Scwd Service Area Plan

SEELEY COUNTY WATER DISTRICT SERVICE AREA PLAN Prepared By: Seeley County Water District 1898 Main Street Seeley, CA. 92273 Submitted to: IMPERIAL COUNTY LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION 801 Main Street El Centro, CA 92243 1601 N. Imperial Avenue El Centro, CA. 92243 Final August 2017 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 1.1 Population Projections 1 1.2 Public Facility Analysis 2 1.2.1 Service Provided by The Seeley County Water District 2 1.2.2 Service Provided by Imperial County 6 1.2.3 Service Provided by Others 7 2.0 INTRODUCTION 9 2.1 History of the Municipal Service Review/Service Area Plan 9 2.2 Purpose of the Service Area Plan 10 2.2.1 Requirements of a Service Area Plan 10 2.2.2 Imperial County Local Agency Formation Commission 10 2.2.3 Current Status of the SCWD Service Area Plan 11 2.3 Background on Seeley and the Seeley County Water District 11 2.4 Public Facilities and Service Provided 17 2.5 General Outlook on Population Growth 18 2.6 Organization of the Service Area Plan and Contents 18 3.0 GROWTH AND PHASING PROJECTIONS 20 3.1 Existing Land Use 20 3.1.1 General Plan Land Use Policy 20 3.1.2 Zoning 20 3.2 Planned Land Uses 23 3.2.1 Development Process 23 3.3 Projected Population Increase 25 4.0 BUILDOUT PHASING PROJECTIONS 30 5.0 PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES 32 5.1 Services Provided by the Seeley County Water District 33 5.1.1 Administrative Facilities 34 5.1.2 Wastewater Treatment Plant and Sewer Collection Facilities 38 5.1.3 Water Treatment Plant & Distribution Facilities 49 5.1.4 Park and Recreational Facilities 60 5.2 Service Provided by Imperial County 65 5.2.1 Fire Facilities 66 5.2.2 Law Enforcement Facilities 70 5.2.3 Library Facilities 74 5.2.4 Transportation Facilities 77 5.2.5 Stormwater and Drainage Facilities 86 5.3 Service Provided by Others 90 5.3.1 Solid Waste Services and Facilities 93 5.3.2 Lighting Facilities 96 5.3.3 School Facilities 96 6.0 FINANCING PLAN 100 6.1 Introduction 100 6.2 Existing Revenue Sources 100 6.3 Potential Revenue Sources 103 6.4 Facility Financing 108 6.4.1 Administrative Facilities 108 6.4.2 Wastewater Facilities 108 6.4.3 Water Facilities 109 6.4.4 Park & Lighting Facilities 111 6.4.5 Drainage Facilities 112 Exhibits Exhibits Page Exhibit 2-A Regional Location Map 12 Exhibit 2-B Seeley County Water District Boundary 14 Exhibit 2-C Sphere of Influence and District Boundary 16 Exhibit 3-A Seeley Urban Area Map 21 Exhibit 3-B Zoning Map 22 Exhibit 3-C Planned Development within Seeley County Water District’s SOI 24 Exhibit 5-A Layout of the SCWD Service Building 35 Exhibit 5-B Existing Wastewater Treatment Plant Design & Flow 41 Exhibit 5-C Existing Wastewater Collection and Sewer Facility Schematic Map 43 Exhibit 5-D Existing Water Distribution System 53 Exhibit 5-E Proposed Water Treatment Improvements 56 Exhibit 5-F Park and Recreational Facilities Map 61 Exhibit 5-G Fire Station Location and Service Area 67 Exhibit 5-H Law Enforcement Facilities Location Map 72 Exhibit 5-I Street Classification Map 79 Exhibit 5-J Street Lighting System 94 Exhibit 5-K School Facilities Map 97 Figures Figure Page Figure 2-A Population Growth within SCWD from 1990-2017 17 Figure 3-A Historic Population Growth within SCWD 27 Figure 3-B Population Projections within SCWD Service Area 29 Tables Tables Page Table 1-A SCWD Population Projections 1 Table 3-A Specific Plan & Development Phasing 26 Table 3-B Population Growth Comparison 28 Table 4-A Available Undeveloped Land within SCWD 30 Table 4-B Potential Developable Units per Residential Zone 31 Table 5-A Wastewater Pipeline General Design Criteria 39 Table 5-B SCWD Wastewater Collection Pipelines 42 Table 5-C Capacity Demand Based on Historic Growth Projections 45 Table 5-D Capacity Demand Based on Natural Growth Rate and Approved Projects 46 Table 5-E Capacity Demand For Natural Growth Rate and Projected Development . 46 Table 5-F Projected Near-Term Wastewater Facility Improvement Needs 47 Table 5-G Water Flow Standards 50 Table 5-H Water Capacity Demand Based on Historic Growth Projections 57 Table 5-I Buildout Demand for Water Treatment Plant 57 Table 5-J Projected Near-Term to Mid-Term Water Facility Improvement 58 Table 5-K SCWD Existing Parks 60 Table 5-L Roadway Performance Standard 77 Table 5-M Imperial County Standards Per Street Classification 78 Table 5-N Recommended Drainage Improvements 88 Table 6-A SCWD Adopted Impact Fee’s 101 Table 6-B Water Rates 102 Table 6-C Sewer Rates 102 Appendices Appendices Appendix A County of Imperial Development Impact Fee’s and Ordinance 1418 Appendix B Pavement Management Analysis Report Appendix C Seeley Area Drainage Master Plan Appendix D SCWD Approved Budget and Financial Statement Blank Page Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Executive Summary August 2017 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Executive Summary provides a brief summary of the population projections to provide a context for the analysis and findings presented for each individual public facility in terms of the performance standard, existing facilities, existing facility demand versus anticipated future demand and its adequacy, mitigation, funding sources, annual budget and cost per capita. 1.1 POPULATION PROJECTIONS This Service Area Plan uses population projections based on existing serviced residential connections tied to the average household size and anticipated development, as provided in the Growth Projections section of this document with an application of a modest 2.08% growth rate. The Seeley service population is estimated to be 2,140 based on the number of actual residential service connections multiplied by 3.53 persons per household as established on the 2010 Census data for household characteristics. This existing population is estimated to increase to 3,111 by the year 2035 due to natural growth that assumes a modest 2.08% annual growth rate. This number does not take planned development into account. If the approved and planned development comes into fruition, the population can increase up to 9,889 by the year 2035 (based on a construction start date of 2019 and a build rate of 120 new dwelling units per year). The following table, SCWD Population Projections, projects the future population of the District through Year 2035 in five-year increments under both the assumption that planned development does or does not come through. Table 1-A SCWD Population Projections Population Population Year Projections Projections At 2.08% with Planned Growth Development Rate1 and 2.08% 2017 2,140 2,140 2020 2,278 2,702 2025 2,528 5,069 2030 2,804 7,464 2035 3,111 9,889 1Calculated by actual residential service connections and multiplying by 3.53 person per household for base population. Page | 1 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Executive Summary August 2017 1.2 PUBLIC FACILITY ANALYSIS This section provides an overview of findings for both facilities serviced by the Seeley County Water District and other public agencies. The following facilities and services were reviewed: Administrative Facilities, Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wastewater Collection System, Water Treatment Plant and Water Distribution System, Parks and Recreation Facilities, and other services provided by Imperial County and other agencies including Fire Facilities, Law Enforcement Facilities, Library Facilities, Transportation Facilities, Drainage Facilities and School Facilities. 1.2.1 Services Provided by the Seeley County Water District The proceeding tables summarize the findings for services provided by the Seeley County Water District but may also include coordination with other agencies who extend similar services. The findings are based on information obtained from existing reports such as Preliminary Engineering Reports (PER’s), infrastructure studies, Specific Plans, adopted budgets, and discussions with District Staff. Also incorporated is reference to the Imperial County 2011 Draft Municipal Service Review. 1.2.1.1 Administrative Facilities Administrative Facilities Summary of Findings Performance Standard None Applied Existing Facilities 1,059 square feet reserved for offices & administrative functions. Existing Demand 393 square feet of office space per 1,000 in population Adequacy The current administrative offices for District Staff are adequate. Future Demand No additional facilities warranted through 2035. Facility Expansion Necessary at Full Build-Out. Mitigation Recommended Mitigation: A-1 Establish an Administrative Budget A-2 Consider Adopting an Administrative Developer Fee A-3 Initiate Administration & Operations Building Plans Funding Sources Current: SCWD Water Fund and Wastewater Fund Future: SCWD Water Fund and Wastewater Fund and Developer Fees Annual Budget Not Separately Budgeted at This Time. Cost Per Capita Not Applicable Page | 2 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Executive Summary August 2017 Administrative Facilities were generally found to be adequate to meet the projected service demand to the SCWD during the Planning Period. No Capital Improvements are necessary at this time, however, mitigation measures are proposed for administrative facilities that are discussed in more detail under the respective section. 1.2.1.2 Wastewater Facilities Wastewater Treatment and Sewer Capacity Summary o f Findings Performance Standard Must meet or exceed peak demand and meet effluent discharge requirement of the RWQCB. Existing Facilities Treatment Capacity: 0.25 MGD Existing Demand Average Annual Demand up to 0.11 MGD (2017) Peak Flow Demand 0.38 GPD (2017) Adequacy Demand at 45% of Capacity at 0.11 MGD (2017) In Compliance with RWQCB. Future Demand Based on Natural Growth Rate 2020: 0.139 MGD 2025: 0.164 MGD 2035: 0.224 MGD Mitigation Recommended Mitigation: WW-1 Adequate Reserves WW-2 Solicit Funding Resources WW-3 Evaluate Impact Fees WW-4 Develop Wastewater Master Plan WW-5 Impose Fair Share Costs on Developers WW-6 Develop Sewer System Management Plan Funding Sources Current: Wastewater Fund and Grant Resources. Future: Wastewater Fund and Grant Resources. Annual Budget Approximately $455,651 (17/18 Adopted Budget) Cost Per Capita $212.92 Wastewater Facilities are found to be generally adequate in meeting the near term and mid-term (2035) demands of the SCWD but would require capital investment via facility expansion to address the projected future demand that may Page | 3 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Executive Summary August 2017 be generated by the planned development Sunbeam Lake Estates, Phase I. These additional demands and a full discussion of the mitigation measures proposed for wastewater facilities are more detailed in the respective section. 1.2.1.3 Water Facilities Water Treatment and Distribution System Findings Performance Standard Meet minimum flow, pressure, and storage requirements, and minimum quality standards established by the California Department of Public Health (CDPH). Existing Facilities Treatment Capacity: 1.08 MGD Storage Capacity: 1 MG Existing Demand Average Daily Demand 0.214 MGD (2016) Peak Demand 0.39 MG Adequacy Demand Adequate at 20% of Capacity (2017) In Compliance with CDPH Standards. Future Demand Based on Natural Growth Rate 2020: 0.37 MGD 2025: 0.63 MGD 2035: 1.15 MGD Mitigation Recommended Mitigation: W-1 Adequate Reserves W-2 Solicit Funding Resources W-3 Evaluate Impact Fees W-4 Develop Water Master Plan W-5 Impose Fair Share Costs on Developers Funding Sources Current: Water Fund and Grant Resources Future: Water Fund and Grant Resources. Annual Budget Approximately $350,628 (17/18 Adopted Budget) Cost Per Capita $163.84 Water Facilities were found to be generally adequate to meet the near term demands of the SCWD but would require mitigation to address future demand during the Planning Period by 2030. Mitigation measures are proposed for water Page | 4 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Executive Summary August 2017 facilities and are more detailed in the respective section. However, capital investment via facility expansion to address the projected future demand that may be generated by the planned development Sunbeam Lake Estates, Phase I would be necessary. This demand is addressed in more detail under the respective section. 1.2.1.4 Park and Recreation Facilities Parks and Recreation Facilities Summary of Findings Performance Standard 5 acres per 1,000 in population Existing Facilities 3.58 Acres of parkland owned by SCWD 66.55 Acres of parkland owned by Imperial County 70.13 Total Acres of Parkland Existing Demand 10 acres (based on population of 2,140) Adequacy Surplus: 32 acres per 1,000 in population Future Demand None (Existing Acreage Supported through 2035) Mitigation Recommended Mitigation: PR-1 Seek Financial Resources for Operation/Services PR-2 Seek Grant Resources for Capital Improvements Funding Sources SCWD Current: Grant Resources. SCWD Future: Grant Resources. Annual Budget Not Separately Budgeted at This Time. Cost Per Capita Not Applicable Park Facilities were found to be adequate in dedication to meet the near term and long term demands of the SCWD but would require mitigation to address park facilities and program needs. SCWD is restricted from using enterprise funds for park facilities thus funding challenges throughout the planning Period for the proper development, repair and maintenance of park facilities may exist. Currently both parks are operated and maintained by Imperial County, but the Robert Bates Memorial Park (leased out to the Imperial County) has seen little investment. Mitigation measures for financial resource examination are proposed for park facilities and are more detailed in the respective section. Page | 5 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Executive Summary August 2017 1.2.2 Services Provided by Imperial County This sub-section provides an overview of findings for the following facilities and services administered, financed, and implemented by Imperial County, in whole or in part: Fire Facilities, Law Enforcement, Library Facilities, and Transportation Facilities. The findings for each of these sections and the discussion in Section 5.2 – Services Provided by Imperial County are based on the Draft 2011 Municipal Service Review prepared for the County of Imperial by Hofman Planning and Engineering.1 1.2.2.1 Fire Facilities Findings The most recently drafted Service Area Plan (2011) for Imperial County identified the existing fire facilities as adequate in size. However, the existing Seeley Fire Station did not meet all the current building code requirements. Service, however appears to be adequate according to the Fire Chief of the County of Imperial, which stated that as of the date of this SAP, the existing staffing levels are sufficient based on the current demands and average response times. 1.2.2.2 Law Enforcement Findings The service demand is currently deficient eight (8) law enforcement officers as of the date of this Service Area Plan. The calculated demand is for 56 officers (based on 1.43 officers per 1,000 in population) for County-wide services. According to the Sheriff’s office, it is currently operating with 48 officers dedicated to patrol. Although this is beyond the service responsibilities of the SCWD, this is an area that may require representation if crime rates or response time become an issue in the Seeley Community given that the nearest station is seven miles away from Seeley. 1.2.2.3 Library Facilities Findings The current library service levels for the Seeley population are currently substandard given the current population of 2,140 and the limited hours of the local library station. The library station operates only two hours and thirty minutes (2.5 hours) a month, not open on weekends, and open no later than 6:45 p.m. thus somewhat restricting accessibility to the community. 1.2.2.4 Transportation Facilities Findings Per the Imperial County Circulation Element, updated in 2008, all roadways within the SCWD Sphere of Influence are operating at a Level of Service C or better, with the exception of Dogwood Road between Seeley Road to Jasper Road which had a Level of Service D. Additionally, several roadway segments within the Seeley 1 Although the Imperial County Municipal Service Review has been under review by Imperial County since January 2011, as of June 2017, Imperial County has not commented on the document. As such, the Municipal Service Review has not been and adopted by Imperial County or approved by LAFCO. Page | 6 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Executive Summary August 2017 community were found to be deficient and in need of significant repair. The findings are more detailed under the respective section of this Service Area Plan. Facilities for pedestrians are also found to be non-existent or substandard. Recommended Mitigation involves a closer relationship with the Imperial County Public Works Department and pursuit of funding opportunities through the California Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration. 1.2.2.5 Stormwater and Drainage Facilities Findings Engineered drainage structures within the Seeley community are virtually non- existent. Minimal curb and gutter exists along County roadways in the community. Stormwater facilities that do exist are limited to recent developments that have included design and construction of on-site retention basins only to accommodate their demand. Runoff discharges naturally flow (overland) towards the New River, but there are no constructed or engineered drainage outlets into the New River. These conditions result in significant flooding throughout the community. These findings are more detailed under the respective section of this Service Area Plan. 1.2.3 Services Provided by Others This sub-section discusses findings for services not provided by the Seeley County Water District or the County of Imperial. The findings are based on information provided by the Imperial Irrigation District for drainage facilities and the Seeley Elementary School District for education services. Other data for utility services are sourced as referenced. Solid Waste Service Findings There is no agency representing Seeley customers under solid waste services. Individual homeowners are under contract with three solid waste facilities: Lucky Tire Inc., CR&R, and Republic Services. This may pose an opportunity for the SCWD to establish a Solid Waste Enterprise and negotiate lower rates for residents and other community benefits such as community clean-up days, scholarship contributions and other community donations as benefitted by other jurisdictions and districts. Lighting Facilities Findings Although the street lights are within the County Right-of-Way and thus owned by the County of Imperial, it appears that the SCWD has been responsible for the operation of these facilities. The existing lighting facilities are adequate to serve the community as long as they remain in service. As development occurs, developers will be required to expand lighting facilities into all new development and maintained through Community Facility Districts or Lighting and Maintenance Districts and not be borne to the SCWD. The SCWD had an operating budget of Page | 7 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Executive Summary August 2017 $4,200 for existing Street Lights (FY 17/18). Enterprise Funds are restricted from paying for the power service demands, thus mitigation measures to offset these costs are recommended. School Facilities Findings The existing Seeley Union School District facilities are adequate to meet the educational needs of the current population. The Seeley Union School District, however, will not be able to meet the expected demand from the projected population growth associated with the planned Sunbeam Lake Estates. It is most likely that the developer will be subject to mitigation in addition to the adopted impact fees. Page | 8 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Introduction August 2017 2.0 INTRODUCTION The Seeley County Water District (SCWD) last updated its Service Area Plan in 2003. Since then the City has experienced moderate growth and interest in new development is increasing. This 2017 Service Area Plan is being updated to provide the SCWD and Seeley Community with a general outlook of anticipated growth and the ability of the SCWD to provide adequate services. This document is designed to provide the District and general public with an overview and introduction of policies regulating this document and an introduction to the SCWD and the community it serves. An executive summary of service findings is presented in order to facilitate review, followed by a detailed discussion of growth projections and phasing of development, existing public service conditions, (including essential services provided by others) and a financing plan for those services under the responsibility of the SCWD. 2.1 HISTORY OF THE MUNICIPAL SERVICE REVIEW/SERVICE AREA PLAN In 1997, Assembly Bill (AB) 1484 established the Commission of Local Governance for the 21st Century. The role of the Commission of Local Governance was to evaluate local government organization and operational issues and develop a statewide vision and determine how the State should grow. The Commission in their final report identified four critical findings, as follows: ▪ The future will be shaped by continued phenomenal growth; ▪ California does not have a plan for growth; ▪ Local Government budgets are perennially under siege; ▪ The public is not engaged. Within this framework, the Local Governance Commission concluded that Local Agency Formation Commission’s (LAFCOs) powers should be expanded and be a participant in regional growth and planning forums. Further, the Local Governance Commission recommended that State law be amended to require that spheres of influence be regularly updated and that LAFCOs initiate periodic regional municipal service reviews, also known as service area plans, to ensure the efficient provision of governmental services. A sphere of influence is defined by law as a “plan for the probable physical boundaries and service area of a local agency, as determined by the commission” (GC 56076). As a result of the Local Governance Commission’s recommendations, on September 26, 2000, Governor Gray Davis signed into law AB 2838, titled the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act. The Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Act requires each LAFCO to review and update as necessary the spheres of influence for all applicable agencies within each County. In Imperial County, service area plans are recommended to be updated every five years in order to be in compliance (Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, LAFCO Municipal Service Review Guidelines, p.10 2003.) Page | 9 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Introduction August 2017 2.2 PURPOSE OF THE SERVICE AREA PLAN Service area plans are intended to assess current service demand and future service needs within an agency’s sphere of influence, and demonstrate that future public facilities, for the provision of services have been identified in accordance with the Cortese-Knox- Hertzberg Act. Service area plans provide each LAFCO with a tool to comprehensively study existing and future public service conditions and to evaluate organizational options for accommodating growth, preventing urban sprawl, preserving open save and prime agricultural lands, and efficiently extending government services. The SCWD 2017 Service Area Plan intends to provide the Imperial County Local Agency Formation Commission with a detailed description and analysis of how facilities will be provided in the proposed sphere of influence. 2.2.1 Requirements of a Service Area Plan The requirements of the contents of a service area plan are determined by the State’s Government Code. Once a service area plan is prepared, it must be reviewed by the local Commission. LAFCO review of public services is in response to the identified need for an orderly and efficient public service structure which will support California’s anticipated growth. Per Government Code Section 56430, LAFCO shall prepare a written statement of its determinations with respect to each of the following: 1. Growth and population projections for the affected area; 2. Present and planned capacity of public facilities and adequacy of public services, including infrastructure needs or deficiencies. 3. Financial ability of agencies to provide services. 4. Status of, and opportunities for, shared facilities. 5. Accountability for community service needs, including governmental structure and operational efficiencies. 6. Any other matter related to effective or efficient service delivery, as required by commission policy. 2.2.2 Imperial County Local Agency Formation Commission The Imperial County Local Agency formation Commission (IC LAFCO) is charged with the review and approval of the SCWD Service Area Plan. The Imperial County LAFCO is comprised of two County Supervisors appointed by the Board of Supervisors, two City Council members appointed by the City Selection Committee and one public member approved by LAFCO, for a total of five members. LAFCO has the authority to review, approve or deny boundary changes, city annexations, consolidations, special district formations, incorporations for cities and special districts, and to establish local spheres of influence. The Imperial County LAFCO responded to the new mandates of AB 2838 by adopting State Municipal Service Review Guidelines from the Governor’s Office of Page | 10 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Introduction August 2017 Planning and Research (OPR) as the Imperial County LAFCO’s new Service Area Plan Guidelines. Imperial County LAFCO requires a service area plan be approved prior to approval of a sphere of influence amendment and/or annexation. Imperial County LAFCO must be able to ascertain that there will be sufficient public facilities within the requested sphere of influence or annexation. 2.2.3 Current Status of the SCWD Service Area Plan The existing SCWD Public Utility District Service Area Plan (SAP) was prepared in 2003 by Nolte Associates, Inc and was approved by the Imperial County LAFCO on July 10, 2003. The 2003 SAP only discusses potable water facilities and services, and wastewater collection facilities and services. A comprehensive discussion of all services is necessary to demonstrate that there will be sufficient public facilities to provide public services within the sphere of influence. The 2003 SAP does not include a discussion of other services provided by SCWD such as administrative facilities, park facilities, and street lights. Facilities and services provided by other agencies such as fire protection, law enforcement, library, circulation (roads), street drainage and education are also excluded from the 2003 SAP. Inclusion of these facilities and services is critical for the orderly growth and development of the community and to ensure any potential service deficiencies are addressed by the corresponding agency. 2.3 BACKGROUND ON SEELEY AND THE SEELEY COUNTY WATER DISTRICT The Townsite of Seeley is a small community situated west of the City of El Centro approximately 7.5 miles from El Centro. Seeley is an unincorporated community within Imperial County and partially serviced by the County of Imperial and other public agencies, including a school district and public utility districts. The SCWD was formed in 1960 under the Public Utility Act of 1921 for the specific purpose of providing wastewater and water services to the Seeley community. A district is different from a city in that it delivers a limited number of public services to a geographically limited area and does not have police authority. Geographic Location of the Townsite of Seeley Seeley is located approximately 10 miles northwest from the U.S./Mexico border and Calexico Port of Entry. (Refer to Exhibit 2-A – Regional Location Map). Seeley’s developed area covers an approximate 2.37 square miles and is accessed from the Page | 11 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Introduction August 2017 Page | 12 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Introduction August 2017 east from Evan Hewes Highway and from the south by Interstate 8 which traverses the community at a west/east orientation. Interstate 8 connects to San Diego located approximately 106 miles to the west of Seeley. Seeley County Water District The Seeley County Water District office is located at 1898 Main Street, Seeley, CA 92273 and serves a population of 2,140 and a constituency of 718 persons (Imperial County Elections Office, May 15, 2017)2. The Seeley County Water District provides limited public services to the Seeley community consisting of water, wastewater and limited parks and recreation services. The Seeley County Water District consists of a five-member Board of Directors elected by the public. A General Manager reports directly to the Board of Directors and is charged with overseeing the District’s operation and employees. The District also has a legal counsel that reports to the Board of Directors. The District currently operates with eight (8) employees and is operating under a $950,000 budget for the 2017/2018 fiscal year. Official District Boundary The legal Seeley County Water District Boundary is uniquely shaped and may be generally described as bound by El Centro Street to the north, extending south to Sunbeam Lake Road, Seeley Drain to the east, and reaching New River Boulevard to the west. (Refer to Exhibit 2-B – Seeley County Water District Boundary). The Seeley County Water District boundary was last modified on January 22, 2004 as the LAFCO approved boundary (LAFCO Seeley Service Area Plan, Exhibit 19). No changes to the Service Area boundaries are proposed under this 2017 Service Area Plan Update. Annexing Land Into The District Boundary In order for land to be annexed into SCWD’s Service Area Boundary, a LAFCO Annexation Application shall be submitted and all applicable LAFCO fees shall be paid. After the Application is deemed complete by LAFCO then analyzes the proposed annexation in light of the commission's State mandated evaluation criteria and responsibilities and its own adopted policies. LAFCO makes a decision on the annexation with or without conditions of approval. According to LAFCO policies, the boundaries of the District may be altered and unincorporated, contiguous or noncontiguous territory of at least 10 privately owned acres lying within three miles of the closest District boundary and may be annexed to the District (Public Utilities Code Sections 17301, 17362). 2 Number of Registered Voters within the Seeley County Water District per Imperial County Elections Office May 15, 2017. Page | 13 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Introduction August 2017 Page | 14 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Introduction August 2017 Seeley County Water District Sphere of Influence The Sphere of Influence for SCWD is a much broader area intended to accommodate future growth. The approved sphere of Influence boundaries are described as El Centro Street to the north, New River to the west, Interstate 8 to the south and Bennet Road to the east (Refer to Exhibit 2-C – SCWD Sphere of Influence/District Boundary). Growth within the Sphere of Influence is planned for and taken into account under the Service Area Plan. The delineation of this Sphere of Influence is important to Seeley community leaders because it defines the primary area within which urban development is to be encouraged and limits up to which areas services should be extended to. Population and Demographics Although Seeley is a sparsely populated unincorporated community in Imperial County, it has experienced steady growth that averages 2.08 percent between 1990 and 2010. Seeley has a current population estimate of 2,140 (based on residential service connections reported to the State in 2016). The population was calculated based on 606 serviced dwelling units multiplied by 3.53 average number of persons per household according to last US Census taken in 2010. Seeley is part of the El Centro Metropolitan Statistical Area which has a much larger population base, estimated at 64,489 persons (MSA, American Community Survey, 2015) and is influenced by regional growth. El Centro is located 7.5 miles east of Seeley. Seeley’s ideal location to El Centro and approximately one mile north of Interstate 8 connecting to San Diego, make it an ideal community for individuals seeking a quiet rural lifestyle within close proximity to urban employment centers. Over the last two decades Seeley has experienced significant growth and development. From 1990 to 2000, the Seeley population increased from 1,228 persons to 1,624 persons, or by 32% percent, per the US Census Bureau. From 2000 to 2010, the population increased from 1,624 to 1,739 per the 2000 and 2010 Census. Thus, from 1990-2017, the SCWD Service Area grew by over 60% percent to its current 2,140 population. Over the last decade, over 260 residential building permits were issued for residential construction in the Seeley area, according to Imperial County Building Department records. Another significant factor contributing to the steady population growth may be attributed to population demographics. Over 88 percent of the Seeley population identifies as Latino (Source: ACS, 2015). Culturally, Latinos tend to share households with extended family members. Seeley’s average household size of 3.53 persons per household is slightly higher than to the County’s 3.34 persons per household and substantially larger than the State’s average at 2.90 persons per household for the same time period (US Census 2010). Page | 15 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Introduction August 2017 Page | 16 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Introduction August 2017 These population statistics are important in determining what the service needs of the population are and how to project service demand when the same growth factors are applied. Figure 2-A- Seeley Population Growth provides the historic population from 1990 to present. Figure 2-A Figure 2-A - Population Growth Within SCWD from 1990-2017 3,000 2,140 2,000 1,739 1,624 1,228 Population 1,000 0 1990 2000 2010 2017 Source: US Census Bureau for Population 1990, 2000, 2010 Year 2017 estimates based Service Connection Data and 3.53 persons per household in June 2017. 2.4 PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES PROVIDED The Seeley County Water District provides a limited amount of services including wastewater collection and treatment services, potable water treatment and distribution services, limited park and recreation services and the corresponding administrative services to residents within the District’s service area. Given that Seeley is located within an unincorporated area of Imperial County, all other public services including law enforcement, fire protection, and roadway maintenance are provided by Imperial County. Additional public service purveyors currently providing services within the SCWD service area include the Seeley Union School District, Central Union School District, and the Imperial Irrigation District. The Seeley County Water District works closely with the respective entities to ensure that all public services are adequately provided for new development. Page | 17 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Introduction August 2017 2.5 GENERAL OUTLOOK ON POPULATION GROWTH As previously noted, the Seeley County Water District service area has experienced significant residential growth over the last couple of decades. There is an equally vibrant population outlook associated with new development planned within SCWD Sphere of Influence. SCWD’s service area, and thus potential growth areas, are comprised of relatively large tracts of vacant, low-priced land that is attractive to residential developers. Seeley is also bordered by Interstate 8 which is a Highway that has an Annual Average Daily Traffic of 15,800 vehicles at Drew Road (Source: Caltrans 2015 Traffic Counts). Highway access makes Seeley an attractive location for residential, commercial, and industrial development. As an example, there is currently interest in developing two major residential sites and to expand the Sunbeam Lake RV Resort to Sunbeam Lake Estates and build 403 single family residences along the lake and multi-family development to the southeast (Source: LAFCO 2005 District Annexation Application). These developments are expected to significantly contribute to the future growth and demand of SCWD services. At the time of the preparation of the Service Area Plan it was estimated that SCWD could have a population base of over 5,000 residents by the year 2035 if all planned development comes into fruition. These figures and projections highlight the importance of SCWD planning services to adequately serve the projected population. Population trends and projections are further discussed under Section 3 Growth and Phasing Projections of this Service Area Plan. 2.6 ORGANIZATION OF THE SERVICE AREA PLAN AND CONTENTS The intent of the Service Area Plan is to demonstrate the District’s ability to provide adequate services within the sphere of influence boundaries in the event of new development with the District Boundaries or new annexation into the District Boundaries. An approximate 20-year planning period is used to forecast growth and the estimated facility and service demands are based on population projections in five-year increments until 2035. This Service Area Plan discusses the services currently provided by the Seeley Water County District, estimates the current and future demand for such facilities and services, and describes how necessary facilities and services will be or may be developed or improved on to meet population demands. Additionally, this Service Area Plan discusses services purveyed by Imperial County and their adequacy based on demand in a matter that satisfies the Guidelines adopted by Imperial County’s LAFCO. These issues are organized into the following six sections, as briefly discussed in the introduction and elaborated below. Section 1.0 – Executive Summary: Provides a brief summary of the Service Area Plan for the Seeley Water County District and highlights critical information regarding performance standards, existing facilities, demand, mitigation, funding sources, annual budget and cost per capita. Page | 18 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Introduction August 2017 Section 2.0 – Introduction: Provides a brief description of the Seeley townsite and the Seeley Water County District as well as the general characteristics of the Service Area Plan. Section 3.0 – Growth and Projections: Provides a discussion on existing and planned land uses in the District and the District’s Sphere of Influence and describes potential impacts associated with population growth and projected service demand. Section 4.0 – Buildout Phasing Projections: Provides a discussion on buildout phasing projections within the 20-year planning period. Section 5.0 – Public Services: Provides a thorough description of current and planned facilities and services, and its current and projected adequacy. An analysis and assessment of public services provided by the District, Imperial County, and any other service purveyor will be addressed. The following facilities and services are reviewed: Administrative Facilities, Wastewater Treatment and Collection Sewer Facilities, Water Treatment and Distribution Facilities, Parks and Recreation Facilities, Fire Facilities, Law Enforcement Facilities, Library Facilities, Transportation Facilities, Stormwater Facilities and School Facilities as well as other utility purveyors in summary. Section 6.0 – Mitigation & Financing Plan: Identifies and discusses existing and potential sources of revenue and financing mechanisms for public facilities and services available to the District. In addition, this section would identify cost saving opportunities for the District. Page | 19 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Growth and Phasing Projections August 2017 3.0 GROWTH AND PHASING PROJECTIONS It is the intent of the Seeley County Water District to plan for growth via the orderly development of areas within the SCWD Sphere of Influence. Growth is influenced by location, land use restrictions, existing conditions, and availability of services. Orderly development is accomplished through planned improvements, phasing of service expansions and phasing of development projects. This Section of the Service Area Plan identifies the existing and planned land uses in the Seeley community, the intricate development process, and the anticipated population growth which are all critical factors on how the SCWD will service the community. 3.1 EXISTING LAND USE Although the District’s service area has shown modest growth in the last decade, it is small in comparison to nearby Cities. For example, the City of El Centro and its sphere of influence area is about 16,000 acres of land (El Centro Service Area Plan, 2016). The City of Imperial and its sphere of influence area is 7,507 acres (Imperial Service Area Plan, 2015). Whereas, the SCWD and its sphere of influence area is only approximately 1,520 acres. It is important to underscore Seeley’s uniqueness as a townsite. The townsite of Seeley is located within an unincorporated area of Imperial County; therefore, it is not a City and does not dictate land use and zoning policies. Rather, the Seeley County Water District works closely with Imperial County to ensure orderly planned development. Existing land uses within the District include residential, commercial and light industrial. There are also over 196 acres of Government/Special Public land use tied to the Sunbeam Lake recreational area. There is also an operational railroad which bisects the town in a west/east orientation. 3.1.1 General Plan Land Use Policy The Seeley community and service area land uses are regulated by Imperial County. Imperial County adopted Seely’s Urban Area Map which provides a more in depth view of the Seeley County Water District’s land use designation and was last revised in 2007. Designated land uses include a variety of land use designations including: low density residential, medium density residential, high density residential, general commercial, government/special public, and light industrial (Refer to Exhibit 3-A – Seeley Urban Area Map). 3.1.2 Zoning Zoning within the Seeley County Water District is regulated by Imperial County. The District area has been assigned several zoning designations. The District is best characterized by the preponderance of zoning designations for residential development at various densities which include, R1 (low density residential), Page | 20 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Growth and Phasing Projections August 2017 Page | 21 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Growth and Phasing Projections August 2017 Page | 22 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Growth and Phasing Projections August 2017 R2 (medium density residential), R3 (medium to high density residential), and R4 (high density residential and mobile home parks). Generally, the land that abuts the railroad is zoned High Density Residential and Medium to High Industrial. Along Evan Hewes Highway various blocks are designated for General Commercial and Neighborhood Commercial. There are also several areas designated as recreational open space, providing a buffer along the New River (Refer to Exhibit 3-B Zoning Map). 3.2 PLANNED LAND USES Within the established County Water District Sphere of Influence, there is ample opportunity for land development. Over 100 acres are vacant and undeveloped in addition to the approximate 119 acres already currently planned for development. The existing sphere of influence boundaries are El Centro Street to the north, Interstate 8 to the south, the New River to the west, and Bennet Road to the east as illustrated under Exhibit 3-C – Seeley County Water District Sphere of Influence. As previously noted, land use within the Seeley County Water District is governed by Imperial County’s Zoning Ordinance which is guided by the goals and policies established under Imperial County’s General Plan. It is important to underscore that the Seeley County Water District does not have land use authority and works closely with Imperial County regarding new development proposals and service considerations to insure planned land uses are consistent with one another. A project known as the Sunbeam Lake Estates was recently approved by the County of Imperial and LAFCO for development within SCWD’s Sphere of Influence. The project can move forward for construction once improvement bonds are accepted by the County of Imperial. Sunbeam Lake Estates will result in the construction of 403 single family homes and approximately 312 multi-family apartment units (calculated based on maximum density allowed by County Code and the total acreages shown on Tentative Map #958). A total of 16.95 acres of commercial land is also designated for development. Refer to Exhibit 3-C – Planned Development Within Seeley County Water District’s Service Area which delineates the Sunbeam Lake Specific Plan Area. 3.2.1 Development Process The process of development varies depending on the location of the proposed commercial, industrial or residential development proposed. When a developer wants to develop land within the District Limits, land use restrictions are already in place and discretionary approval of the project is not necessarily required by the Imperial County Board of Supervisors as long as all development standards are met for the respective land uses. The SCWD reviews any offsite water and sewer facility extensions and proposed connection to services. The SCWD also collects impact fees (capacity fees) for water and sewer services. The District provides services to all development within the District limits. Page | 23 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Growth and Phasing Projections August 2017 Page | 24 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Growth and Phasing Projections August 2017 The District, however, has discretionary authority in providing services to development projects outside its boundaries. As part of its discretionary authority, the District can require certain conditions of approval such as annexation into SCWD. All building permits requested, within and outside of the District boundaries are processed by the Imperial County Building Department. When an applicant requests a building permit, they are required to complete an application as well as a site plan. The Imperial County Building Department is responsible for ensuring that all requests are completed in compliance with the International Building Code and applicable County codes. Imperial County further imposes Development Impact Fees (DIF) for all development within the District and the District’s Sphere of Influence. Development Impact Fees vary by land and a detailed table is available under Appendix A. DIF are used to offset regional impacts to roadways, law enforcement facilities, and similar municipal service facilities caused by the development. A more detailed discussion is under the Financing Section of this Service Area Plan. All developers within Seeley’s Sphere of Influence must work closely with the District and the Imperial County. Additional permits may be needed through the Imperial Irrigation District who owns or holds drainage and power easements throughout the Imperial Valley. In summary, when developing in Seeley and its Sphere of Influence, developers will need to work with multiple agencies. 3.3 PROJECTED POPULATION INCREASE Population projections are difficult to ascertain because they are influenced by outside factors including the real estate market, employment opportunities, and fluidity of migration. Although projections are difficult to predict, they are necessary and critical for District planning to ensure that infrastructure is adequate and that levels of service are acceptable. Anticipated Projects Within the SCWD Sphere of Influence Population projections can be completed based on the number of anticipated projects and their proposed densities. As of the date of this Service Area Plan, one Specific Plan had been submitted to LAFCO and to Imperial County for development but has not secured any building permits. As previously noted, the project is comprised of 403 single family units. Multifamily and commercial development is proposed but will be developed as market demands increase. Based on current absorption rates throughout the County, it is estimated that 50 new homes will be built and occupied per year starting in 2019. Once all single-family homes are constructed, multi-family homes will follow at a rate of approximately 80 dwelling units per year. Direct impacts from Sunbeam Lake Estates is accounted for under this Service Area Plan projections. Table 3-A below provides a Page | 25 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Growth and Phasing Projections August 2017 summary of the proposed development. It should be noted that the developer of Sunbeam Lake Estates initially intends to build the single-family residential component of the project and no specific numbers were provided for multi-family development. For the purposes of this Service Area Plan to anticipate the needs of future population, the maximum density allowed by the County of Imperial was used to estimate the number of apartment units that can be built and the potential population resulting from those units. Table 3-A Specific Plan & Development Phasing Subdivision Proposed Land Equivalent Potential Year Uses Dwelling Population Units Sunbeam Lake Single Family 403 1,423 2025 Estates Multi-Family 312 1,102 2030 Commercial 15 53 2050 Imperial County TTM #958 Planning Department Records Non-residential uses are converted to equivalent dwelling units (EDUs) to ensure an equitable and comprehensive analysis. Due to the low amount of non-residential usage within the SCWD, statistical average would be skewed if actual data were to be applied. Instead, a survey of local service providers was conducted to determine an average demand corresponding to 1.5 EDU’s for every 1,000 square feet of non-residential space. A total of 16.95 acres of land is dedicated for commercial development which result in a total building area of 295,336 square feet based on 40% lot coverage. Due to the low population and traffic, commercial development is expected to occur at a rate of approximately 5,000 square feet every five years with full buildout occurring well beyond the scope of this Service Area Plan. Table 3-A above projects the corresponding conversion into equivalent dwelling units (1.5 EDU’s per every 1,000 SF of nonresidential space). Current Population and Projection for the Next 20 Years The population projections that follow are based on historic population growth rates and anticipated projects. For the Seeley population projections, a growth rate of 2.08 percent has been determined as adequate based on historic growth. According to Imperial County’s Municipal Service Review (2011), the average annual growth rate over the last Page | 26 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Growth and Phasing Projections August 2017 40-year period for the countywide population is 2.28 percent.3 This growth rate is comparable to the historic growth calculated for the Seeley community of 2.08 percent between 1990 and 2010 and will be applied to the entire twenty (20) year planning period analyzed under this Service Area Plan. Planned development as noted in prior discussions may significantly alter these population growth projections and are therefore discussed as probable scenarios affecting service demand. From 2000 to 2010, the number of housing units rose 27.7 percent in Imperial County.4 The Seeley County Water District Service Area had a base population of 2014 as of 2017 as calculated by dwelling unit service connections and an average household size of 3.53 (ACS). Figure 3-A – Historic Population Growth Within Seeley County Water District (from 1990-2017) documents a steady growth to 2,140 residents by 2017, representing a 3.29 percent growth between 2010 and 2017 seven-year period. Figure 3-A Historic Population Growth within SCWD Historic Population Growth Within SCWD from 1990-2017 3,000 2,140 2,000 1,739 1,624 1,228 Population 1,000 0 1990 2000 2010 2017 Source: US Census Bureau for Population 1990, 2000, 2010 Year 2017 estimates based Service Connection Data and 3.53 persons per household in June 2017. 3 Imperial County Municipal Service Review, 2011 p. 6. 4 Semuels, Alana. Los Angeles Times March 9, 2011. <http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/money_co/2011/03/census- california-housing.html> . Page | 27 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Growth and Phasing Projections August 2017 The Seeley County Water District’s population grew in equal or higher percentages than most other rural areas in Imperial County when compared with small communities under 10,000 residents. Seeley surpassed all the incorporated communities except for the City of Imperial. This is significant as it identifies the Seeley Community as a competitive and attractive development community for investors. Please refer to Table 3-B for Population Growth Comparisons. Table 3-B Population Growth Comparison Average Numeric Percentage Jurisdiction 2010 2017 Annual Change Change Growth Rate Imperial 14,758 18,658 3,900 26.43% 3.78% SCWD 1,739 2,140 401 23.06% 3.29% Brawley 24,953 26,928 1,975 7.91% 1.13% El Centro 42,598 45,628 3,030 7.11% 1.02% Calexico 38,572 40,921 2,349 6.09% 0.87% Holtville 5,939 6,255 316 5.32% 0.76% Westmorland 2,225 2,302 77 3.46% 0.49% Calipatria1 7,705 7,555 -150 -1.95% -0.28% Balance of Unincorporated 36,039 37,947 1,908 5.29% .76% Areas in Imperial County Source: 2000 U.S. Census and State of California, Department of Finance 2017 1Includes an institutionalized (prison) population of approximately 3,536 persons as of May 2017. The future anticipated population growth within the existing District boundaries and service area is expected to be modest. Figure 3-B – Population Projections for the Seeley County Water District Service Area depicts a gradual population growth of 2.08 percent that would reasonably place the Seeley County Water District service population at 3,380 at the 20 year mark. If there are changes in the real estate market and the region development demand increases, the District will likely be directly impacted by new growth and expansion outside of the current District boundary within the Sphere of Influence. If and when the planned and approved development (Sunbeam Lake Estates) is developed and incorporated into the population projections, the District population spikes to by the 20 year mark. Page | 28 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Growth and Phasing Projections August 2017 Figure 3-B Population Projections within SCWD Service Area Population Projections for the Seeley County Water District Service Area 9000 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 2017 2020 2025 2030 2035 Population Using 2.08% Growth Rate With Planned Development Page | 29 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Buildout Phasing Projections August 2017 4.0 BUILDOUT PHASING PROJECTIONS A significant task for District management and leadership is to plan for service facilities concurrently with the projected population growth and to do so in a proactive manner. The phasing of new facilities must be coordinated with the phasing of new development in order to adequately meet the projected service demand, while other infill development opportunities exist throughout several zoning densities and designations within the District. Please refer Table 4-A – Available Undeveloped Land Within Seeley County Water District below which includes a list of undeveloped land within the Seeley County Water District and acreage by zoning designation. Table 4-A Available Undeveloped Land Within Seeley County Water District Zoning Acreage R-1 Low Density Residential 73.95 R-2 Medium Density Residential .96 R-3 Medium-High Density Residential 5.37 R-4 High Density Residential & Mobile Home Park 4.58 A-2 Agricultural, General 0 C-1 Light Commercial 2.46 C-2 Medium Commercial 6.06 M-1 Light Manufacturing 5.58 M-2 Manufacturing 6.62 G/S Government/Special 3.85 Source: The Holt Group, Inc.2017 The District has much potential for residential development within its District boundaries. It is difficult to project how infill may be phased out over time, but for planning purposes, a reasonable estimate is based on county-wide residential new-construction absorption rates and historical development rates within the District. Seeley’s developable parcels can result in a maximum 536 dwelling units which could be built out over a 20-year period at a rate of approximately 26 new dwelling units per year. Table 4-B – Potential Developable Units per Residential Zone is a summary of the potential number of dwelling units per zone based on the allowed density for each zone. Page | 30 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Buildout Phasing Projections August 2017 Table 4-B Potential Developable Units per Residential Zone Potential Developable Zone Total Acres Allowable Density Units R1 73.95 5 units/Net Acre 369Units R2 .96 10 units/Net Acre 9 Units R3 5.37 29 units/Net Acre 155 Units R4 4.58 (3 lots) 1 unit/ legal lot 3 Units Total Maximum Dwelling Units 536 units Source: The Holt Group, Inc. 2017 Population Projections at Full Build-Out A steady job growth within the Seeley County Water District service area could certainly entice new developers to construct housing near a regional park and recreation center, contributing to the growth of the Seeley County Water District service area. There are over 84 developable acres available for new residential development in varying densities within close proximity to SCWD service facilities. As stated earlier, Sunbeam Lake Estates consists of 715 dwelling units and all potential infill development can result in an additional 536 dwelling units. New residential development will add an estimated 1,255 new residents. With the natural growth rate of 2.08%, Seeley can have an estimate population of 3,828 at full buildout in 20 years. This represents a 56% increase over the current population. Another potential contributor to indirect population growth is the El Centro Naval Air Facility Base. Expansion of the Navy Base is contingent upon mission changes assigned by the Navy Headquarters not at the discretion of the local Navy Base. There are currently no plans for expansion. Currently the Navy Base provides over 1,267 long- term jobs for the region (Source: Naval Air Facility El Centro Range Complex Area: Military Readiness, Economic Contribution and Community Partnerships). Page | 31 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Public Facilities and Service August 2017 5.0 PUBLIC FACITILITES AND SERVICES This section addresses how public facilities and services will be provided to the Seeley County Water District and development areas over the course of the 20-year planning period. An analysis of the following facilities and services is provided in this document: • Administrative Facilities - SCWD • Wastewater Facilities- SCWD • Water Facilities- SCWD • Park Facilities- SCWD/Imperial County • Transportation Facilities- Imperial County • Drainage Facilities - Imperial County/Imperial Irrigation District • Fire Protection Facilities - Imperial County • Police Protection - Imperial County • Library Facilities - Imperial County Each facility is analyzed in detail based on the standards developed by LAFCO for Service Area Plans. Each facility analysis is divided into four sections as follows: Performance Standard: A description of the desired level of service that a public facility must provide. Facility Planning and Adequacy Analysis: A description of the existing facilities, the current adequacy of the facilities, the future demand for facilities and the phasing of the demand for facilities as follows: ➢ Inventory of Existing Facilities ➢ Adequacy of Existing Facilities ➢ Inventory of Approved Facilities ➢ Growth Demand for Facilities ➢ Buildout/Phasing of Facilities Mitigation: A series of recommendations to ensure that adequate facilities will be provided for throughout the planning period. Financing: An explanation and identification of how the service and facilities are currently being funded, including a per capita cost, and how future services and facilities may be funded. Findings are presented under the respective service provider as noted above. Each analysis is subsequently presented by facility sections and will provide a description of the nature of each service to be provided, a description of the service level capacity and demonstrate that adequate services will be provided within the demanded time frame. Presentations of maps that clearly indicate the location of existing and proposed facilities are provided for each facility. Discussion of any conditions which may be imposed or required within the affected territory are also noted. Page | 32 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Public Facilities and Service August 2017 5.1 SERVICES PROVIDED BY THE SEELEY COUNTY WATER DISTRICT The Seeley County Water District, as a special district, provides a limited amount of services that include wastewater collection and treatment services, potable water treatment and distribution services, incidental administrative services and limited parks and recreation services to residents within the District’s service area. This section also provides a cursory review for all other services provided by other agencies. Facilities planned for and financed by the District for services provided by the Seeley County Water District are described below and a full analysis is provided under this Service Area Plan Section. • Administrative Facilities- Administrative facilities include buildings that house administrative staff that provide general administrative services to Seeley residents and business owners. Examples of administrative services include utility billing and collection, services to the Board of Directors, and other functions of the District. • Wastewater Treatment and Sewer Facilities- Wastewater treatment and sewer facilities include the District’s Wastewater Treatment Plant and the sewer collection system that collects and conveys the wastewater to the Wastewater Treatment Plant. Wastewater Facilities also includes sewer lift stations owned by the Seeley County Water District. • Water Treatment and Distribution Facilities- Water treatment and distribution facilities include the District’s Water Treatment Plant and the distribution pipelines that convey potable water to residences within the Seeley County Water District Service Area. Water facilities may further include any water transmission lines and pump systems necessary for the adequate conveyance of water, water storage tanks and fire hydrants. • Parks and Recreation Facilities- Parks and recreation facilities include open space areas, both improved and unimproved for recreational use, owned and operated by the District. Facility amenities within the parks may include swings, slides, and shade structures for the use of the public. Only those park facilities owned by the Seeley County Water District are applicable under this discussion or that are contracted by Seeley County Water District for the provision of services. Page | 33 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Administrative Facilities August 2017 5.1.1 Administrative Facilities Administrative services for the Seeley community are provided in part by the Seeley County Water District Water Enterprise Fund and Sewer Enterprise Fund. The Seeley County Water District provides administrative services for the community of Seeley incidental to wastewater collection and treatment, water treatment and distribution and parks and recreation services. Additionally, Imperial County provides a number of administrative services to the Seeley community and the general countywide population including but not limited to planning and development services, street maintenance and other governmental services. Performance Standard for Administrative Facilities Imperial County’s performance standard for administrative facilities in unincorporated areas is 1,030 square feet per 1,000 population (Source: County of Imperial Municipal Service Review Draft #3, 2011). The performance standard for administrative facilities under this analysis is based on existing administrative square footage at the time of preparation of the service area plan for facilities maintained and operated by the Seeley County Water District. Current management finds the current 1,059 square-foot building somewhat inadequate and unable to accommodate operations and staff for the natural population growth over the 20-year planning period. This finding is further consistent with the County ratio of 1,030 square feet per 1,000 in population. At the end of the planning period, the population of Seeley is anticipated to be 2,696, therefore if the performance standard is set at 1,030 square feet per 1,000 persons for the facility serving the Seeley community, the current 2,140 population would demand a 2,000 SF facility. Inventory of Existing Administrative Facilities The Seeley County Water District owns a 1,059 square-foot building at 1898 Main Street, Seeley, CA 92273. The building was constructed in 1966 and is appears to be in sound condition. The SCWD Board meets in a 513 square-foot space within the building, and the rest of the building is comprised of a 221 square-foot administrative office, and 277 square-foot operator office (Refer to Exhibit 5-A). Maintenance costs are shared between the Sewer Enterprise Fund and Water Enterprise Fund. According to the SCWD operation budget, administrative expenses are not tracked independently for the office building. Expenses such as utilities and building maintenance are simply allocated to either wastewater or sewer costs. There are no local administrative offices maintained by Imperial County in the Seeley community. All planning and development services, and building services are housed out of the Imperial County Planning and Development Services office located at 801 Main Street in El Centro. Page | 34 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Administrative Facilities August 2017 Page | 35 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Administrative Facilities August 2017 Adequacy of Administrative Facilities The Administrative Building is fifty-five years old and its size is insufficient to meet the needs of current staff and operations. The size of the existing facility would further be restricted from adequately serving the natural growth population during the planning period. Administrative staff and operators are in need of a larger work area that can either be accommodated by adding onto the current building or relocating to a new site. The Seeley County Water District hired National Property Inspections to perform a site evaluation of the current administration and operations building. There were a number of typical repair needs noted due to normal wear and tear due to the age of the structure. One area of immediate need is to upgrade the electrical panel which is currently rate at 225 amps. While this is normally sufficient for a 1,030 square-foot office building, it appears that the panel is providing service to ancillary wastewater treatment plant operations exceeding the panel’s capacity. An electrical disconnect for the electric water heaters was also noted. Plumbing services also appear to be deficient due to age and general deterioration of cast iron pipes, albeit operable. The restroom facilities don’t currently comply with the American with Disability Act standards. Inventory of Approved Administrative Facilities There are no approved administrative facilities at the time this Service Area Plan was prepared. However, given the condition of the existing administrative facilities, the Seeley County Water District is in the preliminary stages of discussing alternatives for improvements and relocation. It is anticipated that there will be a capital demand for administrative facilities during the 20-year planning period. Buildout Demand for Administrative Facilities A substantial increase in population will undoubtedly result in an increased demand for public services and the administration of the same. At full buildout of planned and infill development, Seeley’s population will grow to 9,212 and at a ratio of 1,030 square feet of administrative office space per 1,000 residents, the administrative building will need to be at least 2,775 by the end of the planning period. A 9,490 square-foot building is required to service the full buildout population. An administrative and operations building, built under traditional construction terms can range in cost from $150 SF to $240 SF. A premanufactured metal structure may cost $160 SF to $275 SF. A 2,775 SF building can therefore range between $416,250 and $763,125 for construction costs. An additional 14% would be needed for design and bidding services and 10% for construction management. The total amount the SCWD should budget for is between $516,150 and $946,275. Page | 36 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Administrative Facilities August 2017 Opportunity for Shared Administrative Facilities As previously stated, the SCWD Administrative office is shared between the two enterprise funds. The facility is not large enough to be shared with any other service providers. There may be an opportunity to share future facilities with the Imperial County Fire Department. These opportunities will be explored during the planning phases. Phasing of Administrative Facilities The District will consider designing the administrative facility in phases to be able to accommodate a 20-year planning period and ultimately accommodate the demand at build-out population. Mitigation for Administrative Facilities The Seeley Administrative Facilities are undersized and in need of moderate repair due to age of structure. A new facility will need to be planned for to continue to serve the anticipated population increase throughout a twenty (20) year planning term. Mitigation is recommended during this planning period. It is recommended that administrative expenses be budgeted and tracked separately in the future and then costs be equally shared between the sewer and water enterprise funds. It is also recommended that administrative fees be imposed to developers that require coordination of development plan review. The following are the recommendations for Administrative Facilities and Services: A-1 Establish an Administrative Budget that includes office equipment, supplies, utilities, building repairs, etc. A-2 Consider Adopting an Administrative Fee of 15% from developers above plan check review costs due to consultants. District policy would collect actual consultant cost + a 15% administrative fee. A-3 Determine a design concept, budget and funding resources for the future development of an Administration and Operations Building. Page | 37 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Wastewater Treatment Plant and Sewer Collection Facilities August 2017 5.1.2 Wastewater Treatment Plant and Sewer Collection Facilities The Seeley County Water District owns, operates and maintains a Wastewater Treatment System which provides wastewater collection and treatment services to the Seeley community, and areas immediately outside of the District boundary, but within the Sphere of Influence. The wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) is located at 1898 West Main Street in Seeley, California. The existing wastewater treatment plant is currently situated on a 31 acre parcel but only 14 acres of the site is usable for existing operations and future expansion because the rest of the parcel is part of the New River bank. The treatment plant has a maximum permitted capacity of 0.25 million gallons per day (MGD). The wastewater treatment plant services an area of approximately 2.26 square miles and a population of 2,140 residents. The Wastewater Treatment Plant was constructed in 1965 and there have been numerous upgrades to the facility completed over the years. The most recent improvements were completed in 2014 and 2016 consisting of the conversion of an abandoned lagoon to a primary oxidation pond and installation of an additional secondary treatment filter and an additional in-line UV unit for effluent disinfection. No major expansions have been initiated and the plant operates at an influent average of 0.11 MGD; 45 percent capacity as of 2017. Performance Standards for WWTP Plant and Sewer Collection Facilities Wastewater Treatment Plant- The Performance standards and requirements for the Seeley Wastewater Treatment Plant are governed by the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) discharge permit number CA 0105023 and Board Order Number R7-2012-0011 adopted by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Colorado River Basin Region. The NPDES permit under which the Seeley Wastewater Treatment Plant operates expires on September 30, 2017. The NPDES permit establishes the Waste Discharge Requirements (WDR’s) for the wastewater treatment plant. The NPDES permit establishes the rated capacity of the wastewater plant, discharge prohibitions, effluent limitations and discharge specifications, receiving water limitations, standard provisions for the operation of the wastewater treatment plant, monitoring and reporting program requirements, compliance requirements and special provisions. The NPDES discharge permit also establishes the standards and criteria by which the Seeley Wastewater Treatment Plant operates. Sewer Collection System- The Seeley County Water District utilizes standards established by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), State Water Resources Control Board’s Regional Water Quality Control Board, the Water Environment Federation (WEF) and American Water Works Association Page | 38 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Wastewater Treatment Plant and Sewer Collection Facilities August 2017 (AWWA) to establish performance standards and criteria for the wastewater collection system. Design capacity of a pipeline is the general calculated capacity of the pipeline using the Manning formula. For system analysis, peak dry weather flow (PDWF) does not exceed 75 percent of the design capacity of the pipeline. Accordingly, 25 percent of the pipeline capacity is reserved to accommodate peak wet weather flow (PWWF) incurred during wet weather conditions. The 25 percent reserve is therefore provided to account for groundwater infiltration and rainfall dependent inflow, plus additional sewer capacity reserve allowance. This 25 percent reserve contingency factor is a commonly used allowance in evaluating wastewater utilities. The following are general design criteria for determining sanitary sewer pipeline capacity: Table 5-A Wastewater Pipeline General Design Criteria Pipeline Size Flow Capacity 8” to 10” 1/2 Full @ Peak Flow 12” to 18” 2/3 Full @ Peak Flow 21” and Greater 3/4 Full @ Peak Flow Gravity pipelines should also have a general peak flow velocity of 2.0 feet per second (fps) at peak wet weather flow (PWWF) to ensure adequate flow. Pipelines that cannot reach this minimum flow velocity should be assisted with pump stations. Pump station adequacy is based on two criteria: 1) the ability of the pump station to pump the PWWF and 2) wet well adequacy for pump cycling. The Seeley County Water District incorporates one privately owned and operated lift station into its collection system. Inventory of Existing WWTP and Sewer Collection Facilities Wastewater Treatment Plant- The existing wastewater treatment plant consists of one influent lift station with (2) constant speed submersible pumps rated at 140 gpm each. The influent pump station then pumps the influent wastewater to an aerated pond. There is currently (1) one aerated pond in operation and (1) one aerated pond in standby. The (2) two ponds were originally constructed as percolation and evaporation basins each with a volume capacity of 4,000,000 gallons. The aeration basin effluent flows by gravity to a series of five smaller aeration basins, where solid settling occurs, also referred to as Clemson Ponds. Each Clemson pond has a volume capacity of approximately 97,000 gallons. Page | 39 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Wastewater Treatment Plant and Sewer Collection Facilities August 2017 Wastewater from the Clemson ponds enters a secondary pump station that pumps wastewater through a 6-inch diameter force main to one or a combination of three pressure filters (sand media). The secondary pump station consists of (2) pumps rated at 140 gpm. Two of the sand media filters have a rated design treatment capacity of 140 gpm each. A third sand media filter, which was recently installed, has a rated design treatment capacity of 220 gpm. Wastewater from the filters then gravity flows through one of two ultraviolet disinfection system units for disinfection. One UV disinfection unit has a treatment capacity of 170 gpm. The second UV disinfection unit was recently installed and is rated at 170 gpm. Treated effluent flows into a land outfall which then transports the effluent to the point of discharge into a tributary creek (Wildcat Drain) of the New River. The existing wastewater treatment plant has a design capacity of 250,000 GPD and an average daily flow of about 120,000 GPD. According to John Kemp, consultant chief wastewater operator, the addition of the Clemson pond and ultraviolet disinfection have altered the original hydraulic and treatment capabilities of the system. A Wastewater Master Plan should be performed to determine the plants true capacity due to new regulations and modifications through the years. A portion of the Seeley County Water District’s Office Building is located on the wastewater treatment plant. A portion of the Office Building is used for operations of the wastewater treatment plant. The existing WWTP has two (2) separate electrical service panels: 1) Operations/Office Building and a portion of wastewater treatment facilities and 2) the wastewater treatment facilities. Only one of the power services, which only provide power to wastewater facilities, is supported with a backup system. No large-scale improvements have been accomplished at the WWTP since 2016. Please refer to Exhibit 5-B Existing WWTP Design & Flow. Sewer Collection System- The SCWD owns over 5.4 miles (approx. 28,730 lineal feet) of sanitary sewer collection pipelines. The wastewater collection has a network of pipelines ranging in size from 6-inch to 12-inch in diameter. Most of the pipelines are predominantly located north of Evan Hewes and the Southern Pacific Railroad. There was a project completed circa 2008 that constructed a combination of force main and gravity flow sewer pipeline from the Sunbeam Lake RV Park along Drew Road to a point connecting with the existing WWTP collection system at manhole located at Mount Signal Avenue and Main Street. The existing wastewater collection system is composed of sanitary sewer gravity pipelines and sanitary sewer force mains. There is a sewer pump station that is privately owned and discharged into the sewer collection system. The collection system conveys wastewater from the residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, government, school and church developments to the Seeley County Water District Wastewater Page | 40 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Wastewater Treatment Plant and Sewer Collection Facilities August 2017 Page | 41 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Wastewater Treatment Plant and Sewer Collection Facilities August 2017 Plant for treatment and disposal. The following is a general inventory of the gravity flow Wastewater Collection Pipelines. An additional 4,000 LF of force main pipeline is also inventoried. Table 5-B SCWD Wastewater Collection Pipelines Pipeline Diameters Material Length (FT) 12-inch Vitrified Clay Pipe / PVC 3,810 10-inch Vitrified Clay Pipe 3,200 8-inch Vitrified Clay Pipe 13,040 6-inch Vitrified Clay Pipe 4,680 Source: 2003 Service Area Plan-SCWD; Updated 2017 The Holt Group, Inc.The sewer collection system serves users within the SCWD District boundary except for a few users located on the exterior edges of the District Boundary, but within the Sphere of Influence. The wastewater collection system, generally, extends within the footprint of the Seeley Townsite. Refer to Exhibit 5-C - Existing Wastewater Collection and Sewer Facility Schematic Map. The wastewater flows in a westerly direction through a series of pipelines and via gravity flow into the Wastewater Treatment Plant. There is only one lift station within the entire system. The sewer lift station is owned by and located within the Sunbeam Lake RV Park. Adequacy of Existing WWTP and Sewer Collection Facilities Wastewater Treatment Plant- The average daily flow (design and permitted flow) received at the Seeley County Water District Wastewater Plant in 2017 was approximately 0.11 MGD with peak flows up to 0.380 MGD, as experienced March of 2016. Thus, the WWTP is operating below capacity. The WWTP, however, has experienced recent challenges for effective treatment of effluent discharge and operated under a Cease and Desist Order since 2011 due to increasing effluent quality violations. The violations were largely due to bacteriological quality involving E. Coli and Fecal Coliform. The Cease and Desist Board Order was amended and has a compliance date of August 2016 to meet the board imposed effluent limitations. The Seeley County Water District met the Cease and Desist Board Order requirements by completion of an approved Compliance Project prior to August 1, 2016 consistent with a Wastewater Treatment Plant Assessment that was prepared by The Holt Group, Inc in 2014 that identified three viable and cost- effective options for improvements to the SCWD WWTP to address the disinfection system effluent violations. The most expedient and least costly method of addressing the violations was to increase the performance of the existing pressure filters and UV disinfection unit. An additional pressure filter and an additional UV Disinfection System were completed in July of 2016. Page | 42 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Wastewater Treatment Plant and Sewer Collection Facilities August 2017 Page | 43 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Wastewater Treatment Plant and Sewer Collection Facilities August 2017 Sewer Collection System-The wastewater gravity pipelines within the Townsite of Seeley are composed of vitrified clay pipe (VCP). The vitrified clay pipelines are located within the alleys and streets. The VCP pipelines were cleaned and video camera inspected by the Seeley County Water District just prior to 2003 and were reported to be in fair condition. The investigation noted that some of the pipes were dirty with debris or that may contain tree roots. Hose jet cleaners have a maximum reach of 300 lineal feet making it difficult for operators to clean out clogged lines with distances exceeding 600 feet between manholes. There are eighteen (18) pipeline segments that exceed these length limitations. The wastewater collection system is composed of a network of pipelines within the Townsite of Seeley with an additional pipeline extending south of the railroad tracks to serve Sunbeam Lake (refer to Exhibit 5-C). The network comprises of pipelines ranging in size from 6” to 12” within the Townsite and a 1,000 lineal feet of 4” force main transitioning to 3,000 lineal feet of 6” force main line serving Sunbeam Lake. The existing system can support infill development but future growth areas would be required to construct new sewer mains. As noted earlier, the 12” sewer line on Main Street between Mount Signal Avenue and New River Boulevard is at capacity during peak flow. The other 12” line, located on Rio Vista Street between New River Boulevard and San Diego Avenue has approximately 25% capacity. These two lines are the only lines that connected directly to the treatment plant. New development projects would have to install new sewer main pipelines connecting directly to the treatment plant. Inventory of Approved WWTP and Sewer Collection Facilities There are currently no approved wastewater capital improvements approved for the Wastewater Treatment Plant. There are currently no approved wastewater collection pipelines planned within the service area. There are a number of projects recommended under build-out demand discussed in the proceeding section for SCWD Board consideration. Buildout Demand for WWTP and Sewer Collection Facilities Anticipated Capacity- The 2017 average daily wastewater flow entering the Seeley County Water District wastewater treatment plant was 0.12 million gallons per day according to operator records. The Seeley County Water District 0.25 million gallon wastewater treatment plant provides an average daily flow excess capacity of 0.13 million gallons per day. The average daily per capita (person) wastewater generation is estimated at 100 gallons per capita per day (gpcd). The residential per capita housing density in Seeley has been calculated at 3.53 persons per dwelling unit (2011-2015 ACS) as noted previously within the contents of this document. An equivalent dwelling unit (EDU) within the Seeley County Page | 44 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Wastewater Treatment Plant and Sewer Collection Facilities August 2017 Water District is defined as the wastewater generation in a day by a single family residential housing unit. An EDU is therefore calculated as follows: 3.5 persons per dwelling unit x 100 gallons per capita per day (gpcd) = 350 gallons per dwelling unit Therefore, 1 EDU = 350 gallons per day The additional capacity of the 0.25 million gallon wastewater treatment plant is 0.13 gallons and can be calculated as follows: 130,000 𝑔𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑛𝑠 (𝑒𝑥𝑐𝑒𝑠𝑠 𝑐𝑎𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦) = 370 𝑠𝑖𝑛𝑔𝑙𝑒 𝑓𝑎𝑚𝑖𝑙𝑦 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒𝑠 𝑜𝑟 370 𝐸𝐷𝑈′𝑠 350 𝑔𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑛𝑠/𝐸𝐷𝑈 At the current growth rate of 2.08% per year and an estimated demand of 100 gpcd, the treatment plant will be at capacity in 2039 (see Table 5-C). It should be noted that 100 gpcd is the industry standard used in projecting demand, but actual usage in Seeley is 59 gpcd. Using a 65 gpcd forecasting number (which is more in line with actual usage), capacity would be reached in 2050. Table 5-C Capacity Demand Based on Historic Growth Projections Projected Population Wastewater Treatment (Population Increase Based on Historic Plant Capacity Demand Growth Rate¹) Year 2017 2,140 0.125 mgd Year 2020 2,278 0.139 mgd Year 2025 2,581 0.164 mgd Year 2035 3,176 0.224 mgd After 2045 3,907 0.297 mgd ¹Historical Growth Rate was calculated at 2.08% percent over a 20 year period between 1990 and 2010. ²1 EDU = 350 gallons/day-Based upon 3.5 persons per residence and 100 gallons/capita-day of wastewater A multi-use, multi-density residential subdivision within SCWD’s sphere of influence was recently approved by the County of Imperial in 2016. The project consists of 403 single-family residences, up to 312 multi-family dwelling units, and 16.95 acres of commercial land. Development of the project can begin as soon as 2018 and the residential component can be built out within ten (10) years. This subdivision increases demand on the treatment plant, and along with natural Page | 45 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Wastewater Treatment Plant and Sewer Collection Facilities August 2017 population growth, treatment capacity will be reached in 2027. Table 5-D shows the population numbers and treatment plant demand to the year 2045. Table 5-D Capacity Demand Based on Natural Growth Rate and Approved Projects Projected Population Wastewater Treatment (Natural Growth + Approved Residential Plant Capacity Demand Development¹) Year 2017 2,140 0.124 mgd Year 2020 2,867 0.155 mgd Year 2025 4,110 0.215 mgd Year 2035 6,340 0.359 mgd After 2045 7,795 0.505 mgd ¹Historical Growth Rate was calculated at 2.08% percent over a 20 year period between 1990 and 2010 and applied to projections. (Base year was derived from existing service connections). ²1 EDU = 350 gallons/day-Based upon 3.5 persons per residence and 100 gallons/capita-day of wastewater generation If infill development were to occur at the same time as the approved subdivision project, capacity at the wastewater treatment plant would be reached much sooner. All developable infill parcels in Seeley’s service area boundaries can support up to 536 residential units. A 20-year buildout schedule was used for population projection estimates. Table 5-E shows population size with natural growth, infill development, and growth from the approved Sunbeam Lake Estates project. Treatment demand would exceed capacity in 2025. Table 5-E Capacity Demand Based on Natural Growth Rate and Projected Development Anticipated Projected Population Wastewater Treatment (Natural Growth + Approved Residential Plant Capacity Demand Development¹ + Infill Development) Year 2017 2,140 0.124 mgd Year 2020 3,158 0.163 mgd Year 2025 4,930 0.242 mgd Year 2035 8,398 0.442 mgd After 2045 10,643 0.647 mgd ¹Historical Growth Rate was calculated at 2.08% percent over a 20 year period between 1990 and 2010 and applied to projections. (Base year was derived from existing service connections). ²1 EDU = 350 gallons/day-Based upon 3.5 persons per residence and 100 gallons/capita-day of wastewater generation Page | 46 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Wastewater Treatment Plant and Sewer Collection Facilities August 2017 The Regional Water Quality Control Board generally requires agencies to begin engineering design at 80% capacity and begin construction at 90% capacity. At 2.08% growth rate, SWCD should begin design work between 2031 and 2038, but the added demand from the approved residential subdivision and infill development, design work should begin in 2022 and construction should begin in 2024. Design and construction is generally a 3-5-year process. The existing wastewater treatment plant is not designed in a manner that would allow modular upgrades to increase capacity. A new 0.75 MGD plant will need to be constructed to meet demand through 2045 (assuming no other residential subdivision projects are approved). The estimated cost of a new treatment plant is $5-7 million. Table 5-F provides an overview of the Capital Improvement needs for the SCWD Wastewater facilities within the near-term. Table 5-F Projected Near-Term Wastewater Facility Improvement Needs Estimate Funding Projects (2017) Gap (2017) Wastewater Master Plan (2020) $150,000 $150,000 Design Services for Wastewater Expansion (2022) $300,000 $300,000 New Wastewater Main Pipeline 18” Diameter $267,000 $267,000 Pond Lining and Six Aerators $750,000 $750,000 Source: The Holt Group, Inc. 2017 Estimates Opportunity for Shared Wastewater Treatment Facilities As previously noted, the nearest community to the Seeley service area is the City of El Centro which is 7.5 miles to the east of Seeley. Another wastewater treatment facility is the wastewater treatment facility serving the Centinela State Prison located 5.27 miles to the northwest. These facilities are too far away from the Seeley Wastewater Treatment Plant for a feasible consolidation. The Navy Base, located at 1605 3rd St in El Centro, is one mile east of Seeley and is served by U.S. Navy via an onsite wastewater treatment facility with a capacity of 0.30 MGD. The Navy base is located approximately two miles uphill from Seeley in a northeasterly direction. In order to consolidate with the Navy base, a new lift station will have to be constructed, along with approximately 11,033 lineal feet force main line at an estimated cost of $4.9 million. Consolidation with the Navy base may not be feasible due to military operations and potential security concerns. Page | 47 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Wastewater Treatment Plant and Sewer Collection Facilities August 2017 Mitigation for Wastewater Treatment Plant and Sewer Collection Facilities The Seeley County Water District should plan for immediate improvement to the WWTP associated with compliance and for future expansion needs. Strategies will include securing funding for all phases of facility development. Mitigation is noted as follows: WW-1 The District shall maintain adequate reserves for the proper repair and maintenance of the collection system. WW-2 The District should continue to pursue various means by which to obtain funding and provide for adequate wastewater treatment and collection/conveyance facilities for the existing and future residents of the District. WW-3 The District shall evaluate impact fees are to ensure fees are sufficient to support the costs of the projected expansion needs at the WWTP. WW-4 The District shall develop a Wastewater Master Plan, as funds become available, to ensure that new development will construct sewer main lines to be compatible with the sewer collection system. WW-5 New Development shall continue to be held responsible for constructing adequate wastewater collection system facilities and the fair share costs. WW-6 A Sewer System Management Plan (SSMP) should be developed and implemented to effectively manage the sewer system as well as assist in identification of facilities (pipelines, manholes, etc.) that are in need of rehabilitation. Page | 48 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Water Facilities August 2017 5.1.3 Water Facilities The District owns, operates and maintains a system for the treatment, distribution and storage of potable water resources that currently serves approximately 411 water service connections for residences, businesses, and public facilities within the District and the District’s Sphere of Influence (Source: Seeley County Water District- June 5, 2017 Board Report). The water treatment plant is located at the northeast corner of the Alamo Street and Laguna Avenue intersection where the administration office is located. The District purchases all of its untreated water from the Imperial Irrigation District, which is conveyed to SCWD facilities via IID’s Elder Canal located east of the water treatment plant. Water treatment and distribution facilities are owned and maintained by the Seeley County Water District. The SCWD sub-contracts the testing of the treated water to a certified laboratory. Performance Standard for Water Facilities Although the Seeley County Water District does not have an adopted performance standard for water facilities, there are design criteria that must be met to ensure that adequate potable water supply and fire flow needs are provided. Potable water must meet or exceed water quality standards established by the Water Resources Control Board, Division of Drinking Water and the US Environmental Protection Agency. SCWD’s goal in the operation and maintenance of its water facilities is to provide adequate potable water service to every customer. Seeley County Water District operates under Domestic Water Supply Permit No. 05-14-05P-007 issued May 10, 2005. The California Waterworks Standard requires that specific system pressures be maintained under normal and peak demand conditions. Additionally, each distribution system shall be operated in a manner to assure that the minimum operating pressure in the water main at the user service line connection throughout the distribution system is not less than 20 pounds per square inch at all times, per California Code of Regulations Title 22 related to drinking water and the 2016 California Fire Code related to fire flow. The criteria outlined in Table 5-G considers adequate water pressure for service to customers in addition to technical specifications that assure a properly designed system. As discussed with the Imperial County Fire Department and based on the California Fire Code, the following fire flows are required: 1,000 gallons per minute for residential; 1,500 gallons per minute for commercial; and 2,000 gallons per minute for industrial. The fire flows are required to be maintained for a minimum duration of 2 hours. Page | 49 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Water Facilities August 2017 Table 5-G Water Flow Standards Flow Demand Maximum Velocity Pressure Level Maximum Day Demand + Fire 15.0 ft per second 20 psi - 35 psi Flow* Maximum Day Demand 7.0 ft per second ≥ 20 psi *Fire flow minimums are targeted at 1,000 GPM for residential, 1,500 GPM for commercial, and 2,000 GPM for industrial. The water treatment plant capacity shall further meet the demand of the maximum daily flow, plus provide an operational storage capacity of at least 50 percent of the maximum day demand used. Systems with less than 1,000 service connections must have storage capacity that is equal to or greater than the Maximum Day Demand (MDD), unless the system can demonstrate that it has an additional source of supply or has an emergency source connection that can meet the MDD requirement. Inventory of Existing Water Facilities Water Treatment Plant- The SCWD owns and operates a public water treatment plant located on a 2.5 acre parcel on the northeast corner of the Alamo Street and Laguna Avenue intersection. The plant was originally constructed in 1965 and has a design capacity of 1.08 MGD and a current treatment demand average of 214,800 gallons per day. The Water Treatment Plant operates on a 24 hour a day basis. Raw water is conveyed to the Seeley County Water District (SCWD) Water Treatment Plant (WTP) by gravity flow from the Imperial Irrigation District’s canal. The WTP’s raw water storage consists of two (2) raw water storage basins with a combined capacity of 4.3 million gallons (MG). The raw water pump station is supplied with raw water by gravity from the raw water basins. The inlet piping and outlet piping of the raw water pump station allow for a raw water pumping capacity of 700 gallons per minute (gpm) with two pumps running to the Treatment Units. The Treatment Units are comprised of two (2) packaged water treatment units and coagulant storage and feed system. Each Treatment Unit is composed of a combined adsorption clarification and media filtration system which is designed to treat the capacity of 350 gallons per day (GPD) each. A finish water pump is located downstream of each Treatment Unit pumps 350 gpm to the potable water Storage Tanks. There are two (2) Storage Tanks which have total capacity of 1.0 Million Gallons (MG). Each Storage Tanks has four (4) baffles which will assist with contact time for chlorine disinfection. Page | 50 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Water Facilities August 2017 Finished water is supplied from the Storage Tanks to the distribution pump station. The distribution pump station is downstream of the storage Tanks. The distribution pump station consists of two (2) 250 gpm pumps and four (4) 500 gpm pumps all drive by VFD’s. The pump station has a maximum flow capacity of 2,500 gpm at 80 psi pressure. The pumps are operated via VFD drives, which allow efficient operation for various water distribution water demands. The pump station conveys potable water to the SCWD Water Distribution System at pressure range of 50 to 60 psi. Treatment Units are equipped with a Programmable Logic Controller (PLC) which provides controls required for operation of the Water Treatment Plant. Disinfection is provided via a chlorine storage and chemical feed system. Chlorine is injected downstream of the Treatment Units, with an option to dose downstream of the Distribution Pump Station. Potable Water Storage Facilities/Pump Stations-The SCWD maintains two storage sites at the 2.5-acre site to be used for finished or treated water. The treated water is stored in two (2) on-grade bolted steel tanks, each with a capacity of 500,000 gallons. The tanks operate in series and have the ability to operate separately in any case where one (1) of the storage tanks is placed out of service. Both storage tanks have baffles which were installed to improve CT disinfection conditions. The finished water is then pumped into the water distribution system by a variable frequency drive pump station capable of a maximum fire flow output of 2,500 gpm. This pump station is the only pump station used in the SCWD Water Distribution System. Water Distribution Facilities- The SCWD operates approximately 8.75 miles of distribution pipeline. The pipelines range from 3-inch to 12-inch in diameter and are primarily situated in a grid-like pattern within an approximate 0.50 square mile radius, encompassing the Seeley Community. The distribution pipeline system within the community of Seeley is generally bound by El Centro St. to the north, Evan Hewes Highway to the south and southeast, and the wastewater treatment plant to the west. A 4-inch diameter distribution pipeline runs south from the Seeley Community along Drew Road for approximately half a mile to service the County of Imperial Sunbeam Lake Park and RV Resort. The 4-inch diameter distribution line then runs southeast from the County of Imperial Sunbeam Lake Park and RV Resort for approximately 1.25 miles to service the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Interstate 8 Rest Stop Area. The Caltrans rest area is the furthest point south in the distribution system and serves as the bacteriological and TTHM sampling site under the current Stage 2 Disinfection Byproduct Rule (DBPR). SCWD has 99 water valves and 48 hydrants within the Page | 51 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Water Facilities August 2017 distribution system (Refer to Exhibit 5-D – Seeley County Water District Existing Water Distribution System). Adequacy of Existing Water Facilities Adequacy of Treatment Capacity- The Seeley County Water Districts WTP’s maximum operation capacity is 1.08 MGD. The plant is experiencing an average daily demand of .214 MGD with a peak flow demand of 0.39 MGD. The daily demand has substantial capacity at 20% of the maximum capacity. Thus the plant is capable of meeting the treatment demand projected for the planning period. Seeley County Water District has been issued several citations by the California Department of Public Health between 2006 and 2014 after failing to comply with the drinking water Standard for the Running Annual Average Maximum of Total Trihalomethanes (TTHM) of a maximum of 80 micrograms per liter (µg/L). Most recently in April 29, 2015 an amendment was made to Citation No. 05-14-14C-001 after Seeley failed to comply with Directive 4 of the approved June 11, 2014 TTHM Reduction Plan. An updated TTHM Reduction Plan dated February 25, 2015 was approve where it was understood that the submitted project schedule was subject to change based on funding. Construction is scheduled to begin in August 2017. Improvements proposed to be made include the construction of a Trihalomethane Removal System which will be incorporated as part of the potable water storage tanks which will treat up to 500,000 gallons per day. Adequacy of Storage System- Thus, the water treatment plant has adequate storage capacity of one (1) million gallons which is divided into two (2) storage reservoirs having a total storage capacity of five hundred thousand (500,000) million gallons each. The two (2) Storage Tanks operate in series and have baffles which were installed to improve CT disinfection conditions. The existing reservoirs have a water capacity that may supply more than two (2) days of water demand from its consumers. Adequacy of Distribution System- In 2011 the Water District replaced approximately 70% of the water distribution system. As previously noted, the water distribution system consists of distribution pipelines ranging from three (3) inch diameter to twelve (12) inch diameter. The only 3-inch pipelines serve two different residential neighborhoods and are considered substandard. Per California Code of Regulations Title 22, the minimum allowed pipeline has a four (4) inch diameter. The inadequately sized pipelines serve residential homes at the north-west corner of the intersection at Evan Hewes Highway and San Diego Avenue and as well as the east side of the intersection at Haskell Road and Park Street (See Exhibit 5- D). Page | 52 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Water Facilities August 2017 Page | 53 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Water Facilities August 2017 The Seeley County Water District is proposing to conduct a complete hydraulic analysis of the existing water distribution system review to determine adequate demand, flow and pressure capacities of the distribution system during the Fall of 2017. In specific, Seeley County Water District is interested in the required fire protection flow and pressure capacities at fire hydrant locations throughout the distribution system, serving adequate demand for the residents and commercial facilities within its service area, and residence time of water in pipelines. Based on the hydraulic analysis, Seeley County Water District will evaluate recommended improvements and funding options for water distribution system improvements. As of the current date, a portion of the hydraulic analysis has been conducted. The current distribution system has been evaluated for residence time (water age) in an attempt to identify long residence time of water pipeline sections, which may also contribute to the generation of Trihalomethanes (THM’s) which have been reported at different sampling points throughout the system. A basic hydraulic model has been prepared and results imply that the water distribution system is flushing adequately based on the average daily demands that have been recorded for all existing water services. Residence times are low in all pipe segments with the exception of fire hydrant connections and dead end pipe segments near the Seeley WWTP. There is a single 4-inch ACP pipeline that extends south of the railroad tracks and routes to the Sunbeam Rest Area along I-8. This 4-inch ACP pipeline is providing potable water to the Sunbeam Lake Recreation Facility, Sunbeam BMX, Sunbeam Ball Park, Sunbeam Lake R.V. Resort and the Sunbeam Rest Area. Based on average daily demand this pipeline provides potable water at a rate of about 26 GPM. This line would have to be replaced with a 12” Water Main Pipeline in order to accommodate future connections. The pipeline is considered to be operating at 100 percent capacity. The pipeline would require replacement in order to accommodate future connections. Inventory of Approved Water Facilities TTHM Treatment Improvements-The Seeley County Water District (SCWD) has designed and is in the process of constructing a Trihalomethane (THM) Removal System to be incorporated into and become a part of the potable water treatment process which would be able to treat up to 1,000,000 gallons per day. A modified spray aeration system with forced ventilation is proposed. The spray is proposed to be installed in the roof of the tanks stripping the TTHMs into the open head space. The head space will be fed with fresh air to optimize the TTHM removal, via forced ventilation to exhaust air into the atmosphere. The project is an improvement project which includes the following; installation of a pressure spray Page | 54 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Water Facilities August 2017 aeration (via water pumps and piping) within the storage tank, and a forced air ventilation system (via blowers). The existing Storage Tanks will further need to be retrofitted for construction of the THM Removal System. The intent of this Project is to serve as an action/response for SCWD to comply with Division of Drinking Water Citation requirements and Safe Water Drinking Act standards for drinking water. In specific, the TTHM Reduction improvements are proposed meet the TTHM’s MCL standards and will not affect capacity. Please refer to Exhibit 5-E- Proposed Water Treatment Improvements that illustrates the planned improvements to the Water Tanks. Buildout Demand for Water Facilities Operator records show that 0.39 million gallons per day (MGD) is the peak demand produced by the SCWD water treatment plant with the average demand of 0.214 MGD. The current treatment capacity at the plant is 1.08 MGD and the plant is operating at 20% of its capacity with 0.86 million gallons of excess capacity. The average daily per capita (person) water demand is estimated at 150 gallons per capita per day (gpcd). The residential per capita housing density in Seeley has been calculated at 3.53 persons per dwelling unit (2011-2015 ACS) as noted previously. An equivalent dwelling unit (EDU) within the Seeley County Water District is defined as the water used in a day by a single family residential housing unit. An EDU is therefore calculated as follows: 3.5 persons per dwelling unit x 150 gallons per capita per day (gpcd) = 525 gallons per dwelling unit per day Therefore, 1 EDU = 525 gallons per day The 0.86 million gallon per day excess capacity can provide service to 1,638 EDU’s as calculated below: 860,000 𝑔𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑛𝑠 (𝑒𝑥𝑐𝑒𝑠𝑠 𝑐𝑎𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦) = 1,638 𝐸𝐷𝑈′𝑠 525 𝑔𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑛𝑠/𝐸𝐷𝑈 At the current growth rate of 2.08% per year and an estimated demand of 150 gpcd, the treatment plant will be at capacity in 2079. It should be noted that 150 gpcd is the industry standard used in projecting demand, but actual usage in Seeley is 100 gpcd. Seeley’s treatment plant will not reach capacity until the year 2079 if population growth remains the same as it has in the past. Table 5-H below shows the population project to the year 2045 and the level of demand on the treatment plant. Page | 55 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Water Facilities August 2017 Page | 56 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Water Facilities August 2017 Table 5-H Water Capacity Demand Based on Historic Growth Projections Projected Population Water Treatment Demand (Population Increase Based on Historic Growth Rate¹) Year 2017 2,140 0.22 mgd Year 2020 2,326 0.24 mgd Year 2025 2,581 0.28 mgd Year 2035 3,176 0.37 mgd After 2045 3,907 0.48 mgd ¹Historical Growth Rate was calculated at 2.08% percent over a 20 year period between 1990 and 2010. ²Based on an industry standard of 150 gpd per person, a peaking factor of 2.0. Infill development and the recently approved Sunbeam Lake Estate project have an impact on population growth and the capacity of the water treatment plant. Table 5-I below shows what the population numbers would look like to the year 2045 if all infill areas are developed and the Sunbeam Lake Estate project were to be built. Capacity at the water treatment plant will be reached in 2033. Table 5-I Buildout Demand for Water Treatment Plant Projected Population Water Treatment Demand (Natural Growth + Approved Residential Development¹ + Infill Development) Year 2017 2,140 0.22 mgd Year 2020 3,158 0.37 mgd Year 2025 4,930 0.63 mgd Year 2035 8,398 1.15 mgd After 2045 10,643 1.50 mgd The Regional Water Quality Control Board generally requires agencies to begin engineering design at 80% capacity and begin construction at 90% capacity. At 2.08% growth rate, SWCD will not need to consider expansion until 2070, but the added demand from the approved residential subdivision and infill development, design work should begin in 2028 and construction should begin in 2032. Design and construction is generally a 3-4 year process. Page | 57 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Water Facilities August 2017 The Seeley County Water District may expand the water treatment plant based on the same design facilities that are in place without significant alterations to the existing system. The Seeley County Water District may use the Clarifier/Filter Water Treatment Unit which are often referred to as “packaged treatment systems.” The packaged water treatment systems are pre-assembled prior to delivery to a given water treatment plant. The packaged water treatment systems are purchased and delivered at a designated treatment capacity. Each of the existing packaged treatment system is designed to treat 1.08 MGD. Thus, SCWD would be upgrading the water treatment plant in 1.08 MGD pre-packaged units gradually, as water demand increases. The near-term and mid-term demand on the water treatment and distribution system are tied to immediate needs or future planning expenses. Accommodating any new development south of Evan Hewes Highway would require replacement of the undersized 4” water pipeline that serves as the main distribution line to the Sunbeam Lake area and is unable to meet fire-flow demands. The previously noted deficient residential distribution lines north of Evan Hewes would also need replacement, and in order to proactively plan for community development with the adequate provision of treated water facilities and services, a Water Master Plan needs to be developed. Table 5-J provides a general estimate of these near-term to mid-term costs. Table 5-J Projected Near-Term to Mid-Term Water Facility Improvements Estimate Funding Projects (2017) Gap (2017) Water Master Plan (2020) $150,000 $150,000 3” Water Distribution Residential Pipeline Replacement $60,500 $60,500 4” Water Distribution Main Pipeline Replacement (12”) $700,000 $700,000 Source: The Holt Group, Inc. 2017 Cost Estimates Opportunity for Shared Water Facilities The District does not share water treatment, storage, or distribution facilities with other Districts or jurisdictions. As previously noted, the nearest community to the Seeley service area is the City of El Centro which is 7.5 miles to the east of Seeley. Another water treatment facility is the wastewater treatment facility serving the Centinela State Prison located 7.5 miles to the northwest. These facilities are too far away from the Seeley Water Treatment Plant for a feasible consolidation. The Navy Base, located at 1605 3rd St in El Centro, is one mile east of Seeley and is served by U.S. Navy via an onsite water treatment facility with a capacity of 2 MGD. The Navy base is located approximately two miles uphill from Seeley in a Page | 58 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Water Facilities August 2017 northeasterly direction. In order to consolidate with the Navy base, a new booster station will have to be constructed, along with approximately 11,033 lineal feet force main line at an estimated cost of $2.8 million. Consolidation with the Navy base may not be feasible due to military operations and potential security concerns. Phasing of Water Facilities The immediate water facility projects are near-term projects. No major capital improvement projects need to be programmed in phases beyond the Water Master Plan as the initial phase. Mitigation for Water Facilities In order for SCWD to assure adequate service to its water customers as development continues within the District boundaries and sphere of influence, the following measures should be implemented: W-1 The District shall maintain adequate reserves for the proper repair and maintenance of the distribution system. W-2 The District should continue to pursue various means by which to obtain funding and provide for adequate water treatment and distribution facilities for the existing and future residents of the District. W-3 The District shall evaluate impact fees are to ensure fees are sufficient to support the costs of the projected expansion needs at the WTP. W-4 The District shall develop a Water Master Plan, as funds become available, to ensure that new development will construct water main lines to be compatible with the water distribution system. W-5 New Development shall continue to be held responsible for constructing adequate water distribution system facilities and the fair share costs. Page | 59 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Park and Recreational Facilities August 2017 5.1.4 Park and Recreational Facilities Unincorporated communities such as Seeley are usually served by the County for parks and recreation services and facilities, however SCWD owns and actively seeks funding for improvements to Robert Bates Memorial Park. The community park is leased out to Imperial County for operation and maintenance. Sunbeam Lake Park, owned and operated by the County of Imperial as a regional park, is also located within the boundaries of SCWD and is available to its residents. Performance Standard for Recreational Facilities The Seeley County Water District has not adopted a performance standard ratio and relies on the County’s adopted standard which is larger than the State’s minimum ratio for park facilities of three acres of park space per 1,000 persons. The locally adopted standard is higher than the Quimby Act of 1975 and uses a service ratio of five (5) acres of parkland per 1,000 persons. Inventory of Existing Recreational Facilities There are over 70 acres of park facilities in the Seeley community (slightly over 11 acres are improved). They consist of two recreational facilities: 1) Robert Bates Memorial Park which is located at the northwest corner of San Diego Avenue and Park Street and 2) recreational area known as Sunbeam Lake Park located at 1750 Drew Road. Table 5-K lists the parks in Seeley with respective acreage while Exhibit 5-F-SCWD Park and Recreational Facilities Map, delineates park locations throughout the District’s Service Area. Table 5-K SCWD Existing Parks Park Name Owner Location Size County of Sunbeam Lake Park 1750 Drew Road 66.55 AC Imperial Robert Bates Memorial Park SCWD 1826 Park Street 3.58 AC Total Acres of Parkland 70.13 AC Robert Bates Memorial Park- The park is centrally located in Seeley at 1826 Park Street. It is important to note that both the fire station and the park are located on the same 4.13-acre parcel, but for the purposes of the Service Area Plan, Robert Bates Memorial Park is 3.58 acres in size. Amenities include a large playing field, playground equipment and a basketball court. Page | 60 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Park and Recreational Facilities May 2017 Page | 61 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Park and Recreational Facilities August 2017 Sunbeam Lake Park is located partially within SCWD’s service boundaries and serves as a regional park for all of Imperial County. Amenities at the park include a man-made lake available for fishing and limited boating, improved playing fields for basketball, soccer, baseball, and BMX, covered playground, and a walking trail. Although the park is located on 117 acres of land, only 66.55 acres is included in the inventory. The remaining portion of the parcel is occupied by a gated, private RV resort. The baseball fields are home to the Sunbeam Little League while the BMX area is home to Imperial Valley BMX. School Facilities - Seeley School contains a playing field, running track, and playground equipment, but the space area is restricted to student use during school hours. Community groups may request use of the facilities subject to the discretion of the school district and as long as the use does not interfere with class hours. Adequacy of Existing Park and Recreational Facilities Residents of the District have 70.13 acres of parkland available to them. With an existing population of 2,140 people, the park ratio is 32 acres per 1,000 persons. Due to the proximity of Sunbeam Lake Park, the park ratio exceeds the County standard of five (5) acres per 1,000 persons. The National Recreation and Parks Association (NRPA) published park location, size, and amenities standards in 1970 and is still widely used. The NRPA recommends that a neighborhood park of 1-2 acres in size for every 1,000 residents be located within a half-mile radius of all residential uses. Those dwelling units to the east of Heil Avenue are just beyond the recommended half-mile radius. NRPA standard further require certain amenities based on population size. For example, one (1) picnic shelter and one (1) playground equipment should be provided for every 2,000 residents, but the NRPA also recommends one (1) tennis court for every 2,000 residents. Most communities will use NRPA standards as a starting point in determining the type of amenities required. Neither Seeley nor the County of Imperial have adopted specific park development standards. Although the NRPA recommends a park every half-mile, this standard can not be applied in every situation and the distribution of parkland for Seeley is adequate given its population size. Inventory of Approved Recreational Facilities Robert Bates Memorial Park- the SCWD received a $150,000 from the Imperial Irrigation District Local Entity Grant Program for park improvements. The District proposes to install lighting, shade structure, pedestrian walkways and drinking Page | 62 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Park and Recreational Facilities August 2017 fountain. The District has further budgeted for a Master Plan Development in efforts to assist with future funding. Sunbeam Lake Park-There are nine (9) acres of Sunbeam Lake park area that are proposed to be developed as part of the Sunbeam Lake Estates development project. Proposed improvements include shade structures, tot lot and play ground areas, picnic areas, bike racks, BBQ grills, lighting and dock area. Trees, plants and a landscaped retention basin area are also proposed. Buildout Demand for Recreational Facilities As previously noted, the performance standard for the District is currently 5 acres of parkland per 1,000 persons. Due to the size of the Sunbeam Lake Park, additional recreational facilities are not needed within the planning period. It is anticipated that the Seeley community will have a population of 9,212 by the year 2038 at which time the parkland demand would only be 40-45 acres, far less the current available acreage. At full buildout, the ratio would be 7.6 acres for every 1,000 residents. Opportunity for Shared Recreational Facilities As mentioned previously, Seeley School contains recreational amenities such as playing field, running track, and a playground but these are only available to students and by special permit. SCWD and the School District can enter into a Joint Use Agreement. The 6.7-acre field is approximately 1/8-mile from Robert Bates Memorial Park but does not provide the required half-mile for the residents east of Heil Avenue. Given the abundance of parkland for the current population and at buildout, the need for shared facilities is not necessary. There are no other parks within the vicinity of Seeley. Phasing of Recreational Facilities The only approved development project in the vicinity of SCWD is the Sunbeam Lake Estates residential subdivision with an anticipated buildout date of 2030. The subdivision is located outside of SCWD’s current service boundaries but within its sphere of influence. The Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project states that the demand for additional parks and recreational services will be met by Sunbeam Lake Park and developers of Sunbeam Lake Estates will provide additional amenities at Sunbeam Lake Park to offset the impacts. Required improvements include additional playground equipment, shades, trees, sitting areas, BBQ tables, and landscaping. The timing and phasing of the improvements are to be determined at the time of residential development. Page | 63 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Park and Recreational Facilities August 2017 Mitigation for Recreational Facilities The Seeley Parks and Open Space Facilities meet the established performance standards and are adequate in size and condition to continue to serve the current population. As new development is proposed, projects are required to incorporate park space per the performance standard of five (5) acres per 1,000 in population. It is anticipated that projects contributing to the population increase throughout a twenty (20) year planning term, will satisfactorily fulfill these requirements. Although there is sufficient park space to support current and future population, the ability to maintain SCWD’s own park and any future parks is an issue. SCWD should examine opportunities to generate revenues for park maintenance. In order for SCWD to assure adequate parks and recreation services, the following measures should be implemented: PR-1 The District should examine opportunities to generate revenues for park maintenance and the provision of recreational programs. PR-2 The District should continue to seek grant funding for capital improvements to the only neighborhood park-Robert Bates Memorial Park. Page | 64 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Services Provided by Imperial County August 2017 5.2 SERVICES PROVIDED BY IMPERIAL COUNTY Given that the services provided by Seeley County Water District are limited, and that the District lies within an unincorporated area of Imperial County, there are numerous services provided by the County of Imperial including administration, transportation, fire protection, law enforcement, library facilities and to some extent, parks and recreation. Administration facilities and parks and recreation facilities through Imperial County have already been discussed indirectly in Section 5.1.1 and 5.1.4, respectively and will not be analyzed further. More detailed information regarding Imperial County administrative and parks and recreational services is available in the Imperial County Municipal Service Review and can be accessed through Imperial County’s LAFCO or Imperial County’s Website. The following section discusses services provided directly by the County of Imperial within the Seeley County Water District boundaries and Sphere of Influence. The data collected for this discussion was obtained from Imperial County’s Service Plan, prepared by Hofman Planning and Engineering in 2011 A cursory review is being provided for these services under this Service Area Plan Section.5 • Fire Facilities- Fire facilities include the fire station, and other support equipment including firefighting equipment such as fire engines, water tenders, and aircraft firefighting units. Fire facilities also include the staffing level needed to operate the aforementioned equipment and deliver emergency and fire-protection services. • Law Enforcement Facilities- Law enforcement facilities include the sheriff’s station, and other support facilities including patrol vehicles, the Imperial County jail, and the Coroner’s office. Law enforcement facilities further includes the staffing level needed to provide law enforcement and protection services. • Library Facilities- Library Facilities include the library space, the contents of the library as well as the Staff that manage the library. It also includes any support equipment such as computers, copy machines, and other office equipment that may be available to the general public. • Transportation Facilities- Transportation facilities consist primarily of roadways including Local and State owned roadways. Transportation facilities may also include pedestrian facilities such as sidewalks. • Stormwater & Drainage Facilities- Stormwater and drainage facilities consist primarily of storm-drain pipelines along roadways, open drain ditches, retention basins and any pumping facilites. 5 Although the Imperial County Municipal Service Review has been under review by Imperial County since January 2011, as of June 2017, Imperial County has not commented on the document. As such, the Municipal Service Review has not been and adopted by LAFCo and has since been removed from LAFCo’s project list. Page | 65 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Fire Facilities August 2017 5.2.1 Fire Facilities Fire protection services are provided to the Seeley community by the Imperial County Fire Department (ICFD). The ICFD maintains and operates five (5) fire stations throughout the County of Imperial. Seeley is serviced by Imperial County Station #3, located at 1828 West Park Street in Seeley and was constructed in 1975. Performance Standard for Fire Facilities The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) outlines performance standards related to deployment and organization of firefighting operations. NFPA 1710 recommends a response time of 8 minutes for first-alarm response and that each company be staffed with four (4) firefighters including a company officer. These standards are based on a typical 2,000 square-foot, two-story single-family residential structure. Personnel and equipment can be adjusted to ensure that the fire department can maintain the 8-minute response time. Inventory of Existing Fire Facilities Station #3 in Seeley is one of the second oldest fire stations within the County. The station sits on a 4 acre lot that is shared with Joh Bates Memorial Park, and is situated within a 3,974 square foot building located at 1828 West Park Street. Existing equipment at the station includes one (1) Type I Engine, and one (1) Type III Brush Engine. The Seeley Station is operated by three County employees at any given time. There are three (3) firefighters per shift, including one (1) captain. Their average response time is 8 minutes for the entire service area which encompasses 160 square miles. The average response time for the area is 6.5 minutes. These ratios of service and response are reasonable and acceptable. Please Refer to Exhibit 5-G– Imperial County Fire Station Location and Service Area, for the service area. Adequacy of Existing Fire Facilities The average response time of 6.5 minutes is well within NFPA’s standard of 8 minutes, and according to the Fire Chief, the existing staffing levels are sufficient based on the current demands. Numerous factors affect response time including development densities, population intensity, building height, building materials, and roadway configuration. Infill development north of Evan Hewes Highway can be reasonably supported by Station #3 and its current equipment and personnel. Response times south of Evan Hewes Highway can be affected by delays caused by the railroad. Although it is a rare occurrence, delays would affect residents of Sunbeam Lake RV Resort and the approved Sunbeam Lake Estates residential subdivision. Response time is also affected by Station #3’s vast service area (see Exhibit 3-G) which is much larger than SCWD’s service area. Page | 66 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Fire Facilities August 2017 Page | 67 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Fire Facilities August 2017 When the Fire Department is responding to call to the outer portions of its service area, no additional personnel is available to residents of Seeley thereby affecting response times. Mutual Aid Agreements with the El Centro Fire Department and the Naval Air Facility Fire Department can minimize delays in response time. The most recently adopted Emergency Services Master Plan (2012) for the County Fire Department identified various deficiencies in the existing fire facility given the fact that it is one of the oldest fire stations in the county. Heating, ventilation, and air condition (HVAC) will need to be updated; the building needs to be painted; a back-up power generator needs to be installed; and the entire Station needs to be retrofitted to comply with the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Architectural Barriers Act (ABA). There are currently no plans to improve the facility until grants or other funding sources are secured. Inventory of Approved Fire Facilities There are no additional fire facilities planned for the Seeley community. Fire Station renovations will be planned as funding opportunities arise. Facility improvements that have been budgeted are the following: making all four apparatus doors operable, slate apparatus doors for electrical operators, provide central air conditioning, paint, apparatus floor repairs, repair subfloor, and add a new staircase. Improvements such as backup generator and improvements for ADA compliance have not been budgeted as funding is not currently available. Buildout Demand for Fire Facilities and Services Increased development places a strain on the services, personnel, and equipment of County Fire Station #3. As calls volumes increase, the Fire Department will experience an increase in emergency and non-emergency response times which compromises the ability of the Fire Department to provide life-saving services to the residents of Seeley. SCWD’s Sphere of Influence is already within Fire Station #3’s service boundary would still be able to respond to the needs of future population resulting from infill development and the approved Sunbeam Lake Estates residential subdivision. The Sunbeam Lake Estates Mitigated Negative Declaration identified a potential impact to fire facilities and services unless a Community Facilities District is formed to provide revenues to offset the cost of additional personnel and equipment at Fire Station #3. The Sunbeam Lake Estates Mitigated Negative Declaration only identified an additional 1,411 residents resulting from the single-family units but did not analyze population increase resulting from the proposed multi-family development which can potentially add another 1,102 residents to Station #3’s service area can call volume. Again, Mutual Aid Agreement can minimize delays in response time but call volume needs to be examined further. Page | 68 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Fire Facilities August 2017 Opportunity for Shared Fire Facilities The Imperial County Fire Department Station #3 does not share facilities but is located on parkland owned by Seeley County Water District. Thus the current site is shared with a park facility. Imperial County Fire Department has Mutual Aid Agreements with the El Centro Fire Department and the Naval Air Facility Fire Department to provide personnel and equipment as needed in emergency situations. Phasing of Facilities There are currently no new fire facilities planned within the Seeley County Water District Sphere of Influence. Future improvements only involve building modifications and will not impact capacity. Mitigation for Fire Facilities The Imperial County Fire Department is responsible for the continuous monitoring of the adequacy of the existing Imperial County Fire Department facilities to ensure that adequate fire protection services are provided. Seeley County Water District, however, shall periodically monitor and ensure that adequate fire flow suppressions are maintained throughout the District for fire protection services. SCWD should also review all future residential developments within its Sphere of Influence to ensure that any new construction will not diminish Fire Station #3’s ability to provide life-saving services to its residents. Page | 69 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Law Enforcement Facilities August 2017 5.2.2 Law Enforcement Facilities Law enforcement services are provided to the Seeley community by the Imperial County Sheriff’s Department. The County Sheriff’s department maintains one headquarters office located in El Centro, and five substations located in Brawley, Niland, Palo Verde, Salton City, and Winterhaven. The nearest sheriff station to the Seeley population is the South County Patrol located at 328 Applestill Road in El Centro which is the main headquarters. The Sheriff’s Department provides services to the entire unincorporated areas of Imperial County with a population of approximately 39,902 persons (Source: County of Imperial Municipal Service Review Draft #3, 2011). Services include patrol, criminal investigations, civil services, bailiff enforcement, correctional services, crime prevention, off-highway law enforcement, waterway enforcement, and dispatch services. The Sherriff’s Department only provides service to the unincorporated County population as Cities have their own police departments, unless there is a mutual agreement in place. This section will discuss patrol services provided to the Seeley community by Imperial County only. Performance Standard for Law Enforcement Facilities A general industry standard for law enforcement services is one (1) officer per 1,000 persons. This standard is widely recognized and used by jurisdictions. However, given the characteristics of Imperial County such as geographical challenges, size, and the fact that it is an international border, this ratio appears simplistic. Nevertheless, the ratio is a quantifiable standard that can provide a general basis for levels of service specifically for patrol. The existing patrol officer to population ratio for the entire unincorporated County of Imperial is 1.43 patrol officers per 1,000 persons (p.44 of County of Imperial Municipal Service Review Draft #3, 2011) which has been determined as an adequate service ratio by Imperial County. Inventory of Existing Law Enforcement Facilities The sheriff’s administrative facility that serves the Seeley community is approximately 23, 274 square feet and is responsible for civil services for the entire County of Imperial along with the previously mentioned five (5) substations. Staffing of the Sheriff’s Office includes sworn and non-sworn positions. Of the sworn positions there is 1 sheriff, 1 undersheriff, 2 chief deputies, 3 sheriff lieutenants, 20 sheriff sergeants, 26 senior deputy sheriffs, and 55 deputy sheriffs. Of the non-sworn positions there is one scientific investigation supervisor, 2 identification technicians and 88 administrative and support staff (County of Imperial Municipal Service Review Draft #3, 2011) The sheriff’s office operates on two 12-hour shifts over four patrol areas. For each shift there are 12 patrol officers and there are a total of 4 shift teams. These patrol areas are divided as follows, Page | 70 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Law Enforcement Facilities August 2017 South County, North County, Winterhaven, and Salton City. The Seeley community is patrolled by South County. Adequacy of Existing Law Enforcement Facilities The South County serving Sheriff’s office is located at 328 Applestill Road in El Centro at an approximate 7-mile distance from Seeley County Water District. (Please refer to Exhibit 5-H – Law Enforcement Location Map). Given the existing level of service ratio of 1.43 law enforcement officers per 1,000 persons, which is well about the 1.00 officer per 1,000 standard, the current demand is 58 officers assigned to patrol duties. Given that there is a demand of 58 officers and that currently there are only 48 deputies dedicated to patrol, there is a deficiency of 10 officers. Based on input from the Sheriff’s Office, the staffing shortage should be addressed by hiring 6 deputies and 2 sergeants (County of Imperial Municipal Service Review Draft #3, 2011). Inventory of Approved Law Enforcement Facilities Imperial County’s Service Area Plan notes there are no law enforcement facilities planned for within the Seeley County Water District or its Sphere of Influence. Upgrades to the Main Facility serving the South County Patrol Unit are planned and include a keyless entry system for security and access control, modernization of exercise rooms, replacement of roofs, and resurfacing of the parking lot. Improvements to equipment include installation of video recording in patrol units. Buildout Demand for Law Enforcement Facilities and Services There are no new law enforcement facilities planned within the Seeley County Water District Sphere of Influence within the next twenty years. However, it is noted in the 2011 County of Imperial Municipal Service Review Draft #3, that a law enforcement substation be considered for the Gateway Specific Plan project area by 2030 to meet the projected demand in Heber. The development of such a substation may alleviate some of the shared demand to other coverage areas. The Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the proposed Sunbeam Lake Estates residential subdivision only analyzed the impacts resulting from single- family residences. The MND noted that there would be impacts to law enforcement services and facilities, but the formation of a Communities Facilities District (CFD) would alleviate those impacts through additional revenues for hiring additional personnel. The MND did not analyze the impacts from the multi-family units within Sunbeam Lake Estates which can potentially add another 1,102 residents. There is already a deficiency in the county-wide demand for patrol officers. The buildout population of 9,212 residents would require seven (7) additional deputies. Page | 71 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Law Enforcement Facilities August 2017 Page | 72 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Law Enforcement Facilities August 2017 Opportunity for Shared Law Enforcement Facilities The Imperial County Sherriff’s office does not currently have facilities in Seeley, and operate from the main Sherriff facility in El Centro. The call volume is relatively low and there is no need for a substation in Seeley, but Fire Station #3 can be used to house a report-writing desk to provide additional law enforcement presence in Seeley. At ultimate buildout, a substation may be necessary to address the increased population. A substation can be co-located with Fire Station #3. Phasing of Law Enforcement Facilities No new law enforcement facilities are planned during this 20-year period within the Seeley County Water District Sphere Influence nor within any proximity that would impact the service ratio to SCWD. Mitigation for Law Enforcement Facilities Periodic evaluations of law enforcement services are the responsibility of the Imperial County’s Sheriff’s Office. Evaluations should base service demand on not only population growth projections but incidents of crime, and emergency response times and service ratio of at least 1.2 patrol officers per 1,000 residents as noted in the 2011 County of Imperial Municipal Service Review Draft #3. Page | 73 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Library Facilities August 2017 5.2.3 Library Facilities The Imperial County Free Library (ICFL) formed in 1912 to serve the people of Imperial County who reside outside the city limits of Brawley, Calexico, El Centro and Imperial. There are currently four library branches open to the public in Calipatria, Heber, Holtville, and Salton City. The ICFL provides recreational and informational reading, audiotapes, some videos and DVDs, periodicals, and reference services to its patrons. Materials can be requested via interlibrary loan. Internet and public-access computers are available at most branches. There are no libraries in Seeley. The nearest library to the Seeley is the El Centro Public Library located at 1140 North Imperial Avenue, El Centro, CA 92243, approximately 7.7 miles from Seeley. Performance Standard for Library Facilities The Imperial County Free Library does not have adopted performance standards for library facilities and the State Library system has not created standards. However, the State Library has definitions that provide a basis for facility needs and services. The County librarian provided the following information from the State Library: • Library Branch- “A branch is an extension library, open at least five days a week, has at least 1,400 square feet of floor space, a general book collection of at least 7,000 volumes and staffed with at least one (1) librarian and one clerical employee during the hours open for service.” • Library Station- “A station is a smaller version of a branch with one (1) separate quarters, a permanent basic collection of at least one established paid position and a regular schedule for opening to the public.” The American Library Association, Subcommittee on Standards for Small Libraries published a brief 16-page report in 1962 outlining minimum space requirements for libraries serving population of less than 50,000. The report recommends that a 2,000 square-foot library is adequate to serve a population of under 2,499. The location of a library is also an important performance standard. The American Library Association recommends that patrons should be able to reach the library within 30 minutes travel in rural and suburban areas. Inventory of Existing Library Facilities Seeley County Water District does not have a library, nor does it have a library branch. The nearest public library is located in the City of El Centro, approximately 7.7 miles away. However, minimal library services are provided by the Imperial County Library team to the Seeley community on an average of two times per month. Light library services include story time for children and some books are brought to Seeley Community Church located at 1774 Rio Vista Street to be used Page | 74 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Library Facilities August 2017 by patrons. The Brawley Public Library also provides a mobile library in the form of a 32’ long specialty vehicle traveling throughout Imperial County giving underserved children ages 0-5 years and their parents access to literacy activities and services. The Literacy and Mobile Book Services (LAMBS) is outfitted with a wheelchair lift, a removable puppet stage, laptop computers with software for both parents and children, and ample shelf space to house the materials that will be available for parents and children to checkout and also for books that will be given to the children to keep at the end of each program. Library Facilities Location There are no facilities dedicated to Library resources in Seeley. The bi-weekly Light library services provided by the Imperial County Free Library are delivered at the Seeley Community Church located at 1774 Rio Vista Street. Adequacy of Existing Library Facilities Since there are no library facilities in Seeley, the limited service is considered inadequate due to the limited hours library services are brought in for the benefit of the public. The hours of service are the first and third Wednesday of each month from 5:30 pm to 6:45 pm. Inventory of Approved Library Facilities There are currently no planned or approved library facilities beyond the limited outreach services that are offered through Imperial County Library Services. As Seeley continues to grow, it may be necessary to plan for increased hours or for a full-service library branch. The Imperial County Free Library will be conducting a library needs assessment in late 2017 (Source: Crystal Duran, County of Imperial Librarian, April 11, 2017). Buildout Demand for Library Facilities The current Seeley population of 2,410 is unable to warrant a demand for a new facility. It is very likely that as the community grows within the next 20-year planning term, at minimum, the hours of operation for the Seeley Library Station will be extended. The Cities of Holtville (population 5,939) and Calipatria (population 4,019, excluding institutionalized population) have County Library branches. As Seeley approaches similar population size, a library branch in Seeley will be needed. The El Centro Public Library is within the 30-minute proximity recommended by the American Library Association but it is only able to serve El Centro’s own resident population and cannot be counted as a resource to service Seeley residents. Opportunity for Shared Library Facilities Seeley does not have any dedicated library facilities but minimal services are collocated at the Seeley Community Church. Expanded hours and library materials Page | 75 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Library Facilities August 2017 can continue to be housed at the Seeley Community Church. As Seeley’s population increases, it may outgrow the Seeley Community Church and other shared facilities can be explored. Seeley School is an opportunity for shared library facility and its resources can be expanded through the inter-library loan program. Phasing of Library Facilities The County of Imperial does not propose any dedicated library facilities within the Seeley community during the planning period. It is likely that the hours of service will increase as the population increases and the demand for library services rises. Mitigation It is the responsibility of Imperial County to address the library service demand in unincorporated areas. As previously noted, the Imperial County Free Library will be conducting a library needs assessment in late 2017. Page | 76 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Transportation Facilities August 2017 5.2.4 Transportation Facilities Given that the Seeley County Water District area is within an unincorporated area of Imperial County, the information contained in this section is based on Imperial County’s Circulation & Scenic Highways Element which was updated in 2008. Seeley’s roadways and pedestrian facilities are maintained by the Imperial County Public Works Department with the exception of Interstate 8 which is maintained by the Federal Highway Administration through the State Department of Transportation (Caltrans). Performance Standard for Transportation Facilities The Circulation and Scenic Highways Element for the Imperial County has established a threshold of performance standards for the road segments located in the Seeley County Water District area. The Circulation Element identifies criteria upon which roadway capacity and flow are evaluated. The criteria are based on the level of service (LOS) classification system. The LOS is a professional industry standard by which the operation conditions of a given roadway segment or intersection are measured. LOS A indicates free flow of traffic with minimal vehicle delays, whereas LOS F indicates extreme congestion with significant delays. Refer to Table 5-L – Roadway Performance Standard. Table 5-L Level of Service Roadway Performance Standard Represents free flow. Individual drivers have a high degree of LOS “A” freedom to select their travel speeds and are unaffected by other vehicles. Represents stable flow, but individual drivers are somewhat LOS “B” affected by other vehicles in determining travel speeds. Represents stable flow, but the selection of the speeds of LOS “C” individual drivers is significantly affected by other drivers. Represents a condition of high density, stable traffic flow in LOS “D” which speed and freedom of movement are severely restricted by the presence of other vehicles. Represents operating conditions at or near capacity. Individual vehicles have little free to maneuver within the traffic stream LOS “E” and any minor disruptions can cause a breakdown in the flow of traffic. Represents breakdown conditions. At this level of service, LOS “F” speeds are low, delay is high, and there are more vehicles entering the roadway than can be accommodated. Page | 77 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Transportation Facilities August 2017 It is the intent of the Imperial County that all roadways within unincorporated areas, including the Seeley County Water District area operate at a LOS “C” level or better. The criteria range is adjusted for the different street classifications depending on the street designation and thus designed capacity. Table 5-M describes the average vehicle trips that can be supported by the respective street classification in order to operate at LOS-C or better. Table 5-M Imperial County Standards Per Street Classification Average Daily Trips for Level of Service Street Classification A B C D E Highway/Expressway 30,000 42,000 60,000 70,000 80,000 Prime Arterial 22,200 37,000 44,600 60,000 57,000 Minor Arterial 14,800 24,700 29,600 33,400 37,000 Major Collector 13,700 22,800 27,400 30,800 34,200 Minor Collector 1,900 4,100 7,100 10,900 16,200 Local County * * <1,500 * * Levels of service are not applied to residential streets since their primary purpose is to serve abutting lots, not carry through traffic. Levels of service normally apply to roads carrying through traffic between major trip generators and attractors. Inventory of Existing Transportation Facilities The circulation system within the Seeley County Water District is comprised of numerous grid style roadways under different classifications that are designed to accommodate varying traffic flows. Most local streets are oriented in a north/south and east/west grid style system and are not improved with curb, gutter or sidewalk. The Street Classification Map incorporated as Exhibit 5-I provides a visual display of the roadway system serving the Seeley community. The following is the identification of the different roadway classification and the applicable roadways within the Seeley Sphere of Influence that meet that respective classification: Interstate Freeway-the main function of this roadway is to provide a system linking major cities within the contiguous states of the country. Features include high design standards with multiple travel lanes. The States own and operate the Interstate highway which means that the States establish the operating requirements, such as speed limits, and are responsible for enforcement. The following is a list of Interstates located within Seeley County Water District. Page | 78 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Transportation Facilities August 2017 Page | 79 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Transportation Facilities August 2017 • Interstate 8- The Interstate 8 (I-8) is the primary east-west route through Imperial County and runs for 350 miles from the Pacific coast to its terminus in Arizona where it intersects with Interstate 10. With two travel lanes, it spans 79 miles within the Imperial County. It serves regional, cross-border, and interstate traffic and provides access to desert recreational areas. According to Caltrans’ latest traffic census from 2015 (source: http://www.dot.ca.gov/trafficops/census/volumes2015/Route7- 10.html) the annual average daily traffic (AADT) volumes on I-8 is 13,800 west of Drew Road and 15,600 east of Drew Road. Prime Arterial – The main function of this classification is to provide regional, sub regional, and intra-county travel services. Features include high design standards with four to six travel lanes, raised and landscaped medians, highly restricted access, which in most cases will be a one mile (1 mile) minimum, provisions for public transit lanes, including but not limited to bus lanes, train lanes, or other mass transit type means and no parking. The following is the prime arterial located within Seeley: • Evan Hewes Highway – Evan Hewes is an east/west roadway paralleling Interstate 8 to the North at an approximate distance of 2 miles. It was originally commissioned in 1926 as part of US Route 80 which was the first all-weather coast-to-coast route available to auto travelers. US 80 was gradually decommissioned between 1964 and 1974 as I-8, through San Diego and Imperial counties, was completed. The roadway eventually became Evan Hewes Highway connecting the communities of Ocotillo, Plaster City, Seeley, and El Centro. Daily traffic volumes range from 300 ADT in the Ocotillo vicinity to 9,000 ADT just east of the El Centro city limits. Most portions of this facility are constructed with one travel lane in each direction as within the community of Seeley. All commercial development in Seeley is located along Even Hewes Highway. • Drew Road (S29) – Drew Road is a north/south roadway connecting Evan Hewes Highway to State Route 98 in the south spanning an approximate distance of 8.1 miles. Drew Road becomes Haskell Road through Seeley and continues on for another 1.6 miles connecting to Havens Road which extends to the Naval Air Facility. Currently this roadway is a two lane undivided roadway and provides access to Interstate 8 via a diamond-type interchange with stop sign controls at the east and westbound off ramps. Drew Roads carries 2,400 and 1,300 ADT north and south of Interstate 8, respectively. Page | 80 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Transportation Facilities August 2017 Major Collector (Collector) – These roadways are designed for intra-county travel as a link between the long haul facilities and the collector/local facilities. The following is a list of the major collectors located within Seeley: • Ross Road – A two lane east-west roadway that begins at Drew Road and runs approximately 17 miles to the east connecting Seeley and Sunbeam Lake with El Centro and the outskirts of Holtville. The primary land use on Ross Road in Seeley is Sunbeam Lake. Ross Road is proposed for a re-alignment to accommodate residential development within the approved Sunbeam Lake Estates. Minor Local Collector (Local Collector) – These roadways are designed to connect local streets with the adjacent Collectors or arterial street system. The following is a list of the local collector located within Seeley: • Haskell Road – A two lane north-south roadway that begins as Drew Road south of Evan Hewes Highway and terminates at Havens Road to the north connecting to the Naval Air Facility. Commercial uses are located at the intersection of Haskell Road and Evan Hewes Highway. Haskell Road also passes by the Seeley School. Otherwise, Haskell Road is primarily residential. • Bennett Road – A two lane north-south roadway that begins at Ross Road and terminates at the Naval Air Facility. Bennett Road serves as the eastern boundary of Seeley’s Sphere of Influence and collects traffic from Ross Road and Evan Hewes Highway to deliver traffic to and from the Naval Air Facility. Residential/Local Street – The remainder of streets in Seeley are classified as (residential) local streets which provide direct access to abutting properties and to give access from neighborhoods to the Collector Street system. Alternative Transportation Pedestrian facilities such as sidewalks or transit facilities are also considered transportation facilities. Pedestrian facilities are owned and maintained by the County of Imperial while Transit Facilities are owned and maintained both by local jurisdictions and the Imperial County Transportation Commission. Pedestrian Facilities- Imperial County was awarded grant funding via the Safe Routes to School grant program. The overall purpose of the grant was to improve the safety of the students who walk to school and bike to school. It was determined that various sidewalks in Seeley were absent, substandard and/or required linear improvements, and that Seeley was lacking bicycle parking within the community. (Source: IC Safe Routes to School Master Plan, Page | 81 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Transportation Facilities August 2017 2016. The following is a listing of pedestrian project priorities for Seeley, and their current status: 1. Sidewalk improvements on Rio Vista Street from Laguna Avenue to Holt Avenue. Only San Diego to Imperial Avenue was completed. 2. Sidewalk improvements along south side of El Centro Street from Haskell Avenue to Holt Avenue. Holt to 1400’ east were completed. 3. Sidewalk improvements along the west side of Haskell Road from Rio Vista Street to Evan Hewes Highway. Completed between Rio Vista and Alamo. 4. Sidewalk improvements along the east side of Haskell Road from Park Street to Evan Hewes Highway. Not Completed yet. 5. Sidewalk improvements along both sides of Evan Hewes Highway from Mount Signal Avenue to Haskell Road. Not Completed yet. Transit Facilities-The Imperial Valley Transit Services is an inter-city fixed route bus system subsidized by the Imperial County Transportation Commission. Existing ridership averages approximately 70,000 passengers a month (Source: ICTC, 2016). There is one IV Transit stop in the Seeley community, at the intersection of Evan Hewes Highways, and Haskell Road. Bus Line 4 starts and ends in Seeley and connects Seeley to El Centro where transfers can be made to other bus routes to connect to the rest of the county. A bus shelter is available on the east side of Haskell Road. Freight Facilities Seeley is traversed by a non-passenger, freight only rail system. Union Pacific owns the rail lines through Seeley connecting freight from all points east and Mexico to San Diego. Adequacy of Existing Transportation Facilities Roadways-Per the Imperial County Circulation Element, updated in 2008, all roadways within the Seeley Sphere of Influence are operating at a Level of Service C or better. As areas within the District and Sphere of Influence continue to develop road improvements to accommodate the existing and projected demand will be necessary. Future roadway improvements will be required to be constructed to the design standards set forth by the County of Imperial. Roadway conditions are evaluated by the County of Imperial. Imperial County prepared a Pavement Management Report in February of 2012. Under the report, roadway improvement projects were identified based on condition. There are three steps to the pavement management process; 1) system configuration, 2) field surveys, and 3) analysis and reporting. System configuration involves identifying all roadways in the County’s network where they are given an identification number, noting their physical characteristics such as length and width, pavement Page | 82 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Transportation Facilities August 2017 type, traffic, and functional classification. The second step of the pavement management process is field surveys. Pavement Management Software uses a Laser Road Surface Tester (Laser RST) which observes the condition of the pavement surface, collects digital imagery, and spatial coordinate information. Data collected by the Laser includes rutting, roughness index which measures bumps per mile, and surface distress index which observes the extent and severity of the distress on pavement. The final step is Analysis and reporting which creates a single score that represents the overall condition of the pavement known as the Pavement Condition Index (PCI). The PCI adds thirty-three percent (33%) of the roughness index and sixty-seven percent (67%) of the surface distress index to provide a range. PCI ranges are divided into the following six descriptions: 100-85 are described as excellent, 70-85 are described as very good, 60-70 are described as good, 40-60 are described as fair to marginal, 25-40 are described as poor, and 0-25 are described as very poor. The PCI is used along with the priority weighting factor (PWF) to determine the priority ranking if each road way as shown in the following formula: Priority=(100 –PCI) X PWF. The priority weighting factor (PWF) are predetermined numbers used by the County which gives emphasis to arterial roadways, and is followed by residential road ways, and leaves collector roadways with the lowest priority weighting factors. The Pavement Management Analysis determined that certain roadways within the Seeley community necessitated improvement (See Appendix B). Roadways assessed within the Seeley County Water District include but are not limited to the following: Alamo Street PCI = 26, 38, 46 Rehabilitated 2012 El Centro Street PCI = 20, 32 Rehabilitated 2012 Haskell Road PCI = 24 Rehabilitated 2012 Heil Avenue PCI = 14 Rehabilitated 2012 Holt Avenue PCI = 27, 36 Rehabilitated 2012 Laguna Avenue PCI = 30, 55 Rehabilitated 2012 Main Street PCI = 26, 44, 43 Rehabilitated 2012 Mount Signal PCI = 52 Rehabilitated 2012 New River PCI = 44 Rehabilitated 2012 Imperial Avenue PCI = 48, 57 Rehabilitated 2012 Rio Vista Street PCI = 20, 35 Rehabilitated 2012 San Diego Avenue PCI = 37 Rehabilitated 2012 The entire street system in the Seeley Townsite was improved (rehabilitated in 2012). The streets received a 1 inch A.C. leveling course followed by an asphalt rubber aggregate membrane (ARAM) followed by a slurry sealcoat at a cost of approximately $2 Million dollars due to the level of disrepair. The Holt Group, Inc. completed a windshield survey of the Seeley Street System in August 2017. The street surface was found to be generally in good condition except that cracking is Page | 83 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Transportation Facilities August 2017 evident on the street surface. Cracking is evident throughout the entire street system. Although cracking is unsightly, the pavement surface is presently in good condition, the street sections are smooth and “ride” adequately and the street system should last for 10 to 15 years if adequately maintained. It should be noted that although the pavement cracks did not pose a significant pavement surface problem, at the time of the field review, the cracks will result in a significant deterioration of the pavement if not addressed within a short time period. Cracks allow water to enter the subbase of the street and ultimately result in the alligator cracking and complete failure of the pavement. Crack Sealing is regarded as street maintenance work and can be completed relatively inexpensively at an estimated construction cost of $200,000 (including design, bidding and construction management services). It is recommended that the 7.2 mile Seeley Street System be crack sealed as soon as possible and no later than June of 2018 to prevent the deterioration of the pavement surface. As time goes on the cracks will to continue to increase in length and width. It is estimated there are approximately 250,000 lineal feet of cracks at this time. It is important that these roadways be maintained at least every four years to prevent fast paced deterioration. Since the County has not adopted a Capital Improvement Program for roadway maintenance it is unknown as to when the next roadway maintenance will occur. Sidewalks-There are minimal sidewalk facilities in Seeley. It is estimated that over 9,080 lineal feet (1.72 miles) of sidewalk are needed along school routes, the community park and developed neighborhoods. Accessible curb returns are also part of the need in conjunction with the sidewalks. Sidewalks should be constructed consistent with the County of Imperial Development Standards and concurrent with curb and gutter along paved streets. The community however is also lacking curb and gutter as discussed in the Stormwater & Drainage Section. Buildout Demand for Transportation Facilities Roadways are improved as development occurs and needs are determined under the environmental review process. Imperial County is responsible for ensuring that developers construct required street improvements associated with each project and/or impacted by each proposed development. Sunbeam Lake Estates residential development will generate approximately 14,611 trips per day with 639 vehicles per hour during morning peak hour and 1,393 vehicles per hour during afternoon peak hour at project buildout. The project is required to complete ultimate half-section street improvements on Drew Road and full ultimate cross- section street improvements for the re-alignment of Cross Road with signalization of Drew Road at Ross Road. Page | 84 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Transportation Facilities August 2017 Opportunity for Shared Transportation Facilities The Seeley community mainly uses County roadways with little opportunity for facility sharing with other agencies. The San Diego and Arizona Eastern Railroad system, however, may pose an opportunity for a shared facility. Passenger rail service is being studied to provide service between El Centro and San Diego. It presently provides freight rail service only between El Centro and the US Gypsum plant in Plaster City. Phasing of Transportation Facilities It is procedural that new improvements to transportation facilities be provided during the development process. As previously noted, the Sunbeam Lake Estates residential development is required to complete street improvements on Drew Road and Cross Road. The improvements must be completed during the first phase of the project (single-family residential development). The signalization of Evan Hewes Highway and Drew Road is not required until project buildout. Mitigation for Transportation Facilities Cooperative efforts between the District and the County will ensure that transportation facilities are adequately maintained and upgraded to prevent service deterioration. Additionally, Imperial County has adopted procedures and development standards in place for facility adequacy from new development. Page | 85 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Stormwater & Drainage Facilities August 2017 5.2.5 Stormwater & Drainage Facilities The primary purpose of maintaining, planning, designing and constructing drainage facilities is to control flooding. Generally, in urbanized areas, stormwater is collected through a network of surface (roadway) gutters and stormwater pipelines. In some cases, stormwater is deposited to a retention basin where it percolates into the ground. Stormwater can also be directed to a detention basin where it is held before it is discharged into IID drainage canals which ultimately drain into the Alamo River or New River, both of which are a tributary to the Salton Sea. In Seeley, surface drainage facilities are part of the street system which is a responsibility of the County of Imperial. Performance Standard for Drainage Facilities The County of Imperial adopted design standards for specific components of drainage systems, but there are no adopted performance standards. The goal of any drainage system is to prevent or minimize the impacts of flood conditions that would adversely affect residences and businesses. Requirements established by the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System, Colorado River Basin Water Quality Control Plan, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) affect the local drainage system. Since most of the stormwater discharges onto IID drainage canals, certain IID requirements must also be followed. The County typically evaluates drainage conditions of for all new development and for the project site and requires the construction of any necessary drainage infrastructure. The County requires developers to construct all drainage facilities within each project as a condition of approval. Additionally, a drainage study be conducted by a registered civil engineer and submitted for review and approval by Imperial County and the IID prior to approval of a final subdivision map, a grading plan or development permit. Inventory of Existing Drainage Facilities Seeley’s drainage facilities are primarily composed of non-engineered drainage swales adjacent to all roadways. There are currently no underground catch basins or stormwater pipelines with the original Seeley Townsite. The drainage system generally flows from east to west and ultimately discharges onto the New River via overland flow on natural terrain features along Evan Hewes Highway and north of the wastewater treatment plant. Although there are sporadic curbs and gutters throughout Seeley, the only sizeable curb and gutter system that conveys stormwater is located on the western part of town, specifically, on the east side of the entire length of Laguna Avenue, on the south side of Rio Vista Street between Laguna and New River Boulevard, and on the east side of New River Boulevard. A stretch of curb and gutter also exists on the south side of El Centro Avenue from Holt Avenue to a point approximately 1,400’ to the east. Page | 86 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Stormwater & Drainage Facilities August 2017 In urbanized areas, retention or detention basins are used to minimize overflowing conditions on regional drainage systems that ultimately flow to a natural body of water. Because of Seeley’s size and proximity to the New River, there are no retention or detention basins, but according to the 2010 Drainage Master Plan prepared for County of Imperial (see Appendix C) several topographic low spots and isolated drain inlets function as impromptu retention facilities due to lack discharge locations. The topographic low spots are located on the south side of El Centro Avenue in front of the water treatment facility spanning approximately 1,300’; at the intersection of Imperial Avenue and El Centro Avenue; and at the intersection of Holt Avenue and Alamo Street. Drainage within the Sunbeam Lake Park area sheet-flows onto IID’s drainage system before it ultimately discharges to the New River. Sunbeam Lake itself acts as a retention basin with a drainage outlet connecting to a drain extending east across Drew Road and connecting to the New River. Inventory of Approved Drainage Facilities The 2010 Drainage Master Plan identified seven (7) prioritized improvement recommendations to convey a 25-year storm event. None of these recommendations are currently planned for construction due to lack of funding. The Sunbeam Lake Estates residential subdivision includes a network of curb-and-gutters, stormwater pipelines, and a 5.2-acre retention basin to address the subdivisions drainage impacts. Stormwater from the subdivision will then discharge onto IID’s drainage system. Adequacy of Existing Facilities Imperial County participates in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) which is managed by the Federal Emergency Manager Agency (FEMA). The Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), effective September 26, 2008 identifies portions of the New River as a Zone A floodplain subject to inundation by the 1-percent-annual-chance flood event. The area immediately surrounding Sunbeam Lake is also identified as Zone A. The remaining portions of Seeley’s service boundaries and Sphere of Influence is within Zone X where flood hazard is minimal and higher than the elevation of the 0.2-percent-annual-chance flood. Standing water from nuisance water and the occasional rainfall has been observed and indicates deficiencies in the drainage system. Drainage swales are not maintained and erosion over time has changed the slopes and carrying capacities of those slopes. Construction of driveways across surface drainage flowlines have also impeded the flow of water. Recommendations from the 2010 Drainage Master Plan indicate there are deficiencies in the system that must be addressed. The following Table 5-N summarizes the recommended improvements and the estimated project costs, in order of priority. Page | 87 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Stormwater & Drainage Facilities August 2017 Table 5-N Recommended Drainage Improvements Project Location Pipe Total Number Estimated ID Sizes Length of Inlets Cost Rio Vista Street, SD-01 Haskell Road, San 36’-84” 4,512 FT 12 $7,828,700 Diego Ave Rio Vista Street, SD-02 Imperial Avenue 24”-72” 1,853 FT 8 $2,096,700 San Diego Ave, SD-03 Park Street 36”- 48” 1,547 FT 9 $1,110,700 Rio Vista, Holt SD-04 Ave, West Main, 36”-60” 1,769 FT 5 $1,619,900 Evan Hewes HWY Holt Avenue, El SD-05 Centro Street 36”-48” 2,228 FT 8 $1,619,500 SD-06 Laguna Avenue 36” 804 FT 4 $555,700 Evan Hewes SD-07 Highway 36”-48” 3.477 FT 5 $3,210,400 Total $18,041,600 Buildout Demand for Drainage Facilities Development activity alters natural slope and the decrease of pervious areas which lead to additional runoff. As development occurs, stormwater drainage systems must be installed to ensure adequate removal of runoff. Developments will be required to construct grass lined detention basins to retain stormwater that may be generated by a 100-year, 24-hour storm. Stormwater will be discharged into existing drains upon the IID’s approval. Some development projects will also be required to relocate and underground the existing canals and drains within their project areas to satisfy Imperial Irrigation District requirements. Opportunity for Shared Drainage Facilities The primary drainage system within the SCWD service area is managed by IID and is not intended to convey stormwater generated by urban runoff, although some storm water does flow into the IID drainage system as previously noted. The County of Imperial, Imperial Irrigation District, and Seeley County Water District maintain different components of the total drainage system which in essence are connected and shared facilities. Page | 88 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Stormwater & Drainage Facilities August 2017 Future planned detention basins could be used for joint use as parks. However, that would require public ownership of the basins by either the Seeley County Water District or the County of Imperial, both of which have no established revenue source for the ongoing maintenance and repairs that would be needed over time. Phasing of Drainage Facilities The construction of future storm water drainage facilities is based on the rate of new development. Additional storm water drainage facilities will be needed in the proposed development areas in order to properly convey storm water into the IID drainage system. The storm water systems will be determined during the Tentative Map and designed during the Final Map stage of development. The stormwater systems will be approved by the County of Imperial and Imperial Irrigation District. Mitigation for Drainage Facilities Imperial County will continue to review all development proposed, prior to development approval and shall ensure design standards of stormwater facilities are per Best Management Practices prior to issuing permits. Seeley County Water District Mitigation recommendations are as follows: D-1 Seeley County Water District shall not accept the granting of improved retention basin for dual park use and stormwater infrastructure unless the District has adopted Stormwater Standards, and; D-2 Seeley County Water District shall not accept the granting of improved retention basin for dual park use unless there is a financing mechanism in place that will cover anticipated maintenance and repair costs of shared facilities. D-3 Seeley County Water District shall periodically note any incidents of violations from stormwater facilities and report them immediately to Imperial County for enforcement. Page | 89 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Stormwater & Drainage Facilities August 2017 5.3 SERVICES PROVIDED BY OTHERS There are additional services provided within the Seeley Service Area by agencies other than Seeley County Water District or Imperial County. These special services include educational facilities and other utility services from various purveyors. The sections that follow will discuss these services that are provided by other special districts in brief overview as follows: • Solid Waste Facilities- Solid Waste services consist of the collection and transport of solid waste generated by households and businesses and transported to a landfill for disposal. • Public Lighting Facilities- Lighting facilities refer to the existing street lighting system within the Seeley County Water District service area. The street lighting system consists of the street lights and supporting facilities such as poles and wires. • School Facilities- School facilities consist of improvements necessary to provide educational services including classrooms, libraries, cafeterias, etc. School facilities may further incorporate support services such as school buses, gym or lab equipment and recreational facilities. 5.3.1 Solid Waste Services and Facilities Typically, the jurisdictional agency oversees contracts for waste collection and disposal. In some communities, it may be the sewer facility district while in others it may be the governing body. The Seeley community does not receive solid waste services under any umbrella contract with a solid waste service purveyor. Citizens independently obtain solid waste services with the company of their choosing. Currently there are three companies that service Seeley: 1) Republic Services, 2) Lucky Tire Inc., and 3) CR&R. Performance Standards for Solid Waste Services The State regulates solid waste via laws such as the California Integrated Waste Management Act (AB 939) which requires solid waste reduction, recycling and composting and environmentally safe transformation and land disposal. Municipalities will typically enter into a franchise agreement with solid waste collection purveyor and performance standards are outlined in the franchise agreements. Collection times and schedules, noise and disruption, solid waste containers, bulky item pick-up, electronic waste, green waste, and commercial roll- off provisions are typically spelled out in the franchise agreement to ensure order pick-up and disposal of solid waste. Franchise agreements will also details regarding compliance with recycling, source separation, and other State Page | 90 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Stormwater & Drainage Facilities August 2017 requirements. Since Seeley is located in an unincorporated area, the County of Imperial is responsible for ensuring compliance with AB 939. Inventory of Solid Waste Facilities There is no solid waste office or landfill within the Seeley community. All service purveyors collect and haul off solid waste to a legally permitted landfill. Republic Services transports waste collected to the Allied Waste Land Fill in a privately- owned landfill, located at 104 East Robinson Road, within an unincorporated area, east of the SCWD; Lucky Tire Inc. and CR&R both take their solid waste to the CR&R Landfill located out of State in Yuma, to a location at 19536 South Avenue 1E in Yuma Arizona. Adequacy of Solid Waste Services and Facilities Residents are provided receptacles from the company that they choose. CR&R does not provide recycling services. CR&R picks up solid waste on Fridays. Lucky Tire Inc. collects solid waste as the customer requires from Monday to Friday. Additionally, Lucky tire Inc provides recycling services approximately once a week, but frequency may increase based on customer needs. Republic Services collects solid waste on Thursdays. While they do not currently offer recycling services, it is currently being considered by the company. An estimated 2,788 tons of solid waste are collected annually from the Seeley community. An Estimated 3 – 10 tons are collected from the Seeley community by CR&R alone. The following are the capacities of each of the landfills: • Imperial Allied Waste Landfill, used by Republic Services and Lucky Tire Inc. was recently expanded and has a disposal acreage of 162 acres (15,054,198 Tons) and an expected closure date of December 31, 2040. • CR&R Landfill, used by CR&R currently has 1,913,636 tons of solid waste on site. The land fill has a disposal acreage of and a closure year of 2050. The Allied Waste Landfill may be used in cases of emergency, or through negotiations between CR&R and Republic Services. Solid waste can also be disposed of at other landfills within Imperial County if the purveyors negotiate agreements with them. There are currently four (4) Imperial County-owned landfills: near Imperial, Calexico, Niland, and Bombay Beach. Additionally, there are two (2) privately owned landfills located in Salton City and Brawley. Inventory of Approved Solid Waste Facilities There are no additional Solid Waste Facilities proposed. Page | 91 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Stormwater & Drainage Facilities August 2017 Buildout Demand for Solid Waste Facilities and Services There are no additional Solid Waste Facilities and Services proposed. Existing solid waste facilities are adequate in size and no additional facilities are necessary. As development occurs, through the entitlement process, developers are required to ensure that solid waste facilities are adequate and in place before any new development is approved. Given that the Imperial Landfill was recently expanded, there are adequate solid waste facilities. The Sunbeam Lake Estates Mitigated Negative Declaration found that there is sufficient capacity at the existing landfill and buildout of the project would create less-than-significant impact to solid waste facilities and services. Opportunity for Shared Solid Waste Services and Facilities The landfill are shared facilities with many other jurisdictions in Imperial County. There may be an opportunity, however, for SCWD to negotiate and contract for waste disposal services on behalf of the Seeley Community and establish an enterprise fund in the future for the purpose of maximizing these services. Phasing of Solid Waste Facilities There are no additional solid waste facilities being proposed under the SAP, as there is no contract with the District for the provision of these services. Mitigation for Solid Waste Facilities No mitigation measures are required. Page | 92 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Lighting Facilities August 2017 5.3.2 Lighting Facilities Public lighting facilities are typically owned by the jurisdiction owning the right-of way under which they are found. All rights-of-way within the Seeley Community belong to the County of Imperial. Operation costs for electrical services are typically borne by the jurisdiction owning the right-of-way unless a contract for service exists with private owners or another entity. Performance Standard for Lighting Facilities There are no adopted performance standards by Imperial County or Imperial Irrigation District for lighting facilities. Typical street lights with 150-watt bulbs provide a coverage of approximately 150’ diameter, and as such, street lights should be located every 300’ to provide full coverage along sidewalks. Street lights should also be installed at intersections to ensure night-time visibility for vehicular traffic. Lighting provides safety and security but fixtures should be shielded to minimize light spill on to homes and to minimize light pollution to maintain a dark, night sky. Generally, if lights are not functioning, IID makes the repair to the light and the cost is borne by designated owner. Older street lights generally have wooden poles and are owned by the Imperial Irrigation District while the newer lights within more recent developments consist of metal poles. It is important to note that IID incorporates energy efficiency components throughout its lighting facilities. Inventory of Existing Lighting Facilities There are approximately 47 street lights within the Seeley County Water (Refer to Exhibit 5-J – Street Lighting System in Seeley). There is an average of one light pole every 300 linear feet in north-south directions and 600 linear feet in east-west directions. Street lights within the Seeley County Water District Area are high- pressure sodium (HPS) bulbs varying from 70 Watts to 150 Watts. Adequacy of Existing Lighting Facilities As stated earlier, street lights should be located every 300’ and at intersections to ensure full coverage for safety and security. Lighting in north-south streets appear to be adequate as there are light poles every 300’. Lighting in east-west streets, however, appear to deficient in that there are light poles every 600’. Most intersections appear to be lighted with the exception of Rio Vista-New River, Mount Signal-Main, Mount Signal-Park, and Evan Hewes-New River intersections. Page | 93 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Lighting Facilities August 2017 Page | 94 SCWD Service Area Plan Lighting Facilities August 2017 Buildout Demand for Lighting Facilities As residential and commercial development occurs, developers work with the Imperial Irrigation District to install lighting facilities. Developers are required to submit various applications to the Imperial Irrigation District and pay applicable fees. The Developer is responsible for providing all project related documentation, inclusive of an approved Street Lighting Plan. After fees are paid, the Imperial Irrigation District’s Distribution Engineering Section prepares a job package for construction. Imperial County approves the both the Street Lighting Plan and building permit as the District does not have land use authority. Should a development demand services beyond what can be supported by the existing substation, the costs of providing another substation are borne by the developer. Opportunity for Shared Lighting Facilities There are currently no opportunity for shared lighting facilities. Phasing of Lighting Facilities Lighting facilities are constructed on an as-needed basis for all new development. Phasing of lighting facilities is typically consistent with the phasing of residential or commercial development. As development occurs, street lights are incorporated to ensure safety. Mitigation for Lighting Facilities Public lighting is typically paid through the collection of property tax by the owning jurisdiction. SCWD shall ensure that prior to assuming any lighting service responsibilities that accompanying revenues be agreed to whether it be via tax share agreements or specific community facility districts. Page | 95 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan School Facilities August 2017 5.3.3 School Facilities Performance Standard for School Facilities The schools’ capacity is determined according to the methodology specified by Education Code Section 41376 and 41378. These calculations determine that kindergarten shall be at a maximum of 33 students per classroom, first through third grade classrooms at 32 students per classroom and fourth through eighth grade classrooms at 29 students per classroom. The Seeley Union School District has not completed a School Facilities Needs Analysis to determine the need for additional school facilities. School Facilities Owned by Seeley Union School District Educational facilities and services are provided within the Seeley County Water District by the Seeley Union School District which covers an area of approximately 22 square miles. The school district provides educational services to the Seeley community for grades kindergarten through eighth and does not provide high- school education. Central Union High School provides high school education services for the area. Inventory of Existing School Facilities The Seeley community is serviced by two school districts, Seeley Union School District and the Central Union High School District. (Please refer to Exhibit 5-K – School Facilities Map). The School District operates from one building that is located on the Seeley Elementary School campus. Seeley Union School District was established in 1912 as a single-school elementary school that serves K-8 grade levels. The Seeley Union School District operates one elementary schools and the District office. The Seeley Union Elementary School is located at 1812 West Rio Vista Road in Seeley. There is one special education classroom and 16 classrooms for K-8 grade level. There are currently 337 students enrolled at the school and as of 2017 there is capacity for an additional 163 fourth through eighth grade students. Central Union High School District is the district of the three high schools in El Centro, California — Central Union High School (CUHS), Southwest High School (SHS), and Desert Oasis High School (DOHS). The CUHSD main office and boardroom are located adjacent to DOHS and provide services to the Seeley Community. All incoming freshman from Seeley Union School District have to attend Southwest High School Page | 96 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan School Facilities August 2017 Page | 97 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan School Facilities August 2017 Inventory of Approved School Facilities The Seeley Union School District has an approved plan for the construction of a gymnasium. There are no approved plans for the construction of new classroom facilities as it was operating below capacity as of the date of this SAP. In the future, the Seeley Union School District might consider constructing new classrooms to accommodate any changes in increased demand for services to accommodate new development and population growth. Adequacy of Existing School Facilities The existing Seeley Union School District facilities are adequate to meet the educational needs of the current population. The Seeley Union School District, however, will not be able to meet the expected demand from the projected population growth. As new development is proposed, close coordination with the applicable school districts is required to ensure proper development impact fees are assessed and that necessary facilities are constructed to accommodate the new development. Buildout Demand for School Facilities The Sunbeam Lake Estates subdivision was approved by the County of Imperial for development along the north side of Ross Road at Drew Road. The project site is outside the current service boundaries of SCWD but within the boundaries of the Seeley Union School District. Buildout of the project, along with infill development, would result in an estimated population of 9,212 residents in the year 2038. Using a generic student generation rate of 0.475 for elementary and middle-school aged children for single family residences and 0.5346 for multi-family dwelling units (based on Calexico Unified School District), ultimate buildout of infill projects and the Sunbeam Lake Estates subdivision would result in 507 new students. The school’s current capacity can accommodate 163 students but a new school is needed for the other 344 new students. The Mitigated Negative Declaration identified potentially significant impacts to School District as a result of the proposed residential development project. To mitigate the impact, Sunbeam Lake Estate is required to pay an additional school impact fee on top of the established impact fee. The fees will help in the expansion of existing school facilities. Phasing of School Facilities Seeley School’s current capacity can accommodate natural growth and growth from infill development through 2038. Additional classrooms may be needed or reconfigured depending on actual grade demand. Seeley School will be at capacity Page | 98 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan School Facilities August 2017 within Year 3 of the development of Sunbeam Lake Estates. If Sunbeam Lake Estates were to start developing this year, new students would begin attending in the 2018 school year and capacity would be reached in the 2021 school year. School facility planning, design, funding, and construction could take up to five years. Mitigation for School Facilities Seeley Union School District should develop a School Facilities Need Assessment to use as a tool for planning a new school site. The Seeley County Water District should approach the School District regarding the timely development of the Assessment. Page | 99 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Financing Plan August 2017 6. FINANCING PLAN 6.1 INTRODUCTION Seeley County Water District’s Profit and Loss Statement for July 2015 to June 2017 shows a total of $734,673.32 in expenses. Approximately 55.1% of those expenses were for wastewater operations, 42.4% for water operations, 1.2% for dumper operations, and the remaining 1.3% were administrative/other expenses. The financial statements for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2016 shows that the net position (the difference between assets and liabilities) was $8,674,673.00. SCWD has a current loan balance of $165,134.88 from the USDA with a loan maturation date of June 16, 2046. Loan payments are made on an annual basis for an amount of $8,040.00. Terms of the loan requires that SCWD maintain an annual fund reserve of $3,400.00. All other debt obligations were paid off in the fiscal year ended June 30, 2016. The Financing Plan section of the Service Area Plan lists and describes potential revenue sources and various financing mechanisms available to the Seeley County Water District to meet the projected service and facility demands identified earlier in this document. It also describes how each existing facility and service is currently financed and how future financial demands for these facilities and services can be ensured. Finance plans and available financing options are also discussed in this section and are largely subject to the guidelines of Proposition 218 which was enacted in 1996. Proposition 218 clearly defines general taxes and special taxes and sets guidelines on the issuance, use, and implementation of taxes, which includes water rates. Proposition 218 states that general taxes must be approved by a majority of voters before they can be imposed, extended or increased and special taxes require approval by a two-thirds vote. 6.2 EXISTING REVENUE SOURCES This section provides a summary of the revenue sources available to finance the necessary public facilities and services within the District Boundary or as areas within the Sphere of Influence are annexed. The following list presents sources of revenue that are currently utilized by the District in order to accumulate finances necessary to develop and operate the various facilities and services discussed within the SAP. Complete budgetary information for financing mechanisms currently utilized is available for viewing at the District Office. Property Tax Page | 100 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Financing Plan August 2017 Property taxes generate revenue that can be used to support various improvements and services including general District expenses. Property taxes in California are governed by Proposition 13 which limits the property tax rate to 1%. Other voter approved bonds and assessment districts may also generate tax revenue. The County of Imperial, collects the property tax, and shares the tax revenue collected from property owners within the District. Property taxes are distributed to various entities including, Imperial County, cities, and special districts according to formulas and procedures established by California law and consistent with the “Teeter Plan” for distribution of delinquent taxes owed. Each eligible tax jurisdiction receives a base amount of property tax that increases or decreases based on the growth of that district. According to Property Tax Information issued by the County Controller’s Office, taxes are allocated as follows: schools receive 59%, Cities receive 22%, County receives 12%, Special Districts share 3%, Fire Protection receives 3%, and Libraries receive 1%. The District may enter into specific tax sharing agreements for tax revenue over and above the aforementioned proportion. There is however, no official tax share agreement in place for all District areas. The District cannot rely on tax revenue beyond the stipulated by California Law until an official agreement is put in place with the County. The District Finance Department estimates that approximately $2,500 in property tax revenue may be collected annually depending on assessed values. This tax is utilized by the District to cover non-water or sewer enterprise expenses including park maintenance and power services for street lighting. Development Impact Fees Development Impact Fees are charges to private developers to assure that the demand of physical and financial impacts to public services and facilities are adequately addressed. Development Impact Fees can be a significant funding source to finance large scale capital improvements to public facilities. Development impact fees are used exclusively to fund the capital costs of new and improved facilities specifically related to the category for which fees are charged. The District has an established impact fee as capacity fee and collects the fees for both Water Treatment Facilities and Wastewater Treatment Facilities. The level of Development Impact Fees collected on any given year is driven by the level of new development demand. Table 6-A Adopted Impact Fees depicts the fees in place at the time of the development of this Service Area Plan: Table 6-A SCWD Adopted Impact Fees Fee Residential Commercial/ School RV Park Dumpster/ Industrial Hauler Sewer Fees Capacity $2,450 $2,450 $2,450 $2,450 n/a Page | 101 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Financing Plan August 2017 Water Fees Capacity $3,700 $3,700 $3,700 $3,700 n/a Source: Seeley County Water District User Fees Certain public services and facilities operated by the District entail various user fees that are charged to patrons or other users on a fee-for-service basis. User fees are typically applied to a monthly service. Monthly fees may be charged for services such as water, sewer, and trash to residential uses, commercial uses, industrial uses, and/or public agencies. User fees are also charged for reconnections, penalties, and late fees. The fees are typically used as a revenue source to maintain the systems in proper operating condition and for the construction of facilities needed to meet demand. The District’s current user fees were adopted in 2016 and are depicted in Table 6-B and 6-C as noted. Table 6-B Water Rates Customer Classification Flat Water usage monthly fee /1000 gallons Average Single-Family Customer (=1 EDU) $32.73 $1.29 Average Two-Family Customer, per $1.29 $22.92 Household (=7 EDU EA) Average Multi-Family, per Household $22.92 $1.29 Average Commercial Customer, 2 EDU's $65.46 $1.29 Large Commercial Customer, 29.75 EDU's $973.72 $1.29 Large Commercial Customer, 34.0 EDU's $1,112.82 $1.29 Large Commercial Customer, 82.5 EDU's $2,700.23 $1.29 *Rates are effective as of March 1, 2017 and will increase 5% annually for 5 years. Source: Rate Increases Approved by SCC Board Table, Effective March 1, 2017 Table 6-C Sewer Rates Customer Classification Flat monthly fee Average Single-Family Customer (=1 EDU) $47.45 Average Two-Family Customer, per Household $33.22 (=7 EDU EA) Average Multi-Family, per Household $33.22 Average Commercial Customer, 2 EDU's $94.90 Large Commercial Customer, 34.0 EDU's $1,613.30 Large Commercial Customer, 82.5 EDU's $3,914.63 *Rates are effective as of March 1, 2017 and will increase 3.3% annually for 5 years. Page | 102 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Financing Plan August 2017 Source: Rate Increases Approved by SCC Board Table, Effective March 1, 2017 On average, the Seeley County Water District receives an estimated $360,000 in annual service fee revenue from the Water Enterprise Fund. Additionally, the District receives an estimated $485,000 in annual service fee revenue from the Sewer Enterprise Fund. These revenues along with the project increase in revenues are projected to cover operation and maintenance costs. There are no outstanding loans thus no need for any loan reserves as of June 2017. Reserves for capital improvements may need to be re-evaluated on a continual basis. Developer/Builder Contribution Many of the sewer and water improvements required as a result of new development can be directly funded and constructed by the developer/builder. These required improvements would be in addition to Developer Impact Fees and User Fees. The County of Imperial would respectively request contributions for drainage, parkland and roadway improvements. Other Local Revenue Sources The District currently generates revenues from other sources such as interest earned from bank accounts. Although these miscellaneous revenues are useful, they account for negligible impacts to the District’s total operational budget. 6.3 POTENTIAL REVENUE SOURCES Community Facilities Districts A Community Facilities District (CFD), not to be confused with a Community Services District (CSD), falls under the 1982 Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act. This Act allows a CFD to be established by cities, counties, special districts and school districts to fund a variety of facilities and services. Note that the boundaries of a CFD are not required to be contiguous as they are for a CSD. In order for a CFD to be formed, a public hearing must occur and an election held to authorize the specified tax levy to either provide direct funding or pay off bonds. The Seeley County Water District does not have any CFD within its District boundary as of the date of this 2017 Service Area Plan. Private Financial Institutions A financing opportunity may be via revenue bonds through private financial institutions as part of their Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) obligations. The Community Reinvestment Act was enacted by the U.S. Congress in 1977 to encourage depository institutions to help meet the credit needs of the communities in which they operate, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods, Page | 103 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Financing Plan August 2017 consistent with safe and sound banking operations. The Community Reinvestment Act requires federal financial supervisory agencies to use their authority when examining financial institutions subject to supervision, to assess the institution's record of meeting the credit needs of its entire community, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods. Local institutions make keep a good standing in order to continue to grow, thus investment opportunities into small community capital improvements are actively sought be responsible financial institutions. The following lending institutions have local CRA obligations: • Bank of America- Satisfactory rating as of 2015 • JP Morgan Chase Bank- Outstanding Rating as of 2006 • Rabobank- Satisfactory Rating as of 2007 • Union Bank of California- Outstanding Rating as of 2005 • Wells Fargo- Outstanding Rating as of 2006 Public Financial Institutions North American Development Bank (NADBank)- The NADBank is a binational financial institution capitalized and governed equally by the United States and Mexico for the purpose of financing environmental projects certified by the Border Environment Cooperation Commission (BECC). The two institutions work together with communities and project sponsors in both countries to develop and finance infrastructure necessary for a clean and healthy environment for border residents. NADB can make loans to public and private borrowers, at market and low-interest rates, for the implementation of environmental infrastructure projects located in the U.S.-Mexico border region. Loans are available for the implementation of projects in all environmental sectors in which the NADBank operates. California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank (IBank)- The Infrastructure State Revolving Fund (ISRF) Program provides low-cost financing to public agencies for a wide variety of infrastructure projects. ISRF Program funding is available in amounts ranging from $50,000 to $25,000,000, with loan terms for the useful life of the project up to 30 years. Interest rates are set at the time the applicant is approved and are typically pegged at 67% of a generic A rated municipal bond with an equivalent term to the Loan. Preliminary applications are continuously accepted. Federal Grant Agencies USDA Rural Utility Service Program- USDA Rural Development provides funding opportunities in the form of payments, grants, loans, and loan guarantees, for the development and commercialization of vital utility services. These programs revitalize rural communities with a variety of infrastructure improvements, and Page | 104 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Financing Plan August 2017 create sustainable opportunities for wealth, new jobs, and increased economic activity in rural America. Utilities programs connect rural residents to the global economy by developing rural water and wastewater systems to help address water quality, amongst other infrastructure projects. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)- EPA’s mission is to protect human health and the environment. Nearly half of their budget goes is used towards grants to state environmental programs, non-profits, educational institutions, and others. The funds are used for a wide variety of projects, from scientific studies that assist in EPA making decisions to community cleanups. Overall, grants assist EPA in achieving their overall mission: protect human health and the environment. EPA’s Border Water Infrastructure Program provides grant assistance to communities along the U.S./Mexico border to develop and construct infrastructure to provide safe drinking water and adequate sanitation, and to improve water quality in shared and trans-boundary waters. EPA funds grant programs through the Border Environmental Cooperation Commission created in 1993 under a side agreement to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) for the purpose of enhancing the environmental conditions of the US- Mexico border region. BECC and NADBank work closely with other border stakeholders including federal, state, and local agencies, the private-sector and civil society to identify, develop, finance and implement environmental infrastructure projects on both sides of the US-Mexico border. BECC focuses on the technical, environmental, and social aspects of project development, while NADBank concentrates on project financing and oversight for project implementation. Two Grant Programs available through BECC are the Project Development Assistance Program (PDAP) and Border Environmental Infrastructure Fund (BEIF) as follows: • Community Assistance Program (CAP): The Community Assistance Program is administered through BECC and funds smaller shovel ready projects up to $500,000. Funded with NADB’s retained earnings, this program offers grant financing to support the implementation of projects sponsored by public entities in all environmental sectors eligible for NADB financing. The objective of this program is to support the implementation of critical environmental infrastructure projects for sponsors with limited capacity to incur debt. • Project Development Assistance Program (PDAP): Funding is available for project development activities necessary for certification of projects including, but not limited to planning studies, environmental assessment, final design, financial feasibility, community participation, and development Page | 105 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Financing Plan August 2017 of sustainability elements. Final design grant assistance is limited to 50% of the final design costs and cannot exceed $500,000. • Border Environmental Infrastructure Fund (BEIF): Grants are intended to supplement funding from other sources in order to complete a project’s financial package. Applicants must seek other sources of funding since BEIF is considered to be the funding of last resort. Actual BEIF participation is considered on a project-by-project basis and determined according to funding availability and based on an affordability analysis to be conducted by NADBank during project development. State Grant Agencies State Water Resources Control Board- The Division of Financial Assistance (DFA) administers the implementation of the State Water Resources Control Board’s (State Water Board) financial assistance programs that include loan and grant funding for construction of municipal sewage and water recycling facilities, remediation for underground storage tank releases, watershed protection projects, nonpoint source pollution control projects, and other similar projects. The State Water Resource Control Board administers the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF), the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund and Small Community Wastewater Grant (SCWG) Programs. More information on each Program is found below. • Clean Water State Revolving Fund Program (CWSRF)- The Clean Water State Revolving Fund Program accepts applications on a continuous basis. The Federal Water Pollution Control Act (Clean Water Act or CWA), as amended in 1987, established the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) program. The CWSRF program offers low interest financing agreements for water quality projects. Annually, the program disburses between $200 and $300 million to eligible projects. • Drinking Water State Revolving Fund Program (DWSRF)- The Drinking Water State Revolving Funds Program was established by the 1996 amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). The DWSRF is a financial assistance program to help water systems and states to achieve the health protection objectives of the SDWA. The state DWSRFs have provided more than $32.5 billion to water systems through 2016. Small disadvantaged communities can obtain up to 100% grant funding for eligible projects. • Small Community Wastewater Grant (SCWG)- The Small Community Wastewater Grant Program was created to aid small, financially Page | 106 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Financing Plan August 2017 disadvantaged communities in correcting public health and water quality problems. The SCWG Program originally received funding through the Clean Water Bond Law of 1984, but has relied on several additional funding propositions to continue to assist small communities with water quality needs. Priority is given to small disadvantaged communities which have a significant water quality investment with wastewater rates of at least 1.5% of the communities MHI. Small disadvantaged communities can obtain up to 100% grant funding for eligible projects. California Department of Housing and Community Development- The State Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program was established by the federal Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended (42 USC 5301, et seq.). The State CDBG program is implemented by California Health and Safety Code section 50825, et sequentia, and the California Code of Regulations (Title 25, Section 7050, et sequentia). The primary federal objective of the CDBG program is the development of viable urban communities by providing decent housing and a suitable living environment and by expanding economic opportunities, principally for persons of low and moderate income. "Persons of low and moderate income" or the "targeted income group" (TIG) are defined as families, households, and individuals whose incomes do not exceed 80 percent of the county’s median income, with adjustments for family or household size. Each year the program makes funds available to eligible jurisdictions through several allocations. Under the General Allocation, jurisdictions may apply for funding to subsidize public facilities or special assessment districts. Although SCWD would not be able to access the funds directly, it may do so under an agreement with the County of Imperial. Page | 107 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Financing Plan August 2017 Page | 108 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Facility Financing August 2017 6.4 FACILITY FINANCING 6.4.1 Administrative Facilities Current Funding The existing administrative facilities are currently owned by Seeley County Water District. The primary sources of revenue for operation and maintenance of the administrative facilities are water and sewer user fees, as the District’s primary function is the provision of wastewater and potable water services. Cost Avoidance Opportunities There is currently no opportunity for Cost Avoidance. The operation and costs of the administrative facilities is shared by the two funds. The facility is used for Board meetings and all SCWD related business. Recommended Funding Existing funding sources will continue to be used to support administrative services and facilities. The District will continue to use water and user fees to offset the maintenance and operation of the administrative facilities operated by the District. Development Impact fees may become a key source of funding for capital facilities in the future as deemed necessary by the County of Imperial during the development review process. It is further recommended that SCWD adopt deposit and fees for the cost of engineering review of developer plans. As new development occurs, it will be necessary for the District to review the proposed infrastructure improvement plans for facilities that will be taken over by the District or to ensure the new facilities don’t adversely impact the Districts systems. The cost for the District engineer to review plans is a recoverable cost for the administrative/professional service. Administrative costs may be borne to the General Fund, each enterprise fund, and a parks and lighting fund as deemed appropriate by the District. 6.4.2 Wastewater Facilities Current Funding The primary sources of revenue for wastewater facilities are user fees. Development impact fees (capacity fees) which have been collected over the years are only a revenue source for capital improvements to wastewater facilities and are limited due to slow growth. The current wastewater user fees were last Page | 109 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Facility Financing August 2017 updated in 2016 and were made effective on March 1, 2017 and are established at $42.45 for single family residential as of the date of this document with a capacity fee of $2,450. Cost Avoidance Opportunities The District requires developers to construct wastewater-related infrastructure that will connect the specific development with the existing wastewater treatment system. This requirement helps the District avoid substantial costs associated with infrastructure development. Recommended Funding The District will continue to use the financing mechanisms described above. User fees will continue to finance the wastewater operation, maintenance, salaries, and equipment costs. The District will continue to use user fees and capacity fees to finance the City’s wastewater service and capital improvement needs as well as ongoing operation and maintenance. It is recommended that the Impact Fees (Capacity Fees) for all new wastewater services be reviewed and evaluated. The Sewer Impact Fees would be applicable for all new proposed development to offset their respective new demand such as WWTP expansion or new collection main lines with increased capacities. System rehabilitation costs or pipeline replacement costs associated with system deficiencies that involve major capital investments and or improvements that are tied to Regional Water Quality Board demands should be addressed via grant funding programs. The SCWD qualifies for a number of subsidized funding sources, up to 100% grant funding under programs such as the Clean Water State Revolving Fund through the State Water Resources Control Board; Rural Assistance Community Facilities Program through the USDA; Community Assistance Program through the Border Environmental Evaluation Commission; Border Environmental Infrastructure Fund through NADBank and a possible indirect source accessing Community Development Block Grant HUD funds through the County of Imperial. The SCWD should consider designating the wastewater fund as an independent fund from the water enterprise since these independent facilities have diverse capital needs and costs. 6.4.3 Water Facilities Current Funding The primary sources of revenue for water treatment and distribution facilities are the water service charges and water connection fees collected and deposited into Page | 110 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Facility Financing August 2017 the Water Fund. Development impact fees (capacity fees) which have been collected over the years are the only current revenue source for capital improvements to water facilities and are also limited due to slow growth. User fees are collected for the continued operation and maintenance. The current user fees for water were last updated in 2016 and were made effective on March 1, 2017. The current user fee established at $32.73 for single family residential and $3,700 in capacity fees for residential connections as of the date of this document. However the current user fees will increase five percent (5%) annually for a total of five years. Cost Avoidance Opportunities The District requires developers to construct water-related infrastructure that will connect the specific development to District services. This requirement helps the District avoid substantial costs associated with new infrastructure development. Recommended Funding The District will continue to use the financing mechanisms described above. User fees will continue to finance the wastewater operation, maintenance, salaries, and equipment costs. The District will continue to use user fees and capacity fees to finance the City’s water service and capital improvement needs as well as ongoing operation and maintenance. The current potable water user fees and capacity fees adopted in 2016 will continue to be in effect throughout the planning period unless modified by the District. It is recommended that the Impact Fees (Capacity Fees) for all new water services be reviewed and evaluated. The Water Impact Fees would be applicable for all new proposed development to offset their respective new demand such as WTP expansion or new storage facilities, distribution lines or pump station with increased capacities. System rehabilitation costs or pipeline replacement costs associated with system deficiencies that involve major capital investments and or improvements that are tied to Public Health Department notices of violations should be addressed via grant funding programs. The SCWD qualifies for a number of subsidized funding sources, up to 100% grant funding under programs such as the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund through the State Water Resources Control Board; Rural Assistance Community Facilities Program through the USDA; Community Assistance Program through the Border Environmental Evaluation Commission; Border Environmental Infrastructure Fund through NADBank and a possible indirect source accessing Community Development Block Grant HUD funds through the County of Imperial. Page | 111 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Facility Financing August 2017 The SCWD should consider designating the water fund as an independent fund from the wastewater enterprise since these independent facilities have diverse capital needs and costs. 6.4.4 Park & Lighting Facilities Current Funding The primary sources of revenue for park facilities are property taxes for County parks followed by grant funds for improvements. SCWD does not set aside any funds for park operation and maintenance of the Robert Bates Memorial Park, however, it warrants to note that the District was successful in securing a one-time $150,000 grant through the Imperial Irrigation District Local Entity Program anticipated to be expended during the 17/18 Fiscal Year. Street Light costs are also paid from property tax, however the cost of power services for street lights exceed the property tax revenue. Cost Avoidance Opportunities Parks-Currently, all new development must incorporate park facilities as a County established development standard. This County driven development standard should eliminate the need for the District to provide recreational facilities. Under these development standards, the District is not responsible for the purchase or dedication of land or for park improvements. Continued operation and maintenance costs for parks should be planned for and collected through the establishment of Community Facilities Districts. The SCWD and the County of Imperial should jointly seek these cost avoidance measures. Street Lights-Currently, all new development must incorporate street lighting facilities as a County established development standard. This County driven development standard should be borne to the County of Imperial and not the SCWD. Recommended Funding Parks The District will continue to use the existing financing mechanisms described above to finance the District’s continued improvement, operation and maintenance of parkland. As new development occurs, the formation of a Landscaping and Lighting District or similar mechanism should be considered and coordinated with Imperial County. The collected property tax contribution from Imperial County is not significant enough for the capital improvement needs or continued maintenance costs of the aging park infrastructure at the Robert Bates Memorial Park. The District in partnership with Imperial County should seek grant Page | 112 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Facility Financing August 2017 funding opportunities through the Department of Parks and Recreation and other State agencies or local entities to improve the Robert Bates Memorial Park and/or the Sunbeam Lake Park. Street Lights- Continued operation and maintenance costs for street lights should be planned for and collected through the establishment of Community Facilities Districts. The SCWD should attempt to negotiate a separate tax share agreement to cover street light expenses in the established Seeley Townsite. The SCWD should consider establishing a parks and lighting fund to ensure park costs are not borne to the water or enterprise fund and for proper management of revenue. 6.4.5 Drainage Facilities Current Funding Within the District Boundary and the Heber sphere of influence, drainage facilities are generally installed and funded by developers as projects are developed. Routine maintenance, operation, and personnel costs are not currently tied to any District Fund nor accounted for through any maintenance agreements. Cost Avoidance Opportunities The District, in concert with the County of Imperial is able to avoid some costs for the development of new drainage facilities by requiring developers to construct adequate facilities and retention basins for their projects. As the County of Imperial seeks street funds it should address storm drain facilities within the right-of-way as eligible costs under FHWA grant funded projects. Recommended Funding Funding responsibilities for project related facilities should continue to be the responsibility of developers and secured prior to issuance of any “will serve” letters for water and/or sewer services that may be requested by developer. The District shall make clear that the ongoing operation and maintenance of any drainage facilities including retention basins shall be the responsibility of Imperial County and or privately owned and operated. If for any reason a detention basin is proposed to be dedicated to the SCWD, it shall be necessary to establish a financing mechanism such as a Community Facilities District. Page | 113 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan Appendices August 2017 List of Appendices Appendix A – County of Imperial Development Impact Fee’s & Ordinance 1418 Appendix B – Pavement Management Analysis Report Appendix C – Seeley Area Drainage Master Plan Appendix D – SCWD Approved Budget and Financial Statement Page | 114 Seeley County Water District Service Area Plan August 2017 Resources Caltrans, Traffic Volumes: Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) 2015, Route 8 http://www.dot.ca.gov/trafficops/census/volumes2015/Route7-10.html Census.Gov, American Fact Finder ACS Demographics and Housing Estimates 2011-2015 American Community Survey 5- Year Estimates, 3/16/17 County of Imperial Fire Department, Tony Rauhotas Jr., May 15, 2017 County of Imperial Planning and Development Services County of Imperial Land Use Element, 2007 County of Imperial Planning and Development Services, Seeley Urban Plan, 1994 County of Imperial Registrar of Voters/ Elections Department, Debbie Porter, April 10, 2017 County of Imperial, Zoning Map 9A Townsite of Seeley, 2006 CR&R Incorporated Environmental Services, Francisco Ochoa, April 12, 2017 Department of Finance, California, E-1 2015-2016 Population Estimates, 3/16/17 Emergency Services Consulting International, Imperial County Fire Department, Office of Emergency Services Master Plan, 2012 Imperial County Board of Supervisors Ordinance 1418 on County Development Impact Fees, Adopted 11/21/2006 Imperial County Free Library, Crystal Duran, March 20, 2017 Imperial County Local Agency Formation Commission, LAFCO Policy Manual, Chapter VII. Principal Act Section 30000-33900, Water Code, 2009 Imperial County Local Agency Formation Commission, Seeley Sphere of Influence Imperial Irrigation District, City of Seeley Utility Map, April 10, 2017 IMS Infrastructure Management Services, County of Imperial, CA Pavement Management Analysis Report, February 2012 Lucky Recycling Group, Inc., Dan Drewek, April 12, 2017 Naval Air Facility El Centro, Kristopher Haugh , July 13, 2017 Naval Air Facility El Centro, William Kagele, MS, August 10, 2017 Nolte Associates Inc., Seeley County Water District, Service Area Plan, 2003 Republic Services, Michael Jowell, April 12, 2017 Rick Engineering Company, Seeley Area Drainage Mater Plan, June 2010 Seeley Union School District, Cecilia Dial, April 20, 2017 Vanir Construction Management, Inc, Municipal Service Review Draft #3, January 2011 Page | 115 APPENDIX A County of Imperial Development Impact Fee's & Ordinance 1418 Appendix A - County of Imperial Development Impact Fee's County Unincorp Total A. Sheriff Residential Single-Family $619 $317 $936 (Per Housing Unit): Multi-Family $484 $243 $727 Mobile home (private lot or Park) $415 $217 $632 Non-Residential Comm/Shop Ctr (50,000 SF or less) $407 $349 $756 (Per 1,000 SF) Comm/Shop Ctr (50,001-100,000 SF) $356 $305 $661 Comm/Shop Ctr(100,000-200,000 SF) $308 $264 $572 Comm/Shop Ctr (over 200,000 SF) $264 $227 $491 Office/Inst (25,000 SF or less) $116 $142 $308 Office/Inst (25,001 - 50,000 SF) $141 $121 $262 Office/Inst (50,001 - 100,000 SF) $120 $103 $223 Medical-Dental Office $326 $280 $606 Hospital $158 $136 $294 Business Park $115 $99 $214 Light Industrial $63 $54 $117 Manufacturing $34 $29 $63 Warehousing $44 $38 $82 Elementary School $131 $112 $243 Other Non-residential Lodging (per room) $50 $43 $93 (per unit): Day Care (per student) $40 $34 $74 Nursing Home (per bed) $21 $18 $39 County Unincorp Total B. General Government Residential Single-Family $1,349 $350 $1,699 (Per Housing Unit): Multi-Family $1,057 $267 $1,324 Mobile home (private lot or Park) $906 $239 $1,145 Non-Residential Comm/Shop Ctr (50,000 SF or less) $264 $44 $308 (Per 1,000 SF) Comm/Shop Ctr (50,001-100,000SF) $230 $38 $268 Comm/Shop Ctr(100,000-200,000 SF) $205 $34 $239 Comm/Shop Ctr (over 200,000 SF) $184 $30 $215 Office/Inst (25,000 SF or less) $383 $64 $447 Office/Inst (25,001 - 50,000 SF) $361 $60 $421 Office/Inst (50,001 - 100,000 SF) $340 $56 $396 Medical-Dental Office $374 $62 $436 Hospital $312 $52 $364 Business Park $291 $48 $339 Light Industrial $213 $35 $248 Manufacturing $165 $27 $192 Warehousing $118 $19 $137 Elementary School $84 $14 $98 Other Non-residential Lodging (per room) $40 $6 $46 (per unit): Day Care (per student) $14 $2 $16 Nursing Home (per bed) $33 $5 $38 County Unincorp Total C. Fire Residential Single-Family $- $1,273 $1,273 (Per Housing Unit): Multi-Family $- $977 $977 Mobile home (private lot or Park) $- $871 $871 Non-Residential (Per Comm/Shop Ctr (50,000 SF or less) $- $501 $501 1,000 SF) Comm/Shop Ctr (50,001-100,000SF) $- $438 $438 Comm/Shop Ctr(100,000-200,000 SF) $- $389 $389 Comm/Shop Ctr (over 200,000 SF) $351 $351 Office/Inst (25,000 SF or less) $- $728 $728 Office/Inst (25,001 - 50,000 SF) $- $686 $686 Office/Inst (50,001 - 100,000 SF) $- $647 $647 Medical-Dental Office $- $710 $710 Hospital $- $593 $593 Business Park $- $554 $554 Light Industrial $- $405 $405 Manufacturing $- $314 $314 Warehousing $- $224 $224 Elementary School $- $161 $161 Other Non-residential Lodging (per room) $- $77 $77 (per unit): Day Care (per student) $- $28 $28 Nursing Home (per bed) $- $63 $63 County Unincorp Total D. Parks and Recreation Residential Single-Family $452 $- $452 (Per Housing Unit): Multi-Family $354 $- $354 Mobile home (private lot or Park) $303 $- $303 County Unincorp Total E. Public Works Residential Single-Family $- $1,897 $1,897 (Per Housing Unit): Multi-Family $- $1,453 $1,453 Mobile home (private lot or Park) $- $1,296 $1,296 Non-Residential Comm/Shop Ctr (50,000 SF or less) $- $1,857 $1,857 ( Per 1,000 SF ) Comm/Shop Ctr (50,001-100,000SF) $- $1,625 $1,625 Comm/Shop Ctr(100,000-200,000 SF) $- $1,407 $1,407 Comm/Shop Ctr (over 200,000 SF) $1,207 $1,207 Office/Inst (25,000 SF or less) $- $757 $757 Office/Inst (25,001 - 50,000 SF) $- $645 $645 Office/Inst (50,001 - 100,000 SF) $- $550 $550 Medical-Dental Office $- $1,491 $1,491 Hospital $- $725 $725 Business Park $- $526 $526 Light Industrial $- $287 $287 Manufacturing $- $157 $157 Warehousing $- $204 $204 Elementary School $- $598 $598 Other Non-residential Lodging (per room) $- $232 $232 (per unit): Day Care (per student) $- $184 $184 Nursing Home (per bed) $- $97 $97 County Unincorp Total F. Library Service District Residential Single-Family $- $- $387 (Per Housing Unit): Multi-Family $- $- $368 Mobile home (private lot or Park) $- $- $279 Imperial County Ordinance No. 1418 Approved November 21, 2006 APPENDIX B Pavement Management Analysis Report County of Imperial, CA Pavement Management Analysis Report February 2012 County of Imperial Department of Public Works 155 S. 11th Street El Centro, CA 92243 Attention: William (Bill) Brunet, Director of Public Works IMS Infrastructure Management Services 1820 West Drake Drive, Suite 108, Tempe, AZ 85283 Phone: (480) 839-4347, Fax: (480) 839-4348 www.ims-rst.com TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS I 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1 1.1 Principles of Pavement Management 1 1.2 The Pavement Management Process 4 1.3 Understanding the Pavement Condition Score 6 2.0 ROADWAY NETWORK CONDITION AND FINDINGS 8 2.1 Roadway Network Size 8 2.2 Network Present Condition 9 2.3 Pavement Condition By Region 10 2.4 Load Associated Distress Analysis 12 2.5 Reconstruction Backlog 13 3.0 REHABILITATION PLAN AND BUDGET DEVELOPMENT 14 3.1 Key Analysis Set Points 14 3.2 Fix ALL and Annual Estimates 19 3.3 Network Budget Analysis Models 20 3.4 Network Recommendations and Comments 22 APPENDED REPORTS Following Page 23 Appendix A Street Inventory and Condition Summary (Segments Sorted by Street Name) Appendix B Street Inventory and Condition Summary by Project (Supersegments by ID) Appendix C $10.0M Rehabilitation Program by Project (Supersegment) Appendix D $10.0M Rehabilitation Program by Segment IMS Infrastructure Management Services Imperial County 2011 Report page i List of Acronyms and Abbreviations Abbreviation or Acronym Definition $M Dollars in millions ACP Asphalt Concrete Pavement - asphalt streets ART Arterial roadway functional classification ASTM American Society of Testing Methods Brk Break CAL Coarse Aggregate Loss CDV Corrected Deduct Value COL Collector roadway functional classification Crk Crack DeflCON Deflection Condition - structural load analysis Dvdd Slab Divided Slab DynaCON Dynamic Condition - structural layer analysis ft or FT Foot ft2 or FT2 Square foot FunCL Functional Classification FWD Falling weight deflectometer GCI Gravel Condition Index GFP Good - Fair - Poor GIS Geographic Information System GISID GIS segment identification number H&V Horizontal and Vertical IRI International Roughness Index Jt Joint L&T Longitudinal and Transverse LAD Load associated distress LOC Local roadway functional classification - same as RES LOG Lip of Gutter m metre m2 sqaure metre M Moderate MaxDV Maximum Deduct Value mi or Mi Mile MnART Minor arterial roadway functional classification MOD Moderate NLAD Non-load associated distress OCI Overall condition index, also known as PCI Olay Overlay PCC Portland Cement Concrete - concrete streets PCI Pavement Condition Index - generic term for OCI R&R Remove and replace Recon Reconstruction Rehab Rehabilitation RES Local roadway functional classification - same as LOC RI or RCI Roughness Index S Strong SDI Surface Distress Index SI Structural Index STA Station or chainage Surf Trtmt Surface Treatment TDV Total Deduct Value W Weak IMS Infrastructure Management Services Imperial County 2011 Report page ii 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1.1 PRINCIPLES OF PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT Nationwide, billions of dollars have been invested in roadway networks by municipal, state and federal governments. Locally, Imperial County has over 308 miles of arterial roadways (major roadways that run between communities), 650 of rural county roads and 368 miles of residential roadways, encompassing over 173M square feet of asphalt and concrete surfacing. At a replacement cost exceeding $500,000 per mile – not including the value of the land, the County has over $722 million invested in their paved roadway network. Figure 1 – Replacement Value of Imperial County Paved Roadway Network Preservation of existing road and street systems has become a major activity for all levels of government. There is a shortage of funds to maintain street systems at all government levels. Funds that have been designated for pavement preservation must therefore be used as effectively as possible. One proven method to obtain maximum value of available funds is through the use of a pavement management system. IMS Infrastructure Management Services Imperial County 2011 Report page 1 Pavement management is the process of planning, budgeting, funding, designing, constructing, monitoring, evaluating, maintaining, and rehabilitating the pavement network to provide maximum benefits from the available funds. A pavement management system is a set of tools or methods that assists decision makers in finding optimum strategies for providing and maintaining pavement in a serviceable condition over a given time period. As shown in Figure 2, streets that are repaired when they are in a good condition will cost less over their lifetime than streets that are allowed to deteriorate to a poor condition. Without an adequate routine pavement maintenance program, streets require more frequent reconstruction, thereby costing millions of extra dollars. Over time, pavement quality drops until the pavement condition becomes unacceptable. For each street, the rate of deterioration, and hence shape of the curve, is dependent on many factors – foremost of which are the strength of the roadway structure and traffic loading. The key to a successful pavement management program is to develop a reasonably accurate performance model of the roadway, and then identify the optimal timing and rehabilitation strategy. The resultant benefit of this exercise is realized by the long term cost savings and increase in pavement quality over time. As illustrated in Figure 2, pavement typically deteriorates rapidly once it hits a specific threshold. A $1 investment after 40% lifespan is much more effective than deferring maintenance until heavier overlays or reconstruction is required just a few years later. Time Figure 2 – Pavement Deterioration and Life Cycle Costs Once implemented, an effective pavement information management system can assist agencies in developing long-term rehabilitation programs and budgets. The key is to develop policies and practices that delay the inevitable total reconstruction for as long as practical yet still remain within the target zone for cost effective rehabilitation. IMS Infrastructure Management Services Imperial County 2011 Report page 2 ytilauQ tnemevaP 40% of pavement life Excellent has a 15% drop in quality Very Good 15% of pavement life $1 spent now Good has a 40% drop in quality Fair Poor Costs $8 if delayed Very Poor That is, as each roadway approaches the steep part of its deterioration curve, apply a remedy that extends the pavement life - at a minimum cost, thereby avoiding costly heavy overlays and reconstruction. Thus, the goal of a pavement management system is to identify the optimal level of funding, timing, and renewal strategy agencies should adopt to keep their roadway network at a satisfactory level of service. Figure 3 illustrates the concept of extending pavement life through the application of timely rehabilitation activities. Time Figure 3 – Pavement Life Cycle Curve Ideally, the lower limit of the target zone shown in Figure 3 would be a condition rating of 70 – that is to keep maintenance requirements on as many streets as possible to a thin overlay or less. The upper limit should be close to the upper range of the very good category – that is a pavement condition score of 85. Other functions of a pavement management system include assessing effectiveness of maintenance activities and new technologies, and storing historical data and images. IMS Infrastructure Management Services Imperial County 2011 Report page 3 ytilauQ tnemevaP Pavement Life Cycle Curve Target Zone for Pavement Rehabilitation Increased Pavement Life Pave U m n e - n re t h P a e b rf il o it r a m te a d nce 1.2 THE PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROCESS The actual pavement management process involves three unique, but important steps, and is presented graphically in Figure 4. Each activity builds on the previous, until the end result is a prioritized paving and rehabilitation program. Figure 4 - The Pavement Management Process Highlights of the pavement management process include: 1. System Configuration – this step involves identifying all roadways in the County’s network, assigning them a unique identifier, listing their physical characteristics (length, width etc,) and demographic attributes (pavement type, traffic, functional classification), and linking the network to the County’s GIS map. 2. Field Surveys – following a set of pre-defined assessment protocols matching the County’s Lucity Pavement Management software (ASTM D6433-09), a specialized piece of survey equipment - referred to as a Laser Road Surface Tester (Laser RST, pictured on page 6), was used to collect observations on the condition of the pavement surface, as well as collect digital imagery and spatial coordinate information. The Laser RST surveyed each street from end to end in a single pass, with arterial roadways completed in two passes. Data collected by the Laser RST includes:  Rutting – measurement of wheel path rut depths by severity and length on asphalt roads. Rut depths are a concern for two reasons – if there is insufficient cross slope, they can hold water and thus cause loss of vehicle control. They also identify areas of loss of IMS Infrastructure Management Services Imperial County 2011 Report page 4 structural base or asphalt strength. On asphalt streets, rutting is incorporated into the surface distress observations.  Roughness Index – Roughness is measured following the industry standard “International Roughness Index” (IRI). It is an open-ended score that measures the number of bumps per mile and reports the value as millimeters/meter. The IRI value is converted to a 0 to 100 score and reported as the Roughness Index (RI) as follows: RI = (10.5 – 3.5 x ln(IRI)) x 10, where ln(IRI) is the natural logarithm of IRI. The Roughness Index is not only an indicator of the apparent smoothness of the roadway surface as perceived by the traveling public, but it is also a quantitative way to report the level of deterioration of the pavement surface. All roads start with a fairly low IRI value – less than 1.5 mm/m (equivalent to a Roughness Index of greater than 90) and thus may be considered smooth. As they age, the surface deteriorates and become rougher. This deterioration may be measured and reported as IRI and used as part of the overall condition score.  Surface Distress Index – The Laser RST collects surface distress observations based on the extent and severity of distress encountered along the length of the roadway following ASTM D6433-09 protocols for asphalt and concrete pavements. The surface distress condition (cracking, potholes, raveling and the like) is considered by the traveling public to be the most important aspect in assessing the overall pavement condition. Not all distresses are weighted equally within the Surface Distresses Index. Certain load associated distresses (distresses caused by traffic loading) , such as rutting or alligator cracking on asphalt streets, or divided slab on concrete streets, have a much higher impact on the surface distress index than non-load associated ones such as raveling or patching. Even at low extents and moderate severity – less than 10% of the total area, load associated distresses can drop the Surface Distress Index considerably. ASTM D 6433-09 also has algorithms within it to correct for multiple or overlapping distresses within a segment. 3. Analysis and Reporting – following the field surveys, the condition data is assembled to create a single score representing the overall condition of the pavement. The Pavement Condition Index (PCI) is as follows: PCI = 33% Roughness Index + 67% Surface Distress Index. Analysis was completed using Imperial County specific rehabilitation strategies, unit rates, priorities and pavement performance curves. IMS Infrastructure Management Services Imperial County 2011 Report page 5 Laser Road Surface Tester (Laser RST) 1.3 UNDERSTANDING THE PAVEMENT CONDITION SCORE The following illustration compares Pavement Condition Index (PCI) to commonly used descriptive terms. The divisions between the terms are not fixed, but are meant to reflect common perceptions of condition. Figure 5 – Understanding the Pavement Condition Index Score IMS Infrastructure Management Services Imperial County 2011 Report page 6 The general idea of what these condition levels mean with respect to remaining life and typical rehabilitation actions is included in the following table: Relative PCI Range Description Remaining Life Definition 85 – 100 Excellent 15 to 25 Years Like new condition – little to no maintenance required when new; or routine maintenance such as crack and joint sealing. 70 – 85 Very Good 12 to 20 Years Routine maintenance such as patching, crack sealing with surface treatments such as slurries or microsurfacing. 60 – 70 Good 10 to 15 Years Heavier surface treatments and thin overlays. Localized panel replacements. 40 – 60 Fair to Marginal 7 to 12 Years Progressively thicker overlays with localized repairs. Moderate to extensive panel replacements. 25 – 40 Poor 5 to 10 Years Sections will require very thick overlays or surface replacement, base reconstruction and possible subgrade stabilization. 0 – 25 Very Poor 0 to 5 Years High percentage of full reconstruction. IMS Infrastructure Management Services Imperial County 2011 Report page 7 2.0 ROADWAY NETWORK CONDITION AND FINDINGS 2.1 ROADWAY NETWORK SIZE The paved roadway network consists of three primary functional classes – in two distinctive environments, covering approximately 1,326 miles of pavement. The average overall pavement condition of the roadway network (asphalt and concrete) at the time of the survey was 53 and is currently about 52. The network has two pavement types: flexible (asphalt) and concrete, with asphalt being overwhelmingly predominant. For the purpose of reporting and analysis, the county was divided into two environments or regions: Salton City – All roadways located north and west of Poe Rd along the Highway 86 corridor. Imperial Valley – All roadways located east of Poe Rd (including Poe Rd), including the Ocotillo, Summerhaven and Bombay Beach areas Imperial County Data Summary Imperial County Imperial Valley Salton City Total ART COL RES IV Total ART COL RES SC Total COL RES Segment Count 5602 680 1556 3366 2707 680 1381 646 2895 175 2720 Length (Ft) 7,000,929 1,623,978 3,433,833 1,943,118 5,441,789 1,623,978 3,312,067 505,745 1,559,139 121,766 1,437,373 Length (mi) 1,326 308 650 368 1,031 308 627 96 295 23 272 Area (yd2) 19,291,114 4,473,119 9,184,852 5,633,142 14,708,437 4,473,119 8,754,364 1,480,953 4,582,677 430,488 4,152,189 Figure 6 – Network Split by Functional Classification (miles, %) IMS Infrastructure Management Services Imperial County 2011 Report page 8 2.2 NETWORK PRESENT CONDITION Figure 7 shows the distribution of pavement condition for the roadway network in Imperial County on a 0 to 100 scale, 0 being worst and 100 being best condition. At the time of the survey, the network PCI was 53. While direct comparisons to other agencies are difficult, overall, Imperial County is about 10 points below average of agencies recently surveyed by IMS. Figure 7 –Roadway Network Present Status This is reflective of an aged network servicing a large geographic area with a low population base to support higher levels of pavement maintenance and rehabilitation. In large rural counties, it is common to have high volumes of rural roadways in fair to marginal condition as they do not sustain large traffic volumes. Simultaneously, the County has a significant amount of streets in the Salton City area that have not received upgrading or maintenance since their construction. Overall, given the low average condition of the network and the high number of roads approaching the end of the service life, the County is faced with a significant challenge to maintain and restore the roadway network. The following graph (Figure 8) plots the same pavement condition information, but instead of using the actual Pavement Condition Index value, descriptive terms are used to classify the roadways. From the chart, just under 10% of the network can be considered in excellent condition with a PCI score greater than 85. These streets are in like new condition and require routine maintenance. Nationwide, the amount of roadways falling into the very good category is about 15%, so this value is slightly low. IMS Infrastructure Management Services Imperial County 2011 Report page 9 Just over 14% of the network falls into the very good classification. These are roads that benefit the most from preventative maintenance techniques such as microsurfacing, slurry seals and localized repairs. If left untreated these roadways will drop in quality to become heavy surface treatment or overlay candidates. Eighteen percent (18%) of the streets are rated as good and are candidates for heavy surface treatment rehabilitation and thin overlays. Figure 8 – Roadway Network Present Status Using Descriptive Terms Thirty six percent (36%) of the network can be considered in fair or marginal condition, representing candidates for progressively thicker overlay rehabilitation. If left untreated, they will decline rapidly into reconstruction candidates. The remaining 23% percent of the network is rated as poor or very poor, meaning these roadways have failed or are past their optimal due point for overlay or surface based rehabilitation and may require progressively heavier or thicker forms of rehabilitation (such as surface reconstruction or deep patch and paving) or total reconstruction. 2.3 PAVEMENT CONDITION BY REGION Figure 9 highlights the pavement condition distribution for the two analysis regions – Salton City and the Imperial Valley. From the plot it is apparent the Imperial Valley roadways (shown in red) have a wider range of condition scores and a higher average condition score of 55. The Salton City roads tend to a lower average PCI of 46, with fewer streets rated above very good. IMS Infrastructure Management Services Imperial County 2011 Report page 10 Figure 9 – PCI Distribution by Pavement Type Class The following table presents the overall conditions scores by region and functional class at the time of the survey. Imperial County Data Summary Imperial County Imperial Valley Salton City Total ART COL RES IV Total ART COL RES SC Total COL RES Length (mi) 1,326 308 650 368 1,031 308 627 96 295 23 272 Average PCI 53 55 59 54 52 46 48 46 The following functional class definitions were used for this analysis: Arterial (ART) – major paved roadways typically linking population centers. Arterial roadways carry higher traffic volumes and are generally striped. Collector (COL) – lower volume roads that connect residential or rural areas to the arterial roadway network. In rural areas these are often referred to as County roads and are not stripped. Residential (RES) – urban local roads. IMS Infrastructure Management Services Imperial County 2011 Report page 11 2.4 LOAD ASSOCIATED DISTRESS ANALYSIS Closer examination of the surface defects as they relate to the overall pavement condition provide an insight into the failure mode of roadway segments with low PCI scores. Generally, load associated distresses affect the overall condition score more than non-load associated distresses – however this is not the case in Imperial County where non-load associated distresses contribute considerably to low pavement condition scores. Load associated distresses are those that are directly related to traffic loading and structural capacity (alligator cracking, distortion and rutting). Non-load associated distresses are those that result from materials or environmental issues including shrinkage (transverse) cracking, bleeding and raveling. Figure 10 plots the relationship of the load and non-load associated distresses against pavement condition. As can be seen from the plot, at higher PCI scores, it is the non-load associated distresses (blue dots) that have a higher concentration of deducts over the load associated distresses (red dots). As the PCI score drops, both load and non-load load associated distresses affect the PCI score. Typically, at low PCI scores, it is the load associated distresses that affect the PCI the most – meaning the pavement surface and base have failed due to traffic loading. In Imperial County, transverse (shrinkage) cracking and pavement raveling contribute significantly to the low PCI scores. Figure 10 – Structural Adequacy of the Roadway Network IMS Infrastructure Management Services Imperial County 2011 Report page 12 Segments falling below the lower diagonal line may be deemed strong as they have a lower ratio of load associated distresses to pavement condition. Segments above the upper diagonal line are labeled as weak as they have a higher ratio of load associated distresses to pavement condition. In between the two diagonal lines are the pavements exhibiting moderate strength. In the simplest of terms, Imperial County’s roads are failing due to two primary modes: 1.) Structural failure due to inadequate base materials and pavement thickness, and 2.) excessive weathering and cracking due to high exposure to sunlight and extreme temperatures. The pavement strength label is used to determine which pavement performance curve a segment is to use, as well as a qualifier for rehabilitation selection. 2.5 RECONSTRUCTION BACKLOG Backlog roadways are those that have dropped sufficiently in quality that surface rehabilitation efforts would no longer prove to be cost efficient and either partial or total reconstruction is required. Backlog is expressed as the percentage of roads requiring reconstruction as compared to the network totals. Generally a backlog of 10% to 15% of the overall network is considered manageable from a funding point of view – a target value of less than 12% would be considered ideal. Backlogs approaching 20% and above tend to become unmanageable unless aggressively reduced through larger rehabilitation programs. For agencies with a high backlog (that is approaching 20%) it is important that this value not be allowed to increase. It is also crucial that this number be lessened as to keep road maintenance manageable in the County. It is far more costly to let the backlog amount increase anymore and then attempt to reduce it later. The concept of Pavement Condition Index (PCI) score and backlog must be fully understood in order to develop an effective pavement management program. The PCI score indicates the overall pavement condition and represents the amount of equity in the system and is the value most commonly considered when gauging the overall quality of a roadway network. It may also be used to define a desired level of service – that is an agency may wish to develop a pavement management program such that in 5 years the overall network score meets a set minimum value. It is the backlog however, that defines the amount of work an agency is facing and is willing to accept in the future. Further, it is the combination of the two that presents the true picture of the condition of a roadway network, and conversely defines improvement goals. With Imperial County’s PCI at 53 at the time of the surveys and the reconstruction backlog at 7% and an additional 15% of the network rated as poor, the County’s short term objectives needs to focus on not letting this backlog percentage increase to over 20% by focusing its current rehab program on the asphalt network to arrest any potential PCI slide. The key issue in Imperial County is not the current level of backlog (7%), but rather the extraordinarily high number of roads rated as poor or marginal. Over one-third of the paved roads are approaching the ends of their service life and the opportunity to rehabilitate them with overlays or surface based rehabilitation activities. In Imperial Valley 34% of the streets are rated as poor or marginal, while this value jumps to 39% in the Salton City area. IMS Infrastructure Management Services Imperial County 2011 Report page 13 3.0 REHABILITATION PLAN AND BUDGET DEVELOPMENT 3.1 KEY ANALYSIS SET POINTS Pavement management systems require user inputs in order to perform condition forecasting and prioritization. Key operating parameters, based on national empirical data and Imperial County specific conditions, used in the analysis are as follows:  Pavement Performance Curves Figure 11 – ACP Performance Curves The basic shape of the curves follows traditional sigmoidal performance models such as those contained in MicroPaver and other commonly used pavement management applications. A similar set of curves were created for the single concrete street. IMS Infrastructure Management Services Imperial County 2011 Report page 14  Rehabilitation Strategies and Unit Rates – The rehab strategies, unit rates, PCI ranges and selection criteria used in the pavement analysis are on the following page. In summary the following rehabilitation guidelines were developed: Arterials Rehabilitation consists of slurry seals, chip seals/surface treatments or overlays. If reconstruction is required they are returned to an asphalt standard. Collector/County Rehabilitation consists of slurry seals, chip seals or overlays. If reconstruction is required they are returned to a bituminous surface treatment (BST) standard. BST is similar to a chip seal, but is placed on a crushed aggregate base. This is a common standard used for low volume rural roads where agricultural traffic is present. The benefit is lower construction cost with good dust control and reasonable service life. Much of the Alaska Highway is constructed to this standard. Residential Rehabilitation consists of slurry seals, chip seals or overlays. If reconstruction is required they are returned to an asphalt standard. Salton City At higher PCI values, slurries and chip seals are used to extend pavement life. Roads rated as poor will be overlaid. If reconstruction is required they are returned to a bituminous surface treatment (BST) standard. Pavement Rehab – is the assigned name to each rehabilitation strategy. The term “+ R&R” refers to remove and replace – that is structural patching. When this term is present, additional funds have been assigned to the strategy to allow for an increased amount of preparation work and patching. The “1” and “2” suffixes after the name are simply a placeholder to separate one rehabilitation from another within the software. PCI Range - defines the Pavement Condition Index (PCI) range applicable to the rehab selection. The PCI ranges generally match the Good-Fair-Poor descriptions, but are not required to do so. The Breakpoint PCI is the limit which a segment falling into the range between the Minimum PCI and Breakpoint PCI must be completed in its need year. If the segment is not completed that year, its score will drop below the minimum and require a thicker rehabilitation activity. Segments with a PCI score between the Minimum and Breakpoint PCI’s are referred to as Critical. Constraint –defines the Load Associated Distress (LAD) range applicable to the rehabilitation selection. The PCI score defines when rehabilitation is required based on the segments rate of deterioration and the appropriate PCI Range, while the LAD constraint further defines the rehab selection by identifying whether additional activities such as patching or R&R are required. Rehab Order – defines the order in which rehabilitation activities are funded. The software first selects the critical segments in the rehab selection order until all available monies are spent. After the critical segments are selected, if funds are still available, the software then recycles through the priority list and selects the remaining segments in order. In practice, available funds are generally expended before all critical segments are selected and segments not selected are deferred. IMS Infrastructure Management Services Imperial County 2011 Report page 15 Imperial County Rehabilitation Strategies and Unit Rates Attributes PCI Range Constraint IMS Infrastructure Management Services Imperial County 2011 Report page 16 epyT tnemevaP rebmuN baheR puorG tegduB LCnuF Pavement Rehab Description redrO baheR eulaV ICP teseR efiL muminiM )2dy/$( etaR tinU ICP niM ICP tniopkaerB ICP xaM rotcaF daoL niM rotcaF daoL xaM Asphalt 105 1 Arterial Art - Slurry Seal Single Slurry Seal 9 90 5 2.25 75 77 85 Asphalt 110 1 Arterial Art - Surface Treatment Double Slurry, Chip Seal or MicroSurface 8 92 5 3.25 65 67 75 0 15 Asphalt 111 1 Arterial Art - Surface Treatment + R&R1 Double Slurry, Chip Seal or MicroSurface 7 92 5 3.75 65 67 75 15 100 Asphalt 112 1 Arterial Art - Surface Treatment + R&R2 Double Slurry, Chip Seal or MicroSurface 6 92 5 3.75 55 57 65 0 15 Asphalt 120 2 Arterial Art - Thin Olay < 2" ACP Overlay 14 95 5 13.50 55 57 65 15 30 Asphalt 121 2 Arterial Art - Thin Olay + R&R1 < 2" ACP Overlay 11 95 5 14.50 55 57 65 30 100 Asphalt 122 2 Arterial Art - Thin Olay + R&R2 < 2" ACP Overlay 10 95 5 14.50 45 47 55 0 20 Asphalt 130 2 Arterial Art - Moderate Olay 2" to 3 " ACP Overaly 15 95 5 16.50 45 47 55 20 40 Asphalt 131 2 Arterial Art - Moderate Olay + R&R1 2" to 3 " ACP Overaly 13 95 5 17.50 45 47 55 40 100 Asphalt 132 2 Arterial Art - Moderate Olay + R&R2 2" to 3 " ACP Overaly 12 95 5 17.50 35 37 45 0 30 Asphalt 140 2 Arterial Art - Thick Olay 3" + ACP Overlay 4 96 5 19.50 35 37 45 30 50 Asphalt 141 2 Arterial Art - Thick Olay + R&R1 3" + ACP Overlay 3 96 5 20.50 35 37 45 50 100 Asphalt 142 3 Arterial Art - Thick Olay + R&R2 3" + ACP Overlay 2 96 5 20.50 25 28 35 0 40 Asphalt 150 3 Arterial Art - Partial Recon (ACP) Surface Removal, Compaction, >3" Overlay 1 96 5 35.00 25 28 35 40 100 Asphalt 155 4 Arterial Art - Full Recon (ACP) Full Base Reconstruction and >3" Overlay 5 100 5 50.00 0 15 25 Asphalt 205 1 Collector Col - Slurry Seal Single Slurry Seal 12 90 5 2.00 75 77 85 Asphalt 210 1 Collector Col - Surface Treatment Double Slurry, Chip Seal or MicroSurface 11 92 5 3.00 65 67 75 0 15 Asphalt 211 1 Collector Col - Surface Treatment + R&R1 Double Slurry, Chip Seal or MicroSurface 10 92 5 3.50 65 67 75 15 100 Asphalt 212 1 Collector Col - Surface Treatment + R&R2 Double Slurry, Chip Seal or MicroSurface 6 92 5 3.50 55 57 65 0 15 Asphalt 220 2 Collector Col - Mill and Chip Surface Mill and Chip Seal 9 94 5 4.75 55 57 65 15 30 Asphalt 221 2 Collector Col - Mill and Chip + R&R1 Surface Mill and Chip Seal 8 94 5 5.75 55 57 65 30 100 Asphalt 222 2 Collector Col - Mill and Chip + R&R2 Surface Mill and Chip Seal 7 94 5 5.75 45 47 55 0 20 Asphalt 230 2 Collector Col - Thin Olay < 2" ACP Overlay 15 95 5 12.50 45 47 55 20 40 Asphalt 231 2 Collector Col - Thin Olay + R&R1 < 2" ACP Overlay 8 95 5 13.50 45 47 55 40 100 Asphalt 232 2 Collector Col - Thin Olay + R&R2 < 2" ACP Overlay 7 95 5 13.50 35 37 45 0 30 Asphalt 240 2 Collector Col - Moderate Olay 2" to 3 " ACP Overaly 4 95 5 15.50 35 37 45 30 50 Asphalt 241 2 Collector Col - Moderate Olay + R&R1 2" to 3 " ACP Overaly 3 95 5 16.50 35 37 45 50 100 Asphalt 242 3 Collector Col - Moderate Olay + R&R2 2" to 3 " ACP Overaly 2 95 5 16.50 25 28 35 0 40 Asphalt 250 3 Collector Col - Partial Recon (BST) Surface Removal, Compaction, 3" Overlay 1 98 5 20.50 25 28 35 40 100 Asphalt 255 4 Collector Col - Full Recon (BST) Full Base Reconstruction and 3" Overlay 5 98 5 30.00 0 15 25 Asphalt 260 5 SC Collector SC Col - SurfaceTreatment Double Slurry, Chip Seal or MicroSurface 11 90 5 3.00 65 67 75 Asphalt 265 5 SC Collector SC Col - Mill and Chip Surface Mill and Chip Seal 13 94 5 4.75 55 57 65 Asphalt 270 5 SC Collector SC Col - Mill and Chip + R&R Surface Mill and Chip Seal 9 94 5 5.75 45 47 55 Asphalt 275 5 SC Collector SC Col - Mill and 2xChip + R&R Surface Mill and Double Chip Seal 5 94 5 9.75 35 37 45 Asphalt 280 5 SC Collector SC Col - Deep Patch & Olay Mill, Extensive Patch and 2.5" Overlay 7 96 5 15.50 25 27 35 Asphalt 285 5 SC Collector SC Col - Full Recon (BST) Full Base Reconstruction and BST 15 98 5 20.50 0 15 25 Asphalt 305 1 Residential RES - Slurry Seal Single Slurry Seal 9 90 5 1.75 75 77 85 Asphalt 310 1 Residential RES - Surface Treatment Double Slurry, Cape Seal or MicroSurface 8 92 5 2.75 65 67 75 0 15 Asphalt 311 1 Residential RES - Surface Treatment + R&R1 Double Slurry, Cape Seal or MicroSurface 7 92 5 3.25 65 67 75 15 100 Asphalt 312 1 Residential RES - Surface Treatment + R&R2 Double Slurry, Cape Seal or MicroSurface 6 92 5 3.25 55 57 65 0 15 Asphalt 320 2 Residential RES - Thin Olay 1.5" to 2" ACP Overlay 14 95 5 11.50 55 57 65 15 30 Asphalt 321 2 Residential RES - Thin Olay + R&R1 1.5" to 2" ACP Overlay 11 95 5 12.50 55 57 65 30 100 Asphalt 322 2 Residential RES - Thin Olay + R&R2 1.5" to 2" ACP Overlay 10 95 5 12.50 45 47 55 0 20 Asphalt 330 2 Residential RES - Moderate Olay 2" ACP Overlay 15 95 5 14.50 45 47 55 20 40 Asphalt 331 2 Residential RES - Moderate Olay + R&R1 2" ACP Overlay 13 95 5 15.50 45 47 55 40 100 Asphalt 332 2 Residential RES - Moderate Olay + R&R2 2" ACP Overlay 12 95 5 15.50 35 37 45 0 30 Asphalt 340 2 Residential Res - Deep Patch and Pave Mill, Extensive Patch and 2.0" Overlay 4 96 5 17.50 35 37 45 30 50 Asphalt 341 2 Residential Res - Deep Patch and Pave 1 Mill, Extensive Patch and 2.0" Overlay 3 96 5 17.50 35 37 45 50 100 Asphalt 342 3 Residential Res - Deep Patch and Pave 2 Mill, Extensive Patch and 2.0" Overlay 2 96 5 17.50 25 28 35 0 40 Asphalt 350 3 Residential RES - Partial Recon (ACP) Surface Removal, Compaction, 2.5" Overlay 1 98 5 22.50 25 28 35 40 100 Asphalt 355 4 Residential RES - Full Recon (ACP) Full Base Reconstruction and 2.5" Overlay 5 100 5 35.00 0 15 25 Asphalt 360 5 SC Residential SC Res - SurfaceTreatment Double Slurry, Chip Seal or MicroSurface 11 92 5 2.75 65 67 75 Asphalt 365 5 SC Residential SC Res - Mill and Chip Surface Mill and Chip Seal 13 94 5 4.25 55 57 65 Asphalt 370 5 SC Residential SC Res - Mill and Chip + R&R Surface Mill and Chip Seal 9 94 5 5.25 45 47 55 Asphalt 375 5 SC Residential SC Res - Mill and 2xChip + R&R Surface Mill and Double Chip Seal 5 94 5 9.25 35 37 45 Unit Rates – the rehabilitation costs are presented on a per square yard basis for each pavement type–functional class–rehabilitation activity combination. The rates were developed using typical national averages for similar activities and then were adjusted for Imperial County’ location and unique conditions. The rates include an allowance to cover costs for traffic control and site preparation, striping and pavement markings, engineering and inspection, and miscellaneous costs and contingency. The rates do not include ADA compliance costs, landscaping, signals or signage upgrades, or peripheral concrete repairs and in-house costs. Figures 12 and 13 illustrate the proposed rehab selection plan for roadway segments in the Imperial Valley and Salton City areas. Figure 12 – Imperial Valley Rehabilitation Activities by Functional Class IMS Infrastructure Management Services Imperial County 2011 Report page 17 Figure 13 – Salton City Rehabilitation Activities – All Streets  Priority Ranking – The Lucity pavement management program incorporates a user defined formula to determine the order in which streets are selected for rehabilitation. The priority formula is as follows: Priority = (100 – PCI) X PWF, where the PWF is the priority weighting factor as follows: Region Strength Arterial Collector Residential Imperial Valley Weak 105 75 90 Moderate 100 70 85 Strong 95 65 80 Salton City Weak N/A 35 45 Moderate N/A 30 40 Strong N/A 25 35 The effect of the priority weighting factor is to place increased emphasis for selection on arterials, followed by residentials and then rural-collector roads in the Imperial Valley over their counterparts in the Salton City area. Simultaneously, segments rated as weak are selected over those rated as moderate or strong. IMS Infrastructure Management Services Imperial County 2011 Report page 18 3.2 FIX ALL AND ANNUAL ESTIMATES The Fix All estimate is the theoretical value to rehabilitate all streets in the network to identify the magnitude of the current condition deficiency. The estimate is developed to validate the Steady State budget analysis and provide direction where rehabilitation budgets are best expended. For Imperial County, the Fix All Estimate is approximately $224M, broken down as follows: Fix All Annual Life Estimate Life Cycle Cycle Cost Description ($) (Yrs) ($) Slurry Seal 6,090,000 5 1,220,000 Surf Treatment 8,410,000 7 1,200,000 Mill and Chip 23,730,000 10 2,370,000 Thin Olay 26,720,000 20 1,340,000 Moderate Olay 39,040,000 20 1,950,000 Thick Olay 15,420,000 20 770,000 Deep Patch and Pave 16,320,000 25 650,000 Partial Recon (BST) 29,410,000 20 1,470,000 Partial Recon (ACP) 16,500,000 35 470,000 Full Recon (BST) 24,890,000 25 1,000,000 Full Recon (ACP) 16,860,000 50 340,000 Pulverize & ACP Olay 370,000 35 10,000 Total Network ($): 223,760,000 12,790,000 By dividing the Fix All Estimate totals developed above by typical life cycles for each rehab, an annual steady state budget may be developed. For Imperial County, the Steady State budget (that is, maintaining the current PCI) is estimated at $12.8M annually. Other methods to estimate the annual budget for the network include 1.) dividing the total network value by its depreciation life, and 2.) identifying the network average PCI, assigning an appropriate rehabilitation and then estimating the size of the annual program based on the service life of the average rehabilitation. Both examples are highlighted in the following tables: Asset Value Divided by Depreciation Life Network Valuation ($M): 722,300,000 Ultimate Roadway Depreciation Life (yrs): 50 Annual Budget Based on Depricatied ($M/yr): 14,400,000 IMS Infrastructure Management Services Imperial County 2011 Report page 19 Average Life Cycle of Typical Rehabilitation Selected Rehab Annual Average Average Rehab Based Design Life Program Rehab Cost Annual Cost Region Miles PCI on PCI (yrs) (mi/yrs) ($/mile) ($) Imperial Valley 1,031 55 Thin Overlay 20 51.5 185,000 9,530,000 Salton City 295 46 Mill & Chip 10 29.5 60,000 1,770,000 Annual Budget Based on Average Design Life ($/yr): 11,300,000 These three methods all based on the size and condition of the Imperial County network all point to an annual budget on the order of $11M to 14M. 3.3 NETWORK BUDGET ANALYSIS MODELS A total of 5 budget runs ranging from $2.50M per year up to $12.50M per year plus the Do Nothing and Fix All (Unlimited) options were prepared for the Imperial County network in order to fine tune the analysis process and identify optimum expenditures. The budget analysis results are summarized below: Fix All – The Fix All budget is similar to the Fix All Estimate discussed above in that it provides sufficient funding to rehabilitate each street in its need year with sufficient funds available. The idea is to identify the upper limit of spending over 5 years the County would require if they had unlimited funds. The budget analysis is for reference only and used to calibrate the analysis models. The Fix All budget increases the PCI to 92 tapering off to an 89 in five years and expends $223M. Do Nothing – this option identifies the effect of spending no capital for 5 years. After 5 years, the Do Nothing option results in a PCI drop from a 52 to a 42. $2.50M, $5.00M, $7.50M, $10.00M and $12.50M – identifies the resultant network PCI at various funding levels. For all funding levels the budgets were split between the various functional classes and rehab treatments. The reason splitting the budgets was to prevent the software from solely selecting thick overlays and partial reconstruction rehabilitations. If the budget was not partitioned, these two activities would consume the entire budget. The budget split was as follows: Slurry seals and surface treatments 10% Thin and moderate overlays (PCI > 35) and mill and chip: 20% Thick and moderate overlays (PCI < 35), deep patch and pave, and partial reconstruction 40% Full reconstruction 20% Salton City – all rehab activities 10% The software selects the rehabilitation candidates based on their priority and rehab selection order – starting with thick overlays and partial reconstructs to prevent these from becoming full reconstructs. At funding levels below the estimated steady state value, only critical segments are selected – and even then many are deferred due to lack of funding. Depending of the level of the funding shortfall, some segments are never selected and eventually become fall through segments due to their low priority. As the funding level becomes closer to the steady state budget, the software is able to select most of critical segments within a five year period. When funding is at the steady state budget, the PCI remains fairly constant, and over time, the backlog is able to be reduced. Funding levels above the steady state, allow for increases in PCI and decrease in backlog at an accelerated rate. IMS Infrastructure Management Services Imperial County 2011 Report page 20 The net effect of partitioning the budget is to check the deterioration of the higher rated roadways through the application of lighter treatments such as surface treatments and chip seals, while at the same time attempting to capture the majority of street before they become full reconstructs. Unfortunately, within the five year analysis horizon, multiple roadway segments will not be selected and be allowed to deteriorate in favor of segments with higher needs. Figure 14 – Five Year Network PCI Analysis Results The results of the analysis are summarized in Figure 14. The X axis highlights the annual budget, while the Y axis plots the 5 year Network Post Rehab PCI value. The diagonal red line is the analysis results. The targets for the pavement analysis are to maintain the network PCI at its current level of 52, while attempting to maintain the backlog below 20%. As can be seen from Figure 14, a budget of just under $11.0M would maintain the current PCI. The $11.0M budget varies matches the Life cycle cost estimate of $11.0 to $14.0M. IMS Infrastructure Management Services Imperial County 2011 Report page 21 Figure 15 – Five Year Annual PCI Figure 15 presents the same analysis results on an annual basis. The $10.0M budget is close to the actually steady state requirement of $11.0M and highlights that funding amounts below this level will drop the network PCI over time. Extending the analysis out to 10 years confirmed that the PCI will remain steady at 52 at $10M per year. 3.4 NETWORK RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS The following recommendations are presented to Imperial County and must be read in conjunction with the attached reports. 1. The County should adopt a policy statement identifying the desired overall pavement condition rating and acceptable amount of backlog. We suggest a PCI target that maintains the current network profile on the order of 62, while maintaining the backlog below 20%. An annual budget of $10.0M is required to achieve both of these goals. 2. The full suite of proposed rehabilitation strategies and unit rates should be reviewed annually as these can have considerable effects on the final program. The adoption of the BST rehab strategy for collector/County roads represents a departure from the current practice of asphalt paving of these roads. IMS Infrastructure Management Services Imperial County 2011 Report page 22 3. All costs are in constant 2011 dollars. No allowances have been made for inflation or fluctuations in rehabilitation costs. The County will have to monitor and factor in inflation for each budget year. 4. No allowance has been made for network growth or conversion of gravel roadways to pavement. As the County expands or increases the amount of paved roads, increased budgets will be required. 5. No allowance has been made for routine maintenance activities such as crack sealing, sweeping, striping or patching. These costs are assumed to be outside the pavement management costs. 6. No allowance has been made for compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, which is required on all roadway rehabilitation projects. IMS Infrastructure Management Services Imperial County 2011 Report page 23 Appendix B Street Inventory and Condition Summary by Projects (Supersegments by ID) IMS Infrastructure Management Services ImpCo 2012 Report Rev1 page b Imperial County Paved Network Inventory and Condition Summary - SuperSegments (Projects), Sorted by ID DI gesrepuS noitpircseD )tf( htgneL )tf( htdiW )2dy( aerA epyT tnemevaP htgnertS ytiroirP LCnuF ICP rotcaF daoL rotcaF daoL-noN rotcaF ssenhguoR 1000 10TH - 1000 196 20 434 Asphalt Moderate 5,695 Residential 33 46 24 43 1005 10TH - 1005 762 23 1,988 Asphalt Moderate 3,486 Residential 59 21 11 43 1010 10TH - 1010 740 31 2,550 Asphalt Weak 6,212 Residential 31 75 1 49 1015 11TH - 1015 762 22 1,698 Asphalt Strong 5,195 Residential 35 28 34 33 1020 14TH - 1020 761 19 1,606 Asphalt Moderate 5,489 Residential 35 48 13 33 1025 1ST - 1025 771 23 1,912 Asphalt Moderate 3,406 Residential 60 25 10 51 1030 1ST - 1030 1,348 24 3,531 Asphalt Moderate 4,210 Residential 50 25 24 53 1035 1ST - 1035 2,623 26 7,069 Asphalt Weak 6,592 Residential 27 59 20 41 1040 1ST - 1040 1,943 23 5,035 Asphalt Strong 5,019 Residential 37 21 46 49 1045 1ST - 1045 674 23 1,721 Asphalt Strong 6,177 Residential 23 43 43 43 1050 1ST - 1050 627 20 1,393 Asphalt Moderate 4,805 Residential 43 30 30 55 1055 1ST - 1055 379 43 1,812 Asphalt Moderate 1,035 Arterial 90 2 0 75 1060 2ND - 1060 463 38 1,697 Asphalt Strong 6,261 Residential 22 45 30 19 1065 2ND - 1065 669 24 1,818 Asphalt Moderate 6,707 Residential 21 52 27 23 1070 2ND - 1070 484 23 1,302 Asphalt Strong 5,003 Residential 37 28 30 31 1075 2ND - 1075 330 24 879 Asphalt Moderate 7,058 Residential 17 64 23 29 1080 2ND - 1080 2,291 26 6,326 Asphalt Strong 5,346 Residential 33 25 42 36 1085 2ND - 1085 241 26 696 Asphalt Weak 5,153 Residential 43 58 8 63 1090 2ND - 1090 1,130 40 5,021 Asphalt Moderate 2,260 Residential 73 8 12 61 1095 32 EVAN HEWES HWY - 1095 5,280 32 18,773 Asphalt Moderate 510 Arterial 95 0 0 88 1100 32 EVAN HEWES HWY - 1100 1,352 32 4,807 Asphalt Moderate 470 Arterial 95 0 0 89 1105 32 EVAN HEWES HWY - 1105 5,280 32 18,773 Asphalt Moderate 420 Arterial 96 0 0 91 1110 32 EVAN HEWES HWY - 1110 2,210 32 7,856 Asphalt Moderate 438 Arterial 96 0 0 90 1115 3RD - 1115 1,041 22 2,370 Asphalt Strong 4,444 Residential 44 7 51 52 1120 3RD - 1120 1,001 20 2,175 Asphalt Strong 5,592 Residential 30 39 34 40 1125 3RD - 1125 794 20 1,656 Asphalt Strong 4,206 Residential 47 24 28 49 1130 3RD - 1130 330 25 917 Asphalt Strong 4,941 Residential 38 30 28 34 1135 3RD - 1135 378 38 1,596 Asphalt Moderate 4,344 Residential 49 30 13 36 1140 3RD - 1140 1,650 28 4,657 Asphalt Strong 4,804 Residential 40 16 41 37 1145 3RD - 1145 641 29 2,064 Asphalt Strong 3,291 Residential 59 7 27 47 1150 3RD - 1150 633 23 1,618 Asphalt Moderate 4,040 Residential 52 17 22 38 1155 3RD - 1155 657 22 1,605 Asphalt Moderate 1,905 Residential 78 5 11 66 1160 3RD - 1160 658 23 1,683 Asphalt Moderate 5,073 Residential 40 37 25 49 1165 3RD - 1165 329 22 803 Asphalt Strong 2,659 Residential 67 0 25 54 1170 3RD - 1170 887 20 1,971 Asphalt Strong 5,402 Residential 32 19 50 38 1175 4TH - 1175 1,041 21 2,283 Asphalt Strong 3,696 Residential 54 3 41 51 1180 4TH - 1180 1,980 27 5,462 Asphalt Moderate 6,212 Residential 27 57 20 37 1185 4TH - 1185 642 34 2,167 Asphalt Moderate 3,211 Residential 62 9 22 52 1190 4TH - 1190 1,955 43 6,416 Asphalt Strong 3,978 Residential 50 9 42 55 1195 4TH - 1195 657 22 1,606 Asphalt Strong 3,610 Residential 55 12 25 41 1200 4TH - 1200 556 21 1,297 Asphalt Moderate 1,812 Residential 79 5 10 67 1205 4TH - 1205 309 24 839 Asphalt Moderate 4,961 Residential 42 48 15 55 1210 5TH - 1210 1,320 19 2,603 Asphalt Moderate 4,341 Residential 49 31 12 36 IMS Infrastructure Management Services ImpCo Analysis Results Rev3 - SuperSegs, Supers by ID page 1 of 57 1215 5TH - 1215 660 16 1,173 Asphalt Moderate 6,694 Residential 21 70 9 26 1220 5TH - 1220 642 18 1,248 Asphalt Weak 5,133 Residential 43 48 9 46 1225 5TH - 1225 1,004 22 2,529 Asphalt Moderate 4,344 Residential 49 28 19 45 1230 5TH - 1230 1,525 23 3,740 Asphalt Moderate 5,264 Residential 38 32 27 34 1235 6TH - 1235 318 33 1,166 Asphalt Moderate 4,107 Residential 52 23 16 36 1240 6TH - 1240 762 31 2,498 Asphalt Moderate 4,408 Residential 48 41 8 46 1245 6TH - 1245 1,313 23 3,281 Asphalt Moderate 4,515 Residential 47 28 21 42 1250 6TH - 1250 1,863 24 4,456 Asphalt Moderate 5,163 Residential 39 43 18 44 1255 7TH - 1255 387 25 1,074 Asphalt Moderate 6,409 Residential 25 53 24 29 1260 7TH - 1260 642 19 1,354 Asphalt Weak 5,531 Collector 26 78 4 46 1265 7TH - 1265 375 23 958 Asphalt Moderate 5,758 Residential 32 40 27 36 1270 7TH - 1270 332 20 737 Asphalt Weak 4,693 Collector 37 68 5 64 1275 7TH - 1275 349 20 776 Asphalt Weak 5,314 Collector 29 71 8 49 1280 7TH - 1280 1,325 20 3,016 Asphalt Weak 4,937 Collector 34 67 17 75 1285 9TH - 1285 762 26 2,159 Asphalt Strong 5,279 Residential 34 30 33 30 1290 9TH - 1290 197 24 525 Asphalt Moderate 5,853 Residential 31 52 16 33 1295 A - 1295 1,969 27 5,541 Asphalt Weak 6,982 Residential 22 74 7 30 1300 ABERDEEN - 1300 3,682 31 12,946 Asphalt Strong 1,428 SC Residential 59 5 34 58 1305 ABERDEEN - 1305 2,493 32 8,480 Asphalt Strong 1,618 SC Residential 54 10 32 47 1310 ABERDEEN - 1310 1,274 28 3,874 Asphalt Moderate 1,218 SC Residential 70 0 28 68 1315 ABERDEEN - 1315 950 25 2,500 Asphalt Strong 1,407 SC Residential 60 7 33 61 1320 ACAPULCO - 1320 310 21 722 Asphalt Strong 2,394 SC Residential 32 24 41 28 1325 ACAPULCO - 1325 1,326 24 3,587 Asphalt Strong 1,567 SC Residential 55 8 29 44 1330 ACAPULCO - 1330 954 24 2,364 Asphalt Strong 2,404 SC Residential 31 22 42 24 1335 ACAPULCO - 1335 929 25 2,545 Asphalt Strong 2,203 SC Residential 37 15 54 53 1340 ACAPULCO - 1340 953 25 2,407 Asphalt Strong 2,529 SC Residential 28 32 43 36 1345 ACAPULCO - 1345 1,471 25 5,311 Asphalt Strong 1,961 SC Residential 44 15 42 49 1350 ACAPULCO - 1350 1,619 25 4,496 Asphalt Strong 2,199 SC Residential 37 10 61 56 1355 ACCESS - 1355 112 24 297 Asphalt Moderate 641 Collector 91 0 0 75 1360 ADAMS - 1360 694 24 1,851 Asphalt Strong 2,317 SC Residential 34 10 47 19 1365 ADERHOLT - 1365 2,178 18 4,355 Asphalt Moderate 5,287 Collector 24 57 29 49 1370 AGATE - 1370 900 30 2,593 Asphalt Strong 4,470 Residential 44 9 52 57 1375 AGATE - 1375 476 20 1,058 Asphalt Strong 4,587 Residential 43 11 49 51 1380 AHORE HAWK - 1380 572 24 1,525 Asphalt Moderate 1,173 SC Residential 71 7 20 68 1385 AHORE KING - 1385 308 22 752 Asphalt Strong 1,998 SC Residential 43 17 38 41 1390 AIR CREST - 1390 763 24 2,064 Asphalt Strong 1,433 SC Residential 59 10 22 43 1395 AIR LOOP - 1395 1,338 26 3,866 Asphalt Strong 1,841 SC Residential 47 19 26 37 1400 AIR PARK CR - 1400 691 26 1,996 Asphalt Moderate 1,035 SC Residential 74 7 12 62 1405 AIR PARK - 1405 627 25 1,741 Asphalt Moderate 1,077 SC Residential 73 0 20 61 1410 AIR PARK - 1410 697 50 3,212 Asphalt Strong 2,362 SC Residential 33 31 36 34 1415 AIR PARK - 1415 2,471 45 11,957 Asphalt Moderate 3,452 SC Residential 14 57 40 38 1420 AIR PARK - 1420 395 44 1,929 Asphalt Moderate 3,398 SC Residential 15 55 35 28 1425 AIR VISTA - 1425 1,077 25 2,991 Asphalt Strong 2,181 SC Residential 38 21 36 31 1430 AIR - 1430 535 24 1,427 Asphalt Strong 2,241 SC Residential 36 21 32 17 1435 AIRPORT - 1435 1,534 30 4,730 Asphalt Strong 2,661 SC Residential 24 47 27 23 1440 AISLE OF PALMS - 1440 1,316 25 3,070 Asphalt Weak 5,088 Residential 43 55 1 46 1445 AISLE OF PALMS - 1445 652 29 2,028 Asphalt Moderate 3,587 Residential 58 19 20 54 1450 ALAMO - 1450 979 25 2,684 Asphalt Strong 2,173 SC Residential 38 15 44 35 1455 ALAMO - 1455 3,792 26 10,955 Asphalt Moderate 4,189 Collector 40 36 30 56 1460 ALAMO - 1460 5,280 24 14,080 Asphalt Moderate 4,355 Collector 38 52 24 70 1465 ALAMO - 1465 1,881 24 5,015 Asphalt Moderate 4,039 Collector 42 49 15 58 IMS Infrastructure Management Services ImpCo Analysis Results Rev3 - SuperSegs, Supers by ID page 2 of 57 1470 ALAMO - 1470 5,261 24 14,030 Asphalt Moderate 5,722 Arterial 43 34 30 61 1475 ALAMO - 1475 2,598 31 8,949 Asphalt Weak 5,160 Collector 31 73 9 63 1480 ALAMO - 1480 1,358 25 3,695 Asphalt Strong 4,152 Residential 48 10 38 43 1485 ALAMO - 1485 2,039 30 6,041 Asphalt Strong 5,882 Residential 26 30 40 22 1490 ALBANY - 1490 893 26 2,545 Asphalt Strong 2,146 SC Residential 39 23 31 26 1495 ALBRIGHT - 1495 5,428 24 14,474 Asphalt Moderate 1,290 Collector 82 13 5 84 1500 ALBRIGHT - 1500 2,640 24 7,040 Asphalt Moderate 3,555 Collector 49 28 22 51 1505 ALBRIGHT - 1505 3,883 24 10,356 Asphalt Moderate 819 Collector 88 14 1 96 1510 ALBRIGHT - 1510 3,897 25 10,825 Asphalt Moderate 860 Collector 88 14 0 93 1515 ALBRIGHT - 1515 1,927 22 4,711 Asphalt Moderate 2,271 Collector 68 8 28 79 1520 ALBRIGHT - 1520 5,280 24 14,080 Asphalt Moderate 2,373 Collector 66 5 33 79 1525 ALBRIGHT - 1525 5,280 24 14,080 Asphalt Strong 2,025 Collector 69 0 40 89 1530 ALBRIGHT - 1530 5,280 24 14,080 Asphalt Moderate 1,831 Collector 74 0 32 89 1535 ALBRIGHT - 1535 2,173 24 5,795 Asphalt Moderate 1,642 Collector 77 0 26 84 1540 ALBRIGHT - 1540 5,280 24 14,080 Asphalt Strong 3,950 Collector 39 19 55 69 1545 ALBRIGHT - 1545 5,300 24 14,134 Asphalt Strong 4,032 Collector 38 23 53 71 1550 ALBRIGHT - 1550 2,708 27 8,123 Asphalt Strong 4,095 Collector 37 19 57 66 1555 ALBRIGHT - 1555 5,279 24 14,077 Asphalt Strong 4,277 Collector 34 27 52 64 1560 ALBRIGHT - 1560 5,248 24 13,995 Asphalt Moderate 1,273 Collector 82 6 12 83 1565 ALOHA - 1565 966 24 2,576 Asphalt Strong 2,249 SC Residential 36 12 61 56 1570 ALPINE - 1570 1,288 23 3,137 Asphalt Strong 2,127 SC Residential 39 21 44 51 1575 ALPINE - 1575 546 22 1,334 Asphalt Moderate 1,492 SC Residential 63 15 14 49 1580 ALPINE - 1580 3,830 27 12,351 Asphalt Strong 2,098 SC Residential 40 18 48 56 1585 ALPINE - 1585 425 21 991 Asphalt Moderate 1,525 SC Residential 62 8 24 52 1590 ALPINE - 1590 559 26 1,614 Asphalt Strong 1,412 SC Residential 60 2 33 51 1595 ALPINE - 1595 427 21 997 Asphalt Strong 1,321 SC Residential 62 0 32 54 1600 ALTADENA - 1600 2,339 36 8,362 Asphalt Moderate 3,234 SC Residential 19 69 20 36 1605 ALTADENA - 1605 457 18 915 Asphalt Strong 2,603 SC Residential 26 40 30 19 1610 AMERICAN CANAL - 1610 1,441 34 6,007 Asphalt Strong 3,362 Collector 48 4 48 52 1615 ANDERHOLT - 1615 5,397 24 14,391 Asphalt Weak 5,083 Collector 32 61 18 58 1620 ANDERHOLT - 1620 4,836 24 12,896 Asphalt Moderate 3,923 Collector 44 49 18 69 1625 ANDERHOLT - 1625 6,325 25 16,978 Asphalt Moderate 5,111 Collector 27 65 21 56 1630 ANDERHOLT - 1630 5,284 28 15,251 Asphalt Moderate 1,638 Collector 77 0 25 82 1635 ANDERHOLT - 1635 2,654 24 7,078 Asphalt Moderate 1,708 Collector 76 0 25 79 1640 ANDERHOLT - 1640 5,254 24 13,721 Asphalt Moderate 1,224 Collector 83 3 19 93 1645 ANDERHOLT - 1645 2,502 32 8,896 Asphalt Strong 3,261 Collector 50 4 55 72 1650 ANDERHOLT - 1650 2,784 24 7,425 Asphalt Strong 3,973 Collector 39 6 68 67 1655 ANDERHOLT - 1655 5,280 24 14,080 Asphalt Strong 2,414 Collector 63 5 37 75 1660 ANDERHOLT - 1660 3,476 23 9,055 Asphalt Strong 4,112 Collector 37 8 64 59 1665 ANDRE - 1665 5,283 25 14,674 Asphalt Moderate 905 Collector 87 9 4 90 1670 ANDRE - 1670 5,283 26 14,675 Asphalt Moderate 264 Collector 96 2 0 95 1675 ANDRE - 1675 2,641 25 7,335 Asphalt Moderate 507 Collector 93 1 2 88 1680 ANDRE - 1680 5,292 23 13,230 Asphalt Weak 4,756 Collector 37 64 18 77 1685 ANDRE - 1685 1,369 26 3,953 Asphalt Moderate 4,455 Collector 36 51 22 57 1690 ANDRE - 1690 1,281 22 3,131 Asphalt Moderate 4,550 Collector 35 55 25 69 1695 ANDRE - 1695 5,255 25 14,597 Asphalt Weak 4,982 Collector 34 63 23 77 1700 ANDRE - 1700 5,216 25 14,489 Asphalt Moderate 3,634 Collector 48 35 28 75 1705 ANDRE - 1705 5,327 23 13,302 Asphalt Moderate 2,514 Collector 64 19 25 85 1710 ANN - 1710 311 24 829 Asphalt Strong 2,098 SC Residential 40 18 36 33 1715 ANNAPOLIS - 1715 3,857 25 11,079 Asphalt Strong 2,610 SC Residential 25 25 62 52 1720 ANTHONY - 1720 299 40 1,328 Asphalt Moderate 2,374 Residential 72 0 25 68 IMS Infrastructure Management Services ImpCo Analysis Results Rev3 - SuperSegs, Supers by ID page 3 of 57 5320 DREW - 5320 5,291 24 14,108 Asphalt Strong 4,956 Arterial 48 16 39 56 5325 DREW - 5325 5,280 24 14,080 Asphalt Strong 5,662 Arterial 40 24 42 58 5330 DREW - 5330 5,094 21 12,545 Asphalt Moderate 6,413 Arterial 36 33 38 55 5335 DREW - 5335 5,280 24 14,080 Asphalt Strong 5,954 Arterial 37 29 39 52 5340 DREW - 5340 3,889 20 9,317 Asphalt Moderate 6,771 Arterial 32 36 40 52 5345 DREW - 5345 4,297 24 11,458 Asphalt Moderate 7,229 Arterial 28 46 38 55 5350 DREW - 5350 1,407 22 3,438 Asphalt Moderate 947 Arterial 91 0 0 75 5355 DRIFTWOOD - 5355 1,222 34 4,616 Asphalt Moderate 1,013 SC Residential 75 0 19 63 5360 DUNAWAY - 5360 3,709 24 9,535 Asphalt Moderate 3,535 Collector 49 30 27 67 5365 DUNAWAY - 5365 5,432 24 14,486 Asphalt Moderate 2,881 Collector 59 20 25 71 5370 AVE - 5370 1,969 26 5,325 Asphalt Moderate 6,281 Residential 26 60 11 23 5375 ST - 5375 484 17 913 Asphalt Strong 6,046 Residential 24 42 34 28 5380 ECUADOR - 5380 393 22 961 Asphalt Moderate 2,829 SC Residential 29 52 26 47 5385 ECUADOR - 5385 2,226 25 5,868 Asphalt Strong 1,556 SC Residential 56 4 33 43 5390 EDDIE - 5390 522 22 1,276 Asphalt Moderate 1,334 SC Residential 67 7 18 54 5395 EDDINS - 5395 3,241 20 7,336 Asphalt Moderate 2,855 Collector 59 19 30 79 5400 EDDINS - 5400 5,278 20 11,729 Asphalt Moderate 3,238 Collector 54 20 41 87 5405 EDDINS - 5405 2,671 23 6,826 Asphalt Moderate 3,592 Collector 49 20 46 82 5410 EDDINS - 5410 5,248 24 13,994 Asphalt Moderate 5,684 Arterial 43 38 31 72 5415 EDDINS - 5415 5,397 24 14,392 Asphalt Strong 8,217 Arterial 14 55 41 36 5420 EDDINS - 5420 5,287 21 12,479 Asphalt Moderate 1,227 Arterial 88 1 5 79 5425 EDWARD - 5425 1,181 21 2,871 Asphalt Moderate 1,178 SC Residential 71 9 13 58 5430 EDWARDS - 5430 5,282 24 14,086 Asphalt Moderate 2,378 Collector 66 6 32 77 5435 EL CAMINO - 5435 312 23 799 Asphalt Strong 2,472 SC Residential 29 38 26 19 5440 EL CENTRO - 5440 1,308 24 3,417 Asphalt Strong 1,758 SC Residential 50 0 57 67 5445 EL CENTRO - 5445 2,037 37 8,374 Asphalt Moderate 6,812 Residential 20 68 21 39 5450 EL CENTRO - 5450 1,359 25 3,472 Asphalt Moderate 5,776 Residential 32 59 20 59 5455 EL DORADO - 5455 2,365 19 5,026 Asphalt Strong 1,953 SC Residential 44 15 45 56 5460 EL DORADO - 5460 315 22 770 Asphalt Moderate 3,613 SC Residential 10 75 19 20 5465 EL DORADO - 5465 1,444 24 3,714 Asphalt Strong 2,167 SC Residential 38 21 38 35 5470 EL DORADO - 5470 339 29 1,093 Asphalt Moderate 1,357 SC Residential 66 8 18 53 5475 EL DORADO - 5475 619 23 1,583 Asphalt Strong 1,891 SC Residential 46 15 33 37 5480 EL MOLINO - 5480 1,176 19 2,482 Asphalt Moderate 2,281 SC Residential 43 33 12 21 5485 EL RIO - 5485 559 25 1,554 Asphalt Strong 1,632 SC Residential 53 2 34 35 5490 EL RIO - 5490 371 25 1,029 Asphalt Strong 1,836 SC Residential 48 16 31 41 5495 EL RIO - 5495 721 24 1,884 Asphalt Moderate 2,004 SC Residential 50 28 16 40 5500 EL RIO - 5500 394 24 1,049 Asphalt Moderate 924 SC Residential 77 0 16 65 5505 EL RIO - 5505 1,010 22 2,469 Asphalt Moderate 1,891 SC Residential 53 17 26 48 5510 ELAYNE - 5510 2,174 26 6,070 Asphalt Strong 2,204 SC Residential 37 16 42 29 5515 ELDER - 5515 2,798 28 8,705 Asphalt Weak 3,929 Collector 48 47 17 76 5520 ELM - 5520 574 21 1,340 Asphalt Strong 1,730 SC Residential 51 15 24 34 5525 ELMWOOD - 5525 982 22 2,399 Asphalt Moderate 1,163 SC Residential 71 0 23 61 5530 ELSINORE - 5530 1,340 24 3,533 Asphalt Strong 1,453 SC Residential 58 11 28 56 5535 EMERALD - 5535 320 21 746 Asphalt Strong 2,640 SC Residential 25 45 26 17 5540 EMERALD - 5540 625 24 1,631 Asphalt Strong 2,075 SC Residential 41 23 35 42 5545 EMERALD - 5545 300 20 668 Asphalt Strong 2,583 SC Residential 26 23 48 22 5550 EMORY - 5550 309 22 756 Asphalt Strong 1,392 SC Residential 60 3 28 45 5555 ENGLISH - 5555 2,641 25 7,336 Asphalt Moderate 2,930 Collector 58 22 25 73 5560 ENGLISH - 5560 5,311 23 13,280 Asphalt Weak 4,941 Collector 34 63 22 77 5565 ENGLISH - 5565 5,299 23 13,542 Asphalt Moderate 2,819 Collector 60 32 16 79 5570 ENGLISH - 5570 5,297 25 13,819 Asphalt Moderate 1,621 Collector 77 10 16 85 IMS Infrastructure Management Services ImpCo Analysis Results Rev3 - SuperSegs, Supers by ID page 18 of 57 6595 HARDY - 6595 2,628 21 6,132 Asphalt Moderate 3,758 Collector 46 26 30 56 6600 HARLEQUIN - 6600 663 24 1,769 Asphalt Strong 1,964 SC Residential 44 1 56 50 6605 HARPUR - 6605 812 26 2,345 Asphalt Strong 2,246 SC Residential 36 24 29 18 6610 HARPUR - 6610 326 26 943 Asphalt Moderate 1,514 SC Residential 62 10 20 48 6615 HARRIGAN - 6615 2,498 21 5,829 Asphalt Moderate 4,625 Collector 34 44 33 59 6620 HARRIS - 6620 5,280 24 14,080 Asphalt Strong 2,688 Collector 59 8 40 74 6625 HARRIS - 6625 5,335 24 14,226 Asphalt Strong 3,295 Collector 49 11 43 59 6630 HARRIS - 6630 5,292 24 14,112 Asphalt Moderate 176 Collector 97 1 1 99 6635 HARRIS - 6635 2,811 23 8,825 Asphalt Moderate 1,080 Collector 85 0 12 80 6640 HARRIS - 6640 5,280 24 14,080 Asphalt Moderate 760 Collector 89 5 1 82 6645 HARRIS - 6645 2,522 24 6,725 Asphalt Moderate 481 Collector 93 0 0 82 6650 HARRIS - 6650 5,582 24 14,874 Asphalt Strong 4,020 Collector 38 7 63 57 6655 HARRIS - 6655 5,280 24 14,080 Asphalt Strong 4,221 Collector 35 6 65 52 6660 HARRIS - 6660 4,984 24 13,291 Asphalt Strong 4,035 Collector 38 6 60 51 6665 HARRIS - 6665 2,643 23 6,755 Asphalt Strong 3,176 Collector 51 1 49 56 6670 HARRIS - 6670 5,286 24 14,095 Asphalt Strong 3,317 Collector 49 0 52 55 6675 HARRIS - 6675 2,617 23 6,688 Asphalt Strong 4,729 Collector 27 17 68 55 6680 HARRIS - 6680 5,317 24 14,178 Asphalt Strong 4,551 Collector 30 20 60 53 6685 HARRIS - 6685 5,292 24 14,112 Asphalt Moderate 4,950 Collector 29 62 25 65 6690 HARRIS - 6690 5,378 24 14,342 Asphalt Moderate 5,188 Collector 26 65 30 69 6695 HARRIS - 6695 2,640 24 7,040 Asphalt Moderate 4,194 Collector 40 36 38 71 6700 HARRIS - 6700 5,280 24 14,080 Asphalt Moderate 1,365 Collector 81 1 22 88 6705 HARRIS - 6705 2,543 24 6,782 Asphalt Moderate 1,435 Collector 79 0 23 86 6710 HARRISON - 6710 2,853 25 7,924 Asphalt Moderate 3,134 SC Residential 22 56 24 27 6715 HARRISON - 6715 299 27 897 Asphalt Strong 2,360 SC Residential 33 35 24 19 6720 HARRISON - 6720 286 36 1,142 Asphalt Moderate 1,827 SC Residential 54 18 17 37 6725 HARTSHORN - 6725 5,437 24 14,499 Asphalt Strong 3,450 Collector 47 11 51 68 6730 HARTSHORN - 6730 2,622 25 7,283 Asphalt Strong 4,293 Collector 34 33 41 54 6735 HARTSHORN - 6735 5,299 25 14,427 Asphalt Moderate 2,122 Collector 70 15 21 84 6740 HARTSHORN - 6740 5,263 24 14,036 Asphalt Moderate 1,473 Collector 79 6 18 87 6745 HARTSHORN - 6745 5,339 24 14,239 Asphalt Moderate 958 Collector 86 1 15 92 6750 HARTSHORN - 6750 5,311 24 14,162 Asphalt Moderate 4,646 Collector 34 58 21 63 6755 HARVARD - 6755 272 60 1,815 Asphalt Moderate 1,939 SC Residential 52 32 6 33 6760 HARVARD - 6760 2,709 24 7,413 Asphalt Weak 3,264 SC Residential 27 64 9 33 6765 HARVARD - 6765 1,763 27 5,248 Asphalt Strong 2,703 SC Residential 23 35 44 28 6770 HASKELL - 6770 5,243 24 13,982 Asphalt Moderate 5,294 Collector 24 52 36 51 6775 HASTAIN - 6775 5,300 24 14,134 Asphalt Moderate 4,729 Collector 32 43 37 61 6780 HASTAIN - 6780 2,638 24 7,035 Asphalt Moderate 2,766 Collector 60 18 29 79 6785 HASTAIN - 6785 6,107 24 16,286 Asphalt Moderate 4,887 Collector 30 51 33 64 6790 HASTAIN - 6790 5,003 24 13,341 Asphalt Moderate 4,589 Collector 34 42 37 64 6795 HASTAIN - 6795 5,387 24 14,366 Asphalt Moderate 4,402 Collector 37 34 41 65 6800 HASTAIN - 6800 5,282 24 14,085 Asphalt Strong 3,138 Collector 52 8 45 64 6805 HAUGHTELIN - 6805 5,303 24 14,142 Asphalt Moderate 2,412 Collector 66 11 28 78 6810 HAVEN - 6810 4,634 37 18,165 Asphalt Strong 2,801 SC Residential 20 46 39 32 6815 HAVEN - 6815 270 24 719 Asphalt Strong 1,083 SC Residential 69 0 0 9 6820 HAVEN - 6820 1,565 36 6,190 Asphalt Moderate 2,933 SC Residential 27 54 21 34 6825 HAVEN - 6825 670 30 2,232 Asphalt Moderate 1,816 SC Residential 55 29 8 42 6830 HAVEN - 6830 779 26 2,321 Asphalt Moderate 646 SC Residential 84 3 6 71 6835 HAVEN - 6835 167 24 445 Asphalt Strong 1,083 SC Residential 69 0 0 9 6840 HAVEN - 6840 315 25 876 Asphalt Strong 2,610 SC Residential 25 36 36 22 6845 HAVEN - 6845 618 25 1,750 Asphalt Moderate 2,100 SC Residential 47 25 24 42 IMS Infrastructure Management Services ImpCo Analysis Results Rev3 - SuperSegs, Supers by ID page 23 of 57 6850 HAVEN - 6850 3,857 23 9,856 Asphalt Strong 4,638 Collector 29 39 48 63 6855 HAVEN - 6855 3,082 24 7,890 Asphalt Moderate 3,450 Residential 59 14 28 65 6860 HAVENS - 6860 5,583 24 14,887 Asphalt Moderate 3,374 Collector 52 28 28 71 6865 HAWK - 6865 1,049 42 4,925 Asphalt Moderate 1,013 Residential 88 0 4 74 6870 HAWK - 6870 1,397 43 6,676 Asphalt Moderate 5,715 Residential 33 54 12 35 6875 HAWK - 6875 1,347 43 6,505 Asphalt Moderate 6,413 Residential 25 59 20 35 6880 HAYES - 6880 267 25 742 Asphalt Strong 1,889 SC Residential 46 18 39 55 6885 HEBER - 6885 351 20 780 Asphalt Moderate 6,790 Residential 20 62 21 28 6890 HEBER - 6890 1,144 25 3,177 Asphalt Moderate 2,637 Residential 69 19 10 69 6895 HEBER - 6895 1,160 30 3,055 Asphalt Moderate 6,299 Residential 26 64 14 35 6900 HEBER - 6900 1,826 55 10,702 Asphalt Moderate 6,097 Residential 28 39 36 38 6905 HEBER - 6905 260 60 1,734 Asphalt Strong 3,682 Residential 54 0 42 49 6910 HEBER - 6910 538 60 3,587 Asphalt Moderate 1,732 Residential 80 0 13 67 6915 HEBER - 6915 5,344 24 14,251 Asphalt Moderate 1,815 Collector 74 1 28 83 6920 HEBER - 6920 2,722 25 7,561 Asphalt Moderate 3,849 Collector 45 33 34 73 6925 HEBER - 6925 5,429 24 14,882 Asphalt Weak 5,720 Arterial 46 54 12 74 6930 HEBER - 6930 5,401 24 14,403 Asphalt Weak 5,583 Arterial 47 55 13 84 6935 HEBER - 6935 5,258 24 14,020 Asphalt Moderate 1,950 Arterial 81 20 1 86 6940 HEBER - 6940 2,640 24 7,040 Asphalt Weak 5,239 Arterial 50 58 2 75 6945 HEBER - 6945 2,640 24 7,040 Asphalt Moderate 1,318 Arterial 87 9 2 84 6950 HEBER - 6950 5,280 24 14,080 Asphalt Moderate 2,908 Arterial 71 17 16 81 6955 HEBER - 6955 5,275 24 14,067 Asphalt Moderate 3,077 Arterial 69 7 27 80 6960 HEBER - 6960 4,398 24 11,727 Asphalt Moderate 1,292 Collector 82 1 17 81 6965 HEBER - 6965 2,996 23 7,574 Asphalt Moderate 2,940 Collector 58 23 22 66 6970 HEBER - 6970 3,085 20 6,856 Asphalt Moderate 4,656 Collector 33 52 19 48 6975 HEBER - 6975 2,488 20 5,529 Asphalt Moderate 3,127 Collector 55 34 15 67 6980 HEFFERNAN - 6980 2,669 26 7,537 Asphalt Moderate 2,583 Residential 70 15 8 57 6985 HEFFERNAN - 6985 393 25 1,091 Asphalt Moderate 1,724 Residential 80 11 3 68 6990 HEFFERNAN - 6990 377 26 1,088 Asphalt Moderate 1,319 Residential 84 8 1 72 6995 HEIL - 6995 377 30 1,258 Asphalt Moderate 7,308 Residential 14 68 29 38 7000 HELEN - 7000 315 25 876 Asphalt Moderate 1,903 SC Residential 52 23 14 34 7005 HELEN - 7005 316 26 912 Asphalt Moderate 3,000 SC Residential 25 45 34 36 7010 HELENA - 7010 1,794 30 6,326 Asphalt Strong 2,031 SC Residential 42 3 55 45 7015 HELENA - 7015 678 28 2,109 Asphalt Strong 1,165 SC Residential 67 0 31 65 7020 HELLEN - 7020 623 27 1,800 Asphalt Strong 2,088 SC Residential 40 11 45 36 7025 HEMET - 7025 929 24 2,477 Asphalt Strong 1,969 SC Residential 44 13 51 63 7030 HENSHAW - 7030 372 26 1,075 Asphalt Strong 1,866 SC Residential 47 22 32 51 7035 HENSHAW - 7035 1,121 24 2,989 Asphalt Strong 1,083 SC Residential 69 0 0 9 7040 HENSHAW - 7040 360 25 999 Asphalt Strong 1,219 SC Residential 65 0 29 55 7045 HERMOSA - 7045 885 24 2,359 Asphalt Strong 1,845 SC Residential 47 14 40 53 7050 HERMOSA - 7050 171 24 455 Asphalt Strong 1,781 SC Collector 29 11 66 42 7055 HETZEL - 7055 4,926 24 13,137 Asphalt Moderate 3,513 Collector 50 23 31 62 7060 HIGHLINE - 7060 5,280 24 14,080 Asphalt Moderate 5,148 Collector 26 67 24 63 7065 HIGHLINE - 7065 2,640 24 7,040 Asphalt Moderate 5,358 Collector 23 67 27 61 7070 HIGHLINE - 7070 5,280 24 14,080 Asphalt Strong 2,716 Collector 58 6 43 76 7075 HIGHLINE - 7075 5,297 23 13,822 Asphalt Moderate 3,524 Collector 50 29 30 73 7080 HIGHLINE - 7080 5,202 25 14,164 Asphalt Strong 2,753 Collector 58 5 40 66 7085 HIGHLINE - 7085 2,722 24 7,259 Asphalt Strong 2,556 Collector 61 0 43 70 7090 HIGHLINE - 7090 4,127 24 11,007 Asphalt Moderate 1,265 Collector 82 15 9 96 7095 HIGHLINE - 7095 5,175 25 14,374 Asphalt Moderate 993 Collector 86 11 6 92 7100 HIGHLINE - 7100 5,304 25 14,439 Asphalt Moderate 4,804 Collector 31 47 33 59 IMS Infrastructure Management Services ImpCo Analysis Results Rev3 - SuperSegs, Supers by ID page 24 of 57 7105 HIGHLINE - 7105 5,262 25 14,321 Asphalt Weak 1,822 Collector 76 18 9 84 7110 HIGHLINE - 7110 5,345 24 13,960 Asphalt Moderate 4,279 Collector 39 48 30 77 7115 HILMA - 7115 590 35 1,980 Asphalt Strong 2,008 SC Residential 43 3 45 25 7120 HILO - 7120 785 26 2,268 Asphalt Strong 1,407 SC Residential 60 1 35 54 7125 HOBBS - 7125 5,164 24 13,770 Asphalt Moderate 1,024 Collector 85 7 0 71 7130 HOLDRIDGE - 7130 3,250 25 9,149 Asphalt Strong 5,073 Residential 37 24 42 44 7135 HOLT - 7135 1,504 25 4,178 Asphalt Moderate 5,422 Residential 36 42 18 31 7140 HOLT - 7140 356 25 988 Asphalt Moderate 6,208 Residential 27 63 13 35 7145 HOLT - 7145 4,581 23 11,856 Asphalt Moderate 4,160 Arterial 58 17 27 67 7150 HOLT - 7150 5,283 23 13,501 Asphalt Moderate 3,967 Arterial 60 9 33 68 7155 HOLT - 7155 5,290 24 13,813 Asphalt Strong 2,030 Collector 69 0 33 75 7160 HOLT - 7160 5,290 20 11,755 Asphalt Moderate 2,041 Collector 71 9 21 76 7165 HOLT - 7165 5,302 24 12,955 Asphalt Moderate 1,403 Collector 80 6 14 81 7170 HOLT - 7170 4,041 23 10,488 Asphalt Strong 2,508 Collector 61 12 31 73 7175 HOLT - 7175 5,264 23 12,571 Asphalt Strong 3,039 Collector 53 8 48 76 7180 HOLT - 7180 5,354 22 13,087 Asphalt Strong 3,902 Collector 40 16 53 63 7185 HOLT - 7185 5,284 23 13,215 Asphalt Moderate 3,467 Collector 50 19 36 65 7190 HOLT - 7190 3,252 23 8,311 Asphalt Moderate 2,267 Collector 68 13 27 86 7195 HOLTEN - 7195 2,469 20 5,487 Asphalt Moderate 4,730 Collector 32 43 29 46 7200 HOLTEN - 7200 3,230 24 8,613 Asphalt Moderate 1,322 Collector 81 6 6 69 7205 HOLTEN - 7205 2,713 23 6,933 Asphalt Moderate 1,857 Collector 73 4 19 69 7210 HONDURAS - 7210 326 27 977 Asphalt Strong 1,265 SC Residential 64 5 24 51 7215 HONDURAS - 7215 723 27 1,991 Asphalt Strong 2,087 SC Residential 40 29 27 35 7220 HONEY LAKE - 7220 869 25 2,415 Asphalt Moderate 1,214 SC Residential 70 7 16 57 7225 HONOLULU - 7225 1,351 24 3,604 Asphalt Strong 1,833 SC Residential 48 10 45 56 7230 HONOLULU - 7230 310 24 826 Asphalt Strong 1,083 SC Residential 69 0 0 9 7235 HONOLULU - 7235 310 25 861 Asphalt Strong 2,420 SC Residential 31 5 71 46 7240 HONOLULU - 7240 1,064 25 2,921 Asphalt Strong 1,509 SC Residential 57 0 38 50 7245 HONOLULU - 7245 1,100 27 3,300 Asphalt Strong 2,020 SC Residential 42 1 61 54 7250 HOOVER - 7250 392 25 1,089 Asphalt Strong 1,990 SC Residential 43 0 54 40 7255 HORNE - 7255 2,681 20 6,104 Asphalt Weak 6,048 Residential 33 63 15 58 7260 HORNE - 7260 2,605 20 5,834 Asphalt Moderate 1,754 Collector 75 11 10 69 7265 HOSKINS - 7265 4,369 24 11,650 Asphalt Weak 5,487 Collector 27 71 16 58 7270 HOSKINS - 7270 5,296 24 14,123 Asphalt Weak 1,847 Collector 75 33 1 95 7275 HOSKINS - 7275 2,642 23 7,540 Asphalt Weak 1,713 Collector 77 23 4 87 7280 HOT MINERAL SPA - 7280 3,337 24 9,210 Asphalt Weak 4,750 Collector 37 53 14 50 7285 HOT MINERAL SPA - 7285 5,362 24 14,298 Asphalt Weak 5,203 Collector 31 65 14 54 7290 HOT MINERAL SPA - 7290 5,259 24 14,025 Asphalt Moderate 5,121 Collector 27 57 23 43 7295 HOT MINERAL SPA - 7295 5,006 24 13,350 Asphalt Moderate 3,532 Collector 50 32 18 53 7300 HOVLEY - 7300 5,265 24 13,747 Asphalt Moderate 4,676 Collector 33 43 31 51 7305 HOVLEY - 7305 5,284 24 14,092 Asphalt Weak 4,972 Collector 34 57 21 61 7310 HOVLEY - 7310 2,642 24 7,046 Asphalt Moderate 3,097 Collector 56 24 26 70 7315 HOVLEY - 7315 5,273 33 16,695 Asphalt Moderate 5,113 Collector 27 51 33 53 7320 HUENEME - 7320 317 24 844 Asphalt Strong 2,096 SC Residential 40 18 34 27 7325 HUERTA - 7325 633 24 1,652 Asphalt Moderate 1,163 SC Residential 71 7 14 57 7330 HUFF - 7330 5,280 24 14,080 Asphalt Moderate 6,513 Arterial 35 41 39 69 7335 HUFF - 7335 2,640 24 7,040 Asphalt Moderate 6,418 Arterial 36 40 37 67 7340 HUFF - 7340 6,288 24 16,769 Asphalt Weak 4,541 Arterial 57 36 16 80 7345 HUFF - 7345 3,986 24 10,629 Asphalt Weak 6,551 Arterial 38 54 23 73 7350 HUFF - 7350 5,306 24 13,853 Asphalt Moderate 5,165 Arterial 48 36 25 72 7355 HUFF - 7355 3,144 24 8,384 Asphalt Moderate 3,682 Collector 47 36 29 77 IMS Infrastructure Management Services ImpCo Analysis Results Rev3 - SuperSegs, Supers by ID page 25 of 57 7360 HUFF - 7360 5,631 24 15,015 Asphalt Strong 3,958 Collector 39 15 54 59 7365 HUNT - 7365 5,252 24 14,004 Asphalt Moderate 3,872 Collector 45 21 39 59 7370 HUNT - 7370 6,373 24 16,994 Asphalt Strong 2,875 Collector 56 1 52 78 7375 HUNT - 7375 2,673 26 7,722 Asphalt Strong 2,786 Collector 57 0 50 76 7380 HUNT - 7380 5,277 24 14,073 Asphalt Moderate 1,535 Collector 78 2 24 88 7385 HUNT - 7385 5,287 24 14,098 Asphalt Moderate 2,318 Collector 67 3 36 82 7390 HUNT - 7390 5,286 22 12,922 Asphalt Weak 4,975 Collector 34 61 17 63 7395 HUNT - 7395 3,793 21 8,850 Asphalt Weak 5,283 Collector 30 71 17 70 7400 HUNTINGTON - 7400 1,976 25 5,454 Asphalt Moderate 1,836 SC Residential 54 17 28 57 7405 HURON - 7405 1,013 26 2,926 Asphalt Strong 1,661 SC Residential 53 6 39 51 7410 HWY 78 - 7410 4,307 24 11,485 Asphalt Moderate 2,033 Arterial 80 10 11 83 7415 HWY 8 FONTAGE - 7415 5,281 24 14,082 Asphalt Strong 4,159 Collector 36 9 62 53 7420 HWY 8 FONTAGE - 7420 1,319 24 3,516 Asphalt Strong 4,724 Collector 27 26 56 48 7425 HWY 8 FONTAGE - 7425 2,640 24 7,041 Asphalt Strong 4,198 Collector 35 30 35 39 7430 HWY 8 FONTAGE - 7430 3,723 24 9,927 Asphalt Strong 4,308 Collector 34 24 43 39 7435 HWY ACCESS - 7435 531 24 1,417 Asphalt Moderate 1,746 Collector 75 1 17 63 7440 HYDE - 7440 2,731 20 6,070 Asphalt Moderate 4,833 Collector 31 42 33 47 7445 IDLEWILD - 7445 846 23 2,161 Asphalt Moderate 876 SC Residential 78 4 11 66 7450 IMLER - 7450 5,280 24 14,080 Asphalt Moderate 3,866 Collector 45 38 22 58 7455 IMLER - 7455 4,122 24 10,992 Asphalt Moderate 2,470 Collector 65 11 25 71 7460 IMLER - 7460 4,846 24 12,923 Asphalt Strong 2,547 Collector 61 14 28 71 7465 IMLER - 7465 5,280 24 14,080 Asphalt Moderate 1,784 Collector 75 15 12 80 7470 IMLER - 7470 3,771 24 10,055 Asphalt Moderate 1,391 Collector 80 11 6 75 7475 IMPERIAL - 7475 1,930 28 5,425 Asphalt Moderate 1,864 SC Residential 53 33 19 66 7480 IMPERIAL - 7480 1,245 20 2,767 Asphalt Moderate 3,819 Collector 45 25 37 63 7485 IMPERIAL - 7485 1,681 22 4,317 Asphalt Strong 4,154 Residential 48 6 35 30 7490 IMPERIAL HWY - 7490 3,688 23 11,052 Asphalt Moderate 992 Collector 86 4 2 72 7495 IMPERIAL HWY - 7495 718 34 2,712 Asphalt Moderate 4,182 Collector 40 49 21 65 7500 IMPERIAL HWY - 7500 1,494 20 3,320 Asphalt Moderate 3,399 Collector 51 28 27 67 7505 IMPERIAL HWY - 7505 1,683 20 3,740 Asphalt Moderate 4,367 Collector 38 51 16 53 7510 IMPERIAL - 7510 784 20 1,741 Asphalt Strong 3,439 Residential 57 4 36 54 7515 IMPERIAL - 7515 5,280 24 14,080 Asphalt Moderate 5,416 Arterial 46 31 23 51 7520 IMPERIAL - 7520 2,640 24 7,040 Asphalt Moderate 5,457 Arterial 45 28 29 55 7525 IMPERIAL - 7525 5,280 24 14,080 Asphalt Moderate 2,352 Arterial 76 7 17 79 7530 IMPERIAL - 7530 5,816 24 15,509 Asphalt Moderate 5,726 Arterial 43 33 32 64 7535 IMPERIAL - 7535 5,280 24 14,080 Asphalt Strong 6,288 Arterial 34 39 42 68 7540 IMPERIAL - 7540 3,701 23 9,649 Asphalt Moderate 8,124 Arterial 19 54 39 47 7545 IMPERIAL SPA RV MHP - 7545 1,141 29 3,676 Asphalt Weak 3,357 Collector 55 38 4 54 7550 INDIAN - 7550 710 23 1,814 Asphalt Moderate 1,534 SC Residential 62 12 18 47 7555 INDIAN OCEAN - 7555 2,280 23 5,827 Asphalt Strong 2,065 SC Residential 41 18 47 57 7560 INDIAN OCEAN - 7560 1,210 24 3,227 Asphalt Strong 1,922 SC Residential 45 15 40 50 7565 INDIAN OCEAN - 7565 2,283 21 5,215 Asphalt Strong 2,265 SC Residential 35 17 55 52 7570 INDIAN OCEAN - 7570 976 24 2,601 Asphalt Moderate 1,764 SC Residential 56 15 25 52 7575 INDIAN ROCK - 7575 5,276 24 12,897 Asphalt Strong 3,454 Collector 47 32 24 56 7580 INDIAN ROCK - 7580 5,285 24 14,093 Asphalt Strong 3,853 Collector 41 12 55 60 7585 INDIAN ROCK - 7585 3,246 25 8,951 Asphalt Strong 3,729 Collector 43 4 62 63 7590 INDIAN ROCK - 7590 2,640 24 7,040 Asphalt Moderate 4,625 Collector 34 40 37 59 7595 INDIAN ROCK - 7595 2,080 24 5,547 Asphalt Moderate 2,494 Collector 64 12 26 72 7600 INDIAN ROCK - 7600 5,286 26 14,099 Asphalt Strong 4,244 Collector 35 28 45 54 7605 INDIO - 7605 656 24 1,750 Asphalt Moderate 1,681 SC Residential 58 14 25 54 7610 INDIO - 7610 1,305 22 3,190 Asphalt Strong 2,100 SC Residential 40 15 56 65 IMS Infrastructure Management Services ImpCo Analysis Results Rev3 - SuperSegs, Supers by ID page 26 of 57 8380 LACK - 8380 2,603 24 6,942 Asphalt Moderate 1,144 Collector 84 8 9 87 8385 LACK - 8385 2,939 22 7,401 Asphalt Weak 1,618 Collector 78 20 3 84 8390 LADI - 8390 809 33 2,872 Asphalt Strong 2,196 SC Residential 37 16 56 59 8395 LAGUNA - 8395 834 23 2,131 Asphalt Moderate 1,901 SC Residential 52 23 17 41 8400 LAGUNA - 8400 528 23 1,349 Asphalt Strong 1,913 SC Residential 45 0 59 57 8405 LAGUNA - 8405 757 33 2,478 Asphalt Strong 3,625 Residential 55 1 34 37 8410 LAGUNA - 8410 367 24 979 Asphalt Moderate 5,917 Residential 30 39 29 31 8415 LAGUNA - 8415 219 24 585 Asphalt Moderate 2,508 SC Residential 37 39 18 28 8420 LAKE VIEW - 8420 1,004 25 2,788 Asphalt Moderate 3,198 SC Residential 20 52 26 19 8425 LANAI - 8425 1,021 24 2,723 Asphalt Strong 1,947 SC Residential 44 24 29 41 8430 LANSING - 8430 2,422 24 6,711 Asphalt Strong 1,782 SC Residential 49 9 40 48 8435 LARCHWOOD - 8435 981 23 2,506 Asphalt Moderate 1,539 SC Residential 62 15 15 47 8440 LARK - 8440 290 24 774 Asphalt Moderate 2,244 Residential 74 0 19 62 8445 LARK - 8445 167 24 444 Asphalt Strong 6,208 Residential 22 15 58 15 8450 LARSEN - 8450 5,433 24 14,489 Asphalt Moderate 1,710 Collector 76 0 24 76 8455 LARSEN - 8455 2,577 24 6,873 Asphalt Moderate 2,493 Collector 64 13 22 66 8460 LARSEN - 8460 5,046 24 13,455 Asphalt Moderate 4,450 Collector 36 52 25 67 8465 LARSEN - 8465 2,573 25 7,146 Asphalt Moderate 2,950 Collector 58 25 20 68 8470 LARSEN - 8470 5,359 24 13,995 Asphalt Weak 5,186 Collector 31 64 16 56 8475 LAURA - 8475 1,709 28 5,317 Asphalt Strong 2,654 SC Residential 24 25 56 37 8480 LEE - 8480 1,958 24 5,173 Asphalt Moderate 5,501 Residential 35 48 16 36 8485 LEE - 8485 2,427 24 6,471 Asphalt Strong 4,527 Residential 43 21 38 52 8490 LEEWARD - 8490 3,039 27 9,016 Asphalt Strong 2,074 SC Residential 41 19 42 48 8495 LEIGH - 8495 779 25 2,163 Asphalt Moderate 1,257 SC Residential 69 22 2 56 8500 LESSER - 8500 275 23 847 Asphalt Strong 1,898 SC Residential 46 19 36 50 8505 LESSER - 8505 2,356 25 6,408 Asphalt Strong 2,009 SC Residential 43 19 40 51 8510 LESSER - 8510 2,476 24 6,603 Asphalt Strong 2,231 SC Residential 36 20 48 47 8515 LETO - 8515 1,824 21 4,257 Asphalt Strong 2,339 SC Residential 33 22 51 49 8520 LETO - 8520 1,833 32 5,534 Asphalt Strong 1,654 SC Residential 53 15 29 50 8525 LETO - 8525 1,086 24 2,895 Asphalt Strong 1,738 SC Residential 50 15 40 63 8530 LETTUCE - 8530 1,133 37 4,659 Asphalt Moderate 4,464 Residential 47 31 20 47 8535 LIDO - 8535 320 23 818 Asphalt Strong 1,477 SC Residential 58 3 32 45 8540 LIDO - 8540 1,479 18 3,509 Asphalt Moderate 2,595 SC Residential 35 43 24 41 8545 LIDO - 8545 523 25 1,432 Asphalt Strong 1,654 SC Residential 53 25 17 44 8550 LIMA - 8550 226 25 627 Asphalt Strong 2,504 SC Residential 28 28 41 26 8555 LINCOLN - 8555 903 26 2,507 Asphalt Strong 2,081 SC Residential 41 19 35 34 8560 LINDA - 8560 2,251 24 6,363 Asphalt Strong 2,844 SC Residential 19 41 42 26 8565 LINDBERGH - 8565 2,173 23 6,190 Asphalt Moderate 2,005 SC Residential 50 18 23 35 8570 LINDSEY - 8570 5,421 24 14,455 Asphalt Moderate 1,737 Collector 75 16 7 74 8575 LINDSEY - 8575 5,160 24 13,760 Asphalt Weak 3,304 Collector 56 45 8 77 8580 LISBON - 8580 881 24 2,350 Asphalt Strong 1,681 SC Residential 52 5 44 57 8585 LITTLEFIELD - 8585 520 35 2,022 Asphalt Strong 4,468 Residential 44 24 24 33 8590 LITTLEFIELD - 8590 460 35 1,788 Asphalt Moderate 6,913 Residential 19 70 14 25 8595 LODI - 8595 577 24 1,537 Asphalt Moderate 1,186 SC Residential 70 0 22 58 8600 LOMA - 8600 543 22 1,328 Asphalt Strong 1,414 SC Residential 60 0 34 50 8605 LOMA - 8605 382 23 975 Asphalt Moderate 1,180 SC Residential 70 3 20 58 8610 LONG BRANCH - 8610 910 24 2,426 Asphalt Strong 1,849 SC Residential 47 8 46 54 8615 LONG - 8615 344 35 1,338 Asphalt Moderate 2,208 Residential 74 16 4 62 8620 LONG - 8620 258 35 1,005 Asphalt Moderate 3,186 Residential 63 29 0 48 8625 LOOP - 8625 5,027 28 13,349 Asphalt Strong 2,267 SC Residential 35 26 34 29 8630 LOS ALAMOS - 8630 544 35 2,116 Asphalt Moderate 717 Residential 92 0 0 77 IMS Infrastructure Management Services ImpCo Analysis Results Rev3 - SuperSegs, Supers by ID page 30 of 57 8635 LOTUS - 8635 2,530 30 8,569 Asphalt Strong 5,409 Residential 32 30 44 48 8640 LOVELAND - 8640 5,280 24 14,080 Asphalt Moderate 832 Collector 88 7 1 82 8645 LOVELAND - 8645 5,280 24 14,080 Asphalt Moderate 550 Collector 92 0 2 83 8650 LOVELAND - 8650 3,957 24 10,551 Asphalt Moderate 804 Collector 89 1 5 80 8655 LOVELAND - 8655 5,280 24 14,080 Asphalt Weak 3,532 Collector 53 42 20 87 8660 LOVELAND - 8660 1,999 24 5,332 Asphalt Moderate 3,375 Collector 52 42 22 87 8665 LOVELAND - 8665 5,274 24 14,063 Asphalt Moderate 2,193 Collector 69 20 15 80 8670 LUNAR - 8670 843 24 2,283 Asphalt Strong 1,708 SC Residential 51 8 35 43 8675 LUXOR - 8675 1,225 21 2,902 Asphalt Moderate 3,930 Residential 54 19 19 41 8680 LUXOR - 8680 1,220 24 3,073 Asphalt Moderate 3,099 Residential 64 7 24 57 8685 LYERLY - 8685 2,695 22 6,587 Asphalt Weak 5,273 Collector 30 68 21 71 8690 LYERLY - 8690 2,622 24 6,992 Asphalt Moderate 613 Collector 91 1 3 83 8695 LYERLY - 8695 2,635 24 7,026 Asphalt Weak 5,435 Collector 28 68 23 68 8700 LYERLY - 8700 2,659 23 6,796 Asphalt Weak 6,898 Residential 23 72 16 50 8705 LYNWOOD - 8705 2,242 25 6,049 Asphalt Strong 2,090 SC Residential 40 11 53 51 8710 LYNWOOD - 8710 931 29 3,020 Asphalt Moderate 1,414 SC Residential 65 8 22 56 8715 LYNWOOD - 8715 1,552 24 4,039 Asphalt Strong 2,039 SC Residential 42 22 36 43 8720 LYNWOOD - 8720 310 24 826 Asphalt Moderate 1,177 SC Residential 71 0 22 58 8725 LYONS - 8725 4,740 24 12,639 Asphalt Moderate 3,767 Collector 46 24 36 63 8730 LYONS - 8730 5,280 24 14,080 Asphalt Moderate 4,707 Collector 33 36 36 45 8735 LYONS - 8735 2,647 24 7,058 Asphalt Strong 4,824 Collector 26 36 47 46 8740 LYONS - 8740 5,308 24 14,155 Asphalt Moderate 2,748 Collector 61 20 25 76 8745 LYONS - 8745 2,506 22 6,125 Asphalt Moderate 2,382 Collector 66 5 34 79 8750 MADISON - 8750 898 24 2,395 Asphalt Strong 2,305 SC Residential 34 15 47 28 8755 MAGGIO - 8755 1,129 77 9,656 Asphalt Moderate 1,516 Residential 82 6 4 69 8760 MAIN - 8760 546 25 1,515 Asphalt Strong 4,520 Residential 43 19 32 35 8765 MAIN - 8765 653 24 1,741 Asphalt Moderate 4,699 Residential 45 25 37 61 8770 MAIN - 8770 679 25 1,886 Asphalt Strong 4,330 Residential 46 14 35 38 8775 MAIN - 8775 663 23 1,693 Asphalt Moderate 4,212 Residential 50 23 32 66 8780 MAIN - 8780 679 25 1,885 Asphalt Strong 4,461 Residential 44 21 27 33 8785 MAIN - 8785 668 24 1,780 Asphalt Strong 4,417 Residential 45 24 39 63 8790 MAIN - 8790 675 25 1,874 Asphalt Strong 5,203 Residential 35 17 41 23 8795 MAIN - 8795 1,513 25 4,127 Asphalt Strong 5,882 Residential 26 27 44 25 8800 MALAT - 8800 1,306 25 3,627 Asphalt Moderate 1,389 SC Residential 65 8 23 62 8805 MALAT - 8805 1,611 23 4,117 Asphalt Strong 1,762 SC Residential 50 14 36 53 8810 MALIBU - 8810 1,094 24 2,885 Asphalt Moderate 1,984 SC Residential 50 22 26 50 8815 MALIBU - 8815 1,097 24 2,757 Asphalt Moderate 1,764 SC Residential 56 19 27 62 8820 MALIBU - 8820 316 24 843 Asphalt Strong 2,511 SC Residential 28 31 39 27 8825 MALIBU - 8825 401 25 1,113 Asphalt Strong 2,097 SC Residential 40 5 47 27 8830 MALLARD - 8830 466 27 1,397 Asphalt Strong 5,287 Residential 34 14 52 37 8835 MALLARD - 8835 1,038 35 4,036 Asphalt Moderate 1,623 Residential 81 11 2 69 8840 MANGOLIA - 8840 655 23 1,673 Asphalt Moderate 1,148 Residential 86 2 4 73 8845 MANHATTAN - 8845 640 25 1,778 Asphalt Strong 2,590 SC Residential 26 37 35 24 8850 MANHATTAN - 8850 1,120 23 2,862 Asphalt Moderate 1,982 SC Residential 50 26 15 36 8855 MANSFIELD - 8855 3,953 22 9,809 Asphalt Moderate 2,291 Residential 73 2 22 71 8860 MANSFIELD - 8860 2,314 18 4,627 Asphalt Moderate 5,122 Residential 40 50 6 34 8865 MAPLE - 8865 592 24 1,579 Asphalt Moderate 2,332 SC Residential 42 30 22 32 8870 MAPLE - 8870 674 36 2,694 Asphalt Moderate 1,212 Residential 86 0 7 72 8875 MAPLE - 8875 1,230 45 6,151 Asphalt Moderate 4,328 Residential 49 37 5 34 8880 MAPLE - 8880 1,124 35 4,373 Asphalt Moderate 1,995 Residential 77 8 8 64 8885 MAPLE - 8885 446 35 1,733 Asphalt Weak 6,344 Residential 30 59 5 19 IMS Infrastructure Management Services ImpCo Analysis Results Rev3 - SuperSegs, Supers by ID page 31 of 57 9405 MILLER - 9405 5,284 24 14,091 Asphalt Moderate 5,253 Collector 25 62 26 53 9410 MILLER - 9410 2,514 25 6,983 Asphalt Moderate 4,643 Collector 34 52 26 61 9415 MILLER - 9415 5,119 21 12,208 Asphalt Moderate 3,947 Collector 44 30 34 65 9420 MILLER - 9420 5,752 24 15,339 Asphalt Moderate 2,931 Collector 58 14 32 70 9425 MILLER - 9425 2,772 23 7,084 Asphalt Moderate 2,313 Collector 67 12 24 76 9430 MILLER - 9430 2,697 22 6,592 Asphalt Moderate 3,401 Arterial 66 17 22 79 9435 MILTON - 9435 185 26 533 Asphalt Moderate 896 SC Residential 78 0 16 66 9440 MIRROR LAKE - 9440 771 23 1,971 Asphalt Moderate 1,278 SC Residential 68 2 23 58 9445 MISSION - 9445 660 24 1,722 Asphalt Strong 2,480 SC Residential 29 26 55 53 9450 MISSION - 9450 2,317 23 5,810 Asphalt Strong 2,339 SC Residential 33 15 54 40 9455 MISSION - 9455 599 23 1,532 Asphalt Strong 1,655 SC Residential 53 0 45 51 9460 MISSION - 9460 398 23 1,018 Asphalt Moderate 1,649 SC Residential 59 19 14 45 9465 MOLOKAI - 9465 1,008 23 2,577 Asphalt Strong 1,745 SC Residential 50 17 40 68 9470 MONICA - 9470 1,236 23 3,094 Asphalt Strong 2,340 SC Residential 33 28 39 36 9475 MONOKAI - 9475 874 27 2,659 Asphalt Strong 2,383 SC Residential 32 32 36 35 9480 MONROE - 9480 932 23 2,382 Asphalt Strong 1,353 SC Residential 61 0 30 47 9485 MONROE - 9485 583 23 1,491 Asphalt Strong 2,126 SC Residential 39 12 38 22 9490 MONROE - 9490 594 22 1,451 Asphalt Strong 2,605 SC Residential 26 29 40 18 9495 MONTE - 9495 637 24 1,698 Asphalt Weak 3,779 Collector 50 46 20 86 9500 MONTE - 9500 2,623 23 6,702 Asphalt Moderate 258 Collector 96 0 0 92 9505 MONTEGO - 9505 662 22 1,618 Asphalt Moderate 2,725 SC Residential 32 49 20 36 9510 MONTEGO - 9510 298 23 762 Asphalt Moderate 844 SC Residential 79 5 9 67 9515 MONTEREY - 9515 2,453 23 6,268 Asphalt Strong 2,187 SC Residential 38 26 40 48 9520 MONTEREY - 9520 1,198 24 3,196 Asphalt Strong 1,600 SC Residential 54 7 31 40 9525 MONTEREY - 9525 1,335 23 3,413 Asphalt Strong 1,763 SC Residential 50 12 36 48 9530 MONTEREY - 9530 2,148 33 6,505 Asphalt Moderate 1,847 SC Residential 54 21 23 53 9535 MONTEREY - 9535 220 40 976 Asphalt Moderate 968 SC Residential 76 0 17 64 9540 MONTEREY - 9540 220 25 610 Asphalt Strong 1,572 SC Residential 55 0 35 39 9545 MONTEREY - 9545 313 23 800 Asphalt Strong 2,195 SC Residential 37 11 49 35 9550 MONTGOMERY - 9550 1,051 24 2,801 Asphalt Strong 1,653 SC Residential 53 2 45 56 9555 MONTGOMERY - 9555 281 24 748 Asphalt Moderate 1,168 SC Residential 71 0 24 62 9560 MONTGOMERY - 9560 5,311 24 14,162 Asphalt Moderate 5,412 Collector 23 71 15 44 9565 MONTGOMERY - 9565 2,614 24 6,970 Asphalt Moderate 5,103 Collector 27 61 22 50 9570 MONTGOMERY - 9570 2,640 24 7,040 Asphalt Moderate 3,573 Collector 49 38 22 70 9575 MONTGOMERY - 9575 5,255 24 13,438 Asphalt Moderate 932 Collector 87 0 12 87 9580 MOON - 9580 622 24 1,660 Asphalt Moderate 1,190 SC Residential 70 0 23 58 9585 MORRO - 9585 3,892 23 10,002 Asphalt Strong 1,777 SC Residential 49 16 34 52 9590 MOUNT SIGNAL - 9590 1,605 24 4,280 Asphalt Strong 3,864 Residential 52 4 37 41 9595 MOUNTAIN SPRING - 9595 1,820 24 4,854 Asphalt Moderate 5,632 Collector 20 68 28 54 9600 MOUNTAIN VIEW - 9600 647 33 2,662 Asphalt Moderate 2,145 SC Residential 46 29 21 42 9605 MOUNTAIN VIEW - 9605 2,503 35 9,733 Asphalt Strong 2,239 SC Residential 36 31 40 53 9610 MOUNTAIN VIEW - 9610 1,175 23 3,002 Asphalt Moderate 3,170 SC Residential 21 58 29 39 9615 MOUNTAIN VIEW - 9615 292 24 778 Asphalt Strong 1,730 SC Collector 31 21 46 30 9620 MULLET - 9620 2,271 24 5,512 Asphalt Strong 1,456 SC Residential 58 11 29 57 9625 MURPHY - 9625 617 22 1,507 Asphalt Moderate 2,404 Residential 72 0 21 59 9630 MURPHY - 9630 1,949 21 4,551 Asphalt Strong 5,516 Residential 31 16 62 52 9635 MURPHY - 9635 2,444 22 5,973 Asphalt Strong 4,392 Residential 45 20 40 59 9640 MURRAY - 9640 584 35 2,272 Asphalt Strong 3,055 Residential 62 0 36 60 9645 CHEROKEE - 9645 1,711 23 5,001 Asphalt Strong 2,485 SC Residential 29 37 45 54 9650 NANCE - 9650 1,307 25 3,629 Asphalt Weak 2,975 Residential 67 30 0 64 9655 NANCE - 9655 1,314 25 3,650 Asphalt Moderate 800 Residential 91 0 1 75 IMS Infrastructure Management Services ImpCo Analysis Results Rev3 - SuperSegs, Supers by ID page 34 of 57 9660 NANCE - 9660 5,222 28 14,873 Asphalt Strong 4,147 Residential 48 15 43 65 9665 NAPLES - 9665 873 22 2,133 Asphalt Moderate 1,589 SC Residential 60 21 15 57 9670 NASSIF - 9670 1,612 70 12,535 Asphalt Moderate 1,114 Residential 87 4 2 73 9675 NECKEL - 9675 4,962 24 12,728 Asphalt Moderate 4,766 Residential 44 43 26 74 9680 NEIGHBORS - 9680 3,358 24 9,035 Asphalt Weak 5,480 Collector 27 70 15 54 9685 NEIGHBORS - 9685 3,989 24 10,637 Asphalt Weak 5,404 Collector 28 72 13 59 9690 NEIGHBORS BLVD (OLD ALIGNMENT) - 9690 1,148 24 3,061 Asphalt Moderate 5,908 Collector 16 56 37 35 9695 NEIGHBORS BLVD (OLD ALIGNMENT) - 9695 394 24 1,050 Asphalt Strong 3,367 Collector 48 5 41 40 9700 NEILL - 9700 976 22 2,386 Asphalt Strong 4,502 Residential 44 23 31 43 9705 NEPTUNE - 9705 1,112 23 2,841 Asphalt Strong 1,973 SC Residential 44 9 45 43 9710 NEW BEDFORD - 9710 2,732 24 7,465 Asphalt Moderate 1,796 SC Residential 55 16 19 39 9715 NEW HAVEN - 9715 466 24 1,244 Asphalt Moderate 1,524 SC Residential 62 17 13 47 9720 NEW RIVER - 9720 1,255 23 3,583 Asphalt Strong 4,477 Residential 44 25 25 34 9725 NEWPORT - 9725 1,358 22 3,350 Asphalt Strong 2,302 SC Residential 34 23 51 53 9730 NIDO - 9730 1,258 23 3,215 Asphalt Moderate 1,993 SC Residential 50 16 30 45 9735 NIDO - 9735 308 23 787 Asphalt Moderate 1,006 SC Residential 75 0 18 63 9740 NIEVE - 9740 384 22 939 Asphalt Moderate 1,405 SC Residential 65 11 16 51 9745 NIIHAU - 9745 753 22 1,841 Asphalt Strong 1,429 SC Residential 59 0 40 60 9750 NIKI - 9750 379 36 1,514 Asphalt Moderate 5,969 Residential 30 58 4 17 9755 NILAND - 9755 5,579 24 16,441 Asphalt Weak 4,431 Collector 41 34 31 57 9760 NILAND - 9760 376 25 1,045 Asphalt Strong 4,430 Residential 45 12 43 48 9765 NILE - 9765 1,143 24 3,017 Asphalt Moderate 2,146 SC Collector 28 59 21 50 9770 NILE - 9770 290 24 773 Asphalt Strong 2,176 SC Residential 38 12 50 40 9775 NILE - 9775 2,254 24 6,816 Asphalt Strong 1,876 SC Residential 46 21 34 52 9780 NILE - 9780 4,994 23 12,979 Asphalt Moderate 2,053 SC Collector 32 43 37 58 9785 NILE - 9785 1,078 24 2,873 Asphalt Moderate 1,924 SC Collector 36 41 30 54 9790 NILE - 9790 2,651 24 7,034 Asphalt Moderate 2,083 SC Collector 31 52 29 56 9795 NIMURA - 9795 988 20 2,194 Asphalt Strong 2,878 Residential 64 0 29 52 9800 NINA LEE - 9800 996 47 5,201 Asphalt Moderate 855 Residential 90 0 1 75 9805 NINALEE - 9805 2,024 39 9,166 Asphalt Moderate 2,282 Residential 73 1 24 72 9810 NOFFSINGER - 9810 1,570 22 3,720 Asphalt Moderate 3,724 Collector 47 31 23 51 9815 NOPAL - 9815 561 24 1,496 Asphalt Moderate 2,044 SC Residential 49 21 29 49 9820 NORFOLK - 9820 908 25 2,523 Asphalt Strong 1,302 SC Residential 63 0 29 49 9825 NORRISH - 9825 5,313 24 14,167 Asphalt Weak 5,356 Collector 29 62 26 66 9830 NORRISH - 9830 5,280 24 14,080 Asphalt Moderate 1,850 Collector 74 15 13 79 9835 NORRISH - 9835 2,652 24 7,071 Asphalt Moderate 1,985 Collector 72 21 7 75 9840 NORRISH - 9840 5,295 24 13,825 Asphalt Moderate 2,818 Collector 60 26 28 89 9845 NORRISH - 9845 2,668 24 7,115 Asphalt Moderate 2,160 Collector 69 2 39 91 9850 NORRISH - 9850 5,295 24 14,120 Asphalt Moderate 351 Collector 95 0 3 94 9855 NORRISH - 9855 5,280 24 14,080 Asphalt Moderate 216 Collector 97 0 1 95 9860 NORRISH - 9860 5,280 24 14,080 Asphalt Moderate 285 Collector 96 1 0 93 9865 NORRISH - 9865 4,807 24 12,818 Asphalt Moderate 204 Collector 97 1 1 97 9870 NORRISH RD (COUNTY RD 25) - 9870 546 20 1,213 Asphalt Moderate 2,283 Collector 67 4 21 55 9875 MARINA - 9875 1,148 34 4,477 Asphalt Moderate 1,848 SC Collector 38 41 25 51 9880 MARINA - 9880 4,436 34 15,982 Asphalt Moderate 2,458 SC Collector 18 61 29 37 9885 MARINA - 9885 4,753 33 16,647 Asphalt Moderate 651 SC Collector 78 1 16 71 9890 MARINA - 9890 3,549 30 11,813 Asphalt Moderate 535 SC Collector 82 0 20 87 9895 MARINA - 9895 4,491 30 14,972 Asphalt Moderate 966 SC Collector 68 8 31 85 9900 MARINA - 9900 1,664 30 5,547 Asphalt Moderate 1,328 SC Collector 56 26 25 74 9905 ST - 9905 3,947 21 9,209 Asphalt Moderate 2,891 Residential 66 30 10 81 9910 NOYO - 9910 523 22 1,279 Asphalt Moderate 993 SC Residential 75 0 18 63 IMS Infrastructure Management Services ImpCo Analysis Results Rev3 - SuperSegs, Supers by ID page 35 of 57 10935 RAMP FROM HARTHORN TO HOLT - 10935 1,443 25 4,009 Asphalt Moderate 3,642 Collector 48 25 33 65 10940 RAMP WALKER TO GENTRY - 10940 298 25 828 Asphalt Moderate 3,675 Collector 48 33 22 56 10945 RAMP WINTERHAVEN TO US 80 - 10945 128 28 399 Asphalt Moderate 4,059 Collector 42 37 7 18 10950 RANCHERO - 10950 614 22 1,502 Asphalt Moderate 1,133 SC Residential 72 13 8 59 10955 RANCHERO - 10955 799 19 1,687 Asphalt Strong 2,136 SC Residential 39 19 32 23 10960 RANCHERO - 10960 461 26 1,333 Asphalt Strong 1,774 SC Residential 49 12 39 52 10965 RED SEA - 10965 2,263 24 6,033 Asphalt Strong 2,293 SC Residential 34 18 54 51 10970 RED SEA - 10970 1,282 26 3,702 Asphalt Strong 2,011 SC Residential 43 12 54 63 10975 RED SEA - 10975 1,953 24 5,105 Asphalt Strong 2,362 SC Residential 33 31 41 47 10980 RED SEA - 10980 488 23 1,248 Asphalt Moderate 1,424 SC Residential 64 14 15 54 10985 REDONDO - 10985 2,062 29 6,041 Asphalt Moderate 1,737 SC Residential 57 14 23 46 10990 REDONDO - 10990 645 25 1,790 Asphalt Strong 2,087 SC Residential 40 26 36 49 10995 REDWOOD - 10995 909 23 2,345 Asphalt Strong 1,737 SC Residential 50 11 38 52 11000 REVIERA - 11000 277 61 1,876 Asphalt Moderate 3,515 SC Residential 12 59 32 22 11005 RILEY - 11005 2,636 22 6,442 Asphalt Moderate 1,076 Residential 87 0 7 77 11010 RILEY - 11010 2,651 21 6,185 Asphalt Weak 6,554 Residential 27 81 7 61 11015 RIO VISTA - 11015 2,033 33 7,226 Asphalt Strong 5,197 Residential 35 29 36 39 11020 RIO VISTA - 11020 2,041 33 5,898 Asphalt Strong 6,372 Residential 20 36 49 33 11025 RIVIERA - 11025 3,148 47 15,952 Asphalt Strong 3,121 SC Residential 11 54 40 23 11030 RIVIERA - 11030 2,777 49 15,234 Asphalt Moderate 3,337 SC Residential 17 54 32 24 11035 RIVIERA - 11035 1,758 58 10,066 Asphalt Strong 2,051 SC Residential 41 25 26 28 11040 RIVIERA - 11040 2,199 54 10,979 Asphalt Strong 2,698 SC Residential 23 39 43 34 11045 RIVIERA - 11045 617 38 2,604 Asphalt Strong 2,035 SC Residential 42 15 52 62 11050 RIVIERA - 11050 1,516 41 6,546 Asphalt Moderate 3,447 SC Residential 14 68 24 28 11055 RIVIERA - 11055 2,749 51 15,115 Asphalt Moderate 2,471 SC Residential 38 31 24 28 11060 RIVIERA - 11060 1,260 46 6,254 Asphalt Moderate 1,787 SC Residential 55 20 22 53 11065 RIVIERA - 11065 1,515 50 8,476 Asphalt Moderate 2,558 SC Residential 36 40 23 39 11070 RIVIERA - 11070 385 25 1,069 Asphalt Strong 1,526 SC Residential 56 0 37 46 11075 ROAD 2MO1A - 11075 5,280 24 14,080 Asphalt Moderate 4,553 Arterial 54 23 26 66 11080 ROAD 2MO1A - 11080 5,280 24 14,080 Asphalt Moderate 5,988 Arterial 40 46 26 69 11085 ROAD 2MO1A - 11085 3,453 24 9,209 Asphalt Moderate 5,787 Arterial 42 48 21 69 11090 ROAD - 11090 2,770 21 6,464 Asphalt Moderate 2,907 Collector 58 12 31 65 11095 ROBIN - 11095 819 38 3,457 Asphalt Moderate 4,919 Residential 42 43 6 27 11100 ROCKING HORSE - 11100 831 35 3,230 Asphalt Moderate 3,044 Residential 64 14 14 50 11105 ROCKWOOD - 11105 2,572 18 5,311 Asphalt Moderate 6,528 Residential 23 58 27 42 11110 RODEO - 11110 1,035 27 3,176 Asphalt Strong 2,746 SC Residential 22 43 42 37 11115 RODEO - 11115 3,596 23 9,427 Asphalt Strong 1,803 SC Residential 48 20 35 59 11120 RONA - 11120 123 24 327 Asphalt Strong 2,358 SC Residential 33 0 64 28 11125 ROOD - 11125 2,226 45 12,192 Asphalt Moderate 1,546 Residential 82 3 8 70 11130 ROOD - 11130 1,472 71 10,798 Asphalt Moderate 2,731 Residential 68 23 7 67 11135 ROOD - 11135 479 48 2,553 Asphalt Moderate 1,375 Residential 84 2 7 71 11140 ROOSEVELT - 11140 1,668 29 4,986 Asphalt Strong 2,246 SC Residential 36 23 38 31 11145 ROSELLE - 11145 949 23 2,425 Asphalt Strong 1,354 SC Residential 61 1 39 66 11150 ROSITAS - 11150 910 23 2,325 Asphalt Strong 1,809 SC Residential 48 18 36 57 11155 ROSS - 11155 5,902 24 15,739 Asphalt Moderate 2,679 Arterial 73 6 22 78 11160 ROSS - 11160 5,319 24 14,183 Asphalt Moderate 1,768 Arterial 82 0 19 88 11165 ROSS - 11165 2,611 30 8,704 Asphalt Moderate 2,657 Arterial 73 1 28 79 11170 ROSS - 11170 5,283 25 14,381 Asphalt Moderate 5,182 Arterial 48 24 41 81 11175 ROSS - 11175 2,649 24 7,064 Asphalt Moderate 5,174 Arterial 48 30 33 76 11180 ROSS - 11180 5,261 24 14,028 Asphalt Moderate 847 Arterial 92 1 8 95 11185 ROSS - 11185 2,633 31 9,068 Asphalt Moderate 522 Arterial 95 1 3 95 IMS Infrastructure Management Services ImpCo Analysis Results Rev3 - SuperSegs, Supers by ID page 40 of 57 11445 SALTON - 11445 337 22 824 Asphalt Moderate 1,220 SC Residential 69 0 23 57 11450 SALTON - 11450 704 47 3,675 Asphalt Moderate 3,088 SC Residential 23 55 21 22 11455 SALTON - 11455 1,376 42 6,424 Asphalt Moderate 2,456 SC Residential 39 30 27 34 11460 SALTON - 11460 837 47 4,372 Asphalt Moderate 2,905 SC Residential 27 56 19 35 11465 SALTON - 11465 995 51 5,980 Asphalt Moderate 2,304 SC Residential 42 37 18 41 11470 SALTON - 11470 2,250 34 8,253 Asphalt Moderate 1,505 SC Residential 62 12 20 53 11475 SALTON - 11475 304 24 811 Asphalt Strong 1,083 SC Residential 69 0 0 9 11480 SALTON - 11480 5,377 32 18,763 Asphalt Moderate 1,150 SC Residential 71 5 23 70 11485 SALTON - 11485 2,291 37 9,711 Asphalt Moderate 2,426 SC Residential 39 28 34 45 11490 SALTON - 11490 203 60 1,353 Asphalt Strong 1,124 SC Residential 68 0 24 55 11495 SALTON SEA - 11495 1,067 23 2,847 Asphalt Strong 1,712 SC Residential 51 14 38 60 11500 SAN DIEGO - 11500 1,636 25 4,599 Asphalt Strong 2,011 SC Residential 43 22 38 51 11505 SAN DIEGO - 11505 1,852 28 5,417 Asphalt Strong 1,399 SC Residential 60 4 29 49 11510 SAN DIEGO - 11510 1,108 25 3,113 Asphalt Strong 2,077 SC Residential 41 5 54 43 11515 SAN DIEGO - 11515 1,605 25 4,458 Asphalt Strong 5,026 Residential 37 6 52 30 11520 SAN GABRIEL - 11520 995 30 3,282 Asphalt Moderate 1,922 SC Residential 52 17 26 45 11525 SAN MARINO - 11525 306 30 1,020 Asphalt Strong 2,188 SC Residential 37 28 27 26 11530 SAN MARINO - 11530 2,963 25 8,379 Asphalt Moderate 2,513 SC Residential 37 37 23 35 11535 SAN MARINO - 11535 310 29 997 Asphalt Moderate 900 SC Residential 78 4 12 66 11540 SAN MARINO - 11540 310 26 894 Asphalt Moderate 1,392 SC Residential 65 8 18 52 11545 SAN MARINO - 11545 314 23 803 Asphalt Moderate 1,941 SC Residential 51 21 29 60 11550 SAN PASCUAL SCHOOL - 11550 5,275 24 14,067 Asphalt Moderate 2,962 Arterial 70 9 22 76 11555 SAN PASCUAL SCHOOL - 11555 2,650 23 6,771 Asphalt Moderate 3,147 Arterial 69 14 17 72 11560 SAND - 11560 316 22 771 Asphalt Moderate 3,157 SC Residential 21 50 32 30 11565 SAND BAR - 11565 318 25 882 Asphalt Strong 1,911 SC Residential 45 12 35 33 11570 SAND CREST - 11570 938 29 2,643 Asphalt Strong 1,495 SC Residential 57 7 32 53 11575 SAND CREST - 11575 1,926 24 5,083 Asphalt Moderate 2,949 SC Residential 26 44 39 48 11580 SAND CREST - 11580 617 24 1,628 Asphalt Strong 2,237 SC Residential 36 16 51 46 11585 SAND CREST - 11585 309 24 807 Asphalt Moderate 2,968 SC Residential 26 42 42 48 11590 SAND CREST - 11590 1,555 23 4,371 Asphalt Moderate 2,521 SC Residential 37 34 32 47 11595 SAND CREST - 11595 1,089 46 3,862 Asphalt Moderate 3,337 SC Residential 17 67 21 28 11600 SAND DUNE - 11600 316 27 949 Asphalt Strong 1,645 SC Residential 53 8 30 36 11605 SAND ERE - 11605 1,896 25 5,216 Asphalt Strong 2,181 SC Residential 38 23 46 55 11610 SAND ERE - 11610 2,873 25 7,981 Asphalt Strong 1,464 SC Residential 58 5 30 48 11615 SAND FLOWER - 11615 3,357 22 8,545 Asphalt Moderate 2,543 SC Residential 36 25 41 44 11620 SAND FLOWER - 11620 1,138 23 2,908 Asphalt Moderate 2,029 SC Residential 49 21 26 45 11625 SAND FLOWER - 11625 309 23 791 Asphalt Strong 1,953 SC Residential 44 12 34 29 11630 SAND GLASS - 11630 1,460 27 4,379 Asphalt Strong 1,816 SC Residential 48 18 31 45 11635 SAND HILL - 11635 1,801 24 5,334 Asphalt Strong 1,713 SC Residential 51 5 37 40 11640 SAND JEWEL - 11640 2,390 25 6,474 Asphalt Strong 2,314 SC Residential 34 30 35 35 11645 SAND JEWEL - 11645 712 25 1,979 Asphalt Moderate 2,541 SC Residential 36 34 31 44 11650 SAND KNOLL - 11650 1,984 24 5,290 Asphalt Strong 2,042 SC Residential 42 18 35 36 11655 SAND LAND - 11655 316 25 878 Asphalt Moderate 1,103 SC Residential 72 3 17 60 11660 SAND MAN - 11660 2,286 23 5,841 Asphalt Moderate 2,851 SC Residential 29 40 37 43 11665 SAND MAN - 11665 1,462 23 3,735 Asphalt Strong 1,770 SC Residential 49 4 45 49 11670 SAND MAN - 11670 309 23 790 Asphalt Strong 2,691 SC Residential 23 40 40 30 11675 SAND OASIS - 11675 312 23 796 Asphalt Strong 1,664 SC Residential 52 9 28 34 11680 SAND OASIS - 11680 626 25 1,705 Asphalt Strong 2,207 SC Residential 37 21 40 37 11685 SAND QUILL - 11685 2,975 23 7,711 Asphalt Strong 2,201 SC Residential 37 24 41 45 11690 SAND RANCH - 11690 1,219 26 3,358 Asphalt Strong 1,742 SC Residential 50 7 41 50 11695 SANDALWOOD - 11695 187 24 497 Asphalt Strong 1,083 SC Residential 69 0 0 9 IMS Infrastructure Management Services ImpCo Analysis Results Rev3 - SuperSegs, Supers by ID page 42 of 57 APPENDIX C Seeley Area Drainage Master Plan SEELEY AREA DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN Job Number 16101 June 2010 SEELEY AREA DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN JUNE 2010 Prepared For: Imperial County Planning & Development Services 801 Main Street El Centro, California 92243 Ms. Esperanza Malagon Colio (760) 482-4986 _________________________________________ Dennis C. Bowling, M.S. R.C.E. #32838 Exp 06/12 Prepared by: Rick Engineering Company Water Resources Division 5620 Friars Road San Diego, California 92110 (619) 291-0707 www.rickengineering.com Job Number 16101 DCB:JM:vs:reports/.005 SEELEY AREA DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Project Approach.................................................................................................................4 3.0 Summary of Base Information............................................................................................6 4.0 Hydrologic Methodology..................................................................................................15 5.0 Existing Condition Hydrologic Modeling.........................................................................19 6.0 Ultimate Condition Hydrologic Modeling........................................................................21 7.0 Recommended Drainage Improvements...........................................................................25 8.0 Summary............................................................................................................................28 9.0 References.........................................................................................................................29 Tables 3.2.1 Table of Precipitation Information......................................................................................7 3.2.3 Table of Calculated Intensity & Precipitation Information.................................................8 4.1.2 Table of Calculated Curve Numbers Based on Land Use.................................................16 6.1.1 Table Showing Planned Road Classifications...................................................................22 6.3.2 Storm Drain Sizing...........................................................................................................23 7.3 Table of Recommended Drainage Improvements.............................................................26 Exhibits 1.2 Vicinity Map.........................................................................................................................2 3.4.1 Exhibits Showing Existing Land Use Zoning & Hydrologic Soil Data............................11 3.4.2 Exhibits Showing General Plan Land Use & Hydrologic Soil Data.................................12 3.6.1 Copy of the Effective FEMA Firmette..............................................................................14 APPENDICES A - CD Containing digital HEC-RAS, GIS, and CAD files. B – Existing Condition Hydrologic Exhibit C – Ultimate Condition Hydrologic Exhibit D – Capital Improvement Program Report - i - June 2010 SEELEY AREA DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN 1.0 INTRODUCTION This document summarizes the findings of the Drainage Master Plan (DMP) prepared for the Community of Seeley, California, located within Imperial County. The California Housing and Community Development Department (HCD) through its Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funded the development of this DMP. 1.1 Purpose of DMP The purpose of this DMP is to identify current drainage and flooding characteristics within the Community of Seeley, and determine recommended drainage improvements to reduce flood hazards and improve public safety. Drainage improvements recommended in this report will be based on the criteria outlined in the current Imperial County design standards. The following information is provided within this DMP: • Existing Condition topographic information for the Seeley Community, as of March 2009. • Existing Condition 25-year and 100-year peak flow rates and drainage patterns • Ultimate anticipated 25-year and 100-year peak flow rates and drainage patterns • Recommended drainage improvements including storm drains, inlets, retention areas, and outlet locations. • Opinion of probable construction costs for each recommended phase of the drainage improvements • Prioritization of recommended drainage improvements for implementation The results of the DMP calculations were used to develop a Capital Improvement Program Report that outlines the recommended drainage improvements for implementation, and is attached with this DMP as Appendix D. - 1 - June 2010 dxm.3-9_paMytiniciV_10161\SIG\10161\:W UV 86 UV 86 UV 28 UV UV 28 28 UV 30 EEll CCeennttrroo NNaavvaall aauuxx AAiirr SSttaa IImmppeerriiaall UV Imperial County 86 Naf El Centro UV 86 UV UV El Centro Street 80 80 UV 80 SSeeeelleeyy EEll CCeennttrroo §¨¦ 8 UV 30 UV UV 86 29 ® DATE SCALE 06/2010 1" = 8000' Seeley Area Drainage Master Plan 5620 Friars Road EXHIBIT San Diego, CA 92110-2596 Vicinity Map www.rickengineering.com 1.2 SEELEY AREA DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN 1.3 Computer Programs The following computer programs were used for preparation of the Seeley Area DMP: • AutoCAD 2002 • US Army Corps of Engineers, Hydrologic Engineering Center - Hydrologic Modeling System, HEC-HMS v. 3.3. • ArcGIS, version 9 • Microsoft Excel 1.4 Limitations The Seeley Area DMP is a comprehensive plan for future drainage needs within the Seeley Community. This report has been prepared for master planning purposes only, as a guide for engineers, planners, developers, and County staff. Detailed engineering calculations and investigations should be prepared for the implementation of any of the facilities outlined in this study. - 3 - June 2010 SEELEY AREA DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN 2.0 PROJECT APPROACH The Seeley Area DMP covers approximately 0.556 square miles (356 Acres) of the developed area within Seeley, California, known as the Seeley Townsite. The limits of the DMP are shown on the Vicinity map in Section 1.0. Seeley is located approximately 8 miles west of El Centro and 1.5 miles North of Interstate-8, within Imperial County California. Seeley is bordered on the west by the New River. 2.1 Previous Drainage Plan A previous drainage master plan titled “Seeley Streets Overlay and Drainage Plan” was prepared circa 1975, for the Seeley Area (Reference 9). The previous plan recommended the use of drainage swales along major roadways as the method for conveying storm runoff to the New River. The improvements recommended in the previous study were constructed and as-built in 1979. However, this design approach did not take into consideration public safety factors related to the proximity to the local schools, etc. In addition, the terrain within the Community of Seeley is very flat, and therefore, a significant amount of ponding occurs within the streets and low- lying areas during and after rainfall events. 2.2 HEC-HMS Program The hydrologic modeling was prepared using US Army Corps of Engineers, Hydrologic Engineering Center - Hydrologic Modeling System, HEC-HMS v. 3.3. HEC-HMS is public domain software designed for modeling the precipitation-runoff processes that occur in watershed systems. It is designed to be applicable in a wide range of geographic areas including for use in small urban or natural watershed runoff situations. Hydrographs produced by HEC-HMS can be used directly or in conjunction with other software for studies of urban drainage, future urbanization impact, reservoir design, flood damage reduction, floodplain regulation, drainage master planning. - 4 - June 2010 SEELEY AREA DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN 2.3 GIS Data Processing GIS tools were utilized to calculate spatial factors related to the development of the hydrologic modeling for the Seeley Area. Information including land use, hydrologic soil data, and terrain information were compared with existing drainage patterns and drainage areas to calculate factors such as runoff length, slope, time of concentration, drainage area, curve number, and percent impervious. Detailed discussion of the hydrologic parameters used in the preparation of this DMP is included in Section 3.0 of this report. - 5 - June 2010 SEELEY AREA DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN 3.0 SUMMARY OF BASE INFORMATION The following provides a summary of the base information used in the preparation of the Seeley Area DMP. Rick Engineering Company is not responsible for any future changes to the topographic information, land use information, drainage facilities, or any other base information used in the preparation of this DMP that may occur after the preparation of this report. 3.1 TOPOGRAPHY & ORTHO IMAGERY The following summarizes the source information of the base topography generated for the preparation of the DMP: Date of Survey: March 24, 2009 Contour Interval: 1-Foot Horizontal Datum: NAD 83, CCS Zone 6, 2007.0 EPOCH Vertical Datum: NAVD 88 Date of Photography: March 24, 2009 Approximate Photo 1”= 300’ Scale: Pizel Size: 0.25 feet It should be noted that the elevations in the Seeley Community are below Sea Level. Therefore, 1,000 vertical feet were added to the elevations in Seeley. The adjusted elevations range from 899 feet to 967.5 feet. 3.1.1 DRAINAGE BASIN BOUNDARIES Hydrologic modeling for the Seeley area was prepared utilizing the base topography obtained for this project. The limits of the overall drainage study, and corresponding drainage basin boundaries were confined to the surveyed topographic area and were determined based on the high points surrounding the Seeley area. The terrain within the Seeley Townsite identified that no significant drainage areas outside of the townsite - 6 - June 2010 SEELEY AREA DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN limits flow into the community of Seeley due to the existing topography and the existence of Imperial Irrigation District canals along the northern limit of the community that prevent run-on from adjacent areas. The watershed tributary to the New River was not analyzed in this study. 3.2 PRECIPITATION DATA 2-year and 100-year precipitation values were obtained from the Imperial Irrigation District (IID) DRAFT Hydrology Manual (Reference 7), Figures B-1 through B-4. Table 3.2.1 summarizes the precipitation information obtained from the IID manual. 3.2.1 TABLE OF PRECIPITATION INFORMATION Precipitation (Inches) Duration 2-Year 100-Year 1-hour 0.38 1.35 24-Hour 0.96 2.80 3.2.2 INTENSITY-DURATION CALCULATIONS The rainfall intensity at differing durations storms is required for modeling the 25-year and 100-year storm events reflected in this DMP. Therefore, the following formula was utilized to convert the above noted precipitation values into intensities at varying storm durations. For storm durations less than 1-hour: Yp = Y + [ (Y - Y ) * Kp ] / 263 2 100 2 where: Kp = Constant associated w/ Return Period P 5-yr = 65 10-yr = 108 25-yr = 164 50-yr = 215 Y2 = Intensity associated with the 2-year return period Y100 = Intensity associated with the 100-year return period Yp = Intensity at Return Period P - 7 - June 2010 SEELEY AREA DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN The Kp value for the 25-year storm event was obtained from Appendix II and Figure D-4 in the DRAFT IID Hydrology Manual. For storm durations between 1-hour and 24-hours logarithmic interpolation was utilized to determine intermediate values from the precipitation depths shown in Table 3.2.1. Additional guidance on the development of rainfall depths and intensities for varying storm events can be found in Section D of the Imperial Irrigation District DRAFT Hydrology Manual (Reference 7). 3.2.3 TABLE OF CALCULATED INTENSITY AND PRECIPITATION INFORMATION Intensity (Inches/Hour) Precipitation (Inches) Duration 2-Year 25-Year 100-Year 2-Year 25-Year 100-Year 5-min 1.50 3.90 5.35 0.13 0.33 0.45 15-min 0.91 2.36 3.24 0.23 0.59 0.81 60-min 0.38 0.98 1.35 0.38 0.98 1.35 120-min 0.23 0.58 0.79 0.47 1.16 1.58 180-min 0.17 0.43 0.58 0.52 1.28 1.74 360-min 0.11 0.25 0.34 0.64 1.49 2.04 720-min 0.07 0.15 0.20 0.78 1.74 2.39 1440-min 0.04 0.09 0.12 0.96 2.11 2.80 The methodology used to calculate the intensities shown in Table 3.2.3 are described in section 3.2.2 of this report. Precipitation values for other than the 2-year and 100-year, 1- hour and 24-hour duration storms were calculated based on multiplying intensity (inches/hour) times duration (hours), to determine the precipitation in inches. - 8 - June 2010 SEELEY AREA DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN 3.3 LAND USE Hydrologic modeling for the Seeley area was prepared based on two land use scenarios, the current condition as of the authoring of this report and the ultimate planned development within the study area. 3.3.1 EXISTING CONDITION (ZONING) Existing Condition Land Use data was provided by Imperial County, as shown on the land use zoning “Map 9A” dated May 11, 2006. The land use zoning was compared with the aerial imagery obtained March 2009, and currently vacant parcels of significant size were manually designated as “open space” for the existing condition land use. Exhibit 3.4.1 shows the Existing Land Use zoning designation used for the hydrologic modeling. Table 4.1.2 summarizes the curve number assigned to each land use category 3.3.2 ULTIMATE CONDITION (GENERAL PLAN) Ultimate Condition (General Plan) Land Use data was provided by Imperial County, as shown on the exhibit titled “Seeley Urban Area Map” dated September 13, 2004. The general plan land use data was compared with the current condition land use zoning to identify areas of future development or redevelopment. The impacts of the future development were incorporated into the design of the recommended drainage improvements. Exhibit 3.4.2 shows the General Plan Land Use designation used for the hydrologic modeling. Table 4.1.2 summarizes the curve number assigned to each land use category 3.3.3 ASSESSOR’S PARCEL DATA Assessor’s parcel data for the Seeley Area was obtained from the Imperial County GIS division on October 8, 2009. The Assessor’s parcel data was utilized to identify approximate existing road right of way, locations of publicly owned parcels, and limits of land use/zoning designations. The assessors parcel boundaries are shown for reference on the exhibits within this report. - 9 - June 2010 SEELEY AREA DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN 3.4 HYDROLOGIC SOIL TYPE The Seeley Area DMP was prepared taking into consideration the hydrologic soil type in the determination of the loss rates and curve numbers within the watershed. SSURGO 2008 Soil data was obtained from the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Soil Data Mart (Reference 4), which includes a classification of soil types ranging from type A to type D. The soil types within the limits of the study area are primarily type C soils with some type D along the New River corridor. The following summarizes the hydrologic characteristics of the differing soil groups: Type A: Low Runoff Potential. Soils having high infiltration rates even when thoroughly wetted and consisting chiefly of deep , well-drained sands or gravels. These soils have a high rate of water transmission. Type B: Soils having moderate infiltration rates when thoroughly wetted and consisting chiefly of moderately deep to deep, moderately well to well-drained sandy-loam soils with moderately fine to moderately coarse textures. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. Type C: Soils having slow infiltration rates when thoroughly wetted and consisting chiefly of silty-loam soils with a layer that impedes downward movement of water, or soils with moderately-fine to fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. Type D: High Runoff Potential. Soils having very slow infiltration rates when thoroughly wetted and consisting chiefly of clay soils with a high swelling potential, soils with a permanent high water table, soils with a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and shallow soils over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. - 10 - June 2010 C D A C C D C D D D C D C C D D C D C C D D C C C C te e rtS y a o w h r tn e C g iH s lE e w e H n a v E ts e W te e rtS a ts iV o iR teertS omalA 0102/60 '006 = "1 ETAD ELACS eunevA lieH d a o R eunevA tloH n ia M ts e W te e rtS eunevA lairepmI a eunevA lairepmI ts iV o iR daoR lleksaH daoR lleksaH y te e a w r h eunevA ogeiD naS tS g k iH r a s P e w e H d n a a te e o R n v E ts rtS ia M eunevA langiS tM e W o m ts a e lA W te e rtS o eunevA anugaL r tn e C lE draveluoB reviR weN y a w h g iH s e w e H n a v E ts e W TIBIHXE 1.4.3 moc.gnireenignekcir.www 6952-01129 AC ,ogeiD naS daoR srairF 0265 dnegeL epyT lioS OGRUSS esU dnaL gnitsixE A ecapsnepO B laitnediseR ytisneD woL C laitnediseR ytisneD muideM D laitnediseR ytisneD hgiH-muideM semoH eliboM - laitnediseR ytisneD hgiH laicepS/tnemnrevoG loohcS ¬ laicremmoC lareneG lairtsudnI thgiL lairtsudnI muideM daoR ataD lioS cigolordyH dna gninoZ esU dnaL gnitsixE nalP retsaM eganiarD aerA yeleeS dxm.1tibihxE_lioS+gninoZgnitsixE_10161\SIG\10161\:W:htaP eliF UV 68 UV UV 82 82 ytnuoC lairepmI UV 03 UV 68 UV 08 UV ortneC lE yeleeS 08 §¨¦ 8 UV 68 UV 92 UV 03 C D A C C D C D D D C D C C D D C D C C D D C C C C te e rtS y a o w h r tn e C g iH s lE e w e H n a v E ts e W te e rtS a ts iV o iR teertS omalA 0102/60 '006 = "1 ETAD ELACS eunevA lieH d a o R eunevA tloH n ia M ts e W te e rtS eunevA lairepmI a eunevA lairepmI ts iV o iR daoR lleksaH daoR lleksaH y te e a w r h eunevA ogeiD naS tS g k iH r a s P e w e H d n a a te e o R n v E ts rtS ia M eunevA langiS tM e W o m ts a e lA W te e rtS o eunevA anugaL r tn e C lE draveluoB reviR weN y a w h g iH s e w e H n a v E ts e W TIBIHXE 2.4.3 moc.gnireenignekcir.www 6952-01129 AC ,ogeiD naS daoR srairF 0265 dnegeL epyT lioS OGRUSS esU dnaL nalP lareneG A ecapSnepO B ecapS nepO / noitaerceR C laitnediseR ytisneD-woL D cilbuP laicepS / tnemnrevoG laitnediseR ytisneD muideM laitnediseR ytisneD hgiH laicremmoC doohrobhgieN ¬ laicremmoC lareneG lairtsudnI thgiL lairtsudnI muideM yawdaoR ataD lioS cigolordyH dna gninoZ esU dnaL nalP lareneG nalP retsaM eganiarD aerA yeleeS dxm.2tibihxE_lioS+nalPlareneG_10161\SIG\10161\:W:htaP eliF UV 68 UV UV 82 82 ytnuoC lairepmI UV 03 UV 68 UV 08 UV ortneC lE yeleeS 08 §¨¦ 8 UV 68 UV 92 UV 03 SEELEY AREA DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN 3.5 EXISTING DRAINAGE FACILITIES A minimal number of engineered drainage structures currently exist within the Community of Seeley. Some recently constructed developments have included design and construction of on-site retention basins in accordance with Imperial County Criteria. In addition, there are a few isolated locations where drain inlets and storm drains have been constructed, however these systems function as retention facilities by storing runoff from the tributary areas as they have no identified discharge locations. The existing condition hydrologic analysis within this DMP considers the impact of the known retention facilities in developing the peak discharges for the study area. Currently there are no constructed or engineered drainage outlets into the New River. Runoff discharges to the New River via overland flow. 3.6 NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM Imperial County is a participant in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), which provides flood insurance and oversees floodplain management regulations to reduce the potential for flood damages. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) manages the NFIP. The FEMA Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) for Seeley is identified on Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) panel No 06025C1700C, effective September 26, 2008, attached as Exhibit 3.6.1. The FIRM identifies portions of the New River as a Zone A floodplain, indicating areas subject to inundation by the 1-percent-annual-chance flood event generally determined using approximate methodologies. The FIRM also identifies the remaining areas of the FIRM as Zone X (unshaded), indicating areas of minimal flood hazard, which are the areas outside the SFHA and higher than the elevation of the 0.2-percent-annual-chance flood. Any future construction activities within the limits of the SFHA are required to comply with the requirements of FEMA and the NFIP. - 13 - June 2010 1.6.3 tibihxE SEELEY AREA DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN 4.0 HYDROLOGIC METHODOLOGY Hydrologic Modeling for the Community of Seeley study area was prepared following the criteria outlined in the Imperial Irrigation District (IID) DRAFT Hydrology Manual (Reference 7). Rational method precipitation and intensity information was utilized to reflect peak runoff consistent with rational method calculations, however NRCS (SCS) modeling parameters were utilized to reflect the volume of runoff generated by the watershed and to incorporate the impacts of storage and attenuation on peak flows. 4.1 NRCS (SCS) METHODOLOGY The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), formerly known as the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) developed an approach to calculate runoff from a tributary watershed as a function of the drainage area, precipitation, initial abstraction, soil storage potential, and runoff curve number. 4.1.1 CURVE NUMBER Curve Number for each watershed was calculated as a function of the land use within each area and the hydrologic soil type. Runoff Curve Numbers are an indication of runoff potential for a given area. The higher the Curve Number for a given watershed, the higher the runoff potential. Runoff Curve Numbers were determined based on from Figure C-2 of DRAFT IID Hydrology Manual and Table 2-2a in TR-55 (Reference 8). A detailed description of the runoff curve number values assigned to each land use designation is included in Table 4.1.2. - 15 - June 2010 NALP RETSAM EGANIARD AERA YELEES ESU DNAL NO DESAB SREBMUN EVRUC DETALUCLAC FO ELBAT 2.1.4 **)II CMA( rebmuN evruC % detamitsE nalP lareneG noitidnoC gnitsixE lioS D epyT lioS C epyT * suoivrepmI noitpircseD esU dnaL yrogetaC noitangiseD esU dnaL launnA – ecapsnepO 98 68 %0 revoc rooP ecapS nepO SO sessarG lecraP/UD 1 ytisneD-woL laitnediseR ytisneD woL 29 09 %05 1R )erca/ud 5 ytisned xam( laitnediseR )RDL( 49 sexelpud – lecraP/UD 2 – 1 ytisneD muideM ytisneD muideM 59 %07 2R ) erca/ud 01 ytisned xam( laitnediseR )RDM( laitnediseR lecraP/uD +2 ytisneD hgiH-muideM 69 59 %57 - - 3R )erca/ud 92 ytisned xam( laitnediseR ytisneD hgiH laitnediseR ytisneD hgiH 79 69 %58 skrap emoh eliboM 4R laitnediseR semoH eliboM dna doohrobhgieN 79 69 %58 saera laitnediser nI 1C laicremmoC thgiL laicremmoC ,syawhgih gnolA 89 79 %09 laicremmoC lareneG 2C laicremmoC lareneG sretnec gnippohs 59 49 %07 loohcS laicepS/tnemnrevoG S-SG laicepS/tnemnrevoG 89-79 89-69 %59-%08 sdnal S/G rehtO laicepS/tnemnrevoG SG 89 79 %09 gnirutcafunam & egarotS lairtsudnI thgiL 1M lairtsudnI thgiL 89 89 %59 - - lairtsudnI muideM 2M lairtsudnI muideM 89 89 %89 devaP yawdaoR yawdaoR DAOR devaP/yawdaoR launaM DII TFARD fo 3-C erugiF morf deniatbo suoivrepmI % detamitsE * )8 ecnerefeR( 55-RT ni a2-2 elbaT dna launaM DII TFARD fo 2-C erugiF morf deniatbo rebmuN evruC ** 0102 enuJ - 61 - SEELEY AREA DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN 4.1.3 TIME OF CONCENTRATION To generate a hydrograph for small watersheds, less than one square mile, Lag times utilized in SCS methodology are frequently calculated as a function of Time of Concentration (Tc). Time of Concentration (Tc) for each watershed was calculated based on the Time of Concentration Nomograph for the Rational method, using the following formula: Tc = K (L3/H) 0.2 Where: Tc = Time of Concentration (minutes) K = is a function of % impervious for the basin L = is the length of the longest flowpath within the basin H = the elevation change (ΔE) along the longest flowpath. The K value for each percent impervious was obtained from Appendix II and Figure D-1 in the DRAFT IID Hydrology Manual, and is summarized below. % Impervious K 90 0.304 80 0.324 75 0.336 65 0.360 60 0.374 50 0.389 40 0.412 30 0.438 20 0.469 15 0.483 10 0.487 0 (Poor Cover) 0.525 0 (Fair Cover) 0.706 0 (Good Cover) 0.935 - 17 - June 2010 SEELEY AREA DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN 4.1.4 LAG Lag was then computed from the following formula: Lag = 0.8 Tc / 60 Where: Lag = is the basin Lag time (hours) Tc = Time of Concentration (minutes) The Time of Concentration and Lag calculations were performed in accordance with the Imperial Irrigation District DRAFT Hydrology Manual. 4.2 HEC-HMS PARAMETERS BASIN MODEL: Loss Methodology: SCS Curve Number, with AMC II Transform: Standard SCS Unit Hydrograph (Lag) Channel Routing: Muskingum-Cunge METEOROLOGICAL MODEL: Intensity Position: 2/3 of hydrograph (67%) – equating to approximately hour 16 of a 24-hour storm. Storms Modeled: 25-year, 24-hr – Precipitation = 2.11 inches 100-year, 24-hr – Precipitation = 2.80 inches “Frequency Storm” - 18 - June 2010 SEELEY AREA DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN 5.0 EXISTING CONDITION HYDROLOGIC MODELING The existing basin routing for the previously constructed “Seeley Streets Overlay and Drainage Plan” (Reference 9) was compared to the current terrain and watershed delineations. In general, the existing terrain and basin routing corresponded with the previous drainage plan. However, based on the topographic information, the existing routing was slightly different in the following areas: • Laguna Avenue, between Alamo St. and Rio Vista St. • Signal Avenue, between Park St. and Main St. • Haskell Road, between Park St. and Rio Vista St., and between Alamo St. and El Centro St. • Imperial Avenue between Rio Vista St. and Alamo St • Evan Hewes Highway between Mt. Signal Avenue and San Diego Avenue, and between Haskell Road and Holt Avenue. The results of the Existing Condition Hydrologic Modeling, including flowrates and flow paths, are shown on the Existing Condition Hydrologic Exhibit included as Appendix B of this Report and summarize 25-year and 100-year peak flow rates within the townsite. 5.1 EXISTING RETENTION AREAS The locations of existing retention areas were determined through the use of the existing topography, and survey points of existing structures. The volumes of the above ground retention facilities were calculated from the existing topography, while the volumes of the underground facilities were calculated based on the surveyed pipe size and length between the survey points. The routing in the model was set up so that the runoff tributary to these areas would not contribute to the downstream routing, until the retention volume was full, at which time the flowrate of the runoff exiting the retention area would equal the flow rate of runoff entering the retention area. The existing retention areas have been identified on the Existing Condition Hydrologic Exhibit in Appendix B. - 19 - June 2010 SEELEY AREA DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN 5.2 SURFACE STORAGE Based on the existing topography within the Seeley townsite area, it was evident that there are localized sump areas where surface storage will occur. In the areas where more significant storage occurs, typically streets and low-lying areas, the volumes were calculated based on the existing topography. The impact of surface storage was incorporated into the hydrologic modeling by allowing these areas to pond and store runoff before contributing the tributary runoff to the downstream routing. The existing surface storage areas have been identified on the Existing Condition Hydrologic Exhibit in Appendix B. - 20 - June 2010 SEELEY AREA DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN 6.0 ULTIMATE CONDITION HYDROLOGIC MODELING Ultimate Condition hydrologic modeling was prepared to reflect the ultimate planned land uses within the watersheds, as identified in the Imperial County General plan for the Seeley area, including: • Future roadway improvements reflecting construction of curb and gutter throughout the community, • Development of currently vacant land, consistent with the general plan land uses in the study area, • Construction of private retention facilities assumed to be constructed in conjunction with new multiple lot residential developments and on all new commercial and industrial developments areas • Construction of drainage infrastructure to convey the 25-year storm discharges. The results of the Ultimate Condition Hydrologic Modeling are shown on the Ultimate Condition Hydrologic Exhibit included as Appendix C of this Report and summarize 25-year and 100-year peak flow rates within the townsite. This exhibit also includes the locations and sizes of the recommended drainage improvements and anticipated retention areas within the study. 6.1 ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS Currently minimal curb-and-gutter exists within the study area, and flow is conveyed in roadway swales along the edges of the pavement sections. The ultimate condition hydrologic modeling reflects the construction of curb-and-gutter throughout the Community of Seeley. The majority of the roadways within the Seeley study area are classified as a “Local Road”, with only a few major roadways classified as “Major Collector” and “Prime Arterial.” Major Collector roadways include Rio Vista Street, and Haskell Road. Drainage Improvements were recommended in locations where the roadway capacity would likely be exceeded in a 25-year storm event. - 21 - June 2010 SEELEY AREA DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN Hydrologic routing for the ultimate condition hydrologic modeling reflects roadway geometries based on the roadway classifications identified in the Imperial County Engineering Design Guidelines Manual (Reference 3), which are summarized in Table 6.1.1. 6.1.1 TABLE SHOWING PLANNED ROAD CLASSIFICATIONS Road Width* Curb Height Classification (feet) (Inches) Local Road 40 6 Major Collector 64 6 Prime Arterial 106 6 *Width (ft) represents width of paved road (curb to curb), and does not include right of way. 6.2 RETENTION CRITERIA FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS Imperial County currently has retention criteria in place for new development projects as cited in Section III-A of the Imperial County Engineering Design Guidelines Manual. For the purposes of this drainage master plan, retention was assumed to be implemented for all new multiple lot residential developments, commercial developments, and industrial developments. However, retention was not assumed on individual residential lots that may currently be vacant but are zoned for use as single-family residential. Future retention systems are not included in the construction cost estimates, as they are anticipated to remain private systems and not constructed or maintained by Imperial County, but were included in the Ultimate Condition Hydrologic Modeling. Drainage areas where future retention has been accounted for are identified on the Ultimate Condition Hydrologic Exhibit included in Appendix C. - 22 - June 2010 SEELEY AREA DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN 6.3 DRAINAGE INFRASTRUCTURE Recommended drainage improvements have been identified within the Community of Seeley, with the goal of providing 25-year flood protection for portions of the community where the flow cannot be contained within the road right-of-way, or in areas of public safety concern. 6.3.1 STORM DRAIN DESIGN CRITERIA The following Criteria were considered when determining the location and sizes of the recommended drainage improvements: (cid:131) Minimum Pipe Slopes shall be 0.001 (0.1%) per Imperial County Standards (cid:131) Slopes of recommended pipes designed at 0.0015 (0.15%) (cid:131) Cleanout Spacing: • 300 feet maximum spacing pipes < 48-inches in diameter • 500 feet maximum spacing for pipes ≥ 48-inches in diameter (cid:131) 30-inches minimum cover depth is required (cid:131) Manning’s Roughness Coefficient, n = 0.013 6.3.2 STORM DRAIN SIZING The following table relates the pipe sizes specified for the recommended storm drain facilities along with their respective capacities at their proposed slope of 0.15%. Pipe Diameter Slope Capacity (inches) (%) (cfs)* 24 0.15 7.9 36 0.15 23.2 48 0.15 50.1 60 0.15 90.8 72 0.15 147.6 84 0.15 222.6 96 0.15 317.8 *Capacity based on Manning’s Equation with friction slope adjusted to 90% of pipe slope, to reflect assumed hydraulic losses of 10%. - 23 - June 2010 SEELEY AREA DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN 6.3.3 INLET SIZING The following criteria were considered when determining the minimum number of inlets recommended for each phase of drainage improvements: (cid:131) Curb Inlets at a sump condition should be designed for two (2) cfs per lineal foot of opening when headwater may rise to top of curb. (cid:131) Curb inlets on a continuous grade should be designed based on the following equation: Q = 0.7L(A+Y) 3/2 Where: Y= depth of flow in approach gutter in feet A = depth of depression of flow line at inlet in feet L = length of clear opening in feet (maximum 30 feet) Q = flow in CFS Detailed Inlet Sizing calculations were not performed for the recommended facilities; however, a minimum number of inlets were assumed associated with the construction of each storm drain segment to intercept the 25-year storm flows. Detailed calculations will be required during final design of any drainage improvements to identify the need for additional storm drain inlets within the drainage system to maintain required flow depth and dry lane requirements within the roadways. - 24 - June 2010 SEELEY AREA DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN 7.0 RECOMMENDED DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS The following summarizes the recommended drainage improvements identified within the Seeley Area Drainage Master Plan study area. Recommended drainage improvements were sized to convey the 25-Year Storm Event. Appendix D of this document serves as a detailed summary of each improvement, including cost estimates and an exhibit showing the limits of the improvement. The location, limits, and costs associated with each phase of the recommended drainage improvement are based on preliminary drainage master plan information. Detailed investigations into potential utility conflicts, right-of-way needs, constructability, and or environmental impacts should be investigated prior to the construction of each project, and may impact the design and/or cost of each project. 7.1 PRIORITIZATION OF IMPROVEMENTS This DMP anticipates construction of the recommends drainage improvements will occur as a phased approach to improving drainage within the Seeley area. The recommended drainage improvements have been identified as 7 specific phases of construction, or drainage improvement projects. The phase limits are based on providing flood protection benefits with each phase, as well as identifying logical locations for the limits of improvement. The following items were considered when prioritizing the recommended drainage improvements: (cid:131) Public Safety, (cid:131) Need for downstream improvements prior to implementation, (cid:131) Tributary drainage area, (cid:131) Property that would be protected by the drainage improvement, and whether it is currently developed or undeveloped. - 25 - June 2010 SEELEY AREA DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN 7.2 CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATES Preliminary opinions of the probable construction costs were prepared for each identified improvement project. The facility quantities and costs presented are preliminary and should only be used for planning purposes. A summary of the assumptions associated with the development of the probable construction costs are included in the Capital Improvement Program Report attached as Appendix D of this DMP. - 26 - June 2010 NALP RETSAM EGANIARD AERA YELEES STNEMEVORPMI EGANIARD DEDNEMMOCER FO ELBAT 3.7 detamitsE fo rebmuN rebmuN latoT epiP mumixaM mumixaM tcejorP noitacoL tsoC stuonaelC stelnI fo htgneL seziS Q Q DI 001 52 lleksaH ,teertS atsiV oiR 007,828,7$ 51 21 tf 215,4 ”48-”63 sfc 913 sfc 022 10-DS eunevA ogeiD naS ,daoR lairepmI ,teertS atsiV oiR 007,690,2$ 9 8 tf 358,1 ”27-”42 sfc 641 sfc 611 20-DS eunevA kraP ,eunevA ogeiD naS 007,011,1$ 6 9 tf 745,1 ”84-”63 sfc 77 sfc 45 30-DS teertS tloH ,teertS atsiV oiR 009,916,1$ 8 5 tf 967,1 ”06-”63 sfc 601 sfc 27 40-DS ,daoR niaM tseW ,eunevA yawhgiH seweH navE ortneC lE ,eunevA tloH 005,916,1$ 9 8 tf 822,2 ”84-”63 sfc 07 sfc 64 50-DS teertS 007,555$ 4 4 tf 408 ”63 sfc 92 sfc 91 60-DS eunevA anugaL 004,012,3$ 11 5 tf 774,3 ”84-”63 sfc 55 sfc 93 70-DS yawhgiH seweH navE .ytiroirp fo redro dednemmocer eht ni detsil era elbat siht ni stcejorP ehT ..troper siht fo D xidneppA sa tropeR PIC eht ni dedulcni era setamitse tsoc dna ,noitacol ,stimil tcejorP eht fo snoitpircseD deliateD 0102 enuJ - 72 - SEELEY AREA DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN 8.0 SUMMARY This report presents a summary of the existing condition and ultimate condition 25-year and 100- year peak discharges within the Community of Seeley, in Imperial County, California. This report also identifies recommended drainage improvements with the goal of providing 25-year storm drain infrastructure within the study area, and alleviating current flooding concerns within the community. Hydrologic calculations were prepared using HEC-HMS, and runoff calculations were performed based on the criteria outlined in the Imperial Irrigation District DRAFT Hydrology Manual. The recommended drainage improvements identified in this report were prioritized in an order of recommended construction from SD-01 (the first recommended phase) to SD-07 (the final recommended phase). The drainage improvements were prioritized based on the necessity to construct downstream facilities first, and on the public safety issue of reducing flooding first in the areas historically subject to the most flooding and that convey the most water, such as Rio Vista Street. The results of this Drainage Master Plan report were used to prepare a Capital Improvement Program report, which is attached as Appendix D, summarizing each recommended drainage improvement project, the associated construction cost, and the recommended order of construction. This report has been prepared for master planning purposes only, as a guide for engineers, planners, developers, and County staff. The recommendations outlined in this report are preliminary and the recommended locations, facility sizes, alignments, and costs should be re- evaluated during final design of each improvement phase. 2 8 - 28 - June 2010 SEELEY AREA DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN 9.0 REFERENCES 1. Hydrologic Modeling System HEC-HMS User Manual (CPD-74A), prepared by The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Hydrologic Engineering Center, Version 3.3, September 2008. 2. Flood Insurance Study for Imperial County, California, and Incorporated Areas, prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), September 26, 2008. 3. Engineering Design Guidelines Manual for the Preparation and Checking of Street Improvement, Drainage and Grading Plans Within Imperial County, County of Imperial Department of Public Works, September 15, 2008. 4. Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) database for Imperial County, California, Imperial Valley Area (CA683), prepared by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, January 2008, URL:<http://SoilDataMart.nrcs.usda.gov/> 5. Imperial County Land Use Zoning, Townsite of Seeley, Map 9A, prepared by Imperial County Planning Department, revised May 11, 2006. 6. Imperial County General Plan, Seeley Urban Area Map, Figure 1, prepared by Imperial County Planning Department, revised September 13, 2004. 7. Imperial Irrigation District, DRAFT Preliminary Drainage Master Plan, Hydrology Manual, prepared by Black & Veatch, November 1994. 8. TR-55: Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds, prepared by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, June 1986. 9. Seeley Streets Overlay and Drainage Plan (M-572), prepared by the Imperial County Department of Public Works, As-Built May 9, 1979. 2 9 - 29 - June 2010 SEELEY AREA DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN APPENDIX A CD CONTAINING DIGITAL HEC-RAS, GIS, AND CAD FILES. 3 0 June 2010 SEELEY AREA DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN APPENDIX B EXISTING CONDITION HYDROLOGIC EXHIBIT 3 1 June 2010 tt ee ee rr dd tt aa SS oo aa RR tt ss nn ii ii VV aa MM oo i R i R t t ss ee WW ddaaooRR lllleekkssaaHH yy aa ww hh gg ii HH ss ee ww ee HH nn aa vv EE tt ss ee WW tteeeerrttSS oommaallAA s 5 0 0 2 s - f 0 c 0 8 0 3 2 .5 f c = 2 5 3 2 .8 Q = 0 0 1 Q ss 5 0 0 1 -0 0 0 1 fc 1 6 .3 = 5 2 Q fc 8 1 .5 = 0 0 1 Q s 0 1 0 2 s - f 5 c 0 5 0 9 2 .7 fc = 8 8 5 . 2 2 Q 1 = 0 0 1 Q ss fcfc 0 1 0 1 -5 0 0 1 7 3 .2 1 = 5 2 Q 2 7 .6 1 = 0 0 1 Q s eeuunneevvAA lliieeHH 0 2 11 s - f 5 c 1 9 1 . 1 0 f 1 c = 9 7 5 . 2 5 Q 1 = 0 0 1 Q 5 1 0 2 s - f 0 c 1 5 0 1 2 s .9 fc = 8 2 5 . 2 5 Q 1 = 0 0 1 Q eeuunneevvAA ttllooHH s 0 2 0 s 2 f - c 5 1 9 0 2 2 .0 f 1 c 9 = 5 5 .7 2 1 Q = 0 0 1 Q 0 3 0 1 -5 2 0 1 s fc 1 2 .1 6 = 5 2 Q s fc 9 3 .1 9 = 0 0 1 Q 5 0 2 1 -0 0 2 1 s fc 5 1 .4 = 5 2 Q s fc 9 .5 = 0 0 1 Q eeuunneevvAA llaaiirreeppmmII s s fc fc 5 5 2 0 2 2 4 .0 1 8 .7 1 = -0 = 0 2 0 2 5 2 Q 0 1 Q ss fcfc 0 4 0 1 -5 3 0 1 4 0 .0 0 1 = 5 2 Q 3 4 .3 5 1 = 0 0 1 Q 0 5 5 1 -0 4 5 1 s fc 5 0 .3 = 5 2 Q s fc 8 .4 = 0 0 1 Q eeuunneevvAA ooggeeiiDD nnaaSS t e e t e e 2 0 2 5- 2 0 3 0 Q 2 5 = 9. 8 8 cf s 1 0 0 = 1 6. 6 1 cf s Q rr tt 9 0 0- 1 9 0 5 5 = 6. 8 9 cf s 0 = 1 0. 2 5 cf s S k r S k r 1 Q 2 1 0 aa Q PP tt ee ee rr tt SS eeuunneevvAA llaannggiiSS ttMM oo mm ss fcfc a l A a l A 5 3 0 2 -0 3 0 2 1 7 .0 1 = 5 2 Q 7 1 .8 1 = 0 0 1 Q ss 0 1 9 1 -5 0 9 s fc 6 8 .9 = 5 s fc 8 5 .5 1 = 0 5 0 2 2 -0 0 2 2 fc 9 5 .1 = 5 2 Q fc 1 2 .2 = 0 0 1 Q 120 Q1 Q eeuunneevvAA aannuuggaaLL ss fcfc 5 1 2 2 -0 1 2 s 2 fc 5 .0 1 = 5 s 2 fc Q 8 7 .6 1 = 0 0 1 Q 0 4 0 2 -5 3 0 2 8 3 .3 2 = 5 2 Q 6 2 .4 3 = 0 0 1 Q 5 0 0 3 -0 0 0 3 s fc 5 2 .5 = 5 2 Q s fc 1 .8 = 0 0 1 Q ddrraavveelluuooBB rreevviiRR wweeNN 1 Q 0 2 Q 6 5 0 1 = - 0 1 0 1 0 7 = 6 8 5 2 .1 8 4 c . f 1 s cfs 5701-0701 sfc 36.8 = 52Q sfc77.21 = 001Q ss fcfc 5 1 5 1 -5 0 5 1 6 0 .1 1 = 5 2 Q 7 7 .6 1 = 0 0 1 Q ss fcfc 0 5 0 1 -5 4 0 1 9 2 .5 4 1 = 5 2 Q 3 3 .0 3 2 = 0 0 1 Q ss 5 0 1 2 -0 0 1 2 fc 6 2 .1 = 5 2 Q fc 5 7 .1 = 0 0 1 Q 0291-0191 sfc 5.11 = 52Q sfc9.71 = 001Q 5301-0301 sfc 73.68 = 52Q sfc74.031 = 001Q s s fc fc 2 5 0 1 1 -0 0 11 4 9 .2 = 5 2 1 Q .4 = 0 0 1 Q s sfc 5 1 11 -0 fc 1 1 2 1 .0 1 = 8 5 6 2 .4 Q 1 = 0 0 1 Q sfc34.13 = 001Q sfc96.26 = 001Q sfc83.81 = 001Q sfc 56.22 = 52Q sfc 27.24 = 52Q sfc 54.21 = 52Q 5101-0101 0201-5101 5211-0211 sfc33.7 = 001Q sfc53.21 = 001Q sfc 99.4 = 52Q sfc 54.8 = 52Q 0131-0031 5131-0131 sfc84.41 = 001Q sfc 18.9 = 52Q 5041-0041 sfc7.74 = 001Q sfc 60.23 = 52Q sfc70.5 = 001Q 0351-5151 sfc 85.3 = 52Q 0161-0061 ss cfcf 1 0 4 0- 1 0 4 5 Q 2 5 = 1 4 0. 8 2 Q 1 0 0 = 2 2 3. 1 2 sfc32.4 = 001Q sfc 88.2 = 52Q 5071-0071 ss cfcf 1 0 5 0- 1 0 5 5 Q 2 5 = 1 5 4. 6 9 Q 1 0 0 = 2 4 5. 2 7 sfc99.1 = 001Q sfc31.252 = 001Q sfc 14.1 = 52Q sfc 57.851 = 52Q 5081-0081 0601-5501 55660011 ssffcc 3377..77 == 5522QQ ssffcc 3311..2211 == 000011QQ 00005544 00119911 ssffcc 2266..66 == 5522QQ 00000011 00003311 55003311 ss ss ff f c f c cc 4 4 77 88 77 .. . 3 . 3 22 = = == 0 0 55 00 22 11 QQ QQ ssffcc 33..0011 == 000011QQ ssffcc 1100..55 == 5522QQ 00110011 ssffcc 2244..33 == 5522QQ ssffcc 3322..33 == 5522QQ ssffcc 7799..66 == 000011QQ ssffcc 6600..44 == 5522QQ ssffcc 8888..44 == 000011QQ ssffcc 1166..44 == 000011QQ ssffcc 3377..55 == 000011QQ ss ss ff f c f c cc 6 6 33 55 0 5 0 5 .. 0 . 8 0 . 8 55 0 0 = = 22 == 0 0 55 00 22 11 QQ QQ ss ss ff f c f c cc 3 3 88 44 0 1 0 1 .. 0 . 4 0 . 4 33 1 1 = = 11 == 0 0 55 00 22 11 QQ QQ s s s s f f f f c c c c 6 6 6 6 9 . 9 . 5 5 5 5 .. 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 == 1 1 = = 00 5 0 5 0 2 1 2 1 Q Q Q Q ss ss ff f c f c cc 2 2 77 00 2 9 2 9 .. 1 . 7 1 . 7 44 0 0 = = 11 == 0 0 55 00 22 11 QQ QQ ss ss ff f c f c cc 5 5 66 88 3 8 3 8 .. 1 . 6 1 . 6 44 0 0 = = 11 == 0 0 55 00 22 11 QQ QQ ssffcc 11 1 0 1 0 7 . 7 .33 00 11 == 5522QQ 55770011 ss ss ff f c f c cc 9 9 22 22 5 0 5 0 .. 1 . 7 1 . 7 55 0 0 = = 11 == 0 0 55 00 22 11 QQ QQ ssffcc 11 0 5 0 5 1 . 1 .33 33 11 == 5522QQ ss ss ff f c f c cc 5 5 44 66 0 8 0 8 .. 0 . 5 0 . 5 33 4 4 = = 11 == 0 0 55 00 22 11 QQ QQ ssf s f s cc ffc c 44 7 2 7 2 0 2 . 0 2 .00 0 . 0 .7 1 7 1 99 11 = = = = 5 0 5 00 2 0 2Q 1 Q 1QQ ssf s f s cc ffc c 66 6 4 6 4 5 8 . 5 8 .00 0 . 0 .6 1 6 1 99 11 = = = = 5 0 5 00 2 0 2Q 1 Q 1QQ ss ss ff f c f c cc 0 1 0 1 00 - - = T = T == W W 0 0 55 00 22 11 QQ QQ ss ss ff f c f c cc 5 5 66 88 5 2 5 2 .. 1 . 1 1 . 1 11 9 9 = = 11 == 0 0 55 00 22 11 QQ QQ ss ss ff f c f c cc 5 5 99 22 0 3 0 3 .. 2 . 8 2 . 8 55 9 9 = = 11 == 0 0 55 00 22 11 QQ QQ 55001111 ssffcc 5533..44 == 000011QQ ssffcc 8899..88 == 5522QQ ssffcc 9900..55 == 000011QQ ssffcc 1188..33 == 5522QQ ssffcc 8800..3311 == 000011QQ ssffcc 2233..55 == 000011QQ 00880011 ssffcc 4488..44 == 5522QQ ssffcc 5500..77 == 000011QQ 00770011 00114411 ss ss ff f c f c cc 6 6 44 11 3 0 3 0 .. 1 . 9 1 . 9 66 1 1 = = 11 == 0 0 55 00 22 11 QQ QQ ss ss ff f c f c cc 6 6 99 88 00 .. . 8 . 8 66 = = == 0 0 55 00 22 11 QQ QQ ssffcc 44 5 7 5 7 2 . 2 .55 00 11 == 5522QQ ss ss ff f c f c cc 6 6 55 99 0 3 0 3 .. 2 . 1 2 . 1 11 0 0 = = 11 == 0 0 55 00 22 11 QQ QQ ss ss ff f c f c cc 9 9 22 66 5 2 5 2 .. 1 . 4 1 . 4 33 3 3 = = 11 == 0 0 55 00 22 11 QQ QQ ssf s f s cc ff c c 33 5 5 4 3 4 3 00 . . . . 4 6 9 4 6 9 1 1 = = = = 5 0 5 00 2 0 2Q 1 Q 1QQ ss ss ff f c f c cc 4 4 88 11 44 0 . 0 . . 5 . 5 1 0 1 0 11 6 1 6 1 1 1 = = == 0 0 55 00 22 11 QQ QQ ss s f s fcc ffc c 11 1 6 1 6 00 . . . . 0 5 3 0 5 3 6 6 = = = = 11 0 5 0 5 0 2 0 2 1 Q 1 Q QQ ss ss ff f c f c cc 9 9 11 33 6 7 6 7 .. 9 . 5 9 . 5 33 0 0 = = 11 == 0 0 55 00 22 11 QQ QQ ss ss ff f c f c cc 6 6 77 99 0 1 0 1 .. 1 . 5 1 . 5 44 7 7 = = 11 == 0 0 55 00 22 11 QQ QQ ssf s f s cc ffc c 22 0 3 0 3 0 5 . 0 5 .22 6 . 6 .7 1 7 1 00 11 = = = = 5 0 5 00 2 0 2Q 1 Q 1QQ ss ss ff f c f c cc 0 2 0 2 00 - - = T = T == W W 0 0 55 00 22 11 QQ QQ ss ss ff f c f c cc 3 3 11 88 88 0 . 0 . . 1 . 1 0 3 0 3 22 4 1 4 1 4 4 = = == 0 0 55 00 22 11 QQ QQ 55000022 ssffcc 5555..88 == 000011QQ ssffcc 4422..44 == 5522QQ 55117711 ssffcc 8844..44 == 5522QQ ssffcc 6622..66 == 000011QQ ssffcc 2244..44 == 5522QQ ssffcc 3311..77 == 000011QQ 00440011 22440011 ssffcc 5544..66 == 000011QQ ssffcc 882 5 2 51 . 1 .33 11 11 == 5522QQ ssffcc 11 0 0 0 0 3 . 3 .66 00 11 == 5522QQ s s s s f f f f c c c c 2 1 2 1 0 . 0 .77 ..5 5 == = = 00 5 0 5 0 2 1 2 1 Q Q Q Q ss ss ff f c f c cc 2 2 22 66 11 .. . 1 . 1 11 = = == 0 0 55 00 22 11 QQ QQ 00550011 ssffcc 8866..44 == 000011QQ ssffcc 4477..88 == 000011QQ ssffcc 5544..66 == 5522QQ ssffcc 44..99 == 000011QQ 55880011 ssffcc 3300..55 == 5522QQ 55330011 55440011 ssffcc 7733..77 == 000011QQ ssffcc 1144..55 == 5522QQ ssffcc 9933..55 == 5522QQ 55550011 ssffcc 4499..77 == 000011QQ ssffcc 4488..77 == 000011QQ ssffcc 5511..44 == 5522QQ ssffcc 4400..66 == 000011QQ 55555511 ss ss ff f c f c cc 1 1 66 99 0 6 0 6 .. 1 . 8 1 . 8 55 0 0 = = 22 == 0 0 55 00 22 11 QQ QQ ssffcc 77 0 7 0 7 2 . 2 .33 11 11 == 5522QQ ss ss ff f c f c cc 7 7 77 00 5 0 5 0 .. 2 . 9 2 . 9 66 1 1 = = 11 == 0 0 55 00 22 11 QQ QQ ss ss ff f c f c cc 9 9 33 66 0 5 0 5 .. 1 . 6 1 . 6 44 2 2 = = 11 == 0 0 55 00 22 11 QQ QQ ssf s f s cc ff c c 44 4 5 4 5 00 . . . . 9 2 3 9 2 3 0 0 = = = = 11 5 0 5 00 2 0 2Q 1 Q 1QQ ssf s f s cc ffc c 44 0 7 0 72 . 2 .22 ..8 1 8 1 = = = = 5 0 5 00 2 0 2Q 1 Q 1QQ ss ss ff f c f c cc 3 3 77 99 5 3 5 3 .. 9 . 4 9 . 4 33 0 0 = = 11 == 0 0 55 00 22 11 QQ QQ ss ss ff f c f c cc 7 7 44 55 5 4 5 4 .. 0 . 6 0 . 6 44 7 7 = = 11 == 0 0 55 00 22 11 QQ QQ ssffcc 1155..55 == 000011QQ 55008811 55445511 ssffcc 4433..55 == 5522QQ 55002211 00445511 ss ss ff f c f c cc 4 4 33 11 88 .. . 1 . 1 00 = = == 0 0 55 00 22 11 QQ QQ 00555511 ssffcc 1100..88 == 000011QQ ssffcc 3 3 00 -- T T == WW 5522QQ ssffcc 4477..55 == 5522QQ ssffcc 5599..44 == 5522QQ ssffcc 7700..66 == 5522QQ 00007711 ssffcc 00 == 000011QQ ssffcc 4444..88 == 000011QQ ssffcc 4422..77 == 000011QQ ssffcc 1199..88 == 000011QQ ss ss ff f c f c cc 4 4 99 22 88 .. . 4 . 4 22 = = == 0 0 55 00 22 11 QQ QQ 00008811 ssffcc 2244..11 == 5522QQ 55002222 ssffcc 22 == 000011QQ 55335511 ssffcc 1144..22 == 5522QQ ssffcc 2244..55 == 5522QQ ssffcc 4433..33 == 000011QQ ssffcc 6622..88 == 000011QQ 55110022 ssffcc 7700..55 == 5522QQ ssffcc 1100..88 == 000011QQ 00002211 00335511 ssffcc 33..44 == 5522QQ 55005511 ssffcc 3344..33 == 5522QQ ssffcc 9900..66 == 000011QQ ssffcc 9933..66 == 5522QQ ssffcc 9999..44 == 000011QQ 22002211 ssffcc 3333..99 == 000011QQ ssffcc 66..00 == 5522QQ 55112222 00003344 ssffcc 4488..00 == 000011QQ ssffcc 2222..0011 == 5522QQ ssffcc 5511..0011 == 5522QQ ss ss ff f c f c cc 7 7 33 55 7 8 7 8 .. 1 . 2 1 . 2 11 2 2 = = 11 == 0 0 55 00 22 11 QQ QQ 55112211 s s s s f f f f c c c c 9 1 9 1 2 4 . 2 4 .22 0 . 0 .1 1 5 = 5 = 11 = = 00 5 0 5 0 2 1 2 1 Q Q Q Q ss ss ff f c f c cc 6 6 44 11 5 8 5 8 .. 1 . 4 1 . 4 22 5 5 = = 11 == 0 0 55 00 22 11 QQ QQ ssffcc 2233..6611 == 000011QQ ssffcc 1188..5511 == 000011QQ ssffcc 8844..0011 == 5522QQ 00220022 ssffcc 1133..5511 == 000011QQ ssffcc 22 0 2 0 2 1 . 1 .33 55 11 == 5522QQ ssffcc 66 00 .. 0 1 0 1 2 2 == 22 5522QQ ssffcc 6655 00 .. 1 0 1 0 2 1 2 1 2 2 == 5522QQ ssffcc 4444..44 == 5522QQ ssffcc 77..44 == 000011QQ ssffcc 3322..22 == 000011QQ ssffcc 6688..6611 == 000011QQ ssffcc 9999..66 == 000011QQ 55225511 ssffcc 1100..88 == 5522QQ 55440022 ssffcc 8888..1111 == 000011QQ ssffcc 5511..3311 == 5522QQ ssffcc 8877..0022 == 000011QQ 00225511 55220022 00005511 ssffcc 1199..1111 == 5522QQ ssffcc 1188..66 == 5522QQ ssffcc 5544..66 == 5522QQ ssffcc 4455..7711 == 000011QQ ssffcc 5566..0011 == 000011QQ ssffcc 4411..99 == 000011QQ 00001122 ssffcc 7722..11 == 5522QQ ssffcc 6677..11 == 000011QQ 55001122 ssffcc 5533..22 == 5522QQ ssffcc 4422..33 == 000011QQ 00330022 ssffcc 33..99 == 5522QQ ssffcc 2277..3311 == 000011QQ 00002244 ssffcc 4477..11 == 5522QQ ssffcc 4477..22 == 000011QQ 00440022 ssffcc 4422..4411 == 5522QQ 55330022 ssffcc 88..1122 == 000011QQ 00001144 ssffcc 5588..9911 == 5522QQ ssffcc 6644..55 == 5522QQ ssffcc 44..8822 == 000011QQ ssffcc 9955..88 == 000011QQ 00000044 ssffcc 6699..33 == 5522QQ 00000033 ssffcc 3311..66 == 000011QQ ssffcc 5522..55 == 5522QQ ssffcc 11..88 == 000011QQ 55000033 ssffcc 7777..1111 == 5522QQ ssffcc 8833..8811 == 000011QQ '0 69 965' '069 '0 69 '5 69 965' '569 0' 6 9 960' '069 '0 6 9 960' '0 6 9 '0 6 9 960' 0' 6 9 0' 6 9 0' 96 960' 960' '0 6 9 '069 '0 6 9 960' 960' '069 960' 0' 6 9 '069 '0 6 9 '069 '569 '069 '0 6 9 5' 6 9 0' 6 9 960' 960' '5 6 9 '519 '079 '5 5 9 5' '0 59 9 5 '539 945' 940' 930' '039 '5 2 9 '529 '029 960' '009 '509 910' 915' 920' 925' 930' '539 '049 '549 '059 '559 '069 '0 6 9 '0 69 '5 6 9 5' 6 9 '5 6 9 '5 69 '569 '069 '569 '0 69 '559 '0 '0 69 69 6 0' '069 9 960' 960' 960' '0 6 9 0' 6 9 '0 6 9 '0 6 9 9 6 0' '0 69 '0 6 9 0' 6 9 '0 69 '069 '069 '069 '069 9 6 0' '069 '069 '069 960' 960' '069 960' 9 6 0' 96 0' '0 6 9 960' '0 6 9 '0 6 9 960' '069 '069 960' '0 6 9 0' 6 9 '0 6 9 960' 960' '069 0' 9 6 '069 '069 '069 '0 6 9 '069 960' 0' 6 9 960' 6 0' 9 '069 '069 '0 6 9 '0 6 9 '0 6 9 96 0' 960' 960' 0' 96 960' '0 6 9 960' '069 '0 6 9 '0 6 9 '0 69 5' 9 6 '069 '069 '5 6 '069 9 '079 '0 '079 6 9 9 6 0' 960' 960 9 ' 65' 9 6 0' '0 6 9 9 6 0' '069 '069 96 0' '0 6 9 5' 5 9 0' 6 9 965' 955' 955' 0' 6 9 965' 5' 2 9 5' 9 5 '559 935' 915' 955' 910' 9 4 0' '519 '5 1 9 955' 915' 955' 955' 945' '049 940' 940' 930' 930' 925' 905' '0 3 '5 9 2 9 955' '069 '5 6 9 '069 '0 69 '069 '0 6 9 0' 6 9 960' '0 6 9 960' 960' 960' '0 6 9 '0 6 9 960' '069 0' 96 960' 0' 960' 9 6 960' '0 6 9 '069 '5 6 9 '0 6 9 '5 3 9 '5 6 9 '559 5' 1 9 935' '5 5 9 '559 '069 '0 69 '5 6 9 '5 69 '0 69 '5 69 '0 6 9 0' 6 '069 9 '559 '069 '0 6 9 '069 960' 0' 6 9 '0 6 9 '069 960' 0' 6 9 '0 6 9 955' '0 6 9 960' '0 6 9 0' 6 9 '069 '069 '0 '069 6 9 '069 '0 6 9 '0 6 9 '069 '069 '069 '069 '069 0' 6 9 '5 6 9 '069 '5 6 960' 9 '0 6 9 0' '069 6 9 965' 7 0' '569 960' 9 960' '5 4 9 955' 965' '559 0' 6 9 '0 1 9 '0 2 9 '549 '559 '0 5 '0 9 39 '559 '5 2 9 930' 930' '039 925' '569 '5 69 '0 69 '5 6 9 960' '069 '0 6 9 960' '0 9 6 0' 6 9 9 6 0' 960' 960' '0 '069 9 6 0' '069 6 9 '0 6 9 '069 960' '0 6 9 '069 '0 6 9 0' 6 9 '0 6 9 '0 6 9 '0 6 9 '0 6 9 965' '0 6 '0 9 6 9 960' '069 '0 7 9 '069 '0 6 9 960' '069 0' 6 9 '069 0' '559 9 2 '559 '019 '5 5 9 930' 955' 5' 925' 2 9 '039 '039 '529 '509 900' '039 '039 '0 69 5' 6 9 '5 6 9 '5 6 9 '0 69 960' 0' 6 9 '069 '0 69 '069 '069 '069 '0 69 '0 6 '069 9 '0 6 9 '069 '0 69 '0 69 0' 6 9 960' '0 69 '5 69 0' 6 9 960' '0 59 '0 6 9 '0 6 9 '069 '0 960' 69 960' '0 6 9 '069 960' '069 '0 6 9 '069 '069 960' 0' 6 9 '069 '0 6 9 0' 6 9 '0 6 9 0' '069 9 6 0' 6 9 '069 960' 0' 6 9 '0 69 '069 '0 6 9 '069 960' '0 6 9 '0 6 9 960' 9 6 0' 9 6 0' '0 6 9 '069 960' '069 0' '069 9 6 965' '069 960' 0' '069 9 6 '0 69 '0 4 9 0' 6 '559 9 '559 5' 5 9 '559 '019 '559 940' 955' '559 '5 5 9 '059 '5 5 9 935' 930' 5' 95 955' 925' '529 '039 920' 920' 925' '009 '509 '069 toN A traP toN A traP toN A traP y ranimilerP dnegeL gnituoR wolfteertS ylnO weiveR roF snisaB eganiarD noitidnoC gnitsixE yradnuoB nisaB eganiarD snoitaredisnoC laicepS .teef 0001 sulp 88DVAN :mutaD elcitreV aerA gnitubirtnoC noN egarotS ecafruS saerA noitneteR deledoM daoR srairF 0265 01129 AC ,ogeiD naS 004 002 0 001 002 7070.192.916 teeF dxm.paM_snisaB_yeleeS\ordyH\10161\:W ttiibbiihhxxEE cciiggoolloorrddyyHH nnooiittiiddnnooCC ggnniittssiixxEE moc.gnireenignekcir.www 0102 hcraM :etaD tibihxE 10161 :NJ CER SEELEY AREA DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN APPENDIX C ULTIMATE CONDITION HYDROLOGIC EXHIBIT 3 2 June 2010 55660011 ssffcc 9922..33 == 0 0 55 00 22 00 QQ 22 ssffcc ss ff 77 cc 99 . 5 . 5 44 99 11 ..9 9 == = = 00 5 0 5 0 2 1 2 1 Q Q Q Q ssffcc 2266..66 == 0 0 55 00 22 55 QQ 44 ssffcc 7755..44 == 000011QQ ssffcc ss ss ff f s f s 55 cc cc ff 44 c c 2 . 2 . 99 4 4 .. 2 9 2 9 3 3 0 . = 0 . = 66 . = . = 5 5 0 0 0 0 == 5 0 5 0 00 = = 2 1 2 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 Q Q Q Q 1 5 0 1 5 0 00 2 1 2 1 00 Q Q Q Q 11 ssf s f s cc ff c c 88 6 1 6 1 . 0 . 0 55 .. 1 1 1 11 1 == = = 00 5 5 5 0 5 0 00 2 1 2 1 00 Q Q Q Q 11 ssf s f s cc ffc c 99 2 0 2 0 0 . 0 .77 ..5 5 == = = 00 2 2 5 0 5 0 11 2 1 2 1 00 Q Q Q Q 11 ssf s f s cc ffc c 33 1 9 1 9 9 . 9 .66 ..4 4 == = = 00 3 3 5 0 5 0 11 2 1 2 1 00 Q Q Q Q 11 ssf s f s cc ffc c 33 9 6 9 6 9 . 1 9 . 1 55 . 7 . 7 3 3 00 == 11 = = 00 0 0 5 0 5 0 11 2 1 2 1 00 Q Q Q Q 11 ssf s f s cc ffc c 88 7 0 7 0 7 . 7 .11 ..0 0 == 55 = 5 = 5 - 0 - 0 1 1 RR 5 0 5 0 00 D 2 1 D 2 1 11 Q Q H Q Q Hssf s f s cc ffc c 33 2 8 2 8 4 . 4 .44 ..3 3 == = = 00 0 0 5 0 5 0 00 2 1 2 1 33 Q Q Q Q 11 00113311 ssf s f s cc ffc c 77 5 4 5 4 0 . 0 . ss 11 .. f s f s 1 1 cc f = f = 4 c 4 c = = 44 - 0 - 0 7 3 R 7 3 R 5 0 5 0 0 . 0 . D 2 1 D 2 1 44 .. Q Q H Q Q H 3 3 == s s = = f s f s 00 5 5 c c ff 5 0 5 0 00 c c 2 1 2 1 7 3 7 3 Q Q Q Q 4 8 1 4 8 1 3 . 3 .44 ..3 3 == = = 00 0 0 5 0 5 0 00 2 1 2 1 44 Q Q Q Q 11 ssffcc ss ff 77 cc 11 . 7 . 7 33 11 11 ..9 9 == = = 00 0 0 5 0 5 0 00 2 1 2 1 99 Q Q Q Q 11 ssffcc ss ff 33 cc 33 . 4 . 4 66 .. 1 1 1 11 1 == = = 00 5 5 5 0 5 0 00 2 1 2 1 99 Q Q Q Q 11 ssff ss cc ss ff ff cc 88 cc 88 0 0 8 . 8 . 33 . = . = 2 2 11 == 5 - 5 - = = TT 22 00 0 0 WW QQ 5 0 5 0 11 2 1 2 1 99 Q Q Q Q 11 ssf s f s cc ffc c 77 1 2 1 2 6 . 6 .22 ..1 1 == = = 00 5 5 5 0 5 0 11 ss 2 1 2 1 99 ff Q Q Q Q 11 cc ss ff 55 cc 33 8 . 8 .11 99 11 ..7 7 == = = 00 0 0 5 0 5 0 22 2 1 2 1 99 Q Q Q Q 11 ssffcc 8822..0011 == 000011QQ ssffcc 3300..33 == 5522QQ 55770011 ssffcc 6699..44 == 5522QQ ssffcc 6666..33 == 5522QQ ssffcc 00 == 000011QQ ssffcc 8833..44 == 000011QQ ssffcc 3355..99 == 5522QQ ssffcc 6611..77 == 000011QQ ssffcc 9922..55 == 000011QQ 00660011 ssffcc 6677..3311 == 000011QQ ssffcc 3300..88 == 5522QQ 00114411 ssffcc 55..1111 == 000011QQ 55001111 ssffcc 5544..66 == 5522QQ ssffcc 3377..33 == 5522QQ ssffcc 9933..99 == 000011QQ ssffcc 22..55 == 000011QQ 00770011 ssffc s c sf s f s 1 c 1 c ff 2 c 2 c 22 . . 6 4 7 6 4 7 2 . 2 . = 1 = 1 ..1 1 11 5 = 5 = -- 2 = 2 = II 00 Q 5 Q L 5 L 5 0 5 0 00 2 1 2 1 00 ss Q Q Q Q 22 ffcc 8811..5522 33 == -- RR 55 D 2 D 2Q H Q H ssf s f s cc ffc c 88 9 0 9 0 2 . 2 .99 ..6 6 == = = 00 0 0 5 0 5 0 11 2 1 2 1 11 Q Q Q Q 11 ssffcc 44 ss 77 ffc . c .88 6 6 == = = 00 5 0 5 0 2 1 2 1 Q Q Q Q ssf s f s cc ffc c 99 7 5 7 5 7 . 7 .88 ..5 5 == = = 00 5 5 5 0 5 0 22 2 1 2 1 00 Q Q Q Q 11 ssff s c s c f f 8 c 8 c 3 3 22 ..1 1 == = = 00 0 0 5 0 5 0 22 2 1 2 1 00 Q Q Q Q 11 ss ss f s s f s s ff cc f f c f f c c c c c 22 8 8 7 7 6 7 7 6 ..4 1 . 4 1 . = 4 = 4 . . = 3 = 3 = 0 = 0 0 0 = 5 0 = 5 0 88 00 5 2 1 5 2 1 00 5 0 5 0 1 Q Q 1 Q Q 11 2 1 2 1 33 Q Q Q Q 11 ssffcc 3333..44 == 5 5 55 00 22 44 QQ 11 ssf s f s cc ffc c 66 6 6 6 6. 8 . 8 55 ..0 1 0 1 1 1 == = = 00 0 0 5 0 5 0 11 2 1 2 1 66 Q Q Q Q 11 ssf s f s cc ffc c 55 4 1 4 1 6 . 6 .55 ..3 3 == = = ss 00 0 0 f s f s 5 0 5 0 0 c 0 c ff 2 1 2 1 6 c 6 c 4 Q Q 4 Q Q 1 1 8 3 8 3 6 . 6 .55 ..3 3 == = = 00 6 6 5 0 5 0 99 2 1 2 1 00 Q Q Q Q 11 ssf s f s cc ffc c 44 4 0 4 0 2 . 2 .66 ..4 4 == = = 00 0 0 5 0 5 0 11 2 1 2 1 77 Q Q Q Q 11 55117711 ssf s f s cc ffc c 55 4 4 4 4. 2 . 2 44 ..0 1 0 1 1 1 == 66 = = - 0 - 0 RR 5 0 5 0 D 2 1 D 2 1 Q Q H Q Q H ssf s f s cc ffc c 00 0 0 == = = 0 2 0 2 5 0 - 5 0 -TT 2 1 2 1 WW Q Q Q Q ssf s f s cc ffc c 22 8 4 8 4. 4 . 4 66 ..7 2 7 2 1 1 == = = 00 0 0 5 0 5 0 00 2 1 2 1 44 Q Q Q Q 44 ssffcc 7766..88 == 000011QQ ssffcc 3355..5533 == 000011QQ ssffcc 9933..66 == 000011QQ ssffcc 4444..44 == 5522QQ 22440011 ssffcc 9933..66 == 000011QQ ssffcc 7700..11 == 5522QQ 00440011 ssffcc 5555..11 == 000011QQ 55440011 ssffcc 4411..55 == 5522QQ ssffcc 6644..55 == 5522QQ ssffcc 5522..77 == 000011QQ ssffcc 4499..77 == 000011QQ 00110022 55880011 00330011 ssf s f s cc ffc c 44 1 6 1 6 9 . 9 .22 ..1 1 == = = 00 5 0 5 0 2 1 2 1 Q Q Q Q ssffcc 4433..33 == 5 5 55 11 22 11 QQ 11 ssf s f s cc ffc c 66 2 3 2 3 0 . 0 .77 ..5 5 == = = 00 5 0 5 0 2 1 2 1 Q Q Q Q ssf s f s cc ffc c 88 4 7 4 7 0 . 0 .88 ..6 6 == = = 00 5 0 5 0 2 1 2 1 Q Q Q Q ssf s f s cc ffc c 55 9 0 9 0 4 . 4 .88 ..5 5 == = = 00 5 5 5 0 5 0 33 2 1 2 1 00 Q Q Q Q 11 ssffcc ss ff 66 cc 44 5 . 5 .99 ..6 6 == = = 00 0 0 5 0 5 0 55 2 1 2 1 00 Q Q Q Q 11 ssffcc 1199..33 == 5 5 55 55 22 00 QQ 11 ssffcc 7777..44 == 000011QQ ssffcc 3366..55 == 000011QQ 66--CCGG ssf s f s cc ffc c 99 3 7 3 7 9 . 9 .88 ..5 5 == = = 00 5 5 5 0 5 0 22 2 1 2 1 11 Q Q Q Q 11 ssf s f s cc ffc c 44 6 7 6 7 5 . 5 .66 ..4 4 == = = 00 0 0 5 0 5 0 11 2 1 2 1 22 Q Q Q Q 11 ssf s f s cc ffc c 99 3 5 3 5 4 . 4 .33 ..2 2 == = = 00 0 0 5 0 5 0 99 2 1 2 1 00 Q Q Q Q 11 ssffcc ss ff 88 cc 44 . 1 . 1 22 66 11 ..8 8 == = = 00 5 5 5 0 5 0 55 2 1 2 1 55 Q Q Q Q 11 ssf s f s cc ffc c 33 4 0 4 0 4 . 4 .55 ..3 3 == = = 00 5 5 5 0 5 0 99 2 1 2 1 00 Q Q Q Q 11 55007711 ssf s f s cc ffc c 11 6 3 6 3 6 . 6 .22 ..1 1 == = = 00 5 0 5 0 2 1 2 1 Q Q Q Q ssffcc 9977..00 == 5 5 55 44 22 55 QQ 11 ssf s f s cc ffc c 99 8 4 8 4 3 . 3 .66 ..4 4 == = = 00 5 0 5 0 2 1 2 1 Q Q Q Q ssffcc 6655..55 == 5 5 55 00 22 88 QQ 11 33--TTWW ssffcc 9900..11 == 000011QQ 00007711 ssffcc 6622..88 == 000011QQ ssffcc 00 == 5522QQ ssf s f s cc ffc c 66 3 2 3 2 6 . 6 .22 ..1 1 == = = 00 5 5 5 0 5 0 11 2 1 2 1 00 Q Q Q Q 22 ssf s f s cc ffc c 99 4 1 4 1 6 . 6 .55 ..3 3 == = = 00 0 0 5 0 5 0 22 2 1 2 1 11 Q Q Q Q 11 s s s s f f f f c c c c 8 5 8 5 7 . 7 .88 ..5 5 == = = 00 5 5 5 0 5 0 00 2 1 2 1 22 Q Q Q Q 11 ssf s f s cc ffc c 33 7 1 7 1 8 . 8 .77 ..4 4 == = = 00 0 0 5 0 5 0 44 2 1 2 1 55 Q Q Q Q 11 ssf s f s cc ffc c 66 3 8 3 8 0 . 0 .88 ..6 6 == = = 00 0 0 5 0 5 0 55 2 1 2 1 55 Q Q Q Q 11 ssffcc ss ff 77 cc 99 . 1 . 1 00 66 11 ..7 7 == = = 00 5 5 5 0 5 0 33 2 1 2 1 55 Q Q Q Q 11 ssf s f s cc ffc c 11 3 3 3 3 9 . 9 .44 ..2 2 == = = 00 5 0 5 0 2 1 2 1 Q Q Q Q ssf s f s cc ffc c 88 7 2 7 2 3 . 3 .33 ..2 2 == = = 00 5 5 5 0 5 0 00 2 1 2 1 22 Q Q Q Q 22 ssf s f s cc ffc c 88 3 8 3 8 3 . 3 .11 ..1 1 == = = 00 0 0 5 0 5 0 00 2 1 2 1 88 Q Q Q Q 11 ssffcc 00 == 000011QQ 00335511 ssf s f s cc ffc c 66 9 6 9 6 4 . 4 .22 ..1 1 == = = 00 0 0 5 0 5 0 00 2 1 2 1 22 Q Q Q Q 11 ssf s f s cc ffc c 77 6 7 6 7 7 . 7 .66 ..4 4 == = = 00 5 5 5 0 5 0 11 2 1 2 1 22 Q Q Q Q 11 s s s s f f f f c c c c 4 4 4 4 4 . 4 .99 ..6 6 == = = 00 5 5 5 0 5 0 00 2 1 2 1 55 Q Q Q Q 11 ssf s f s cc ffc c 55 1 9 1 9 4 . 4 .44 ..3 3 == = = 00 5 0 5 0 2 1 2 1 Q Q Q Q ssffcc 3377..11 == 1 1 55 11 22 22 QQ 22 22002211 22--RRDDHH ssffcc 4466..22 == 000011QQ 00003344 ssffcc 66..00 == 5522QQ ssffcc 6644..00 == 5522QQ ssffcc 4411..0011 == 5522QQ ssffcc 4488..00 == 000011QQ 77112211 ssffcc 5566..00 == 000011QQ 22005511 55115511 ssffcc 88..5511 == 000011QQ 00220022 ssffcc 4488..11 == 5522QQ ssffcc 7744..11 == 5522QQ ssffcc 99..22 == 5522QQ 55225511 ssffcc 7733..11 == 5522QQ ssffcc 9955..22 == 000011QQ ssffcc 7700..22 == 000011QQ ssffcc 5522..44 == 000011QQ ssffcc 4422..77 == 5522QQ ssffcc 99..11 == 000011QQ ssffcc 3344..0011 == 000011QQ 11--RRDDHH 00115511 00002222 22--RRDDLL 11--RRDDLL 55112222 ssffcc 6688..22 == 5522QQ ssffcc 3322..33 == 5522QQ ssffcc 5566..11 == 5522QQ ssffcc 3344..6611 == 5522QQ ssffcc 3366..9911 == 5522QQ ssffcc 2211..22 == 5522QQ ssffcc 3300..44 == 000011QQ ssffcc 2277..44 == 000011QQ ssffcc 9922..22 == 000011QQ ssffcc 3355..4422 == 000011QQ ssffcc 3322..9922 == 000011QQ ssffcc 5500..33 == 000011QQ 66--IIMM ssffcc 9944..1122 == 5522QQ 55--CCGG ssffcc 3377..9922 == 000011QQ ssffcc 7700..77 == 5522QQ ssffcc 7788..99 == 000011QQ 00225511 55440022 00005511 ssffcc 6644..0011 == 5522QQ 00112222 ssffcc 1122..3311 == 5522QQ ssffcc 9977..77 == 5522QQ ssffcc 2299..4411 == 000011QQ ssffcc 5522..22 == 5522QQ ssffcc 4488..0022 == 000011QQ ssffcc 3344..33 == 000011QQ ssffcc 2299..0011 == 000011QQ 44--CCGG 33--CCGG 22--CCGG ssffcc 8822..33 == 5522QQ ssffcc 1133..11 == 5522QQ ssffcc 1122..55 == 5522QQ ssffcc 8855..44 == 000011QQssffcc 3388..11 == 000011QQ ssffcc 7722..77 == 000011QQ 55220022 00225511 ssffcc 1188..22 == 5522QQ ssffcc 6644..0011 == 5522QQ ssffcc 9988..33 == 000011QQ ssffcc 2299..4411 == 000011QQ 55001122 ssffcc 9955..33 == 5522QQ ssffcc 6699..44 == 000011QQ 00330022 ssffcc 3388..77 == 5522QQ 00002244 ssffcc 3399..0011 == 000011QQ 11--IIMM ssffcc 6677..11 == 5522QQ ssffcc 7755..99 == 5522QQ 11440022 ssffcc 8877..22 == 000011QQ 11--CCGG ssffcc 4422..3311 == 000011QQ ssffcc 66..11 == 5522QQ ssffcc 44..66 == 5522QQ ssffcc 6644..22 == 000011QQ ssffcc 4499..88 == 000011QQ 55330022 ssffcc 1111..8811 == 5522QQ 00440022 ssffcc 7711..5522 == 000011QQ ssffcc 9977..77 == 5522QQ ssffcc 9977..0011 == 000011QQ 00001144 ssffcc 3355..55 == 5522QQ 00000044 ssffcc 1177..88 == 000011QQ ssffcc 5555..22 == 5522QQ 00000033 22--IIMM ssffcc 3388..33 == 000011QQ ssffcc 7733..55 == 5522QQ ssffcc 4499..55 == 5522QQ ssffcc 9944..77 == 000011QQ 44--IIMM ssffcc 1122..88 == 000011QQ ssffcc 4499..22 == 5522QQ ssffcc 6600..44 == 000011QQ 33--IIMM ssffcc 8811..44 == 5522QQ 55000033 55--IIMM ssffcc 9977..55 == 000011QQ ssffcc 6622..44 == 5522QQ ssffcc 7777..2211 == 5522QQ ssffcc 2233..66 == 000011QQ ssffcc 6666..7711 == 000011QQ 88--IIMM ssffcc 7755..6611 == 5522QQ ssffcc 2299..2222 == 000011QQ PCR ni84 = eziS sfc77.86 = 001Q sfc 15.54 = 52Q 5201-0201 0 4 0 1 -5 3 0 1 s fc 3 6 .5 1 1 = 5 2 Q s fc 7 0 .0 7 1 = 0 0 1 Q P C R n i2 7 = e z iS s P s f f C c c 0 R 8 9 3 1 8 n 5 .1 . i 1 5 8 5 - 3 4 5 = 1 = = 5 0 5 e 1 0 2 z 1 Q i Q S 0 3 0 2 -5 2 0 2 s fc 4 .4 = 5 2 Q s fc 5 3 .6 = 0 0 1 Q P C R n i6 3 = e z iS s fc s fc P C 5 4 0 1 -0 4 0 1 8 2 .6 8 1 = 5 2 Q 1 3 .1 7 2 = 0 0 1 Q R n i4 8 = e z iS 0 5 0 1 -5 4 0 1 s fc 8 4 .7 8 1 = 5 2 Q s fc 7 .0 7 2 = 0 0 1 Q P C R n i4 8 = e z iS 5 5 0 1 -0 5 0 1 s fc 8 4 .5 1 2 = 5 2 Q s fc 2 1 .3 1 3 = 0 0 1 Q P C R n i4 8 = e z iS PCR ni48 = eziS sfc69.813 = 001Q sfc 38.912 = 52Q ssP 0601-5501 5 4 0 2 -5 1 2 2 fc 4 6 .8 3 = 5 2 Q fc 5 4 .4 5 = 0 0 1 Q C R n i8 4 = e z iS 5302-0302 sfc 63.11 = 52Q sfc79.51 = 001Q PCR ni63 = eziS 0 1 0 1 -5 0 0 1 s fc 3 2 .2 1 = 5 2 Q s fc 9 3 .7 1 = 0 0 1 Q P C R n i6 3 = e z iS ssP 0 1 0 1 -5 0 0 1 fc 3 2 .2 1 = 5 2 Q fc 9 3 .7 1 = 0 0 1 Q C R n i6 3 = e z iS ssP 1 0 0 5- 1 0 1 0 Q 2 5 = 1 2. 2 3 cf Q 1 0 0 = 1 7. 3 9 cf Si z e = 3 6i n R C 0 2 1 1 -5 1 11 s fc 4 6 .0 1 = 5 2 Q s fc 2 4 .5 1 = 0 0 1 Q P C R n i6 3 = e z iS ssP 1 0 0 5- 1 0 1 0 Q 2 5 = 1 2. 2 3 cf Q 1 0 0 = 1 7. 3 9 cf Si z e = 3 6i n R C PCR ni63 = eziS PCR ni63 = eziS sfc21.33 = 001Q sfc39.71 = 001Q sfc 6.22 = 52Q sfc 82.21 = 52Q PCR ni63 = eziS 5101-0101 5211-0211 sfc39.71 = 001Q s P f C c5 R 4 n .9 i8 6 4 = = 0 0 e 1 zi Q S sfc 5 8 2 2 1 . 1 2 - 1 0 = 21 5 1 2Q sfc 8.54 = 52Q 0201-5101 0 3 0 1 -5 2 0 1 s fc 4 2 .1 7 = 5 2 Q s fc 5 7 .5 0 1 = 0 0 1 Q P C R n i0 6 = e z iS PCR ni42 = eziS 0 3 0 1 -5 2 0 1 s fc 4 2 .1 7 = 5 2 Q s fc 5 7 .5 0 1 = 0 0 1 Q P C R n i0 6 = e z iS PCR ni63 = eziS PCR ni63 = eziS sfc18.8 = 001Q sfc79.31 = 001Q sfc79.31 = 001Q sfc 32.6 = 52Q sfc 63.9 = 52Q sfc 63.9 = 52Q 0131-0031 0121-5021 0121-5021 PCR ni42 = eziS PCR ni63 = eziS PCR ni63 = eziS sfc18.8 = 001Q sfc28.31 = 001Q sfc28.31 = 001Q sfc 32.6 = 52Q sfc 37.9 = 52Q sfc 37.9 = 52Q 0131-0031 5131-0131 5131-0131 5 3 0 1 -0 3 0 1 s fc 4 4 .8 9 = 5 2 Q s fc 9 3 .5 4 1 = 0 0 1 Q P C R n i2 7 = e z iS PCR ni63 = eziS sfc26.31 = 001Q sfc 63.9 = 52Q 5041-0041 ssP 0 3 0 2 -5 2 0 2 s fc 4 .4 = 5 2 Q s fc 5 3 .6 = 0 0 1 Q P C R n i6 3 = e z iS 5 1 5 1 -5 0 5 1 fc 2 8 .6 1 = 5 2 Q fc 3 9 .3 2 = 0 0 1 Q C R n i6 3 = e z iS 0 4 0 1 -5 3 0 1 s fc 3 6 .5 1 1 = 5 2 Q s fc 7 0 .0 7 1 = 0 0 1 Q P C R n i2 7 = e z iS PCR ni84 = eziS 5 1 5 1 -5 0 5 1 s fc 2 8 .6 1 = 5 2 Q s fc 3 9 .3 2 = 0 0 1 Q P C R n i6 3 = e z iS 0 3 0 2 -5 2 0 2 s fc 4 .4 = 5 2 Q s fc 5 3 .6 = 0 0 1 Q P C R n i6 3 = e z iS sfc99.67 = 001Q sfc 73.35 = 52Q 5551-0351 PCR ni63 = eziS sfc18.02 = 001Q sfc 5.41 = 52Q 0 3 0 2 -5 2 0 2 s fc 4 .4 = 5 2 Q s fc 5 3 .6 = 0 0 1 Q P C R n i6 3 = e z iS ssP 5 3 0 2 -0 3 0 2 fc 6 3 .1 1 = 5 2 Q fc 7 9 .5 1 = 0 0 1 Q C R n i6 3 = e z iS 0 5 0 1 -5 4 0 1 s fc 8 4 .7 8 1 = 5 2 Q s fc 7 .0 7 2 = 0 0 1 Q P C R n i4 8 = e z iS PCR ni63 = eziS PCR ni63 = eziS PCR ni63 = eziS sfc94.32 = 001Q sfc92 = 001Q sfc92 = 001Q sfc 66.41 = 52Q sfc 95.81 = 52Q sfc 95.81 = 52Q 0291-0191 5171-0171 5171-0171 0 4 0 2 -5 3 0 2 s fc 7 8 .4 2 = 5 2 Q s fc 5 7 .4 3 = 0 0 1 Q P C R n i6 3 = e z iS s s P f f c c C 6 0 R 3 9 6 8 . n 0 8 .9 i 1 1 4 1 - 3 8 5 2 5 = = = 0 0 e 1 5 0 z 2 1 i Q S Q 2 2 1 5 Q - 2 2 0 5 4 = 5 Q 3 8 1 . 0 6 0 4 = c S f 5 i s z 4 e . 4 = 5 c 4 f 8 s i n R C P 0601-5501 sfc 38.912 = 52Q sfc69.813 = 001Q PCR ni48 = eziS 5 3 0 1 -0 3 0 1 s fc 4 4 .8 9 = 5 2 Q s fc 9 3 .5 4 1 = 0 0 1 Q P C R n i2 7 = e z iS ssP 0 4 0 2 -5 3 0 2 fc 7 8 .4 2 = 5 2 Q fc 5 7 .4 3 = 0 0 1 Q C R n i6 3 = e z iS 0 5 0 1 -5 4 0 1 s fc 8 4 .7 8 1 = 5 2 Q s fc 7 .0 7 2 = 0 0 1 Q P C R n i4 8 = e z iS 0101-5001 sfc 32.21 = 52Q sfc93.71 = 001Q PCR ni63 = eziS yy aa ww hh gg ii HH ss ee ww ee HH nn aa vv EE tt ss ee WW tt ee ee rr tt SS aa tt ss ii VV oo ii RR dd aa oo RR nn ii aa MM tt ss ee WW ddaaooRR lllleekkssaaHH tt ee ee r t S o r t S o 5 4 0 1 -0 4 0 1 s fc 8 2 .6 8 1 = 5 2 Q s fc 1 3 .1 7 2 = 0 0 1 Q P C R n i4 8 = e z iS rr tt nn ee CC ll EE PCR ni63 = eziS sfc94.32 = 001Q sfc 66.41 = 52Q 0291-0191 tteeeerrttSS oommaallAA '5 6 9 965' '069 '069 eeuunneevvAA lliieeHH 960' eeuunneevvAA ttllooHH '069 '069 '069 960' 960' 960' '0 6 9 tt ee ee rr tt SS 960' kk rr aa 960' PP '0 6 9 tt ee 0' ee 9 6 rr tt 960' SS 960' 960' oo eeuunneevvAA llaannggiiSS ttMM '069 mm '0 6 9 aa ll AA '069 5' 6 9 5' 6 9 '069 '5 '0 7 6 9 9 eeuunneevvAA aannuuggaaLL '0 4 9 ddrraavveelluuooBB rreevviiRR wweeNN 0' 2 9 '549 '049 '559 9 2 5' '5 5 9 5' 2 9 '039 '5 2 9 '529 960' 925' '009 905' '509 910' 915' 920' 925' 930' '039 '539 '049 '549 '059 '559 '039 '569 '069 960' '0 6 9 0' 9 6 '069 0' 6 9 '0 6 9 '079 '519 '559 '039 '5 6 9 5' 6 9 '069 '069 '069 960' '069 '069 960' 0' 6 9 '0 6 9 0' 6 9 '0 6 960' 9 960' '0 6 9 '069 960' '0 6 9 0' 6 9 0' 6 9 '0 6 9 0' 6 9 '069 0' 6 9 '0 6 9 0' 6 9 960' '079 0' 6 9 '069 '559 '559 '559 '559 0' 1 9 955' '5 5 9 '519 955' '539 935' 930' 930' '5 2 9 925' '039 '5 2 9 '569 '069 '069 960' '0 6 9 940' '529 '069 '069 '5 6 9 '0 6 9 960' 960' '069 '0 6 '0 9 6 9 '069 0' 6 9 '069 0' 6 9 '069 '069 955' 960' '559 '559 '069 '069 965' '069 '5 6 9 '559 '0 6 9 '0 6 9 0' 6 9 '069 0' 5 9 '019 '559 '069 '0 6 9 5' 6 9 '569 '5 6 9 '569 '569 '069 '069 '569 '569 965' '569 '0 6 960' 9 0' 6 9 '069 '069 '069 '069 0' 6 9 0' 6 9 '0 6 9 '069 '069 '069 9 6 0' '069 '069 '0 6 9 960' 0' 6 9 0' 6 9 '069 '569 '069 '0 5 9 '069 '069 960' '0 6 9 960' '069 '0 6 9 '069 '0 6 9 955' 960' '069 '069 '0 6 9 960' '0 6 9 '069 960' 960' '0 6 9 960' '0 6 9 9 6 0' '0 6 9 0' 6 9 0' 6 9 '0 6 9 '0 6 9 '069 '0 6 9 '0 6 9 '0 6 9 '0 6 '0 9 '069 '0 6 9 '069 '069 6 9 9 6 0' '0 6 9 '069 960' '069 '569 '069 960' '0 '069 6 9 0' 6 9 0' '069 '069 9 6 '0 6 9 '0 6 9 '069 '069 '069 960' 0' 6 9 '5 6 9 '069 960' 9 6 0' '0 6 9 '5 6 9 960' 6 0' 9 0' 6 9 '069 0' 6 9 0' 6 9 0' 6 9 965' 960' '0 6 9 0' '069 9 6 '0 960' 7 9 955' '5 5 9 5' 6 9 0' 915' 5 5' 9 5 9 910' 0' 955' 9 6 0' 9 4 925' 940' 915' 955' '5 5 9 940' 945' 940' '519 '0 3 9 955' 930' 930' 925' '009 900' '509 '069 '0 6 9 '0 6 9 '069 '069 '569 960' '069 '069 '069 '069 960' 960' 9 5 5' 960' '069 '0 6 9 960' 960' 960' 0' 960' 6 9 '069 '069 0' 960' 6 9 0' 6 9 '0 6 9 960' '069 '069 '069 960' '069 '069 960' '069 960' 9 6 0' 9 6 0' '069 '069 '0 6 9 '0 6 9 960' '069 960' 960' 0' 6 9 '0 6 '069 9 '0 6 9 '0 6 9 960' '069 '0 6 9 '0 6 9 '0 6 9 '069 '0 6 9 '5 6 9 '0 6 9 0' 6 9 965' '0 6 9 '0 6 9 '069 5' 5 9 '5 6 '0 6 '569 9 9 '079 955' 955' '5 4 9 5' 3 9 '559 5' '559 9 5 0' 6 9 '059 '559 '559 '0 1 '5 1 9 9 920' '5 5 9 955' '059 955' '0 930' 3 9 '039 925' 925' '039 '529 '039 920' 920' '029 '509 '0 3 9 toN A traP toN A traP toN A traP dnegeL senilretneC niarD mrotS y ranimilerP serutcurtS niarD mrotS snisaB eganiarD noitidnoC etamitlU yradnuoB nisaB eganiarD snoitaredisnoC laicepS ylnO weiveR roF noitneteR erutuF htiw aerA .teef 0001 sulp 88DVAN :mutaD elcitreV aerA gnitubirtnoC noN aerA noitneteR deledoM daoR srairF 0265 004 002 0 001 002 01129 AC ,ogeiD naS 7070.192.916 teeF dxm.etamitlu_paM_snisaB_yeleeS\ordyH\10161\:W ttiibbiihhxxEE cciiggoolloorrddyyHH nnooiittiiddnnooCC eettaammiittllUU moc.gnireenignekcir.www 0102 hcraM :etaD tibihxE 10161 :NJ CER SEELEY AREA DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN APPENDIX E TOPOGRAPHIC MAP 3 4 June 2010 APPENDIX D SCWD Approved Budget and Financial Statement Seeley County Water District PRELIMNARY BUDGET FISCAL YEAR July 2016 - June 2017 2017-2018 Board President: Patrick Harris Ad-Hoc Board Members: Jason Grima, Victor Ibarra, 2016-2017 Committee Keith Baird, Beatriz Scroggins. 2016-2017 A c tuals to Recommendation Budget 5/26/17 Preliminary Budget Income Billable Expense Income 7 7.26 Charges for services $275.00 1 ,014.34 $275.00 Dumper Income 6 1,817.34 General Fund Income Dividend Income $400.00 4 12.80 $413.00 Secured Property Tax Income $1,800.00 1 ,149.35 $1,150.00 Unsecured Property Tax Income $255.00 ( 4.77) Total General Fund Income $2,455.00 1 ,557.38 Homeowners General Op 35% 1 0.69 $14.00 Interest income $1,200.00 1 ,087.06 $1,185.00 Sales 6 ,797.39 $7,190.00 Sewer - Off-Site Revenue (Capital Improvement) $250,000.00 1 40,200.15 $158,000.00 Sewer Charges Base - Commercial $25,000.00 2 8,926.56 $77,500.00 Sewer Charges Base - Residential $265,000.00 2 35,536.03 $288,000.00 Sewer Charges Usage - Commercial $18,000.00 2 0,913.90 Unapplied Cash Payment Income 2 ,404.19 $2,400.00 Water Charges - Base - Commercial $43,000.00 4 0,724.13 $110,500.00 Water Charges Base - Residential $180,000.00 1 60,784.09 $196,000.00 Water Charges Commercial Metered Usage $20,000.00 1 9,020.06 $18,500.00 Water Charges Residential Metered Usage $110,000.00 1 02,132.89 $92,000.00 Water/Sewer Fees $14,000.00 1 ,806.04 $2,000.00 Total Income $928,930.00 8 24,809.50 $953,289.00 Expenses Admin-Other 3 8.48 Advertising $1,000.00 3 ,406.34 $3,000.00 Alert Services Expense $50.00 2 2.50 $37.00 Bank Charges/Late Fees/Over limit Fees $1,500.00 7 66.57 $880.00 Business Insurance 1 5,040.58 $15,000.00 Capital Improvements 1 5,650.19 $45,000.00 Auto $4,800.00 Liability/Fraud Insurance (Property) $25,000.00 Total Business Insurance $29,800.00 page 1 2017-2018 Board President: Patrick Harris Ad-Hoc Board Members: Jason Grima, Victor Ibarra, 2016-2017 Committee Keith Baird, Beatriz Scroggins. 2016-2017 A c tuals to Recommendation Budget 5/26/17 Preliminary Budget Computer Expense $200.00 Contract Labor $30,000.00 4 4,572.80 $40,000.00 Director Fees $11,000.00 6 ,100.00 $11,000.00 Drug Testing $200.00 $200.00 Dues and subscriptions $3,000.00 6 ,606.45 $7,000.00 Employee Insurance Medical Insurance $45,000.00 8 ,629.30 $12,000.00 Dental/Vision/Life/AD&D $4,000.00 1 ,627.00 $2,000.00 Workers Compensation Insurance $15,500.00 1 3,407.17 $17,000.00 Total Employee Insurance $64,500.00 2 3,663.47 Employee Relations $600.00 2 76.08 $535.00 Fees - Permits/Certifications/Fines $20,000.00 1 3,010.90 $15,000.00 Fuel $4,350.00 4 ,693.01 $5,000.00 General Fund Expenses 1 ,062.94 Street Lights $6,150.00 3 ,619.18 $4,200.00 Total General Fund Expenses $6,150.00 4 ,682.12 Interest Expense $200.00 2 7.23 $8,000.00 Internet Lab Testing $65,000.00 3 9,457.00 $42,000.00 Legal and Professional Fees Bookkeeping Services $15,000.00 1 4,151.00 $21,600.00 CPA $7,000.00 7 ,000.00 $7,000.00 Legal Fees $20,000.00 1 7,575.01 $7,000.00 Total Legal and Professional Fees $42,000.00 3 8,725.01 Payroll Expenses Taxes $17,000.00 2 2,177.15 $38,000.00 Wages $240,000.00 1 70,628.23 $268,000.00 Total Payroll Expenses $257,000.00 1 92,805.38 Miscellaneous Expense 5 00.00 Office Expenses 5 ,034.54 $5,000.00 Company Contributions - Health Insurance - Total Company Contributions $0.00 Permit Fees - Burn/Air Pollution $600.00 1 82.50 $200.00 Postage and Freight $5,000.00 3 ,134.77 $3,500.00 Professional & special services $55,000.00 7 2,880.70 $68,500.00 Repair & Maintenance 2 29.79 $300.00 Auto $3,000.00 1 ,301.76 $3,000.00 Sewer-maintenance $27,490.00 7 ,892.21 $13,000.00 Water Maintenance $27,490.00 1 6,066.34 $20,000.00 Total Repair & Maintenance $57,980.00 2 5,490.10 page 2 2017-2018 Board President: Patrick Harris Ad-Hoc Board Members: Jason Grima, Victor Ibarra, 2016-2017 Committee Keith Baird, Beatriz Scroggins. 2016-2017 A c tuals to Recommendation Budget 5/26/17 Preliminary Budget Security System Expense $500.00 Source-Purchased Water $8,000.00 1 ,160.00 $2,000.00 Supplies 1 75.88 Office Supplies $10,000.00 5 ,801.41 $6,000.00 Wastewater Treatment Supplies $20,000.00 1 0,140.95 $12,000.00 Water Treatment Supplies $17,000.00 3 1,326.00 $34,000.00 Total Supplies $47,000.00 4 7,444.24 Telephone Expense $8,000.00 5 ,399.93 $6,600.00 Transport & Travel $1,500.00 3 02.69 $1,000.00 Uncategorized expenses 6 .30 Tuition $900.00 7 42.29 $900.00 Uniforms $4,000.00 5 ,165.12 $6,000.00 Utilities 1 3,403.88 Utilities - Sewer $45,600.00 2 9,767.59 $37,000.00 Utilities - Water $34,000.00 3 0,270.56 $38,000.00 Total Utilities $79,600.00 7 3,442.43 Total Expenses $547,130.00 6 50,429.72 $826,952.00 Net Operating Income $381,800.00 1 74,379.78 $126,337.00 OTHER INCOME Other Income - Sewer 1 02.00 6 8.00 0 .81 7 68.92 2 18.01 4 .31 Total Other Income 1 ,162.05 OTHER EXPENSES Reconciliation Discrepancies 0 .01 Total Other Expenses 0 .01 NET OTHER INCOME 1 ,162.06 NET INCOME 1 75,541.84 Pay Off In June '17 USDA Loan #4 Wastewater $36763.79 USDA Loan #8 Water $10,400.00 $165,134.88 Pay Off In June '17 Smith Loan (property)Proposed Admin/Community Center Building site $14,400.00 $1293.00 Capital Improvement $100,000.00 P&L Fiscal Report page 3 Regular Meeting: June 12, 2017 preliminary budget presented to board for review 5/24/17: Ad-Hoc Committee: President Mr. Harris, Board Member Mr. Ibarra