Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Capital Facilities topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission recommends Capital Facilities Element update after water, sewer capacity discussion
Summary
Planning staff told the commission that planned wastewater upgrades should meet Winslow’s projected growth through about 2038–2040; commissioners pressed for clarification on capacity numbers for water and sewer, pump‑station upgrades and funding and unanimously recommended the Capital Facilities Element updates.
The Bainbridge Island Planning Commission voted unanimously on March 26 to recommend updates to the Capital Facilities Element after a detailed presentation by Public Works staff and an extended Q&A on water and wastewater capacity.
Public Works Director Chris said the Capital Facilities Element principally updated inventory and references and incorporated water and sewer technical memoranda and the six‑year capital improvement plan. On water, Chris noted that a water supply production well appears in the six‑year CIP (planned in the 2029–2030 window in the packet) and that the city’s water tank and planned pump upgrades are intended to support projected growth. On wastewater, he told the commission the city is implementing a capacity upgrade now and that it is expected to serve through roughly 2038–2040; further upgrades could remain within the plant footprint for one additional cycle but later work might require expansion outside the footprint or satellite facilities. “We are doing a capacity upgrade right now for the treatment plant that we expect is going to be good until about the year 2038, 2040,” Chris said.
Commissioners asked for the technical basis of the capacity numbers: staff said the wastewater treatment plant upgrade analysis came from the consultant designing the current project and the collection‑system (pipes and pumps) analysis was performed by BHC for the DEIS. Commissioners noted that a technical memo referenced a water system supply capable of serving about 6,500 people in Winslow while the planning commission’s expected recommended Winslow population was much lower (~3,352), and asked how those figures reconcile with the DEIS estimate that a given upgrade would serve approximately 2,700 additional people. Staff explained there are multiple upgrade scenarios (different packages of improvements) and different consultants analyzed different components; they agreed to return with clearer cross‑walks identifying which memo or consultant produced each capacity estimate.
Commissioners also pressed on near‑term assets and costs: staff confirmed several pump stations are nearing capacity but said many upgrades can be achieved by replacing pumps or scheduled CIP projects; table estimates in the packet showed alternatives with multiyear costs in the $11–14 million range for some options, while average annual capital needs in early decades looked more like $1.5 million per year. Staff said rate studies and tools such as latecomer agreements and transportation impact fees are used to apportion costs between new development and existing ratepayers.
After discussion the commission moved and unanimously recommended the Capital Facilities Element updates, noting remaining questions about the technical memos and requesting clearer documentation: commissioners requested a zone‑by‑zone breakdown of the capacity analysis, the source of the Winslow population figures, and a clearer mapping between consultant memos, DEIS numbers and the capital improvement plan.
What’s next: staff will provide the requested documentation and clarify which consultant produced each capacity estimate in advance of the public hearing and the commission’s next review.
