Loading...
06/05/2012 12A Council General Information a .4,,, , .,, 4 ,....„ c r,,,,, k i4.4.;4; .....1,./ . y% BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL YAKIMA, WASHINGTON AGENDA STATEMENT Item No. 101 For Meeting of: June 5, 2012 ITEM TITLE: Council General Information SUBMITTED BY: CONTACT PERSON/TELEPHONE: SUMMARY EXPLANATION: 1. Interim City Manager Morales's letter of resignation 2 5/31/12 Weekly Issues Report 3. Basic motions based on Robert's Rules of Order 4. 6/5/12 Memo to Council from Judge Woodard re First Quarter 2012 Municipal Court Office Statistics 5. 5/15/12 Letter from WWTP Manager Schafer to Department of Ecology with attachments a 6. 5/23/12 Letter from Department of Ecology re recognition of Wastewater Treatment Plant Outstanding Performance award 7. City Meeting Schedule for week of June 4 through 11, 2012 8. Preliminary Future Activities Calendar as of June 4, 2012 9. Preliminary Council Agenda I Resolution Ordinance Other (specify) Contract: Mail to: Contract Term: Amount: Expiration Date: Insurance Required? No Funding Source: Phone: APPROVED FOR City Manager SUBMITTAL: 1 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: BOARD /COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: ATTACHMENTS: Click to download ❑ 6 -5 council packet a , MEMORANDUM May 31, 2012 TO: Honorable Micah Cawley, Mayor Members of the Yakima City Council FR: Michael A. Morales, Interim City Manager RE: Resignation Per the terms of my agreement with the city, please accept this 30 day notice of resignation from the position of Interim City Manager, and resignation of employment with the City of Yakima. My last day in the office will be Friday, June 29, 2012.' Thank you for the opportunity to serve the city council, city organization, and the community during the past 18 months of management transition. While challenging, the experience has been rewarding. I am especially proud of our accomplishments over my 14 year career with the city, and owe a tremendous debt of gratitude to all levels of staff in the organization. May God bless all of you. MEMORANDUM May 31, 2012 TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council Members FROM: Michael Morales, Interim City Manager, SUBJECT: Weekly Issues Report • STUDY SESSION: There will not be a Council Study Session on June 12, 2012. • GFI STEERING COMMITTEE: This Committee (Adkison, Coffey, and Ettl) will be meeting on Thursday, June 7 at 4:30 p.m. at Central Washington Comprehensive Mental Health. • REGIONAL FIRE AUTHORITY: This Committee (Adkison, Cawley, and Coffey) will be meeting on Thursday, June 7 at 6:00 p.m. at Fire Station 86. • WILLIAM O. DOUGLAS TRAIL DEDICATION: There will be a trail dedication ceremony on Saturday, June 9 at 11:00 a.m. by the William O. Douglas statue in the park on the east side of the school. • CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES: The sidewalk on Tieton Drive will be closed from 40 Avenue to 44 Avenue for an undetermined amount of time. This is due to the construction of the new Eisenhower High School. Motorists and pedestrians should be aware of heavy equipment in the area and are advised to use alternate routes when possible. • WASTEWATER PROJECTS: TTC will be replacing the manhole at the intersection of Yakima Avenue and Naches starting on Saturday, June 2 around 5 pm. They will work straight through until the project is complete. The pumping by -pass for the project requires a large detour and closes most of Naches and Yakima Avenue's through traffic. City crews will be cleaning the lines that TTC will be using as the by- pass lines during the project this week. The manhole replacement will be a complicated project for the contractor. Crews have been working in the vicinity of 36 Avenue and Chestnut. They are in the process of repairing a hole in the sewer line. • FIESTA EN LA CALLE: On Saturday, June 2 from 2 -7:00 p.m., the Madison House and Pacific Northwest University will be partnering with several community organizations throughout Yakima to hold "Fiesta en la Calle" a community block party. This event will highlight many of the community agencies whose services are available for eastside families. • JUNE 5 COUNCIL MEETING: As you know, I manage my son's baseball team and the Yakima National Little League City Tournament begins Saturday. Depending on wins and losses, I may need to be excused for the June 5 meeting to coach a game. Jeff Cutter will serve as City Attorney and Acting City Manager for the meeting. Go Nationals!! • BASIC MOTION QUICK TIPS: In your packet is a list of basic motions based on Robert's Rules of Order. A shorter version will be placed at the beginning of your Council packet. Basic.Motions Quick Tips (Based on Robert's Rules of Order) Motions The three most common motions a Council member will make are a motion to take action, a motion to amend, and a previous question ( "call for the question ") motion. Others motions used less often include a motion to table, ,a motion to postpone, and a reconsideration motion. Following are brief descriptions of those common motions that hopefully give you a better understanding of when and how each is intended to be used. There are many other elements of parliamentary procedure, but most will never need to be used in a Council meeting. Above all, in order for a meeting to be successful, the most important rule is for all involved to demonstrate common courtesy. Motion to Take Action - Before an item or issue can be discussed (debated) by the Council, a motion directing the Council to take action has to be made and seconded. Without a motion to take action being made and seconded, discussion by the Council is not appropriate. Motions to take action have to be seconded, and require a majority vote of the Council in favor to pass. - To make a motion to take action a Council member should begin by saying, "I move..." and then simply, clearly, and concisely state the intention of the motion. The most common motions to take action are to adopt or to deny. As an example, a Council member might say, "I move the Council adopt the contract as proposed." If the motion receives a second, the Council can then proceed to discuss the item or issue according to the debate process described in the Council's Rules of Procedure. * TIP - When making a motion, say what you mean and mean what you say. Do not go the "I so move" route. Saying "I so move" often results in confusion for your fellow Council members, the recording clerk, and citizens watching the meeting. When making a motion, be as exact and specific as you can and leave no doubt as to what you're asking the Council to agree to. Motion to Amend - Motions to take action that are under discussion by the Council can be amended, but only if a motion to amend receives a second and is approved by a majority of the Council. - To offer an amendment a Council member should first be recognized by the mayor and then make a motion to amend the original motion that is currently under discussion by the Council. As with any motion, a motion to amend should be simple, clear and concise. If the motion to amend receives a second, the Council can then proceed to discuss the proposed amendment. 1 * TIP - A motion to amend can only be approved by a majority of the Council and cannot fundamentally change the intent of the original motion. Under Robert's, there is no such thing as a "friendly" amendment. Once a motion to take action has been made and seconded, the motion belongs to the Council as a whole. Only the Council as a whole, not the maker of the original motion, can agree to amend it. Additionally, an amendment cannot fundamentally change the intent of the original motion. Previous Question Motion - A previous question motion most commonly appears during debate as a "Call for the Question." However, it is also likely the most misunderstood and misapplied of all parliamentary procedure motions. In order to end debate immediately, a "Call for the Question" or previous question motion requires a second AND a two - thirds majority vote of the Council in favor in order to pass. - To Call for the Question a Council member should first be recognized by the mayor and then make a previous question motion or simply say, "I call for the question." If the previous question motion receives a second, it is voted on without debate. If the previous question motion passes, debate ends and a vote is immediately taken on the original motion that was under discussion by the Council. If the previous question motion fails, debate on the original motion continues. * TIP - Do not expect debate to stop and a vote to be taken on the original motion just because you say, "I call for the question ". It would be patently unfair, not to mention a serious violation of Robert's, to allow one member of the Council to end debate by simply saying he or she wants debate to end. Parliamentary procedure, whether it's Robert's or some other version, is primarily intended to foster debate, not stifle it. Ending debate is considered, therefore, a serious matter. That's why a previous question (or "call for the question ") motion requires a second AND a two - thirds majority vote of the Council in favor to pass. Motion to Table - Under Robert's, a motion to table simply proposes temporarily setting aside a motion that the Council is currently discussing so that it can address something that is more pressing. A motion to table should be made only if the group fully expects to return to and deal with the tabled motion during the same meeting or, at the very latest, the Council's next meeting. - To table a motion currently being discussed a Council member should first be recognized by the mayor and then make a motion to table. If the motion to table receives a second, it cannot be debated or amended but must be voted on immediately. A majority vote of the Council in favor is required for a motion to table to pass. 2 * TIP - An adopted motion-to -table does not kill an original motion under discussion and, therefore, should only be used in rare circumstances. The motion to table is nearly as misunderstood and misused as the previous question motion. An adopted motion to table does not kill an original motion under consideration by the Council. As mentioned, under Robert's, a motion to table is only properly used to temporarily set aside a motion currently under consideration by the Council so that more urgent business can be addressed. That scenario rarely occurs. So, a motion to table should rarely be used. Motion to Postpone - There are two types of motions that can postpone further discussion and /or consideration of an original motion. A "motion to postpone to a certain time" must include reference to a specific meeting at which the original motion will be discussed again. A "motion to postpone indefinitely" does not include reference to a specific meeting at which the original motion will be discussed again and if passed, therefore, effectively kills the motion being considered. - To postpone further consideration of a motion until another time a Council member should say, "I move we postpone further consideration of this motion until..." and then identify a specific meeting at which the motion will be discussed again. A motion to postpone to a certain time requires a second, can be debated, can be amended, and must gain a majority vote of the Council in favor in order to pass. - To effectively kill a motion being discussed by the Council a Council member should say, "I move we postpone further consideration of this motion indefinitely." A motion to postpone indefinitely requires a second, can be debated, cannot be amended, and must gain a majority vote of the Council in favor in order to pass. * TIP - A motion to postpone is an effective strategic tool and can be used to either put off uncomfortable decisions or avoid them altogether. A motion that was made and seconded may have sounded just fine to begin with. But during discussion, issues arise that make voting on the original motion problematic. By passing a motion to postpone, the Council is agreeing that it's better not to make a decision on the original motion rather than to vote it up or down. Reconsideration Motion - A motion to reconsider allows the Council to take another vote on an item that had already been decided. However, a reconsideration vote can only be taken under limited circumstances (see below). The Yakima City Council Rules of Procedure includes a reconsideration motion procedure that slightly varies from that found in Robert's. However, both the Council Rules of Procedure version and the Robert's version accomplish the same goal of allowing an item previously decided to receive another vote. 3 - To have the Council vote again on an item that was previously decided a Council member should say, "I move the Council reconsider its vote taken on..." and then specify the subject matter of the vote as well as the date of the vote. A reconsideration motion requires a second, can be debated, and must gain a majority vote of the Council in favor in order to pass. If the reconsideration motion passes, the Council can then debate the original motion again and vote on it. * TIP - A reconsideration motion can only be made by a Council member on the prevailing side of the vote on the original motion and has to be made not later than the end of the next Council meeting. If the majority of the Council originally voted to deny a motion, then only a Council member who voted "no" on the original motion can make a reconsideration motion. Likewise, if a majority of the Council originally voted to pass a motion, then a reconsideration motion can only be made by a Council member who voted "yes" on the original motion. Additionally, a reconsideration motion can only be made at the same meeting at which the original vote on the item or issue was taken OR before the end of the next Council meeting. 4 MEMORANDUM June 5, 2012 TO: The Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Michael Morales, Interim City Manager FROM: The Honorable Susan Woodard, Presiding Judge Linda Hagert, Court Services Manager Debbie Baldoz, CPA SUBJECT: 1st Quarter 2012 Municipal Court Office Statistics The City of Yakima Municipal Court operation was created in late 1996 and has been an independent judicial arm of the City since January 1, 1997. The Court adjudicates all traffic infractions, misdemeanors, and gross misdemeanors cited in the City. The Court operates with two full time Judges, one of whom presides over the Court's activities, and a part time Court Commissioner. The City Council adopts the Courts budget annually; the Court is otherwise independent from City Administration. Following please find summary statistical reports for Municipal Court 1st Quarter activity through March 31, 2012. Detailed reports are available from the Office of the Municipal Court. Prior year totals for 2011 are included for comparison. The following summary information for each quarter includes: I. Municipal Court Infraction Statistics II. Municipal Court Criminal Statistics III. Public Safety Education Assessment (PSEA) Statistics IV. Collection Statistics -- Municipal Court Outstanding Time -Pay Contracts V. Outside Agency Collection Statistics - DB 2012 1st Qtr MuniCt Page 1 Yakima Municipal Court -- 1st Quarter 2012 I. Municipal Court Infraction Statistics 2011 2012 Prior 2012 Prior Year Qtrs. January February March YTD Total Filings -- Proceedings During Year: Infractions Filed 9,600 0 701 829 809 2,339 Violations Charged 12,586 0 918 1,106 1,087 3,111 Mitigation Hearings 1,190 0 106 109 97 312 Contested Hearings 292 0 16 32 38 86 Show Cause Hearings 108 0 6 6 6 18 Other Hearings On Record 2,496 0 178 157 195 530 Total 26,272 0 1,925 2,239 2,232 6,396 Dispositions During Year: Infractions Paid 2,469 0 145 211 234 590 Failure to Respond 2,812 0 280 289 247 816 Committed 3,877 0 304 275 286 865 Not Committed 166 0 14 12 12 38 Dismissed 1,928 0 167 164 175 506 Amended 9 0 0 0 0 0 Total Disposed 11,261 0 910 951 954 2,815 Municipal Court Traffic Infraction Revenues $960,485 $59,592 $96,269 $85,599 $241,460 Budget $1,060,000 $1,000,000 DB 2012 1st Qtr MuniCt Page 2 Yakima Municipal Court -- 1st Quarter 2012 II. Municipal Court Criminal Statistics 2011 Prior 2012 Prior 2012 Year Qtrs. January February March YTD Total Filings During Year: Citations Filed 5,141 0 343 471 415 1,229 Violations Charged 6,132 0 419 551 483 1,453 Trial Settings During Year: Non Jury Trials Set 8 0 1 1 0 2 Jury Trials 2,154 0 142 154 94 390 Proceedings: Arraignments 4,255 0 276 361 366 1,003 Non Jury Trials 1 0 0 0 0 0 Jury Trials 15 .0 0 0 2 2 Stipulations to Record 3 0 1 0 0 1 Other Hearings 5,103 0 397 380 399 1,176 Dispositions: Bail Forfeitures 11 0 1 0 0 1 Guilty 3,698 0 289 326 298 913 Not Guilty 5 0 0 .. 0 0 0 Dismissed 2,255. 0 220 186 151 557 Amended 329 0 23 29 15 67 Deferred/ Driver 543 0 54 49 48 151 Prosecution Resumed - 125 0 5 8 19 32 Total Disposition 6,966 0 592 598 531 1,721 Criminal Fines Revenue: DWI Penalties $102,773 0 $5,248 $5,741 $10,777 $21,766 Criminal Traffic 147,886 0 7,315 11,918 16,494 35,727 Non - Traffic Misdemeanor 87,270 0 6,499 14,337 9,135 29,971 Recoupments 186,478 0 13,014 16,974 50,612 80,600 Total Fines $524,407 0 $32,076 $48,970 $87,018 $168,064 dotal Budget $545,000 $555,000 DB 2012 1st Qtr MuniCt Page 3 Yakima Municipal Court -- 1st Quarter 2012 III. Public Safety Education Assessment (PSEA) Statistics 2011 2012 Prior 2012 . Prior Year Qtrs. January February March YTD Total Public Safety $1,416,534 0 $84,802 . $137,675 $152,441 $374,918 Education Assessment (PSEA) Payments * * Required payments to State Public Safety Education. Revenue for these payments is included as part of the total fine. Revenue figures presented are net of these payments. IV. Collection Statistics -- Municipal Court Outstanding Time -Pay Contracts As of 03/31/2012 Outstanding Municipal Court Time -Pay Agreements ** $2,537,559 * *After judgment the offender makes arrangements with the court to pay their outstanding fines. If the offender does not make a payment in 30 days and does not make an effort with the court to make other arrangements to pay, the account is considered in arrears. A final notice is mailed to the person in arrears. If ignored the account is then turned over to collection. The collection agency is mandated by the state of Washington to write off accounts still owing ten years after the judgment date due to the statute of limitations. The statute of limitations covers all fines and restitution. V. Outside Collection Agency Statistics 2012 and Prior Years Outside Collection Agency: * ** Accounts Assigned in Prior Years $18,930,300 Accounts Assigned in 2008 4,361,132 Accounts Assigned in 2009 4,868,762 Accounts Assigned in 2010 4,216,404 Accounts Assigned in 2011 6,872,233 Accounts Assigned in 2012 1,355,067 Total Assignments $40,603,898 Dollars Collected Since Assignment (Cumulative) (as of 3/31/12) $6,713,638 Collection Performance Court Accounts 16.53% * ** Net of cancellation DB 2012 1st Qtr MuniCt Page 4 a • o Y CITY OF YAKIMA ^ `� AIIIMINII,' c ° ',, WASTEWATER- DIVISION �' ' _ k , 2220 East Viola F „ Yakima, Washington 98901 w Phone: 575 -6077 • Fax. (509) 575 -6116 , ' 1 j \'C�kPORA'LF.V �4af May 15, 2012 , Mr. Sanjay Barik, Technical Unit Supervisor Washington Dept. of Ecology, Water Quality Program 15 W Yakima Avenue, Suite 200 Yakima WA 98902 Mr. Barik, Attached is a memorandum from our consultant, RIDOLFI, Inc., that describes the City's approach for developing designs and an engineering report for Ecology's consideration regarding our floodplain restoration and alternative outfall project. We think that, as is stated in the memo, the overall water quality of the Yakima River will improve as a result of our project. Please provide any comments or suggestions you might have. Sincere y, \\ Scott Schafer, Manage Wastewater Division cc. Donna Smith Charlie McKinney Tom Tebb Colin Wagoner Yakima . !? q II IIV 1999 RIDOLFI MEMORANDUM DATE: April 26, 2012 TO: Ryan Anderson FROM: Colin Wagoner SUBJECT: Wastewater Treatment Plant NPDES Permit Modification The City of Yakima Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) currently treats upwards of 15 million gallons of wastewater on a daily basis. Treated effluent from the WWTP is discharged into the Yakima River through a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permitted outfall located at river mile 110. This memorandum is developed in response to plans that are in various stages that will affect the City's ability to discharge at the current location. The plans are generally related to Gap -to -Gap river restoration, in which the City is a participant and Yakima County's Upper Yakima Flood Control Zone District is the lead agency along with several other entities. Salmon populations were in steep decline, or entirely extirpated, in the Yakima Basin for many decades during the 20 century. In 1999, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries) classified Middle Columbia River steelhead as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act (Conley et al., 2009). In 2002, a large study sponsored by the US Bureau of Reclamation (Stanford et al., 2002) identified the Gap to Gap reach as having the most potential for floodplain and salmon habitat restoration if levees are set back. Since then, several planning efforts have identified floodplain restoration and levee setback in the Gap to Gap reach of the Yakima River as an action item to restore listed steelhead species and other salmonid species, including the Middle Columbia River bull trout which are listed as threatened by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 1998 (USFWS, 2002). In 2006, the Washington Department of Ecology changed its water quality standards from "Class based" standards protecting general characteristic uses to "Designated Use" based standards. The designated uses of the Yakima River in the Gap to Gap reach include salmonid spawning and rearing. Yakima County is developing plans to set back or remove various levees in the Gap to Gap reach including the Drainage Improvement District 1 (DID #1) levee downstream of the State Highway 24 bridge on the east bank of the Yakima River. These setbacks will increase flood control to the Yakima Valley residents and will restore some of the natural riverine and ecological processes to the floodway (USBR, 2010). These are important projects for restoration of designated uses in the Yakima River. The proposed levee setbacks may result in an avulsion of the primary channel away from its current location to a new alignment further east, which could result in the WWTP. outfall discharging to a dry or partially wetted channel. Ecology Memo May 2012 Y � To plan for this change, the City of Yakima is considering an alternative WWTP outfall location that is not dependent on the Yakima River's current alignment. In a related effort, the City is pursuing the project as an opportunity to restore off - channel habitat in the City -owned floodplain terrace to the south the WWTP. The memorandum addresses the WWTP's approach to maintaining compliance with NPDES permit requirements with an alternative outfall configuration. WWTP Current Permit Requirements The WWTP's current NPDES permit (no. WA0024023) was issued by the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) September 30, 2011 and expires on September 30, 2016. The permit places limits on five effluent parameters: • Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) • Total suspended solids (TSS) • Total residual chlorine' • pH • Fecal coliform bacteria Biochemical oxygen demand, TSS, residual chlorine, and fecal coliform bacteria are regulated using average monthly and average weekly concentrations (fecal coliform uses a geometric mean value). pH is regulated using daily maximum and minimum values. The permitted limits are provided below in Table 1. Table 1. Permitted Effluent Limits Parameter Units Average Weekly Limit Average Monthly Limit Biochemical Oxygen Demand mg /L 45 30 Total Suspended Solids mg /L 45 30 Total Residual Chlorine mg /L 0.0355 0.0149 Fecal Coliform Colonies /100 200 100 Bacteria* mL Daily Min Daily Max pH standard 6 9 units `Fecal coliform uses a geometric mean rather than a standard average. For more information on calculation of a geometric mean see Ecology publication number 04 -10 -020. Effluent limits set by the NPDES permit are based on two mixing zones in the river identified as the acute and chronic mixing zones. These mixing zones dilute the released effluent to meet aquatic life and human health criteria. For acute exposure, the required dilution factor is 1.9, ' Total residual chlorine only applies to emergency periods when the normal UV disinfection bank is not operating. Ecology Memo May 2012 2 and the mixing zone extends from 3.1 feet upstream to 31 feet downstream of the outfall. Chronic exposure requires a dilution factor of 10. The chronic mixing zone extends from 31 feet upstream to 310 feet downstream of the outfall. Both the acute and chronic mixing zones are 50 feet wide and extend from the bottom of the river to the water surface. Dimensions of the acute and chronic mixing zones are based on a low river - discharge scenario that occurs over 7- consecutive days and has a 10 -year recurrence interval period. This flow is commonly referred to as the "7010." For the Yakima River the 7010 discharge is 835 cubic feet per second (cfs). The current WWTP effluent limits are set on the basis that adequate dilution will be achieved at the 7010 flow within the dimensions described above using 2.5% of the 7010 for acute mixing, and 25% of the 7Q10 for chronic mixing. During normal, higher flows effluent dilution factors are greater than the minimums identified in the permit. The WWTP has maintained an excellent record of compliance with NPDES permit requirements, and incurred only one effluent violation in the past 31/2 years for residual chlorine. Permitted parameter values in WWTP effluent are generally well below NPDES regulatory limits as can be seen in Table 2. Ecology Memo May 2012 3 V Table 2.Effluent Parameter Summary Statistics for 2006 -2010 Parameter Units Weekly Average Range Monthly Average Range Biochemical Oxygen Demand mg /L 5 to 15 5 to 15 Total Suspended Solids mg /L 6 to 13 4 to 16 Total Residual Chlorine* mg /L N/A N/A Fecal Coliform Colonies /100 Bacteriat mL 5 to 50 5 to 50 Average Daily Min Average Daily Max standard pH units 6.3 6.8 *Residual chlorine only applies during emergency periods when the ultraviolet disinfection bank is not in operation. This did not occur during the period of record examined, so no data has been provided. t Fecal coliform uses a geometric mean rather than an arithmetic mean. For more information on calculation of a geometric average see Ecology publication number 04 -10 -020. Proposed Alternative Outfall Configuration Possible future avulsion of the Yakima River channel is one of the primary drivers for relocating the existing outfall to a new location. In order to avoid depending on the river channel position to continue discharging WWTP effluent in the future, the new outfall would diffuse treated water into a series of conveyance channels that run through the middle of the current floodplain (Figure 1). The project design is being developed to maximize restoration of off - channel and floodplain habitat development for the benefit of Endangered Species Act listed species, designated used species, and for supporting designated uses. The conveyance channels will carry most of the effluent to the Yakima River. This system will run northwest to southeast and will be approximately 1,000 feet long. Adjacent to the primary conveyance system, a separate surface channel will collect conveyance channel losses after they are allowed to mix with groundwater Mixing with groundwater will provide some thermal regulation of the effluent that reaches the secondary channel network, since process records indicate that summer temperatures are above 20°C, the recommended maximum for salmonids, for an extended period. This secondary surface channel network will be designed and built with the primary goal of creating new off - channel habitat for native fish species. The restoration project will incorporate in- channel woody debris and riparian vegetation to provide shade, increase diversity, and moderate water temperatures. The total length of the secondary channel network is approximately 2,000 linear feet. Groundwater elevation data collected at the site, indicate that groundwater flows across the floodplain to the southeast. Comparison between river stage data, and groundwater data demonstrate that monitoring well MW -05 is located outside the hyporheic zone that is influenced by the river, while monitoring well MW -06 is located within the hyporheic zone (Figure 1). The secondary channel network will be constructed to a depth that intercepts the lowest local Ecology Memo May 2012 4 groundwater elevation to a depth of two feet . Seasonal low- groundwater elevations in the floodplain are approximately 12 feet below ground surface As the groundwater from the western boundary of the floodplain is expected to provide a continuous source. of dilution along the entire length of the secondary surface channel network. Observations made over the past four months indicate that some hyporheic water is also expected to enter the secondary surface channel network, particularly during periods of high river stage. Hyporheic contributions are expected to follow the secondary surface channel network back to the confluence of the project and the Yakima River and provide additional dilution to the effluent in the lower project reaches. This conceptual design for the alternative outfall provides both reliable conveyance for the majority of the plant effluent, and new off - channel habitat for native fish species throughout the year. Additionally this system is not dependent on the position of the Yakima River's main channel. The secondary surface channel network will provide both thermal refuge in the summer, and low- energy off - channel habitat in the winter, both of which have been identified as critical links to restoring the health of native fisheries (Mantua et al., 2011). Groundwater and hyporheic contributions to the secondary surface channel network flows will be returned to the Yakima River and the project's confluence with the main channel. Data collected by the USGS (Vaccaro, 2011) indicates that this reach of the Yakima River gains a modest flow from groundwater discharge. The proposed alternative outfall project will continue to discharge comparable volumes of groundwater into the Yakima through the surface channel network, thus leaving the total flows in the river unchanged. Alternative Outfall NPDES Permit Compliance Presently effluent compliance with the NPDES permit requirements is demonstrated just after the UV bay in the WWTP before water discharges to the outfall in the Yakima River. Permitted parameter values are set based on the total dilution that will be achieved once the effluent released is allowed to mix with a portion of the river flow. Because the alternative outfall system will not discharge directly into the Yakima River, but rather into a series of conveyance channels and secondary surface channels, an extended mixing zone will need to be established. The Washington Administrative Code provides four conditions for establishing an extended mixing zone (Section WAC 173-201A-400-12): "Exceedences from the numeric size criteria in subsection (7) and (8) of this section and the overlap criteria in subsection (9) of this section may be considered by the department in the following cases: a. For discharges existing prior to November 24, 1992, (or for proposed discharges with engineering plans formally approved by the department prior to November 24 1992). b. Where altering the size configuration is expected to result in greater protection to existing characteristic uses. c. Where the volume of water in the effluent is providing greater benefit to the existing or characteristic uses of the water body due to flow augmentation 2 Seasonal low -stand elevations for groundwater in the project area were measured to be 983.9 feet above sea level at monitoring well MW -05, and 981.1 feet above sea level at monitoring well MW -06. Ecology Memo May 2012 5 ! than the benefit of removing the discharge, if such removal is the remaining feasible option - d. Where the exceedence is clearly necessary to accommodate important economic or social development in the area in which the waters are located Conditions b., c., and d. are applicable to the alternative outfall. Based on the standards identified in the Washington Administrative Code the alternative outfall will: • Result in the creation of new off - channel habitat, which provides greater benefit and characteristic use of the existing floodplain than does the current condition. • Accommodate the planned levee setback in this reach of the Yakima River. • Allow for restoration of natural processes in the river channel that have been previously limited or actively fought to protect infrastructure such as the current outfall. Ecology granted an extended mixing zone to the Selah WWTP (NPDES Permit WA- 002103 -2) which discharges to Selah Ditch approximately 3,000 feet upstream of its point of discharge to the Yakima River. The Selah facility outflows augment the total flow in the extended mixing zone, which provides over - wintering habitat for juvenile salmonids. Similarly, the alternative outfall for the Yakima WWTP is intended to enhance off - channel habitat by providing flow to an area that is seasonally dry. Most of the undiluted effluent will be conveyed into an extended mixing zone on the north end of the project reach. These conveyance surface channels will terminate in the porous river gravels found in the side channels of the Yakima River (Figure 1). Dilution of this flow will occur in the main river channel, side channels, and hyporheic zone in what can be defined as an extended mixing zone. A relatively small fraction of the conveyance channel flows will seep out of the channels, mix with groundwater, and enter the secondary surface channel network. This water will combine with some groundwater and hyporheic water captured by the surface channels as they flow south. It is estimated that dilution equivalent to what is currently allowed in the existing NPDES permit will be reached within a relatively short (300 to 500 foot) distance downstream of the secondary surface channel network's confluence with the main Yakima River channel. Historic effluent data provides a baseline for what the conveyance system that connects to the upper portion of the extended mixing zone will release. Currently the water is relatively nutrient rich, slightly acidic, and warmer than the river throughout the year. By the time that the outfall is completed the WWTP will have completed two additional treatment phases to reduce phosphate and nitrogen concentrations in the effluent However temperature is expected to remain elevated relative to the river. It is not clear how quickly effluent will be diluted once it is released into the extended mixing zone, but this can be evaluated by monitoring water quality in side channels and comparing water quality parameters to the concentrated effluent. 3 The WWPT is currently working on an Enhanced Biological Nutrient Removal project and installation of struvite recovery systems that are expected to be online before the conveyance channels are constructed. Ecology Mertes May 2012 6 Additional monitoring in the secondary surface channel network will also be performed since the level of dilution in these channels can only be generally estimated (see above). Because these channels are designed for use as native fish habitat water temperature in particular will need to be monitored regularly. Nutrient levels are also expected to be elevated in the channels since effluent is expected to make up a large fraction of the total water volume. Extended Mixing Zone Uncertainties and Proposed Evaluation Approach Water quality in the Yakima River downstream of the point of discharge from the proposed alternative outfall system is expected to be equivalent to, or slightly improved over existing conditions. However, determining the rate of mixing between river water and effluent in the extended mixing zone is a complex and difficult problem since the physical system in which mixing is occurring is both large and highly anisotropic. As an example, we consider changes in temperature effects to the river from the existing outfall to the extended mixing zone. Temperature effects from the existing WWTP outfall into the Yakima River are relatively minor under most circumstances since the effluent is released into a comparatively large and turbulent water body. As a result, effluent is quickly mixed with river water over a short downstream distance. In the proposed extended mixing zone temperature effects may be more significant since the side channel flows and turbulence are reduced from those in the primary river channel. Additional complications that are expected to influence the water temperature include: • Thermal segregation between the warmer effluent and cooler river water • Shading over some portions of the riparian channels • Side channel geometry • Lateral and subsurface flow though the porous river gravels between the primary and side channels • Hyporheic water contributions to the side channels • Changes in side channel flows associated with changes in river stage Modeling may provide some a gross indication of groundwater / surface water interactions. A simple model will be developed to evaluate dilution and thermal spreading at a coarse scale. However, the large number of complications, which vary spatially throughout the extended mixing zone make detailed modeling impractical, since any model will require significant simplification of the real physical system to meet model parameter requirements. Evaluation of other water quality parameters such as nutrient loading are expected to be even more complex than the temperature effects, in part because temperature effects cascade to other parameters. Additional environmental processes such as nutrient sorption onto organic carbon or digestion by pelagic communities make reliable of the system still more difficult. Therefore, in recognition of these complexities and challenges, we believe a combined approach of qualitative analysis during the planning phase followed by empirical data collection within the extended mixing zone remains the best approach to evaluating the extended mixing zone's performance. Ecology Memo May 2012 7 per;; References Conley, A., J. Freudenthal, D. Lind, P. Mees, R. Visser. 2009. Yakima Steelhead Recovery Plan. Yakima Basin Fish and Wildlife Recovery Board, Yakima WA Mantua, N., I. Tohver, and A. Hamlet. 2009. Climate change impacts on streamflow extremes and summertime stream temperature and their possible consequences for freshwater salmon habitat in Washington State. Climatic Change number 102: pages 187 -223. Stanford, J., E. Snyder, M. Lorang, D. Whited, P. Matson, and J. Chaffin. 2002. The Reaches Project: Ecological and Geomorphic Studies Supporting Normative Flows in the Yakima River Basin, Washington. Project Number 1997 -04700 (BPA Report DOE/BP- 00005854 -1). Bonneville Power Administration, Portland OR. U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. (USBR). 2010. Yakima River Geomorphology and Sediment Transport Study: Gap to Gap Reach, Yakima WA. Technical Report Number SRH -2010- 08.Prepared for the County of Yakima, Washington. November U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. (USFWS). 2002. Bull Trout Draft Recovery Plan: Middle Columbia Recovery Unit. October. Available at: http: / /www.fws.00v /pacific /bulltrout /RP /Chapter 21 %20Middle %20Columbia.pdf Vaccaro, J.J. 2011. River - aquifer exchanges in the Yakima River basin, Washington: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2011- 5026.98 pages. Washington Department of Ecology.Fact Sheet for NPDES Permit Number WA- 002103 -2 City of Selah Publically Owned Treatment Works. Ecology Memo May 2012 8 . , . . . . . 4 .. . 0 0.1, . - . 'I' ". .1?. .. • ' 0 _ 'it ) \ . 4 a .... ........,, . s ... so r Existing Outfall to • " .. , , , ' f *t. Yakima River i - • s • * " 0 <(- JP ' - — — - . I"' ..., NI • Subsurface Conveyance I 3 . 7 :1 . System . frIl 4 ....,. . _ i , L II. \.tt:'''' - - - 4.....t Fenced Area Meht -, .."7 . . 2, .. . - 4111111 Daylighted Conveyance System . _. . . *: „, - •••'... , ' I .,_ , d” .& ^ •;it ' . • t N ',...:".' . a 11. - , : Capture Conveyance Losses 1 - % .a Ilk: • to Groundwater • • .,„ _ - I .1 • Modified, • • ' Billy's Pond. " , — ■A''' ',.. '. ,..i. A , .47 . Secondary Surface Channel a Network Dug to 2' Below 1 ..■ 4. 66-11 - 1- .ib. t • Groundwater Elevation i off -- : ; .,,,, .: • ._ , • , ..- , LEGEND y-s _ i, ii .0-_ i • Monitoring Well t.. , .../C4c. 0 Proposed Phase I 0 Conveyance .., Secondary e Surface Channel t. . Downstream Edge for Subsurface ik ',.., N Chronic Mixing Zone ) 0 , Conveyance ! 6 t ., Daylighted ' . -j l it - Conveyance SITE STATISTICS: t , DIMENSIONS ' Bike Trail i ' ProjectSite: 111 Acres Billy's Pond: 46 Acres . Existing Outfall Road: 2 9 Miles Trail: 1 Mile 0 260 520 . ,• . j t 'C I, . River from Bridge to S Extent IIING■INIFeet .r i g ; ' of Project Boundary: 1 Mile AlPrk 111"1114 ' 1.11i • -• ADDITIONAL INFO , ' ■■ . WRIA: 37 \ 1 x 1 T 10 ti `...,' ARE Al• RO I - «.' HUC: 1703000302 April 2012 Figure 1 Outfall Alternative Evaluation e.„ . ...- LI Outfall Alternative Project II. City of Yakima Wastewater Treatment Division Conceptual Layout :ft STAT& w RECEIVED CITY OF YAKIMA 4 "e Is [;9 '° MAY 2 9 2012 STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY OFFICE OF CITY COUNCIL PO Box. 47600 • Olympia, WA 98504 -7600 • 360- 407 -6000 711 for Washington Relay Service • Persons with a speech disability can call 877 - 833 -6341 May 23, 2012 The Honorable Micah Cawley Mayor of Yakima 129 N 2nd Street Yakima, WA 98901 Dear Mayor Cawley: Congratulations! The Yakima Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant is receiving the 2011 "Wastewater Treatment Plant Outstanding Performance" award. The Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) will issue a news release recognizing the 2011 award recipients that will include the Yakima Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant. My staff evaluated wastewater treatment plants in Washington for compliance with the effluent limits, monitoring and reporting requirements, spill prevention planning, pretreatment , and overall operational demands of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. Of approximately 300 wastewater treatment plants statewide, yours is one of 108 that achieved full compliance with its NPDES permit in 2011. It takes diligent operators and a strong management team, working effectively together, to achieve this high level of compliance. It's not easy to operate a wastewater treatment plant 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, without violations. Ecology appreciates the extraordinary level of effort your plant operators demonstrated throughout 2011. Talented and proficient operators are critical to successful plant operations and protecting the health of Washington's waters. Your excellent record proves that dedicated operators run the Yakima Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant and their combined efforts lead to outstanding compliance. Please call Donna Smith at 509- 575 -2612 if you have any questions or comments about your award. Thank you for the excellent service you provide. Congratulations! Sincerely, Kelly Susewind, P.E., P.G. Water Quality Program Manager two, CITY MEETING SCHEDULE For June 4, 2012 — June 11, 2012 Please note: Meetings are subject to change Monday, June 4 10:00 a.m. City Council Media Briefing — Council Chambers 3:30 p.m. Civil Service Commission Meeting — Council Chambers Tuesday, June 5 10:00 a.m. County Commissioners Agenda Meeting — Council Chambers 4:30 p.m. City Council Executive Session — Council Chambers 6:00 p.m. City Council Meeting — Council Chambers Thursday, June 7 9:00 a.m. County Hearing Examiner — Council Chambers 1:00 p.m. County Commissioners Meeting — Council Chambers 3:00 p.m. Bid Opening — Council Chambers 4:30 p.m GFI Steering Committee Meeting — CWCMH 6:00 p.m. Regional Fire Authority Meeting — Station 86 6:00 p.m. Valley Mayor's Meeting — Toppenish Saturday, June 9 11:00 a.m. William O'Douglas Trail Dedication — Davis High School - Monday, June 11 8:30 a.m. Pension Board Meeting — Human Resources Conference Room Office Of Mayor /City Council Preliminary Future Activities Calendar Please Note: Meetings are subject to change eeti "Y" . ,. , -w :Or anizatio r, % .', :x:: :., :.Mlle 3 .. , g.' ;.� Y �g n r° .,�._ etingPur'ose ",- - ,Partici' ants'. "' ,:�;;; .,�M`eetfn 3L'ocati ori'':;'�;: : � 4 . ^3 J' ;4:. fCa•.' n , N g n, °,✓EN?"• ,XS:�- Y^ '5. -- q >. " s .. Mon. June 4 10:00 a.m. City Council Media-Briefing Scheduled Meeting Coffey. Council Chambers Tue. June 5 12:00 p.m. Miscellaneous Issues Scheduled Meeting Cawley, Adkison TBD 4:30 p.m. City Council Executive Scheduled Meeting Council Council Chambers Session 6:00 •.m. Ci Council Meetin• Scheduled Meetin• Council Council Chambers Thur. June 7 9:00 a.m. 911 Joint Board Meeting Board Meeting Lover Toppenish 4 30 p m. GFI Steering Committee Scheduled Meeting Coffey, Adkison, CW,CMH Meeting EttI 6:00 p m. Regional Fire Authority Scheduled Meeting Cawley, Adkison, Station 86 Coffey 6:00 • m Valle Ma or's Meetin• Scheduled Meetin• Cawle Touenish Sat. June 9 11:00 a m. William O'Douglas Trail Scheduled Event Open Davis High School Dedication Ceremon Mon. June 11 30 a m. Pension Board Meetings Board Meeting Coffey Human Resources Conference Room Tue. June 12 12:00 • m Miscellaneous Issues Scheduled Meetin• Cawle Adkison TBD Wed. June 13 10:00 a.m. Council Nominating Scheduled Meeting Adkison, Ensey, Mayor's Office Committee Bristol 3 30 p m. Planning Commission Scheduled Meeting Ensey Council Chambers Meeting 5 p m Parks Commission Meeting Scheduled Meeting Adkison Council Chambers Thur. June 14 � ry 1.00 p.m. Harman Center Board Board Meeting Cawley, Adkison Harman Center Meeting 1 p.m. Yakima Regional Clean Air Scheduled Meeting Lover Council Chambers Meeting 3.30 p.m. YAKCORPS Executive Board Meeting Cawley CED Conference Room Board 5:30 • m. YCDA Board Meetin• Board Meetin• Adkison New Vision Offices Mon. June 18 1000 a m City Council Media Briefing Scheduled Meeting Ettl Council Chambers Tue. June 19 12 00 p m Miscellaneous Issues Scheduled Meeting Cawley, Adkison TBD 2•00 p.m. Yakima County Gang Scheduled Meeting Adkison TBD Commission 4.30 p m. (T) City Council Executive Scheduled Meeting Council Council Chambers Session 6.00 m. Ci Scheduled Council Meetin Meetin Council Council Chambers Wed. June 20 12 00 p.m. PAL Board Meeting Board Meeting Coffey PAL Center PRELIMINARY FUTURE COUNCIL AGENDA June 12 NO SCHEDULED BUSINESS MEETING June 19 (T) 4:30 p.m. Executive Session — Council Chambers 6 :00 p.m. Business Meeting — Council Chambers • Resolution authorizing 2012 budget amendments (Epperson) • Consideration of resolution approving 2012 Collective Bargaining Agreement between the City of Yakima and Yakima Police Patrolman's Association • Review and approve first quarter revenue and expenditure report • Resolution authorizing execution of agreement with Block by Block to provide safety, cleaning, and parking management services in the DYBID • Update on GFI activities • Approve agreement with Yakima County for 2013 jail services • Resolution authorizing professional services agreement for jail feasibility study 7:00 p.m. Public Hearing — Council Chambers • Open record public hearing to consider a Resolution declaring surplus a 5.72 -acre parcel owned by the City of Yakima, located in Terrace Heights Yakima, Washington, and authorizing disposal of said surplus property • Second and final public meeting concerning the 2012 Budget Amendments to CDBG and HOME funds • Public hearing to consider: A) Adoption of the Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program for the years 2013 to 2018, and to amend the Metropolitan Transportation Plan; and B) Amend the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan Capital. Facilities Element 5/31/2012 9 AM 1