire or medical(Square feet per incident for North Whatcom Fire and Rescue was listed as 35.64 in the undated draft). Since that time,North Whatcom Fire and Rescue has prepared and adopted an updated Capital Facilities Plan(dated August 15,2009)which does not utilize a square footage per incident analysis. The updated methodology relies on response time and fire station geographic coverage to arrive at a number of stations and apparatus needed to maintain recent ratios to existing development. Most fire districts in Whatcom County do not currently have this information. For this reason,and to ensure consistency of analysis,the North Whatcom Fire and Rescue Square Feet Per Incident in Tables 75 and 76 utilizes the information obtained from the Whatcom County Fire Marshal's Office. 4 If using these Districts own 2008 population estimates,the incidents per capita would be higher(incidents per capita divided by smaller population). The facility deficits would be approximately 16%higher for Fire District and 6%higher for the South Whatcom Fire Authority. Source: ICF Jones&Stokes,Berk&Associates,and Whatcom County Fire Marshal's Office(2008). Table 76b. Fire District Level of Service Analysis- Response Time/Fire Ratings WSRB Rating Response Time Meets Fire District Standard Standard Adopted LOS? [ALIr[tKtM*V tt�Y � � gMomiagg / t°5 Tf ye``iKWatw,-,W N ��'•F y ..�•�k 1Id !�✓� f ���,�u,.�, a.At >�'ti�A,cs�i ..r., r;��.,�,..oii,v ... �._�,.max 3.�1..'�,�, sa..�. .�*. _�,.�. .� k� „ �.3v:,,�. ���i_,� f:" Fire District 7 6 for the 8 minutes 80%of Yes2 Cherry Point UGA the time for the Ferndale UGA Fire District 8 8 minutes 80%of Yes3 the time for the Bellingham UGA and 12 minutes 80%of the time for rural areas Fire District 14 6 for UGAs and 10 minutes 80%of Yes4 8 for rural areas the time for the Columbia Valley& Sumas UGAs and 14 minutes 80%of the time for rural areas 1 Fire districts that have developed capital facility plans that incorporate the county-wide level of service for fire protection, adopted in May 2011,are included in Table 76b. 2 Table 74 and Whatcom County Fire District No.7 Capital Facility Plan 2011-2029. 3 LOS will be met with planned improvements set forth in the Fire District#8 Capital Facilities Plan(2013). 4 Table 74 and Whatcom County Fires District#14 Capital Facilities Plan(2012) Capital Projects and Funding Capital Project Funding City Fire Departments and Regional Fire Districts usually fund needed capital improvements through a combination of revenue sources. These can include General Fund revenues, excess property tax levies,sales taxes,capital bonds, fire benefit charges, and fire impact fees. 8 Exhibit F- 20-Year CFP Amendments (Fire Protection) Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 The State of Washington authorizes cities and regional fire districts to levy both"regular"and "special"property taxes to support their operational and capital needs.As part of the regular property tax levy,a fire service provider is authorized to levy a property tax at a total maximum rate of$1.50 per$1,000 of assessed value. However,the total maximum aggregate"regular" property tax levy by all taxing agencies in an area may not exceed$5.60. Occasionally,all local levies will total more than this limit. In this case,"junior"taxing districts,including fire districts, must follow state statute to lower their levy rate so that the total aggregate rate does not exceed the statutory limit. Fire districts may also pass"special"property tax levies for short-term periods without a statutory maximum levy limit. An Emergency Medical Service property tax may be levied at a total maximum rate of$0.50 per $1,000 of assessed value.This levy must pass by at least 60% of the vote and must be renewed every six years. Fire impact fees may be collected on new residential and commercial development to fund facility improvements necessary to serve that development. Additional comments on capital funding strategies of note are discussed below: • Bellingham Fire Department-The Bellingham Fire Department receives capital dollars from the Medic One Fund,which is funded by a 1%sales tax that can be used for operations or capital;from the first 0.25% of Real Estate Excise Taxes,and from general fund revenues. • Lynden Fire Department-The City of Lynden Fire Department receives capital funding from the general fund and from impact fees. Impact fees for the fire department are project driven, and are expected to pay a set portion of the costs of needed expansion due to growth. Capital Projects Capital projects for the Bellingham Fire Department,Lynden Fire Department,North Whatcom Fire and Rescue(which serves the Birch Bay and Blaine UGAs),Fire District 7,Fire District 8 and Fire District 14 are provided below. The following fire districts do not have approved capital facility plans: • Fire District 1 (serving the Everson and Nooksack UGAs). As these districts approve capital facility plans,they will be incorporated by reference into the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan. 9 Exhibit F- 20-Year CFP Amendments (Fire Protection) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 Table 77. Fire District/Department Capital Projects 1 Project 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016- Total Costs/Revenue 2029 (thousands$) %/;',zr✓�/r }rp^l Srz ::'�Fi )\tom -3\�\:C\\� z�``�3 2,ATI://'%�/s' .. �////ii�.i�O P3-4WI ��\��vA ,�;.:'. /��i1� t1�1;�L}��i'\�'��7 :1 l� 3��\\�~� -.. ��; ".,dcb/ j--��' �/% ���/ ���:�..,:�\\� �\\\�.-. ��/,.. ��.'%�ii,.��z7 �, /,f s;,3i., 1, f�:.,a�'....n:\\�o.\G�\\; `S.?�`��3.� ... ...sC'� 1,�. ;‘,210 ;11111e4.:..�� :� \,b:� �� \\�O�\�'�... Boat House Cost 150 150 Revenue 150 150 REET(1S`Quarter) Classroom/Office Cost 1,000 1,000 Revenue 1,000 1,000 REET(1S`Quarter) Broadway Fire Station Upstairs Carpet Cost 9 9 Revenue 9 9 REET(1S'Quarter) Cardiac Monitor/ Defibrilator Cost 24 24 Revenue 24 24 Medic 1 Fund Field Computers Cost 11 12 23 Revenue 11 12 23 Medic 1 Fund Medic Unit Cost 158 158 Revenue 158 158 Medic 1 Fund Rechassis Medic Unit Cost 111 111 Revenue 111 111 Medic 1 Fund Thermal Imaging Camera Cost 12 12 24 Revenue 12 12 24 General Fund 10 Exhibit F- 20-Year CFP Amendments (Fire Protection) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 Project 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016- Total Costs/Revenue 2029 (thousands$) Ziljait�,7�i/ll oMi a 1, I . -.t y.,-,...'f /lll.A5.,,,:Ca,c', � O --f,����\_;��� %�/' ��-:�i� �`. 5tri Ladder Truck Purchase Cost 950 950 Fire Station Remodel- Sleeper Cost 380 380 New Ambulance Cost 130 130 New Pumper Truck Cost 600 600 aa�s I�t a.�"ili, k t ,f,�4�a�4,j:`/�i�i� i.,,.. w`-''„ :, �' "�%�/r/�yr`� i 1s"y% f� f� \ 5 c �� B'1Yp ' fi t OLlet�, 9r$ 'i a �`t)f 'ri ✓ 11 i ,a 'aa :r rE?:. New Station A with engine and aid vehicle (location TBD,but likely northwest area of district) Cost 5,723.1 New Station B with engine and aid vehicle (location TBD) Cost 5,723.1 Station 62 Seismic Upgrade Cost 376.2 Station 63 Seismic Upgrade Cost 340 Station 63 Exhaust system Cost 140 Station 64 Exterior Skin Replacement Cost 117.5 Station 64 Reroof Cost 87.5 11 Exhibit F- 20-Year CFP Amendments (Fire Protection) Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 Project 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016- Total Costs/Revenue 2029 (thousands$) Station 64 Seismic Upgrade Cost 218.7 Station 65 Seismic Upgrade Cost 227.5 Station 65 Exterior Skin Replacement Cost 121.8 Station 68 Seismic Upgrade Cost 223.8 Station 68 Site Paving Overlay Cost 97.5 Station 69 Seismic Upgrade Cost 279.9 Station 69 Site Paving Overlay Cost 126.2 Station 70 Seismic Upgrade Cost 226.2 Station 71 Seismic Upgrade Cost 426.8 Station 71 Exhaust System Cost 70 Station 72 Seismic Upgrade Cost 285.7 � error,% New Maintenance Vehicle Cost 40 40 Reserves 40 40 12 Exhibit F- 20-Year CFP Amendments (Fire Protection) Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 Project 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016- Total Costs/Revenue 2029 (thousands$) New Medic Unit Cost 150 150 Reserves 150 150 New Tender Cost 320 320 Reserves 320 320 Finalize Short Plat Cost 35 35 Property Tax 35 35 Funds Station 43- Carpet&Repairs Cost 50 50 Reserves 50 50 Station 45-New Water Service Cost 25 25 Property Tax 25 25 Funds New Staff Vehicle Cost 40 40 Reserves 40 40 Refurbish Medic Unit Cost 75 75 Reserves 75 75 Station 42- Remodel Cost 1,500 1,500 Voted Bond Issue 1,500 1,500 or impact fees New Staff Vehicle Cost 40 40 Property Tax 40 40 Funds New Engine Unit 13 Exhibit F- 20-Year CFP Amendments (Fire Protection) Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 Project 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016- Total Costs/Revenue 2029 (thousands$) Cost 375 375 Reserves 375 375 Replace Two Engines Cost —__ — 900 900 Reserves ----- 900 900 Station - Improvements --.-■.- Improvem ents Cost 300 300 Reserves 300 300 Station 2-Fiber — Connection Cost 30 30 Reserves 30 30 Remodel Cost ---.■.- Re Cost —__-- 108 108 Reserves __--- 108 108 Station 44-Fiber --.■ Connection Cost 35 35 Station Imp - Improvements Cost 77 77 New Ambulance -- .■.- Unit Cost 165 165 Data Terminals for Apparatus and Stations Cost 90 90 Department -■.- Training Center Cost _-_ 2,000 2,000 Station - Improvements .-■.- Improvem ents Cost 245 245 Station 46- 14 Exhibit F- 20-Year CFP Amendments (Fire Protection) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 Project 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016- Total Costs/Revenue 2029 (thousands$) Improvements Cost 75 75 Station 41 - Support Facility Cost 500 500 P3XE Oas�rl�rt�� \ �' �� it�.%1` A Y\�c ...�• \�a��\\\�\.,vj;;,,„ ,fte�s�l�nj ,` ���'oh r�.m.\:..;�..<v\-•. .\..;:-- ...o. ���..<U ...,�..�.9\: -,.�li,/,.,\�,�m�s.'..,..�,���..;; ��' �s.,,r�s�a � .i�7h,'��a:,,. Sumas Land Payment Cost 13.2 13.2 13.2 13.2 184.8 237.6 Replace Tender 93 Cost 200 200 Replace Command Vehicle Cost 20 20 Replace Ambulance Cost 125 125 New Command Vehicle Cost 45 45 Columbia Valley Station Cost 945 945 Equipment Cost 11.5 11.5 New Fire Engine Cost 450 450 New Ambulance Cost 125 125 Air Station Cost 40 40 Kendall Station Addition Cost 380,475 380,475 Replace Ambulance 15 Exhibit F- 20-Year CFP Amendments (Fire Protection) Adopted by the County Council -January 28, 2014 Project 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016- Total Costs/Revenue 2029 (thousands$) Cost 125 125 Replace Command Vehicle Cost 45 45 Replace Fire Engine Cost 250 250 Replace Tender Cost 300 300 Refurbish Fire Engine Cost 50 50 Sumas Station Architectural& Engineering costs Cost 207 207 16 Exhibit F - 20-Year CFP Amendments (Fire Protection) Adopted by the County Council - January 28, 2014 Fire district 8 _" Project Costs(thousand$) 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016-29 Total Ambulance 150 150 Replacement Fire Engine 500 500 Replacement Utility Vehicle 50 50 Replacement Station 31 3,525 3,525 Replacement Ambulance 150 150 Replacement Station34 444 444 Remodel Command Vehicle 50 50 Replacement Ambulance 150 150 Replacement Command Vehicle 50 50 Replacement New Kwina Station 2,675 2,675 &Apparatus Utility Vehicle 50 50 Replacement Ambulance 150 150 Replacement Command Vehicle 50 50 Replacement Fire Engine 500 500 Replacement Fire Engine 500 500 Replacement Command Vehicle 50 50 Replacement Ambulance 150 150 Replacement Ambulance 150 150 Replacement Utility Vehicle 50 50 Replacement 17 Exhibit F— 20-Year CFP Amendments (Fire Protection) Adopted by the County Council — January 28, 2014 1 Specific revenue sources in Table 77 are only provided where identified within the service provider's individual plans. 2 City of Bellingham 2008 Adopted Budget includes Fire Department projects through 2013,while the City of Bellingham Comprehensive Plan Capital Facilities element(Chapter 5)only include fire department projects through 2011. Locations are not provided for projects. 3 City of Lynden Fire Department 2009-2014 Capital Facilities Plan shows projects through 2014. Locations are not provided for projects. 4 North Whatcom Fire and Rescue's August 15,2009 Capital Facilities Plan identifies cost but does not identify year of funding. Therefore,all project costs are noted only in the Total column. Locations are not provided for new stations,and locations of projects at existing stations are associated with the station number per August 15,2009 Capital Facilities Plan (page 25). Sources: For Bellingham Fire: City of Bellingham,2008 Adopted Budget,Capital Facilities Plan(page 408),and Bellingham Comprehensive Plan,Capital Facilities(Chapter 5),page CF-75. For Lynden Fire: City of Lynden 2008-2014 Fire Department Capital Facilities Plan For North Whatcom Fire and Rescue: North Whatcom Fire and Rescue Capital Facilities Plan prepared by Henderson,Young& Company,(August 15,2009). For Fire District 7:Whatcom County Fire District No.7 Capital Facility Plan 2011-2029(May 2011) For Fire District 14: Whatcom County Fire District#14 Capital Facilities Plan(2012) For Fire District 8: Whatcom County Fire District#8 Capital Facilities Plan(2013) 18