HomeMy WebLinkAboutCAP032819
CITY OF CENTRAL
POINT
Oregon
City Council Meeting Agenda
Thursday, March 28, 2019
Mayor
Hank Williams
Ward I
Neil Olsen
Ward II
Kelley Johnson
Ward III
Brandon Thueson
Ward IV
Taneea Browning
At Large
Rob Hernandez
At Large
Michael Parsons
At Large
Michael Parsons
Next Res(1572) Ord (2057)
I. REGULAR MEETING CALLED TO ORDER
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III. ROLL CALL
IV. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
1. Planning Commission Member Recognition
2. RVCOG Annual Report (Casey)
V. PUBLIC COMMENTS
Public comment is for non-agenda items. If you are here to make comments on a specific agenda item, you must speak at
that time. Please limit your remarks to 3 minutes per individual, 5 minutes per group, with a maximum of 20 minutes per
meeting being allotted for public comments. The council may ask questions but may take no action during the public
comment section of the meeting, except to direct staff to prepare a report or place an item on a future agenda. Complaints against specific City employees should be resolved through the City’s Personnel Complaint procedure. The
right to address the Council does not exempt the speaker from any potential liability for defamation.
VI. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Approval of March 14, 2019 City Council Minutes
VII. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA
VIII. PUBLIC HEARING
Public comments will be allowed on items under this part of the agenda following a brief staff report presenting the item
and action requested. The presiding officer may limit testimony.
IX. ORDINANCES, AND RESOLUTIONS
A. Resolution No. _______ to include Southern Oregon Regional Economic
Development Funding Request Amount of $5,300 for a New Regional Economic
Strategy in the 2019-2021 City of Central Point Budget Proposal (Clayton)
B. Resolution No. ______, Adopting the Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual
(Samitore)
C. Resolution No. _______, Approving Amendment No. 1 to Intergovernmental
Agreement with Jackson County for Improvement and Elimination of Railroad
Crossings and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Agreement (Samitore)
X. BUSINESS
A. Consideration of Rogue Valley Transit District request for a Bus Stop at 5th and
East Pine (Samitore)
XI. MAYOR'S REPORT
XII. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
XIII. COUNCIL REPORTS
XIV. DEPARTMENT REPORTS
XV. EXECUTIVE SESSION
The City Council will adjourn to executive session under the provisions of ORS 192.660. Under the provisions of the
Oregon Public Meetings Law, the proceedings of an executive session are not for publication or broadcast.
XVI. ADJOURNMENT
Individuals needing special accommodations such as sign language, foreign language interpreters or equipment for the
hearing impaired must request such services at least 72 hours prior to the City Council meeting. To make your request,
please contact the City Recorder at 541-423-1026 (voice), or by e-mail to Deanna.casey@centralpointoregon.gov.
Si necesita traductor en español o servicios de discapacidades (ADA) para asistir a una junta publica de la ciudad por
favor llame con 72 horas de anticipación al 541-664-3321 ext. 201
City of Central Point
Staff Report to Council
ISSUE SUMMARY
TO: City Council
DEPARTMENT:
Administration
FROM: Deanna Casey, City Recorder
MEETING DATE: March 28, 2019
SUBJECT: RVCOG Annual Report
ACTION REQUIRED:
Information/Direction
RECOMMENDATION:
Not Applicable
Rogue Valley Council of Governments Executive Director Michael Cavallaro will be presenting
the Annual Report for Central Point.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. 17_18 Annual Update Central Point
4.2
Packet Pg. 3
ROGUE VALLEY
COUNCIL OF
GOVERNMENTS
We shall act as a catalyst to promote quality of life, effective
and efficient services, and leadership in regional communication,
cooperation, planning, and action in Southern Oregon.
Program and
Financial Update
January 2019
4.2.a
Packet Pg. 4 Attachment: 17_18 Annual Update Central Point (1122 : RVCOG Annual Report)
Contents
ORGANIZATIONAL OVERVIEW ............................................................ 3
PROGRAM OVERVIEW ....................................................................... 4
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING ............................................................................. 4
LAND USE PLANNING .......................................................................................... 5
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT .............................................................................. 5
NATURAL RESOURCES ......................................................................................... 6
SPECIAL MEMBER SERVICES ................................................................................ 6
FOOD & FRIENDS ................................................................................................. 7
HOME AND COMMUNITY-BASED CARE ............................................................... 8
AGING AND DISABILITY RESOURCE CONNECTION ............................................... 8
FINANCIAL OVERVIEW ....................................................................... 9
JURISDICTION PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS ....................................... 11
4.2.a
Packet Pg. 5 Attachment: 17_18 Annual Update Central Point (1122 : RVCOG Annual Report)
Unlike its member
governments, RVCOG
has no legislative,
taxing, or
enforcement
authority
ORGANIZATIONAL OVERVIEW
Of the 39,000
general purpose
governments in the
U.S., 35,000+ are
served by COGs
3
What is a COG?
A Council of Governments (COG) is a voluntary association of cities,
counties, and special purpose districts within a distinct region, serving
as planning, coordination, program development, and service delivery
organizations. They promote regional cooperation and provide services
and resources that might not otherwise be affordable or available to
local governments. While COGs differ in their mix of programs from one
region to another, they always share a fundamental purpose – to work
with the expressed consent and support of their members to facilitate
outcomes that improve the local and regional quality of life.
What is RVCOG?
In 1968, under the provisions of Chapter 190 of the Oregon Revised Statutes,
the Rogue Valley Council of Governments (RVCOG) was established by local
jurisdictions to operate in Jackson and Josephine counties. Currently,
RVCOG has 23 members: 15 local governments and 8 other entities
(special districts and higher education). Elected and appointed
representatives from each of the members serve on RVCOG’s Board of
Directors, which governs the organization at the policy level. In addition
to the Board, RVCOG’s moving parts comprise an Executive Committee,
professional staff, and a variety of permanent and temporary advisory
committees of stakeholders, members of the public, and technical experts. In
terms of funding, the vast majority comes through grants and contracts with federal,
state, and local governments, with additional monies collected from donations and membership dues.
How Does RVCOG Provide Services?
We have the long-term responsibility for implementing certain state and federal programs.
For example, we are the home of the Rogue Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization (RVMPO) for the
Greater Bear Creek Valley and the Middle Rogue MPO (MRMPO) for the Greater Grants Pass area. We are
also the Area Agency on Aging for Jackson and Josephine counties.
We collaborate with our members to obtain funding and cooperation from state, federal, and non-
governmental entities.
For example, we managed the Regional Problem Solving (RPS) process, a collaborative process that
established future growth patterns for multiple jurisdictions in the Rogue Valley.
We directly contract with our members for specific services.
Our provision of grant administration and financial services are good examples of this, as is our ability to
provide a staff member to serve as a contract land use planner for several of our jurisdictions.
Although the specifics of RVCOG’s programs have evolved over the years as a response to new needs of
members and changing funding sources, it has always maintained its fundamental role as a regional
resource for technical expertise and project management, as well as a collective voice for the region when
working with the State or Federal government.
4.2.a
Packet Pg. 6 Attachment: 17_18 Annual Update Central Point (1122 : RVCOG Annual Report)
PROGRAM OVERVIEW 4
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
RVCOG’s transportation planning services are primarily focused on the Rogue Valley Metropolitan Planning
Organization (RVMPO) and Middle Rogue Metropolitan Planning Organization (MRMPO). Federal
transportation law requires that transportation planning activities in urbanized areas with a population in
excess of 50,000 be coordinated through Metropolitan Planning Organizations, which were created to ensure
that existing and future expenditures of governmental funds for transportation projects and programs are
based on a continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive (3-C) planning process.
MAJOR HIGHLIGHTS of FY 17/18
RVMPO
Managed the region’s $1.4 million Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ)
program.
Adopted amendments to the 2018-2021 Metropolitan Transportation
Improvement Program which contains an estimated $187 million in
transportation projects.
Adopted amendments to the 2017-2042 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP).
Provided ongoing planning assistance to the Rogue Valley Transit District in
their development of a Transit Master Plan.
Revised the Public Participation Plan and updated the Title VI and
Environmental Justice Plans.
MRMPO
Completed the Benchmarks for the VMT reduction plan.
Adopted amendments to the 2018-2021Transportation Improvement
Program which contains an estimated $91 million in transportation projects.
Continued assisting TPAU with the development of the Activity Based
Transportation Model for the entire Rogue Valley.
Adopted Amendments to the 2015-2040 Regional Transportation Plan and
Air Quality Conformity Determination.
Began working on updating the Public Participation Plan for the MRMPO.
Completed an update to the Title VI and Environmental Justice Plans
OTHER
Took over and revamped Rogue Bike Share Program through a cooperative
effort with United Way of Jackson County, the Rogue Valley Transit District,
and the Oregon Department of Transportation.
Produced GIS map updates for the cities of Eagle Point, Jacksonville, Rogue
River, and Cave Junction.
Staffed Rogue Valley Area Commission on Transportation (RVACT) meetings.
Staff Contact
The RVMPO was
established in 1982, and
includes Jackson County
and the cities of Eagle
Point, Medford, Central
Point, Jacksonville,
Phoenix, Talent, and
Ashland, as well as
ODOT and RVTD.
The MRMPO was
established in 2013, and
includes Jackson and
Josephine Counties and
the cities of Grants Pass,
Rogue River, and
Gold Hill.
Karl Welzenbach -- Planning Program Manager
541-423-1360 kwelzenbach@rvcog.org
4.2.a
Packet Pg. 7 Attachment: 17_18 Annual Update Central Point (1122 : RVCOG Annual Report)
PROGRAM OVERVIEW 5
LAND USE PLANNING
RVCOG’s Planning Department offers land use planning services to member jurisdictions. These services are
available on a short- or long-term contract basis, for both current and long-range planning. Zoning
Ordinance development and updates, Comprehensive Plan updates, Periodic Review, and collaborative
planning processes are among the services available. RVCOG’s ability to provide contract planner services
to jurisdictions is an excellent example of the benefits of RVCOG membership. Our member jurisdictions are
able to purchase only the services they need when they need them, without incurring the costs of a full- or
part-time employee.
MAJOR HIGHLIGHTS of FY 17/18
Provided current planning assistance to the cities of Jacksonville, Shady Cove, Gold Hill, Rogue River,
and Cave Junction; performed expedited application review for Jackson County.
Managed the Rogue River Transportation System Plan update.
Conducted a Simplified Urban Growth Boundary analysis for the City of Eagle Point.
Facilitated the monthly regional planners’ meeting, providing a forum for discussing subjects of
common interest such as RPS implementation, affordable housing, and land use issues regarding
recreational and medical marijuana.
Staff Contact
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Over the last decade, Community Development has focused on assisting our members with grant writing,
grant management, RFP/RFQ preparation, environmental assessments, and labor standards compliance.
RVCOG can provide our members with expertise in even the most complicated and burdensome federal
and state grant and loan programs—Community Development Block Grants, Water/Wastewater Financing
Program, State Energy Program Grants, Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grants, Seismic
Rehabilitation Grant Program, Safe Drinking Water Revolving Loan Fund, Special Public Works Fund, Water
and Wastewater Revolving Loan Fund Grants, and Rural Development Loan Assistance. Depending on the
grant program, RVCOG’s services can be free of cost to the jurisdiction.
MAJOR HIGHLIGHTS of FY 17/18
Successfully completed an environmental assessment and procured a construction contractor for
the Food & Friends Senior Resource Center in Grants Pass. Obtained an additional $161,906 in
CDBG grant funds for the project.
Served as project manager for the Rogue River School District’s Bond Projects, helping to ensure
engineering and construction of HVAC upgrades at the District’s elementary school (east and west
campuses) and Junior/Senior High School prior to the start of the 2018 school year.
Assisted the City of Gold Hill in meeting all conditions of the Infrastructure Finance Authority (IFA)
grant contract and the USDA’s grant and loan contracts for the continued work necessary to make
the City’s Water Treatment Plant and Wastewater Collection System operational.
Staff Contact
Peter Town – Grants and Contracts Administrator
541-423-1374 ptown@rvcog.org
Dick Converse – Principal Land Use Planner / Ryan Nolan – Principal Land Use Planner (5/1/2019)
541-423-1373 dconverse@rvcog.org / 541-423-1373 rnolan@rvcog.org
4.2.a
Packet Pg. 8 Attachment: 17_18 Annual Update Central Point (1122 : RVCOG Annual Report)
PROGRAM OVERVIEW 6
NATURAL RESOURCES
The Natural Resources program is directed at improving the health and vitality of our watersheds, natural
systems, and recreational assets by providing RVCOG members and other partner organizations with
specialized technical assistance, regionalized coordination and implementation of programs, and
organization support. Staff works with numerous partners, including cities and counties; federal, state, and
local agencies; conservation organizations; schools; special interest groups; and members of the public.
MAJOR HIGHLIGHTS of FY 17/18
Monitored water quality in Bear Creek, its tributaries, and storm drains to comply with Clean Water Act
Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) requirements. This cooperative program is unique in Oregon.
Continued regional implementation and coordination of TMDL programs in Bear Creek and the Rogue
Basin including the promotion and development of the Stream Smart Program.
Worked with Partners to Adopt Bear Creek as part of SOLVE’s “Adopt-a-River Program.
Worked with ODOT, the City of Medford, the City of Central Point, Jackson County, Jackson Soil and
Water Conservation District, and other partners to restore sections of Bear Creek along the Greenway
in Medford from McAndrews Boulevard north and near the Expo Center in Central Point.
Completed vegetation management plan for the Bear Creek Greenway with a focus on managing areas
outside of the active trail management zone for invasive species and restoration with native species.
Conducted salmon watch classes for 1,000+ children with the cooperation of RVSS, Jackson Soil &
Water Conservation District, Bear Creek Watershed Education Partners, OSU Extension, & local schools.
Continued developing a local Brownfields program with EPA funding. Year 1 activities included
identifying, prioritizing, nominating, selecting, and completing work on potential candidate sites.
Assisted the Medford Water Commission and Jackson County in issues of vernal pool conservation.
Developed proposals for, and continued or began implementation of, various Bear Creek riparian
restoration projects in partnership with the City of Medford, ODOT, Oregon Stewardship, and others.
Continued implementation of education programs supporting stormwater programs (NPDES Phase II),
TMDL Implementation, Stream Smart, and other projects.
Established the RVCOG Drone Services program.
Staff Contact
SPECIAL MEMBER SERVICES
RVCOG’s Administration Department offers a range of services to its members, such as computer network
design, troubleshooting, and support services, accounting and payroll services, human resources and
benefits administration, technical writing, procurement, and special projects.
MAJOR HIGHLIGHTS of FY 17/18
Provided information technology services to Shady Cove, Jackson Soil and Water Conservation District,
and Rogue River (City and Police).
Provided full accounting services (accounts payable, bank reconciliations, payroll, financial reporting,
and audit preparation) for SOREDI and the Jackson County Library District, reporting and billing services
for the TAP Intertie project (Talent, Ashland, and Phoenix), and payroll and accounts payable
consultation for the City of Gold Hill.
Provided the Jackson County Library District with its administrative staff (1.5 FTE’s).
Provided City Manager recruitment services for the City of Talent.
Staff Contact Ann Marie Alfrey – Internal Services Director
541- 423-1334 amalfrey@rvcog.org
Greg Stabach – Natural Resources Program Manager
541-423-1370 gstabach@rvcog.org
4.2.a
Packet Pg. 9 Attachment: 17_18 Annual Update Central Point (1122 : RVCOG Annual Report)
PROGRAM OVERVIEW 7
FOOD & FRIENDS
RVCOG’s Meals on Wheels and Senior Meals Program has been serving Jackson and Josephine Counties
since 2001. The program provides balanced nutrition and frequent social contact, key to maintaining good
health and vitality for those who wish to continue living as independently as possible. The program,
appropriately called Food & Friends, provides between 230,000 and 240,000 meals a year in the two-
county area. Each month, nearly 400 dedicated volunteers deliver more than 16,000 meals to individuals
living independently at home whose health prevents them from preparing their own meals. In many cases
volunteers are the only people our seniors see on any given day, and often the meal that is delivered is a
client’s main or even sole source of nutrition. In addition to home delivery, approximately 3,800 meals a
month are served at 12 congregate meal sites located throughout the two-county area.
Since Federal and State funding constitutes less than 2/3 of what Food & Friends needs to provide its meals
and its critical safety net, fund raising activities are an essential part of staff’s responsibilities. The program
relies on foundations, cities, counties, service organizations, businesses, churches, and clients to help close
the financial gap, and to maintain the program’s unbroken history of never having to resort to waiting lists.
MAJOR HIGHLIGHTS of FY 17/18
Volunteers in Jackson County donated 40,277 hours to help provide 132,210
meals to homebound seniors and 21,158 meals to seniors at 7 congregate
sites, for a total of 153,368 meals.
Volunteers in Josephine County donated 23,380 hours to help provide
64,007 meals to homebound seniors and 18,546 meals to seniors at 5
congregate sites, for a total of 82,553 meals.
Staff Contact
OLDER ADULT BEHAVIORAL HEALTH INITIATIVE
RVCOG’s Older Adult Behavioral Health Specialist provided consultation on complex cases; referred case
managers and other partner agency employees to resources for their clients; sponsored, coordinated, and
facilitated trainings for area providers and consumers; and attended meetings with local stakeholders to
build better relationships and connect people with regional resources.
MAJOR HIGHLIGHTS of FY 17/18
Developed the Openbed Foster Home Website, the only one of its type in the state
(www.findadultfostercare.com)
Provided 23 education events to over 650 participants
Consulted on more than 75 complex case reviews.
Staff Contact
Evelyn Kinsella – Nutrition Program Manager
541- 734-9505 X3 ekinsella@rvcog.org
Sean Connolly
Older Adult Behavioral Health Specialist
541- 423-1364 sconnolly@rvcog.org
4.2.a
Packet Pg. 10 Attachment: 17_18 Annual Update Central Point (1122 : RVCOG Annual Report)
PROGRAM OVERVIEW
8
HOME AND COMMUNITY-BASED CARE
Oregon offers one of the nation’s best combinations of services to make it possible for individuals to
continue living in their home as they age or face a disability. In southern Oregon, RVCOG partners with
Aging and People with Disabilities (APD), the region’s Medicaid Financial Assistance, and SNAP (food
stamps) programs. RVCOG directly implements Oregon Project Independence (OPI) for seniors 60+ and
younger people with physical disabilities, and provides workshops in several evidence-based trainings that
address such topics as how to care for a family member with dementia, or how to deal with chronic
physical conditions or depression.
MAJOR HIGHLIGHTS of FY 17/18
25,844 individuals assisted by the Medicaid program in southern Oregon.
106 participants attended 14 workshops in the region designed to assist people to cope with chronic
conditions, chronic pain, and diabetes. 18 Leaders were trained to facilitate these workshops.
284 individuals 60 and older and 83 individuals with disabilities ages 19-59 were assisted through
Oregon Project Independence (OPI).
RVCOG continued to maintain the Disaster Registry for vulnerable populations (seniors, people with
disabilities, and others) who would require special attention by emergency services in the case of a
disaster. 445 individuals, 427 long-term care facilities, and 286 child care facilities are currently listed.
RVCOG continues to build its Lifelong Housing Certification program for accessible/adaptable housing in
both counties. Currently, there are 45 certified homes in Jackson County. The RVCOG-created
standards have been adopted by the Real Estate Standard Organization (RESO) as approved
terminology to be used by Multiple Listing Services across the United States.
The PEARLS program served 58 individuals and the REACH OUT program served 87 individuals with
Mental Health Outreach services designed for isolated Older Adults and People with Disabilities.
Staff Contact
AGING AND DISABILITY RESOURCE CONNECTION
Before Oregon’s implementation of the Aging and Disability Resource Connection (ADRC) program,
locating accurate and unbiased information about services to help seniors or adults with disabilities to
maintain their independence and health was a frustrating and time-consuming process. With ADRC now
statewide, that situation has been significantly improved. Although the State’s ADRCs are operated on a
local basis, they can be accessed through a single phone number (855-ORE-ADRC) or a single website
(www.ADRCofOregon.org). The ADRC phone lines are open during business hours five days a week with
trained staff ready to help the consumer. Services can range from responding to a simple request for
information all the way up to a comprehensive session of Person-Centered Options Counseling in a home
setting to ensure that clients and family members are given the range of choices they need.
MAJOR HIGHLIGHTS of FY 17/18
In Jackson and Josephine counties, staff received and answered 2,654 information and assistance calls
and held 247 in-depth Options Counseling sessions.
Staff Contact
Katie Merola
ADRC Lead
541- 423-1365 kmerola@rvcog.org
Laura O’Bryon
SDS Director
541- 423-1364 lobryon@rvcog.org
4.2.a
Packet Pg. 11 Attachment: 17_18 Annual Update Central Point (1122 : RVCOG Annual Report)
FINANCIAL OVERVIEW 9
Budget and Revenue
RVCOG’s budget continues a trend of the last several years of relative stability between the $8 and $9
million mark. The only outlier was FY 17/18, which was impacted by the state-wide defunding of the
Developmental Disabilities Crisis Intervention programs, which for the COG meant a loss of almost
$800,000 and five staff. The budget rebounded by almost half of that amount in FY 18/19, and will likely
completely recover with FY 19/20’s budget.
Expenditures
As for the core considerations of the cost of RVCOG’s services, we continue to hold expenditures as low as
we possibly can for our jurisdictions and funders. Not only are dues continuing to be the lowest they have
ever been, but the COG also continues to be aggressive in keeping the billable rates of its employees as low
as possible to minimize cost increases to our members and funders, while still managing to attract and
maintain a highly professional staff.
Fund Equity
Following an uncharacteristically large increase in fund equity of $563,228 from July 2016 ($995,920) to July
2017 ($1,559,148) – driven in large part by the establishment of an endowment dedicated to the Food &
Friends program – the COG registered a smaller increase of $53,745 on the following July ($1,612,893).
$0
$1,000,000
$2,000,000
$3,000,000
$4,000,000
$5,000,000
$6,000,000
$7,000,000
$8,000,000
$9,000,000
$10,000,000
FY 12/13 FY 13/14 FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 FY 17/18 FY 18/19
Budget Revenues Expenditures Fund Equity
Recent Financial History and Current Budget
4.2.a
Packet Pg. 12 Attachment: 17_18 Annual Update Central Point (1122 : RVCOG Annual Report)
Federal and State Grants
/ Contracts, 49.4%
Program Income, 8.3%
Other Revenues, 11.3%
Local Grants /
Contracts, 21.2%
Donations and Fund
Raising, 3.3%
Departmental Admin,
0.1%
Indirect Charges, 5.3%
RVCOG & MPO Dues,
1.2%
FINANCIAL OVERVIEW 10
Revenue Sources FY 17/18
4.2.a
Packet Pg. 13 Attachment: 17_18 Annual Update Central Point (1122 : RVCOG Annual Report)
11
11
JURISDICTION
PROGRAMS
AND
PROJECTS
4.2.a
Packet Pg. 14 Attachment: 17_18 Annual Update Central Point (1122 : RVCOG Annual Report)
12
4.2.a
Packet Pg. 15 Attachment: 17_18 Annual Update Central Point (1122 : RVCOG Annual Report)
13
CITY OF CENTRAL POINT
Activities Contractual Information Member Cost and Role
Coordination and Project Development
Dues and Indirect Supported Activities
Activities included ShakeAlert, Crater High School
CTE development, housing survey review,
planners’ monthly meetings, public managers’
meetings, regional census work, Salmon Watch,
Brownfields, Rogue Basin Partnership
coordination, drone program establishment, 319
(TMDL) grant work, riparian restoration project
development, Jackson Soil and Water
Conservation District water quality grant work.
Activities are part of member
services, which are paid for by a
combination of ½ of dues and
dedicated indirect
Cost – $1,380 from member
dues (remainder of total cost
of $3,465 from indirect)
Role –Partner, Participant,
partial funder through dues
Land Use Planning
Planners’ Group
Hosted and facilitated monthly meetings of land
use planners from multiple jurisdictions in Jackson
County.
N/A Cost -- $0
Role -- Participant
Transportation Planning
Rogue Valley Metropolitan Planning
Organization
Staffed the Rogue Valley Metropolitan Planning
Organization (RVMPO), including the following
activities:
Approved amendments to the 2018-2021
Transportation Improvement Program.
Approved amendments to the 2017-2042
Regional Transportation Plan (RTP)
Worked with Oregon DOT’s Transportation
Planning Analysis Unit (TPAU) on the
development of the Southern Oregon Activity
Based Model
Completed a 2015 Alternative Measures
benchmark analysis for compliance with
Oregon’s Transportation Planning Rule (TPR)
for MPOs to show reduction in vehicle miles
traveled.
RVCOG designated as the RVMPO
by order of Oregon Governor in
1982, annual state and federal
funding agreements
Total FY 2017-18 MPO
discretionary funding = $4.8
million (STBG, CMAQ, Planning)
Cost -- $2,814 (MPO dues)
Role – Partner, partial funder
through dues
RVACT Staff Support
Staffed the activities of the Rogue Valley Area
Commission on Transportation.
ODOT IGA with RVCOG
FY 17/18 budget $25,000
Cost -- $0
Role -- Stakeholder
Geographic Information Systems (GIS)
Alternative Measures, Routable Network Data
Coordination/Research, Southern Oregon Activity
Based Model Data Build/Coordination, Safety
Performance Measures State Benchmark Data
MPO-funded Unavailable
4.2.a
Packet Pg. 16 Attachment: 17_18 Annual Update Central Point (1122 : RVCOG Annual Report)
14
CITY OF CENTRAL POINT
Activities Contractual Information Member Cost and Role
Research, Obligated Projects Map, Critical Urban
Freight Corridor Data & Map, Environmental
Justice/Title VI Data & Maps
Local Update Census Address Coordination,
Census Participant Statistical Areas Program
Lead, RVCOG Open Data Portal
Mix of dues and overhead Unavailable
Rogue Valley Active Transportation Plan Data
Build
Contractual Unavailable
Natural Resources
Business Oregon Brownfield Inventory and
Public Outreach
RVCOG applied for and received a brownfield
grant from Business Oregon to inventory
brownfields in several locations including part of
the White City Industrial Area and Medford. In
addition, the project began outreach to build
support for a brownfield program and re-
submittal for EPAs Community Wide Assessment
Program.
RVCOG pre-project activities paid
through organization dues.
Total funding = $25,000
Cost -- $0
Role – Partner
Brownfield Community Wide Assessment
Coalition Grant
A Coalition led by RVCOG including Jackson
County and the cities of Medford, Central Point
and Grants Pass, submitted an application for a
$600,000 US Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA) Community-wide Assessment Brownfield
Grant. The Coalition pursued these funds to
address brownfields in the Coalition partner
jurisdictions to enhance community livability and
economic vitality. Many local community-based
organizations and government agencies
supported the application. Notification that the
funding was approved was received in May, and
project work began in October of 2017.
RVCOG pre-project activities paid
through organization dues.
Total funding = $600,000
Cost -- $0
Role – Partner, Coalition
Member
Bear Creek Water Quality Monitoring
Monitored water quality for Bear Creek and
tributaries to comply with Clean Water Act Total
Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) requirements. The
monitoring program also includes sampling and
analysis of storm drains (stormwater runoff), site
investigation of spills or contamination
throughout the Bear Creek watershed as part of
the hot spot monitoring program, and serving as
a public contact for information for water quality
concerns and questions.
Local IGAs between RVCOG and
participating jurisdictions
Total funding = $43,449
Cost -- $4,581 (Central Point’s
share of TMDL monitoring
costs)
Role – Client, partner, partial
funder
Rogue Basin Partnership (RBP) Funding from Rogue Basin Cost -- $0
4.2.a
Packet Pg. 17 Attachment: 17_18 Annual Update Central Point (1122 : RVCOG Annual Report)
15
CITY OF CENTRAL POINT
Activities Contractual Information Member Cost and Role
Worked with the Rogue Basin Partnership
(http://www.roguepartners.org/) to continue to
strengthen the organizational capacity of RBP and
its members and implement an action plan for
the basin focusing on priority restoration projects
and on bringing in outside funding. In addition,
participated as part of several working groups on
urban issues including stormwater management,
riparian restoration, urban runoff, and education.
Partnership. (RVCOG Share
$15,000)
Total funding = $25,000
Role -- Stakeholder
Rogue Basin Outreach and Engagement Program
Continuing to work with RBP on a project to
develop a diverse outreach and engagement
effort that spans the entire Rogue River Basin.
The program will engage the community through
outreach events, educational programs,
job/career opportunities, and community/river
cleanups that provide social, economic, and
ecological benefits. Selected activities included in
the program include Creek Clean-ups, education
events (Bear Creek Fall Festival, World Fish
Migration Day).
Funding from Meyer Memorial
Trust/RBP. (RVCOG share
$32,500 over two years)
Total funding = $120,000
Cost -- $0
Role -- Stakeholder
Bear Creek Greenway Vegetation Management
Plan
Developed a Vegetation Management Plan for
the Bear Creek Greenway. The plan contains
recommendations for managing areas outside of
the recreational corridor (path and existing
greenway managed area). Plan elements include
site preparation, removal of invasive species,
planting of native species (including species
recommendations), and general costs per acre.
IGA between RVCOG and Jackson
County (Joint Powers)
Total Funding = $15,000
Cost – varied, total cost of
$15,000 came from
jurisdictional contributions to
Joint Powers Committee.
Role -- Client, partner, partial
funder
Stormwater Quality Program Assistance
Assisted the City with stormwater activities
including education and outreach for
implementing programs in local schools and
assisting within developing and implementing a
community workshop.
IGA with RVCOG.
Total funding = $6,000
Cost -- $6,000
Role – Client, partner, funder
Salmon Watch
Conducted Salmon Watch classes in the Fall of
2017 with Rogue Valley Sewer Services, the Bear
Creek Watershed Education Partners, Rogue River
Watershed Council, OSU Extension, and local
schools. Classes for students region-wide were
conducted at streams and the Rogue River. The
program continued to expand and reached over
1,000 students.
Gray Family Grant and supported
by Stormwater Programs from
RVSS, Medford, and Ashland plus
match from Partners.
Total Funding = $36,361.11
Cost -- $2,200 from
Stormwater Program
Role –Partner, Partial funder
4.2.a
Packet Pg. 18 Attachment: 17_18 Annual Update Central Point (1122 : RVCOG Annual Report)
16
CITY OF CENTRAL POINT
Activities Contractual Information Member Cost and Role
Clean Air Campaign
Coordinated a project to develop a Clean Air
Campaign for the RVMPO. The campaign is
working with a steering committee to develop
additional program materials. Key elements
include a campaign logo, website, social media,
and a bus wrap on an RVTD interactive bus that
was completed and put into service in April 2017.
The project website can be viewed at
http://www.roguevalleycleanair.org/.
IGA between ODOT and RVCOG. Cost -- $0
Role -- Stakeholder
Stream Smart Program – Advisory Committee
Coordination, Website Updates and
Maintenance, Program Implementation
Coordinated the Stream Smart Advisory
Committee which serves as the sounding board
guiding updates, policies, next steps, and changes
to the Stream Smart website. Other work
included taking over the ownership and hosting
of the website, posting information on the webs
and Facebook platforms, using the Stream Smart
materials, and assisting with the website upkeep
and maintenance.
RVCOG activities paid through
the TMDL program and
organization dues.
Total funding = $2,200
Cost -- $0
Role – Partner
Senior and Disability Services
Senior Meals Program
Provided 17,180 meals to 146 homebound
seniors and served 664 meals to 41 seniors at the
City’s congregate site, for a total of 17,844 meals.
44% of Central Point Meals on Wheels recipients
were aged 80+ years.
77 volunteers donated a total of 5,695.5 hours in
Central Point during FY 17/18.
Federal and state contract with
RVCOG for both counties.
FY17/18 funding:
Federal $1,234,405
State $ 83,233
Local $ 527,751
Cost -- $12,000 (Central
Point’s contribution towards
meal costs)
Role -- Indirect client (benefit
to Central Point citizens),
partial funder
Rogue Valley Aging and Disability Resource
Connection (ADRC)
Received and answered 3,097 information and
assistance calls to 2,069 unduplicated
consumers, and 240 unduplicated consumers
were enrolled in Options Counseling cases
throughout the two-county area. As of 6/30/18,
there are 351 active listings in the ADRC
Resource Database.
Federal and state contract with
RVCOG for both counties. Also
used miscellaneous local funds.
FY 17/18 funding =
Federal $165,308
State $65,295
Local $ 3,653
Cost -- $0
Role -- Indirect client (benefit
to Central Point citizens)
Adult Protective Services and Adult Foster
Home Licensing
Managed Adult Protective Services and Adult
Foster Home licensing for all seniors and adults
with physical disabilities in Jackson County. A
total of 2,482 contacts made to Adult Protective
Federal and state contract with
RVCOG
FY 17/18 Aging and People with
Disabilities funding = $2.3 million
for APS and AFH licensing staff
Cost -- $0
Role -- Indirect client (benefit
to Central Point citizens)
4.2.a
Packet Pg. 19 Attachment: 17_18 Annual Update Central Point (1122 : RVCOG Annual Report)
17
CITY OF CENTRAL POINT
Activities Contractual Information Member Cost and Role
Services; 90 foster homes licensed.
Go-Stay Kit
The Rogue Valley-created emergency
preparedness tool now has national distribution.
RVCOG receives a small share of profits from
sales, which fund staffing for our two-county
Vulnerable Populations Emergency Preparedness
Committee.
Self-supporting with book sales
with private sector partner.
Cost -- $0
Role -- Indirect client (benefit
to Central Point citizens)
Lifelong Housing Certification Project
45 homes have been certified in Jackson County.
Certification assists people find homes they can
live in for the rest of their lives or to remodel to
accommodate guests and/or family members.
The project educates building and real estate
professionals, as well as the public about the
practical and economic value of Lifelong Housing.
RVCOG-created standards have been adopted as
approved terminology to be used by Multiple
Listing Services across the country.
Federal and state contract with
RVCOG for both counties. AARP
Memorandum of Understanding
FY 17/18 funding =
Federal $3,003
AARP $4,000
Cost -- $0
Role -- Indirect client (benefit
to Central Point citizens)
Medicaid Administration
RVCOG administered the Medicaid Program and
Services for low income seniors and adults with
disabilities, including determination of financial
benefits and service eligibility. Benefits and
services include Oregon Health Plan (medical
coverage); SNAP (food stamps); and Case
Management for long term care services (in-
home care, adult foster care, assisted living,
residential care, and nursing facilities). A total of
16,757 individuals served in Jackson County.
Federal and state contract with
RVCOG for both counties
FY 17/18 Aging and People with
Disabilities =
$120.7 million
FY 17/18 funding to RVCOG =
$109,049
Cost -- $0
Role -- Indirect client (benefit
to Central Point citizens)
Oregon Project Independence
Provided case management and in-home services
under Oregon Project Independence to assist
seniors—at risk of institutional placement—who
are not eligible for Medicaid long term care
services remain in their own homes. 118
individuals were served in Jackson County.
State contract with RVCOG for
both counties
FY 17/18 funding = $869,877
Cost -- $0
Role -- Indirect client (benefit
to Central Point citizens)
Oregon Project Independence – Pilot for Adults
with Disabilities (ages 19 – 59)
Provided case management and in-home services
under Oregon Project Independence to assist
adults with physical disabilities —at risk of
institutional placement—who are not eligible for
Medicaid long term care services remain in their
own homes. 61 individuals were served in
Jackson County.
State contract with RVCOG for
both counties
FY 17/18 funding = $445,254
Cost -- $0
Role -- Indirect client (benefit
to Central Point citizens)
4.2.a
Packet Pg. 20 Attachment: 17_18 Annual Update Central Point (1122 : RVCOG Annual Report)
18
CITY OF CENTRAL POINT
Activities Contractual Information Member Cost and Role
Family Caregiver Support
Provided ongoing assistance to family caregivers
(39), STAR-C training in the home to family
caregivers caring for someone with Alzheimer’s
(2), Powerful Tools for Caregivers training (32),
and respite vouchers (28), We also trained 11
Powerful Tools for Caregivers Class Leaders.
Federal and state contract with
RVCOG
FY 17/18 = $85,328
Cost -- $0
Role -- Indirect client (benefit
to Central Point citizens)
Disaster Registry
Maintained the Disaster Registry for vulnerable
seniors and people with disabilities to assist in
disaster response. Serve as the lead agency for
the Vulnerable Populations Emergency
Preparedness Committee which would work with
the Emergency Operations Center in the event of
a disaster. A total of 445 individuals were served
in the two-county area. The Registry also lists 427
long-term care and retirement facilities and 286
child care facilities.
Federal and state contract with
RVCOG for both counties
FY 17/18 funding = $1,845
Cost -- $0
Role -- Indirect client (benefit
to Central Point citizens)
Living Well
Provided Living Well workshops to help people
with chronic conditions, chronic pain and
Diabetes (in both English and Spanish) to better
manage their conditions and improve quality of
life. A total of 161 participants attended. 20
workshops were offered. 18 leaders completed
training in one or more of the following
programs: Chronic Disease Self-Management
(Grants Pass, Medford and Curry County), Master
Trainer Diabetes, Pain Training, and New Master
Trainer Refresher Course Training.
Federal and state contract with
RVCOG for both counties
FY 17/18 funding = $44,256
Cost -- $0
Role -- Indirect client (benefit
to Central Point citizens)
Guardianship
Provided Public Guardianship service to highly
vulnerable seniors in Jackson County through a
contract with the Center for Non-Profit Legal
Services. A total of 18 individuals were served in
Jackson County.
Federal and state contract with
RVCOG for both counties
FY 17/18 funding = $10,338
Cost -- $0
Role -- Indirect client (benefit
to Central Point citizens)
Behavioral Health
Older Adult Behavioral Specialist provided
consultation on complex cases both during multi-
disciplinary team meetings and on an individual
basis. Referred case managers and other partner
agency employees to resources for their clients.
Sponsored, coordinated, and facilitated trainings
for area providers and consumers, attended
meetings with local stakeholders to build better
relationships and connect people with regional
State contract for Mental Health
Services to Seniors in both and
State contract with Jackson
County Mental Health, sub-
contracted with RVCOG for
Jackson County to provide
OABHS services.
FY 17/18 funding =
Cost -- $0
Role -- Indirect client (benefit
to Central Point citizens)
4.2.a
Packet Pg. 21 Attachment: 17_18 Annual Update Central Point (1122 : RVCOG Annual Report)
19
CITY OF CENTRAL POINT
Activities Contractual Information Member Cost and Role
resources. Provided 23 education events to over
650 participants. Consulted on 75+ complex
cases. PEARLS (Program to Encourage Active and
Rewarding Lives for Seniors) served 58
individuals. The REACH OUT program came to a
close June 30, 2018. 85 participants received
service through the program from its inception
through June 30, 2018. A total of 9 from the 102
referrals received declined the program.
State Mental Health - $27,473
Jackson County Mental Health
Pass Thru - $312,223
Home At Last
Provided permanent supportive housing to 17
homeless households at a time for a total of 29
adults with disabilities and 5 children over the
course of the year. Home At Last uses the
“housing first” model, providing rent, utilities,
and case management to the most difficult-to-
house homeless people.
FY 17/18 funding =
Federal - $118,098
Local Cash - $5,502
Cost -- $0
Role -- Indirect client (benefit
to Central Point citizens)
4.2.a
Packet Pg. 22 Attachment: 17_18 Annual Update Central Point (1122 : RVCOG Annual Report)
4.2.a
Packet Pg. 23 Attachment: 17_18 Annual Update Central Point (1122 : RVCOG Annual Report)
21
4.2.a
Packet Pg. 24 Attachment: 17_18 Annual Update Central Point (1122 : RVCOG Annual Report)
22
ROGUE VALLEY COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS
ESTABLISHED IN 1968
TO SERVE THE COMMUNITIES OF JACKSON AND
JOSEPHINE COUNTIES
Jackson county Josephine county CITY OF
ASHLAND TOWN OF BUTTE FALLS CITY OF CAVE
JUNCTION CITY OF CENTRAL POINT CITY OF
EAGLE POINT CITY OF GOLD HILL CITY OF GRANTS
PASS CITY OF JACKSONVILLE CITY OF MEDFORD
CITY OF PHOENIX CITY OF ROGUE RIVER CITY OF
SHADY COVE CITY OF TALENT EMERGENCY
COMMUNICATIONS OF SOUTHERN OREGON
JACKSON SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
ROGUE COMMUNITY COLLEGE ROGUE VALLEY
SEWER SERVICES ROGUE VALLEY TRANSPORTATION
DISTRICT SOUTHERN OREGON REGIONAL
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, INC. SOUTHERN OREGON
UNIVERSITY JACKSON COUNTY LIBRARY SERVICES
4.2.a
Packet Pg. 25 Attachment: 17_18 Annual Update Central Point (1122 : RVCOG Annual Report)
CITY OF CENTRAL POINT
Oregon
City Council Meeting Minutes
Thursday, March 14, 2019
I. REGULAR MEETING CALLED TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM by Mayor Hank Williams
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III. ROLL CALL
Attendee Name Title Status Arrived
Hank Williams Mayor Present
Neil Olsen Ward I Present
Kelley Johnson Ward II Absent
Brandon Thueson Ward III Present
Taneea Browning Ward IV Present
Rob Hernandez At Large Present
Michael Parsons At Large Present
Staff Members present: City Manager Chris Clayton; City Attorney Sydnee Dreyer;
Community Development Director Tom Humphrey; Parks and Public Works Director
Matt Samitore; Principal Planner Stephanie Holtey; Police Chief Kris Allison; Captain
Dave Croft; and City Recorder Deanna Casey.
IV. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
1. Fire District #3 Annual Report
Fire Chief Bob Horton presented the Fire District Annual Report. He provided a
breakdown of activity and calls for service in the city of Central Point. The district
offers recommendations for defensible space for citizens and their homes. They plan
to build and open their new firehouse on Scenic in the spring of 2020.
2. Citizen Satisfaction Survey Report
Stephanie Holtey introduced Rebecca Elmore-Yalch, Principal and Managing
Director for Northwest Research Group. They conducted a survey of citizens residing
in Central Point to determine satisfaction and expectations relative to city services
and overall quality of life.
Mrs. Emore-Yalch reported that that city received a 4 Star rating from our citizens.
She explained the highlights of the report and things that citizens enjoy most about
their city. Small Town Feel and Quiet Neighborhoods rank high. The survey breaks
down how each section of town feels regarding safety, downtown, open space and
future development. Their confidence in the Police Department to provide a safe and
secure community has the greatest impact, and receives the highest rating. Areas for
6.A
Packet Pg. 26 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Mar 14, 2019 7:00 PM (CONSENT AGENDA)
City of Central Point
City Council Minutes
March 14, 2019
Page 2
future focus are the ease of contacting Council members and keeping residents
informed, both are high importance and have relatively low rating.
RESULT: FOR DISCUSSION ONLY
V. PUBLIC COMMENTS - None
VI. CONSENT AGENDA
RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Rob Hernandez, At Large
SECONDER: Michael Parsons, At Large
AYES: Williams, Olsen, Thueson, Browning, Hernandez, Parsons
ABSENT: Kelley Johnson
A. Approval of February 28, 2019 City Council Minutes
VII. ORDINANCES, AND RESOLUTIONS
A. Ordinance No. ________, An Ordinance to Update and Adopt the Central Point
Comprehensive Plan Population Element (2019-2039)
This item was moved from item 8.c. by Mayor Williams to be the first item
considered. Principal Planner Stephanie Holtey explained that this was the second
reading of an Ordinance to update and adopt the Central Point Comprehensive Plan
Population Element (2019-2039). There were no recommended changes at the first
reading on February 28, 2019.
Brandon Thueson moved to approve Ordinance 2052, An Ordinance to Update
and Adopt the Central Point Comprehensive Plan Population Element (2019-
2039)
RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Brandon Thueson, Ward III
SECONDER: Taneea Browning, Ward IV
AYES: Williams, Olsen, Thueson, Browning, Hernandez, Parsons
ABSENT: Kelley Johnson
B. Ordnance No. ________, Updating and Adopting the Residential Buildable
Lands Inventory (2019-2039), Central Point Comprehensive Plan Land Use
Element
Mrs Holtey stated that this is the second reading of an Ordinance Adopting the
Residential Buildable Lands Inventory (2019 - 2039). On February 28, 2019 the
Council heard argument to increase the infill percentage to 50%. It was agreed at
that meeting that the infill adjustment should remain at the recommended 20%. Staff
provided a map showing current development opportunities in the infill lands that are
available in the city limits. There were no recommended changes at the first reading
on February 28, 2019.
6.A
Packet Pg. 27 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Mar 14, 2019 7:00 PM (CONSENT AGENDA)
City of Central Point
City Council Minutes
March 14, 2019
Page 3
Rob Hernandez moved to approve Ordinance 2053, Updating and Adopting the
Residential Buildable Lands Inventory (2019-2039), Central Point
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element.
RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Rob Hernandez, At Large
SECONDER: Taneea Browning, Ward IV
AYES: Williams, Olsen, Thueson, Browning, Hernandez, Parsons
ABSENT: Kelley Johnson
C. Ordinance No. ___________, Updating and Adopting the Central Point
Comprehensive Plan Urbanization Element (2019-2039)
Community Development Director Tom Humphrey explained that this is the second
reading of an Ordinance adopting the Central Point Comprehensive Plan
Urbanization Element (2019-2039). At the first reading on February 28, 2019, there
was some concern over some of the wording regarding the direction and where we
plan to expand our UGB. Mr. Humphrey explained that this was all decided during
the RPS process over 12 years. All the cities had to agree what direction they would
expand and how many acres each would be allowed. The city of Central Point
wanted to keep growth in a concentric or radial growth pattern to our down town.
This includes property that is closer to designated activity centers in town which
include mixed use and pedestrian friendly areas.
Mike Parsons moved to approve Ordinance No. 2054, Updating and Adopting
the Central Point Comprehensive Plan Urbanization Element (2019-2039).
RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Michael Parsons, At Large
SECONDER: Brandon Thueson, Ward III
AYES: Williams, Olsen, Thueson, Browning, Hernandez, Parsons
ABSENT: Kelley Johnson
D. Ordinance No. _________, a Minor Zone Map Amendment on 1.76 acres
located at 1909 Scenic Avenue on property identified on the Jackson County
Assessor’s Map as 37S 2W 03AB, Tax Lots 4400, 4500 & 4600. Applicant: Fire
District 3. (File No. ZC-18007)
Mr. Humphrey explained the second reading of an ordinance approving a zone
change for three tax lots on Scenic Avenue from R-1-8 to Civic. This zone change is
requested by Fire District #3 so they can build a fire station in the north section of
town to help with call response times. There were no recommended changes at the
first reading. The civic zone is consistent with the school district zoning on the
property adjacent to these lots.
Brandon Thueson moved to approve Ordinance No. 2055, A Minor Zone Map
Amendment on 1.76 Acres Located at 1909 Scenic Avenue on Property
Identified on the Jackson County Assessor’s Map as 37S 2W 03AB, Tax Lots
4400, 4500, & 4600.
6.A
Packet Pg. 28 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Mar 14, 2019 7:00 PM (CONSENT AGENDA)
City of Central Point
City Council Minutes
March 14, 2019
Page 4
RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Brandon Thueson, Ward III
SECONDER: Rob Hernandez, At Large
AYES: Williams, Olsen, Thueson, Browning, Hernandez, Parsons
ABSENT: Kelley Johnson
E. Ordinance No. _____, Amending in Part and Repealing In Part Central Point
Municipal Code Chapter 8.05 Regarding Storm Drain Protection
Parks and Public Works Director Matt Samitore explained that this is the second
reading of an ordinance setting specifications for how DEQ expects the city to
administer the rules for Storm Drain Protection. The city has been awarded the MS4
Phase II Permit as of March 1st. This ordinance will set the requirements for the city
as well as how the city will deal with illicit discharge into the storm drain system.
There were no recommended changes at the first reading.
Rob Hernandez moved to approve Ordinance No. 2056, An Ordinance
Amending in Part and Repealing in Part Central Point Municipal Code Chapter
8.05 Regarding Storm Drain Protection.
RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Rob Hernandez, At Large
SECONDER: Taneea Browning, Ward IV
AYES: Williams, Olsen, Thueson, Browning, Hernandez, Parsons
ABSENT: Kelley Johnson
F. Resolution No. _______, A Resolution Adopting the Special Event Fee
Schedule 2019
Mr. Samitore explained that the city is in need of an updated special event fee
schedule. The new schedule includes resident and non-resident rates and offers
dedicated blocks of time to allow for easier scheduling of our parks and rec facilities.
The proposed change would be consistent with other city fees. We added additional
permit options for water facility usage and inflatable bounce houses. Both of these
require additional staff time for initial setup and post-use maintenance. We are also
offering the availability of the “Rec & Go” program. We will have seasonal staff
available if citizens want to rent this program for parties.
We added charges for extra trash associated with the rentals. Last year we had an
increase in trash being left behind and some events extended into evening hours
which requires staff to work overtime. We make sure the garbage containers are
empty for each reservation, there are times when extra containers are required.
The Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed the fee schedule in 2018, there
have been a couple changes since the original recommendation. These changes
were approved through email correspondence with the Commission.
Rob Hernandez moved to approve Resolution No. 1571, A Resolution Adopting
the Special Event Fee Schedule 2019.
6.A
Packet Pg. 29 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Mar 14, 2019 7:00 PM (CONSENT AGENDA)
City of Central Point
City Council Minutes
March 14, 2019
Page 5
RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Rob Hernandez, At Large
SECONDER: Taneea Browning, Ward IV
AYES: Williams, Olsen, Thueson, Browning, Hernandez, Parsons
ABSENT: Kelley Johnson
VIII. BUSINESS
A. Planning Commission Report for the March 5, 2019
Community Development Director Tom Humphrey presented the Planning
Commission report from March 5, 2019:
The Commission continued consideration of a Public Hearing for the Housing
Element which has been updated based on changes to the population and
buildable land elements. The Housing Element was last updated in 2017 based
on an earlier population forecast. The revised population numbers potentially
increase the City’s long term residential need to 305 acres. The revised element
will enable the city to demonstrate a greater land need when expanding its UGB
this year.
The Commission discussed the Residential Urban Growth Boundary Amendment
Schedule. A tentative UGB Amendment schedule was proposed by planning
staff.
RESULT: FOR DISCUSSION ONLY
IX. MAYOR'S REPORT
Mayor Williams reported that he attended:
The SOREDI Crown Dinner where Mayors and County Commissioners from Jackson
and Josephine County attended.
A TRADCO meeting.
A Medford Water Commission meeting.
X. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
City Manager Chris Clayton reported:
Talks regarding the 4th of July Fireworks are moving forward. The event will be held
at the Expo.
Staff has been working with a citizen regarding the Blue Grass Downs Wetlands
area.
ACCE training will be in April at City Hall. The Police Department will host Peter
Buckley for this event. If Council members are interested in attending the City
Recorder will get you registered for the training.
We have filled the Finance Clerk position, the new employee will start April 1, 2019.
6.A
Packet Pg. 30 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Mar 14, 2019 7:00 PM (CONSENT AGENDA)
City of Central Point
City Council Minutes
March 14, 2019
Page 6
RVTD would like to recommend a different location for a bus stop. They are not in
favor of returning to the previous route. Staff will return with their recommendation at
a future meeting.
Staff is moving forward in budget preparations with the information we have received
from the citizen survey in regards to a Community Center. He does not recommend
approving the Community Center without a way to fund staff and maintenance of the
center. There will be more opportunities to speak with the public about the options.
XI. COUNCIL REPORTS
Council Member Brandon Thueson thanked staff for for handling the wetlands concerns.
He likes the results of the survey and is proud we are a 4 Star city.
Council Member Rob Hernandez reported that:
He attended the Medford Chamber Forum lunch. He noticed there were no Medford
Council members in attendance
He is not surprised with the survey results.
Council Member Taneea Browning attended the Medford Chamber Forum.
Council Member Mike Parsons attended the Planning Commission meeting. Staff does a
good job explaining how all these elements fit together in order for us to expand our
UGB.
Council Member Neil Olsen attended a Boy Scouts event.
XII. DEPARTMENT REPORTS
Community Development Director Tom Humphrey stated that the Oregon Cheese
Festival is this weekend. The City is a “Big Cheese” sponsor this year.
Police Chief Kris Allison reported that:
It will be a busy weekend for the Department with the Cheese Festival and Shamrock
Run happening.
They will be going to Salem tomorrow. One of our officers is graduating from the Police
Academy.
The ACCE training is a great opportunity. She encourages Council members to attend
if they can.
Parks and Public Works Director Matt Samitore reported that:
6.A
Packet Pg. 31 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Mar 14, 2019 7:00 PM (CONSENT AGENDA)
City of Central Point
City Council Minutes
March 14, 2019
Page 7
He attended a meeting with Western Display for the 4th of July Fireworks. They
presented a map of the area that needs to be cleared for fire prevention. The City is
going to contract with a company to remove the dense blackberry bushes and transient
camp areas. These areas are just east of the amphitheater pond.
In regards to the Blue Grass Downs wetland there is a difference between a seasonal
wetland and a pond. The lady concerned about the wetlands being overgrown would like
to see it as a pond. The area is supplied by irrigation which is hit and miss throughout
the summer months. We have implemented a three year plan to make it more
manageable. There is a concern about the trees that have died in area, we will be
testing the soil for arsenic.
We have a vacancy on the community center adhoc committee. The meetings are
adjustable if one of the Council members would be interested in participating.
Councilmember Thueson will fill the vacant position.
The construction project for Laurel Street is moving along. We are putting in new water
lines because the old ones are from 1909.
Council Member Neil Olsen asked if the Nature Path next to Mae Richardson could get
some maintenance. It is overgrown with blackberry bushes. Mr. Samitore stated that he
would see what can be done.
XIII. EXECUTIVE SESSION - 192-660 (2)(h) Legal Counsel
Brandon Thueson moved to adjourn to Executive Session under ORS 192.660
(2)(h) Legal Counsel. Taneea Browning seconded. All said aye and the meeting was
adjourned to executive session at 8:45 p.m.
Council returned to regular session at 9:33 p.m.
XIV. ADJOURNMENT
Brandon Thueson moved to adjourn. Taneea Browning seconded. All said aye and
the March 14, 2019 Council meeting was adjourned at 9:34 p.m.
The foregoing minutes of the March 14, 2019, Council meeting were approved by the City
Council at its meeting of March 28, 2019.
Dated: _________________________
Mayor Hank Williams
ATTEST:
__________________________
City Recorder
6.A
Packet Pg. 32 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Mar 14, 2019 7:00 PM (CONSENT AGENDA)
City of Central Point
Staff Report to Council
ISSUE SUMMARY
TO: City Council
DEPARTMENT:
City Manager
FROM: Chris Clayton, City Manager
MEETING DATE: March 28, 2019
SUBJECT: Resolution No. _______ to include Southern Oregon Regional Economic
Development Funding Request Amount of $5,300 for a New Regional
Economic Strategy in the 2019-2021 City of Central Point Budget
Proposal
ACTION REQUIRED:
Resolution
RECOMMENDATION:
Approval
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
As discussed at previous city council briefings/study sessions, a number of municipalities
throughout the Rogue Valley are planning a coordinated effort to assist Southern Oregon
Regional Economic Development, lnc (SOREDI) in establishing a regional economic strategy for
Southern Oregon. As the federally appointed Economic Development District, SOREDI is
required to develop a comprehensive economic development strategy (CEDS) in five-year
increments. lnasmuch, SOREDI is currently attempting to create economies of scale by
partnering with local governments on a regional economic approach, while concurrently
satisfying necessary federal mandates related to their CEDS.
The SOREDI Board of Directors, which includes broad representation from Southern Oregon
local governments and business community partners, has recently adopted an initiative to
create a regional economic strategy aimed at eliminating long-standing economic
disadvantages and generating potential expansion opportunities. Additionally, it is the SOREDI
Board's stated intention to include robust performance measurement in any developed strategy
so that all stakeholders-including our policymakers and elected representatives-can evaluate
our outcomes/results and demonstrate the wisdom of this publicly funded project.
The City of Central Point contributes to SOREDI via annual membership dues and generally
supports SOREDI’s economic development initiatives. Currently, the City is being asked to
support SOREDI's proposal to create a new regional economic strategy via a requested amount
of $5,300 (July of 2019).
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS:
If directed by the Council, City staff will include the requested amount of $5,300 in the upcoming
2019-2021 budget proposal. If adopted as part of the budget by the City Council and Central
Point Budget Committee, the requested funds will become available in July 2019.
9.A
Packet Pg. 33
LEGAL ANALYSIS: N/A
COUNCIL GOALS/STRATEGIC PLAN ANALYSIS:
City of Central Point 2020 Strategic Plan Priorities Economic Development; Goal 1- Diversify the
City’s local economy and economic base.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
City Staff recommends the City Council include SOREDI’s requested amount of $5,300 in the
2019-2021 budget proposal.
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
I move to approve resolution number_______directing City Staff to include SOREDI’s requested
amount of $5,300 in the 2019-2021 budget proposal.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. SOREDI Council Funding
2. SOREDI Resolution
9.A
Packet Pg. 34
lnvoice
February 12,2OI9
Southern Oregon Regional
Economic Development, I nc.
A/rI¿q S e rí o u s Ab o utausíness
Chris Clayton
City of Central Point
Central Point, OR 97502
Development and lmplementation of a Five'year Broad-based
Economic Development Strategic Plan for Southern Oregon
Our Vision: The most business-friendly region on the west coast.
Our Mission: Advance business in Southern Oregon in order to foster economic vitality by helping companies
and entrepreneurs launch, relocate, and prosper.
City of Central Point Commitment 55.300
soREDt TAX tD - 93-L062727
Checks made payable to:
SOREDI
13L1 E. Barnett Road, Suite 301
Medford, OR 97504
E-mail: colleen@soredi.org
Office: (541) 773-8946
Southern Oregon Regional Economic Development, lnc. I www.soredi.org
LAUNCH I RELOCATE I PROSPER
9.A.a
Packet Pg. 35 Attachment: SOREDI Council Funding (1123 : SOREDI Funding Request)
Southern Oregon Resiliency: A Plan for Long Term Economic Vitality
Southern Oreson Resiliencv: A Plan for Lons Term Economic Vitalitv
Lost update: Februory 7,2079
Background: Southern Oregon is comprised of nearly 300,000 citizens in 15 jurisdictions based in
Jackson and Josephine Counties, and both are distressed counties. Of the 13 cities, 11 are considered
ru ra l.
As the EDA appointed Economic Development District, SOREDI is preparing now for its 2020 update of
its 5-year Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS).
A recent survey of SOREDI Underwriters in
response to "what does business-friendly
mean" revealed that 50% of the respondents
believe Southern Oregon needs to:
1-) Streamline permitting processes across
the region and
2l Attract a younger population of families
and professional workers.
The next four highest priorities identified:
Develop a Skilled Workforce (29o/ol; Address
Housing Needs Qa%l; Cultivate Regional
Unity (za%l; and Provide lncentives for Business Development (2L%).
The Problem: Southern Oregon lacks a unifying regional approach that celebrates it differences while
also being committed to new business development, tourism promotion, and new investment. The
region must be purpose-driven and resilient. No single organization is responsible for economic
development and we must position ourselves to collaboratively establish resiliency measures to
survive natural disasters such as forest fires and potential earthquakes. We must also take greater
strides toward identifying economic threats and creating new strategies to address those threats.
SOREDI recognizes its role to act as the lever that will create large changes through targeted
investments and initiatives. The region must be forward-thinking in the development of metrics that go
beyond just the scope and functions of SOREDI to include tourism, workforce development, chambers,
higher education, every jurisdiction, and the development community. The stakes are high for
Southern Oregon as we address how to best position the region for success with a focused approach
that is committed to the idea of innovation, upstream technologies, a thriving entrepreneurial culture,
talent recruitment, creative housing solutions and workforce development. With an ever- increasing
Southern Oregon Regional Economic Development, lnc.
1311 East Barnett Road, Ste. 301, Medford, OR 97504 | (541) 773-8946 | www.soredi.org
Gr¡ntr F¡rs o
Er [¡.t lurilion
@Oregon
@
W'
cÐ
5l'Jfì [,]r. r
r Ê,il1:lr, f¡llr
r ÍF':+ar r
l: j.Ênl.
ú ¿1."hlrnr,1
R{*lt¡¡ lL,:,rl
ll'ir'r', Xl itl t L.¡T ir F¡r rlt
. llntlr,Lrtt
r (¡4lr,rl Fr¡,irrì
Lrlpdf¡rd
9.A.a
Packet Pg. 36 Attachment: SOREDI Council Funding (1123 : SOREDI Funding Request)
Southern Oregon Resiliency: A Plan for Long Term Economic Vitality
anti-business sentiment and regulation in California, our region is on the cutting edge of attracting new
investment to our region and the State of Oregon. lt is time to act!
The Solution: The SOREDI Board of Directors, which includes representation from Jackson County,
Josephine County, and the cities of Ashland, Central Point, Eagle Point, Medford, and Talent, has
approved moving forward now to create a robust and resilient regional strategy that focuses on
prioritized needs, strategic-doing tactics, and outcome based metrics. We are engaging the services
of an outside consultancy firm, TIP Strategies, to create a Southern Oregon Resiliency Plan for Long
Term Economic Vitality.
Scope of Work: The expected timeline for this work is 6-8 months, projected to begin as soon as funds
are committed for the work. Our intent is not to simply raise funds for the strategy, but raise funds for
immediate implementation of key priorities identified. Expected timing is April - November 2OL9.
The scope of work will include:
1) Discovery Phase - document the region's current position with extensive analytics, 6 - 8 weeks
2) Opportunity Phase - stakeholder interviews with all 15 jurisdictions, industries, business
groups, and agencies to align community-wide goals and objectives, 6-8 weeks
3) Plan Development and lmplementation Matrix - identify 2-3 priorities that produce outcomes:
robust job growth in existing, new and startup businesses, new capital investment, and
reinvigorated communities that celebrate regional successes together, 6-8 weeks
Project Budget for Strategy and lmplementation of Priorities: 5450,000
Amount needed (received plus commitmentsf to proceed with Contract: 5185,000
Matching Funds Received: SsS,gso (SOREDI - 525,000, Josephine County - 525,000, City of Eagle Point,
S2,600, Southern Oregon Sanitation S2,500, Rogue Disposal 5750)
Other Committed Funds: 537,200 (Cities of Ashland and Medford, Recology, Ausland Group)
Expected Partners/Stakeholders: Jackson County, Josephine County, City of Ashland, City of Cave
Junction, City of Central Point, City of Eagle Point, City of Gold Hill, City of Grants Pass, City of
Jacksonville, City of Medford, City of Phoenix, City of Rogue River, City of Shady Cove, City of Talent,
Town of Butte Falls, Chambers of Commerce, Southern Oregon University, Rogue Community College,
Cow Creek Tribe, Coquille lndian Tribe, Travel Southern Oregon, Private Businesses, Rogue Workforce
Partnership, Foundations, and Developers
About TIP Strategies: The TIP team has crafted innovative strategies for communities and regions across the US and is
uniquely qualified to serve as the contractor for this work. TIP has the analytical capacity, experience, and planning
expertise to assist SOREDI in strengthening southern Oregon's position in the global economy. www.tipstrategies.com
Southern Oregon Regional Economic Development, lnc.
1311 East Barnett Road, Ste. 301, Medford, OR 97504 | (541) 773-8946 | www.soredi.org
9.A.a
Packet Pg. 37 Attachment: SOREDI Council Funding (1123 : SOREDI Funding Request)
City of Medford
OREGON
Office of the City Mayor
February 5,2OL9
Senator Golden
900 Court St NE, 5-421-
Salem, OR 97301
Representative Kim Wa llan
900 Court St NE, H-376
Salem, OR 97301
Medlord - A Føntost¡c Ploce to Live, Work & Play
Representative Pam Marsh
900 Court St NE, H-375
Salem, OR 97301
Dear Senator Golden, Representatives Wallan and Marsh:
The City and region is in the process of developing a coordinated economic strategy to identify existing
resources while looking at future opportunities to further develop our strategies that wíll serve both
Jackson and Josephine Counties.
As the federally appointed Economic Development District, Southern Oregon Regional Economic
Development, lnc. (SOREDI) is preparing now for its 2020 update of its 5-year Comprehensive Economic
Development Strategy (CEDS). The proposed coordinated economic strategy would be completed in
conjunction with the CEDS process and link future initiatives between both the local needs and federal
requirements.
The SOREDI Board of Directors, which includes representation from Jackson County, Josephine County,
and the cities of Ashland, CentralPoint, Eagle Point, Grants Pass, Medford, and Talent, has approved
moving forward now to create a robust and resilient regional strategy that focuses on prioritized needs,
strategic-doing tactics, and outcome based metrics.
Southern Oregon lacks a unifying regional economic development approach that celebrates it
differences while also being committed to new business development, tourism promotion, and new
investment. The region must be purpose-driven and resilient. To assist in accomplishing this, we are
engaging the services of an outside consultancy firm, TIP Strategies, to create a Southern Oregon
Resiliency Plan for Long Term Economic Vitality.
The potential impact of a coordinated strategy between business and government is a huge benefit that
affects the entire region consisting of nearly 300,000 citizens in 15 jurisdictions. Therefore, the City of
Medford supports the 5300,000 funding request by SOREDI from the 2019 Oregon Legislature during
this session.
The City of Medford is committing $z3,SOO for this project. This is in addition to funds committed by
SOREDI, private business and other government agencies for this 5450,000 project.
S¡ly,
Mayor
411 West 8th Street, Medford, OR 97501
Tel. 541 .774 .2OOO . email: mavor@citvof medford.ors . Fax 541 ,618 . 17OO
www.cltyof medf o rd. o rg
Gary
9.A.a
Packet Pg. 38 Attachment: SOREDI Council Funding (1123 : SOREDI Funding Request)
City of Central Point, Oregon CE
140 S 3rd Street, Central Point, OR 97502
54 1.664.3321 Fax 54 I .664.6384
www.central ooi ntoreson.sov
Administration Department
Chris Clayton, City Manager
Deanna Casey, City Recorder
Elizabeth Simas, Human Resources Director
POINTOregon
February 27,2019
Senator Herman E. Baertschiger Jr.
Republican - District 2 - Grants Pass
900 Court St. NE, 5-403, Salem, Oregon 97301
Representative Duane A. Stark
Republican - District 4 - Grants Pass
900 Court St. NE, H-372, Salem, Oregon 97301
RE: SOREDI-Regional Economic Strategy lnitiative
Dear Senator Baertschiger and Representative Stark:
As you are likely already aware, a number of municipalities throughout the Rogue Valley are
planning a coordinated effort to assist Southern Oregon Regional Economic Development, lnc
(SOREDI) in establishing a regional economic strategy for Southern Oregon.
As the federally appointed Economic Development District, SOREDI is required to
update/develop a comprehensive economic development strategy (CEDS) in five-year
increments. lnasmuch, SOREDI is currently attempting to create economies of scale by
partnering with local governments on a regional economic approach, while concurrently
satisfying necessary federal mandates related to their CEDS.
The SOREDI Board of Directors, which includes broad representation from Southern Oregon
local governments and business community partners, has recently adopted an initiative to
create a regional economic strategy aimed at eliminating long-standing economic
disadvantages and generating potential expansion opportunities. Additionally, it is the SOREDI
Board's stated intention to include robust performance measurement in any developed strategy
so that all stakeholders-including our policymakers and elected representatives-can evaluate
our outcomes/results and demonstrate the wisdom of this publicly funded project.
Southern Oregon is brimming with economic potential, and in the opinion of Central Point's
elected officials, advancement of public/private partnerships and investment is the linchpin
which will allow a newly developed regional economic strategy to produce economic "fruit,"
community investment, and local tourism promotion.
The City of Central Point broadly supports SOREDI's $300,000 funding request ($450,000 total
project cost) and hopes any associated legislative process aimed at achieving this important
financialtarget will receive your support during the 2019 Oregon Legislative Session. Moreover,
The City of Central Point is willing to participate in this critical partnership by contributing
SOREDI's requested amount of $5,300 in July of 2019.
9.A.a
Packet Pg. 39 Attachment: SOREDI Council Funding (1123 : SOREDI Funding Request)
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Hank Williams
Mayor
9.A.a
Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: SOREDI Council Funding (1123 : SOREDI Funding Request)
RESOLUTION NO. _________
A RESOLUTION TO INCLUDE SOUTHERN OREGON REGIONAL ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT’S REQUESTED AMOUNT OF $5,300 FOR A NEW
REGIONAL ECONOMIC STRATEGY IN THE 2019-2021 CITY OF CENTRAL
POINT BUDGET PROPOSAL
RECITALS:
A. The City of Central Point supports local and regional economic
development.
B. Southern Oregon Regional Economic Development (SOREDI) has
requested a contribution of $5,300 to assist with the development of a new
regional economic strategy.
C. The City of Central Point has historically contributed to SOREDI through
annual membership dues and generally supports their economic policies
and initiatives.
D. The City of Central Point supports SOREDI’s efforts to fund a new
regional economic strategy via funding appropriated from the 2019
Oregon legislative session.
THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Authorizing City Staff to include SOREDI’s requested amount of
$5,300 for the development of a new regional economic strategy in the 2019-
2021 City of Central Point budget proposal.
Section 2. If included in the adopted 2019-2021 City of Central Point budget, the
requested amount of $5,300 would become available July 1, 2019.
Passed by the Council and signed by me in authentication of its passage
this _____ day of March, 2019.
__________________________
Mayor Hank Williams
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Recorder
9.A.b
Packet Pg. 41 Attachment: SOREDI Resolution (1123 : SOREDI Funding Request)
City of Central Point
Staff Report to Council
ISSUE SUMMARY
TO: City Council
DEPARTMENT:
Public Works
FROM: Matt Samitore, Parks and Public Works Director
MEETING DATE: March 28, 2019
SUBJECT: Resolution No. ______, Adopting the Rogue Valley Storm Water Design
Manual
ACTION REQUIRED:
Resolution
RECOMMENDATION:
Approval
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual is the
currently approved manual for design consultants to use for designing new water quality
projects associated with new development or major redevelopment. The Manual is updated
annually with a working group of regional government staff and engineers employed both
privately and publically.
The City has previously adopted the manual thru the City Standards and Specifications. In
reviewing that approval with the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) it was suggested
that it would be best to adopt via a separate Council resolution now that the City has its own
Water Quality Permit.
Staff will be working with the other design professionals to update the manual with the new
permit requirements.
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS: N/A
LEGAL ANALYSIS: N/A
COUNCIL GOALS/STRATEGIC PLAN ANALYSIS:
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the resolution adopting the Rogue Valley Storm
Water Design Manual.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: I move to approve Resolution ___, adopting the Rogue Valley
Storm Water Quality Design Manual.
9.B
Packet Pg. 42
ATTACHMENTS:
1. RESO - Storm Water Quality Manual Adoption 2019
2. DesignManual revised July 2018
9.B
Packet Pg. 43
Res. No.___________; March 14, 2019 Page 1
RESOLUTION NO. _________
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE ROGUE VALLEY
STORMWATER QUALITY DESIGN MANUAL
RECITALS:
1. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) administers the Clean Water
Act (33 U.S.C.§1251 et seq. (1972)), which prohibits anyone, including municipalities,
from discharging pollutants through a point source into waters of the United States
without National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit.
2. The State of Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) is authorized by the
Clean Water Act Section 402(b) and 40 CFR Part 123 to implement and administer the
NPDES permit in Oregon.
3. The City of Central Point, Oregon has applied for a stand-alone (NPDES) Municipal
Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4) Phase 2 General Permit from DEQ, which is
scheduled to take effect sometime after March 1, 2019.
4. The General Permit in Section A.3.e, Post-Construction Site Runoff for New
Development and Redevelopment, requires the City to reduce the discharge of
pollutants and control stormwater runoff from new development and redevelopment of
projects in the City.
5. The Rogue Valley Stormwater Quality Design Manual (RVSQDM) establishes stormwater
quality design standards to regulate development in the Rogue Valley in accordance
with the permit requirements.
6. By adopting the RVSQDM the City will satisfy a major component of the Phase 2 General
Permit.
The City of Central Point resolves as follows:
Section 1. The City hereby adopts the current Rogue Valley Stormwater Quality Design Manual
in the form attached hereto as Exhibit “A”.
Passed by the Council and signed by me in authentication of its passage this _____ day
of March, 2019.
__________________________
Mayor Hank Williams
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Recorder
______________________________________________________________________________
9.B.a
Packet Pg. 44 Attachment: RESO - Storm Water Quality Manual Adoption 2019 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
ROGUE VALLEY STORMWATER
QUALITY DESIGN MANUAL
Revised July 2018
CREATED FOR:
City of Ashland
City of Central Point
City of Medford
City of Phoenix
City of Talent
Jackson County
Rogue Valley Sewer Services
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 45 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
ii
Table of Contents
CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 1-1
1.1 PURPOSE ............................................................................................................................................ 1-1
1.2 APPLICABILITY .................................................................................................................................... 1-1
Exemptions to Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual ............................................................. 1-2
1.3 LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ......................................................... 1-2
Exemption to LID Stormwater Management..................................................................................... 1-2
CHAPTER 2 – PERFORMANCE STANDARDS .............................................................................................. 2-1
2.1 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL ................................................................................................. 2-1
Performance Standard: .......................................................................................................................... 2-1
Design Storm: ......................................................................................................................................... 2-2
2.2 POLLUTION REDUCTION .................................................................................................................... 2-2
Performance Standards: ........................................................................................................................ 2-3
Design Storm: ......................................................................................................................................... 2-5
2.3 FLOW CONTROL ................................................................................................................................ 2-5
Performance Standards: ........................................................................................................................ 2-5
Design Storm: ......................................................................................................................................... 2-6
2.4 DESTINATION ..................................................................................................................................... 2-6
Performance Standards: ........................................................................................................................ 2-6
Design Storm: ......................................................................................................................................... 2-6
CHAPTER 3 – ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................. 3-1
3.1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 3-1
3.2 POLLUTION REDUCTION .................................................................................................................... 3-1
3.2.1 24-Hour Rainfall .......................................................................................................................... 3-1
3.2.2 Time of Concentration ................................................................................................................ 3-1
3.2.3 Land Area .................................................................................................................................... 3-1
3.2.4 Runoff Curve Number ................................................................................................................. 3-1
3.2.5 Removal Efficiency ...................................................................................................................... 3-2
3.3 FLOW CONTROL ................................................................................................................................ 3-2
3.3.1 Design Requirements .................................................................................................................... 3-3
3.4 DESTINATION .................................................................................................................................... 3-3
CHAPTER 4 – APPROVED STORMWATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS ............................................................ 4-1
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 46 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
iii
4.1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 4-1
4.2 BMP SELECTION PROCESS ................................................................................................................. 4-2
4.3 SOURCE CONTROL BMPS ................................................................................................................... 4-3
4.3.1 Vegetated Roof (Green Roofs) BMP ............................................................................................. 4-3
4.3.2 Trees ............................................................................................................................................. 4-7
4.3.3 Porous Pavement BMP ................................................................................................................. 4-9
4.3.4 Contained Planter BMP ............................................................................................................... 4-13
4.4 COLLECTION BMPS .......................................................................................................................... 4-16
4.4.1 Rain Garden, Stormwater Planter, and LID Swale (aka Vegetated Stormwater Facility) BMPs . 4-16
4.4.2 Soakage Trench BMP................................................................................................................... 4-23
4.4.3 Dispersion BMPs: Vegetated Filter Strips and Disconnected Downspouts ................................ 4-26
4.4.4 Water Quality Conveyance Swales .............................................................................................. 4-29
4.4.5 Extended Detention Basin ........................................................................................................... 4-34
4.4.6 Proprietary Treatment Devices ................................................................................................... 4-36
4.4.7 Underground Detention .............................................................................................................. 4-36
CHAPTER 5 – ALTERNATIVE TREATMENT SYSTEMS ................................................................................. 5-1
5.1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 5-1
5.2 TREATMENT PROCESSES ................................................................................................................... 5-1
5.2.1 Gravity Separation ....................................................................................................................... 5-1
5.2.2 Coagulation and Precipitation ...................................................................................................... 5-1
5.2.3 Inert Media Filtration .................................................................................................................. 5-1
5.2.4 Sorptive Media Filtration ............................................................................................................. 5-2
5.3 PERFORMANCE CRITERIA .................................................................................................................. 5-2
5.3.1 Design Storm ................................................................................................................................ 5-2
5.3.2 Performance Criteria .................................................................................................................... 5-2
5.4 TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT PROTOCOL ........................................................................................... 5-2
Chapter 6- SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS ................................................................................................ 6-1
6.1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 6-1
6.2 DRAFTING STANDARDS ...................................................................................................................... 6-1
6.3 LANDSCAPE SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS ......................................................................................... 6-1
6.4 STORMWATER CALCULATION REPORT ............................................................................................. 6-2
6.5 PROPRIETARY SYSTEMS ..................................................................................................................... 6-3
6.6 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN ........................................................................................... 6-3
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 47 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
iv
6.7 STORMWATER FACILITY EASEMENT ................................................................................................. 6-4
DEFINITIONS ............................................................................................................................ Definitions-1
APPENDICES ..................................................................................................................................................... iv
APPENDICES
Appendix A – Plant Specifications
Criteria for Choosing Plants ..................................................................................................................... A-1
Recommendations for Stormwater Management .......................................................................... A-1
Soil Depth Influences Plant Choice .................................................................................................. A-1
Plant Spacing, Density & Container Size .................................................................................................. A-1
Safety & Crime ......................................................................................................................................... A-3
Choosing Plants from Plant Lists Generated Using USDA PLANTS Database .......................................... A-4
Planting Techniques .............................................................................................................................. A-12
Planting in Containers ................................................................................................................... A-12
Planting in the Ground .................................................................................................................. A-12
Establishment Period Maintenance ...................................................................................................... A-13
Irrigation ........................................................................................................................................ A-13
Integrated Pest Management ............................................................................................................... A-13
Sourcing Plants ...................................................................................................................................... A-14
References ............................................................................................................................................. A-15
Appendix B – Infiltration Testing Methodology
Applicability ........................................................................................................................................ B-1
Timing ................................................................................................................................................. B-1
Location .............................................................................................................................................. B-1
Number of Tests ................................................................................................................................. B-1
Testing depth ...................................................................................................................................... B-2
Falling Head Test for the Simplified Design Approach ............................................................................ B-4
Ribbon Testing ......................................................................................................................................... B-6
References ............................................................................................................................................... B-8
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 48 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
v
Appendix C – Santa Barbara Urban Hydrograph Spreadsheet Example
Appendix D – NRCS Method Details and Curve Numbers
NRCS Method: Time of Concentration Calculation, Runoff Curve Numbers
Medford IDF Curve Numbers
Appendix E – Standard Drawings
Standard Drawings Index
PDF Drawings
DWG drawings
General Notes for Vegetated BMPs (pdf)
General Notes for Vegetated BMPs (dwg)
Appendix F – RVSS Stormwater Credits
INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................... F-1
VOLUME CONTROL .................................................................................................................................. F-1
TREES ....................................................................................................................................................... F-2
COMBINED CREDIT .................................................................................................................................. F-2
RVSS STORMWATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT FEE CREDIT WORKSHEET ............................................... F-3
Appendix G – SWAT Pre-Approved Proprietary SW Treatment Technologies
Appendix H – Stormwater Operation and Maintenance Plan Template
O&M Manual Template (word)
O&M Manual Template (pdf)
SW Facility Inspection and Maintenance Worksheets
Hazardous Material Spill Fact Sheet
RVSS Declaration of Covenants (formerly the SW O&M Agreement)
Medford Declaration of Covenants
Medford Subdivision O&M Agreement
Appendix I – Stormwater Quality Structure Easements
Appendix J – Bear Creek and Rogue River TMDL documents
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 49 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018 Chapter 1 - 1
CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION
1.1 PURPOSE
Managing stormwater is an essential part of maintaining livability in an urban area while trying to
preserve the natural state of local rivers and streams. Typical urban development often interferes
with the hydrologic process of rain filtering through the soil, recharging the groundwater, and
slowly reaching the nearby streams. Most rooftops, parking lots, roadways, and other impervious
surfaces collect stormwater, often increasing the temperature and amount of pollutants, and
quickly discharge the flow to the closest water body. Both the quantity and quality of stormwater
runoff from urban areas can have detrimental effects on the aquatic life and ecosystem of surface
waters, further affecting local recreation and drinking water quality. Properly managing urban
stormwater helps to prevent these detrimental effects and can lead to environmental,
recreational, and economic benefits, such as reducing the cost of water treatment.
City/public planners, engineers, and developers have traditionally held to the concept of collecting
and discharging stormwater as quickly as possible to avoid the potential for urban flooding. This
concept is currently being modified to encourage reducing the amount of runoff from the source,
providing some filtering or treatment, and slowly releasing the stormwater by infiltration into the
ground or to a local water body. By designing stormwater management systems to mimic a natural
hydrologic process during a rain event, urban stormwater should have minimal adverse effects on
local surface waters.
The overall purpose of this design manual is to provide stormwater management principles and
techniques that mimic the natural hydrologic process and meet new water quality goals. More
specifically, this manual intends to do the following:
1) Establish water quality standards for stormwater discharges from public and private
developments in the Rogue Valley;
2) Provide guidance to design professionals on how to meet applicable water quality
standards;
3) Identify Best Management Practices (BMPs) that meet water quality standards; and
4) Establish review procedures for stormwater management plans.
1.2 APPLICABILITY
The standards set forth in Rogue Valley Stormwater Quality Design Manual (RVSQDM) apply to all
development or redevelopment that creates 2,500 square feet or more of impervious surface, both
public and private, within the MS4 boundaries of any jurisdiction that adopts this manual. This
requirement applies to the total amount of impervious surface that will be developed or
redeveloped at full build-out of the project.
Public roadway projects including ‘Development and/or Redevelopment’ as defined in the
definitions require special attention. It is suggested that jurisdictions require staff and consultants
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 50 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018 Chapter 1 - 2
meet with the reviewing agency to discuss stormwater management requirements and options
prior to the design phase of each project.
Exemptions to Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual
Development or redevelopment of a single family dwelling or duplex, constructed on a single tax
lot, that is not part of a larger common plan of development will be exempt from the requirements
of the Design Manual.
1.3 LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
Development or redevelopment of impervious surfaces greater than 2,500 sq. ft. on soils classified
as belonging to the Type A or B hydrologic soil groups, by the Natural Resources Conservation
Service, and on slopes of 5% or less, will require the use of Low Impact Development (LID)
stormwater Best Management Practices (BMP). Existing facilities are only required to implement LID
for added impervious surfaces of 2,500 sq ft or more. Several example LID techniques are detailed
in the Design Manual.
Exemption to LID Stormwater Management
Road development and road redevelopment may use any stormwater BMP that meets the
performance standards outlined in Chapter 2.
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 51 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018 Chapter 2 – 1
CHAPTER 2 – PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
The overall goal of the stormwater manual is to allow engineers and designers the freedom to
design a stormwater management plan within a set of usable parameters without dictating specific
Best Management Practices (BMPs). To accomplish this, the following performance standards have
been developed for four major stormwater management issues: Erosion and Sediment Control,
Pollution Reduction, Flow Control, and Stormwater Destination. Specific BMPs that meet these
standards are included in this manual in Chapter 4 for those who wish to use a standard
method/design.
When a project must meet stormwater management requirements for multiple agencies, the local
jurisdiction will determine whether or not their requirements have been met (eg. meeting Oregon
Department of Transportation or Federal-Aid Highway Program requirements does not
automatically mean local requirements are met).
Please note: Chapter 3 “Analysis Methodology” provides detailed information on how individual
stormwater management plans are reviewed for compliance and Chapter 6 “Submittal
Requirements” provides details on the submittal requirements for these plans.
2.1 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL
Erosion rates increase significantly when ground cover is removed on a construction site. The
rate of erosion may be 1000 times greater on disturbed land than land in its natural condition1.
The typical rate of erosion on a site can vary from 100 up to 500 tons per acre annually
depending on the site conditions, climate, and soil types2. Erosion is a stormwater management
issue because of its potential to move soil off the site thereby impacting the downstream waters
and/or drainage systems.
Erosion and Sediment Controls (ESC) are necessary during the construction phase of developments.
All construction activities that affect more than one acre of land are currently required by the
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) to obtain an NPDES 1200-C permit that
addresses ESC measures specific to that project. Those projects that have obtained and are in
compliance with an NPDES 1200-C permit are considered to be in compliance with the ESC
performance standards described below. However, the standards in this manual apply to all land
development projects.
Performance Standard:
The purpose of Erosion and Sediment Controls is to prevent the discharge of significant amounts
of sediment to surface waters. As stated in the NPDES 1200-C Permit, the following conditions
describe “significant amounts of sediment” and shall be prevented from occurring:
1 Clean Water Services: “Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Planning And Design Manual”
December 2000, Chapter 1, Page 1-1
2 Ibid.
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 52 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018 Chapter 2 – 2
• Earth slides or mud flows that leave the construction site and are likely to discharge to
surface waters.
• Evidence of concentrated flows of water causing erosion when such flows are not filtered or
settled to remove sediment prior to leaving the construction site and are likely to discharge to
surface waters. Evidence includes the presence of rills, rivulets, or channels.
• Turbid flows of water that are not filtered or settled to remove turbidity prior to leaving the
construction site and are likely to discharge to surface waters.
• Deposits of sediment at the construction site in areas that drain to unprotected storm water
inlets or catch basins that discharge to surface waters. Inlets and catch basins with failing
sediment controls due to lack of maintenance or inadequate design will be considered unprotected.
• Deposits of sediment from the construction site on public or private streets outside of the
permitted construction activity that are likely to discharge to surface waters.
• Deposits of sediment from the construction site on any adjacent property outside of the
permitted construction activity that are likely to discharge to surface waters.
Turbid flows entering the stormwater conveyance system including catch basins and ditches will
be considered a violation if the turbidity is greater than 10 percent over background or receiving
water.
Sediment is considered “likely to discharge to surface waters” if there is no physical barrier
between the sediment source and surface waters or municipal storm drain inlets.
Design Storm:
Most ESC measures, such as silt fences, biofilter bags, etc., are not designed based on a design
storm. ESC measures are designed to be used as tools to help control erosion during routine storm
events and usually consist of multiple structures. ESC measures, where used, should be designed
and installed in accordance with the most recent edition of the DEQ Erosion and Sediment
Control Manual or Oregon Department of Transportation Hydraulics Manual, Volume 2, Erosion
and Sediment Control. Unless otherwise specified in the ODOT Hydraulics Manual, ESC measures
that require flow calculations will be designed based on a 10-year, 24-hour rainfall level of 3.0
inches3.
2.2 POLLUTION REDUCTION
Urbanization typically generates new sources of pollution and provides transport mechanisms to
deliver those pollutants to local water bodies. To mitigate the adverse effects of pollutants on
surface waters, pollution reduction standards are essential for stormwater management. The first
step in managing these pollutants is to identify which pollutants are of primary significance to the
Rogue Valley area.
Bear Creek and several of its tributaries have been identified in the 303(d) list (referring to Section
303(d) of the Clean Water Act) as not meeting federal water quality standards (see Appendix J). The
Bear Creek watershed is currently monitored for pollutants by the Rogue Valley Council of
Governments (RVCOG). In order to improve water quality, the DEQ has developed standards by
creating the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) requirements for each parameter of concern in the
3 NOAA Atlas 2, Volume X, Figure 27. Isopluvials of 10 year 24 hour precipitation in tenths of an inch
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 53 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018 Chapter 2 – 3
Bear Creek watershed. In July 2007 TMDLs for temperature, bacteria, and sedimentation were
approved for the Bear Creek watershed. The water quality parameters in 1992 and 2007 TMDLs
include:
Table 2.1 Bear Creek Total Maximum Daily Load Parameters
1992 TMDL Parameters 2007 TMDL Parameters
Ammonia (as Nitrogen) Fecal Coliform
Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD) E. Coli
Dissolved Oxygen (DO) Temperature
Phosphorous Sedimentation
Habitat Modification Habitat Modification
Flow Modification Flow Modification
Other pollutants typically caused by urbanization can be classified as follows:
• Suspended solids
• Heavy metals
• Nutrients (such as nitrogen and phosphorous)
• Bacteria
• Organics (oil, grease, hydrocarbons, etc.)
• Floatable debris
• Thermal load (temperature)
The purpose of the pollution reduction standard in this manual is to minimize, to the maximum
extent practicable, the amount of all pollution that enters a water body from a particular
development. However, to simplify the design process and water quality monitoring, the
performance standards described below address two specific parameters that are assumed
to help reduce other pollutants of concern.
Performance Standards:
Standards for pollution reduction are based both on the impact pollutants can have on a water
body and the ability to measure the pollutant. The primary pollutants of concern in this manual
are Suspended Solids and Organics (oil and grease). This manual assumes that by meeting
standards for these two pollutants, the stormwater management system will also effectively limit
the discharge of heavy metals, nutrients, bacteria, and floatable debris. Temperature loading is a
concern mostly during summer months and is not addressed in this manual.
Performance standards can be set based on the percent of removal of pollutants, maximum
discharge concentrations, or a combination of both. The City of Portland has developed a
protocol for assessing pollution reduction that was used as a basis to create the following
standards.
Suspended Solids: For influent concentrations of less than 70 mg/l the maximum effluent
concentration leaving a development is 20 mg/l. For influent concentrations of 70 mg/l to 130
mg/l stormwater treatment facilities must remove 70% of suspended solids. For influent
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 54 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018 Chapter 2 – 4
concentrations of 130 mg/l to 400 mg/l the allowable effluent concentration will increase linearly
to a point corresponding to 89% removal at an influent concentration of 400 mg/l. Above
400 mg/l, the required removal will be 89% of total suspended solids. (See Chart Below).
Figure 2.1 Allowable concentration of Total Suspended Solids in stormwater effluent
Oil/Grease: The maximum concentration of oil/grease discharged from a site is 10 mg/l4. The
lack of a visible sheen of oil/grease on stormwater effluent is not considered measurable proof of
meeting this standard. As defined below, only sites expected to generate runoff containing oil and
grease at a concentration equal to or greater than 10mg/l will be required to treat for oil and
grease.
All of the following site conditions are expected to generate runoff containing oil and grease at a
concentration equal to or greater than 10mg/l:
1. Non-employee parking areas of commercial or industrial sites with daily trip end counts
greater than 100 vehicles per 1,000 square feet gross building area or greater than 300
total trip ends.
2. A commercial or industrial site storing and/or transferring petroleum, not including
locations where heating fuel is routinely delivered to end users;
4 Ibid, Page B-5
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 55 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018 Chapter 2 – 5
3. Fueling stations and facilities;
4. A commercial or industrial site with the capacity to use, store, or maintain a fleet of 25 or
more vehicles that are over 10 tons gross weight (trucks, busses, trains, heavy equipment,
etc.);
5. Maintenance and repair facilities for vehicles, aircraft, construction equipment, railroad
equipment or industrial machinery and equipment;
6. Commercial on-street parking areas located on streets with an expected total Average Daily
Traffic (ADT) count equal or greater than 7,500;
7. Outdoor storage yards and other sites subject to frequent use or storage of forklifts and/or
other hydraulic equipment;
8. Railroad yards;
9. Any road with an expected ADT count equal to or greater than 30,000 (assumes a straight
stretch of road, where intersecting ADTs are low); and,
10. Road intersections with expected ADT count equal to or greater than 25,000 on the main
roadway and equal to or greater than 15,000 on any intersecting roadway.
Design Storm:
Facilities designed to remove pollutants from stormwater must be properly sized in order
to be effective. Undersized facilities will not adequately detain stormwater and will not provide
adequate pollutant removal; oversized facilities will be prone to stagnation and place an undue
burden on development. The ideal system should treat at least 90% of the precipitation in a
given year.
The Bear Creek Valley receives an average of 18.37 inches of rain per year5. On average, the area
receives measurable rainfall 102 times per year and an excess of 1.0- inch of rain in a 24-hour
period 1.8 times per year6. Based on this data, a design storm of 1.0-inch in 24-hours will
capture over 98% of the rainfall events and is assumed adequate to capture close to 90% of
annual precipitation.
2.3 FLOW CONTROL
Flow control standards are intended to prevent an increase in the peak flow of runoff from a
particular property. The purpose of maintaining the peak flow is to preserve the capacity in
downstream storm drains and prevent flash flooding and erosion.
Most Cities in the Rogue Valley currently require some peak flow attenuation. In all cases, the post-
development peak flow is not to exceed the pre-development peak flow as described below. Flow
controls do not apply to the residential area of White City.
Note: Standards relating to total runoff volume are not included in this manual at this time.
Performance Standards:
5 Medford WSO AP weather station, Oregon Climate Service – www.ocs.oregonstate.edu
6 Ibid
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 56 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018 Chapter 2 – 6
•Post-development peak flow ≤ pre-development peak flow. (See definition for pre-
development in Chapter 1).
Design Storm:
Peak Flow: 10-year event, 24-hour rainfall depth of 3.0 inches7
Overflow: 25-year event, 24-hour rainfall depth of 3.25 inches8
2.4 DESTINATION
Destination standards are designed to ensure that downstream storm drainage systems have
adequate capacity to carry additional stormwater flows. Consult with the local jurisdiction to
determine applicable destination requirements.
Performance Standards:
Stormwater runoff from a site must not increase the flow in any downstream storm drain system
to the extent that one of the following conditions occurs during the design storm:
• Overtopping of roadways
• Flooding of buildings
In addition, pollution control and flow control facilities must be designed to safely bypass flows
greater than their respective design storm without damage to private property.
Design Storm:
Design storm for the destination performance standard is a 10-year storm. The design storm for
bypass routing is a 25-year storm.
7 NOAA Atlas2, Volume X, Figure 27. Isopluvials of 10-year, 24-hour precipitation in tenth of an inch
8 NOAA Atlas2, Volume X, Figure 28. Isopluvials of 25-year, 24-hour precipitation in tenth of an inch
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 57 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018 Chapter 3 - 1
CHAPTER 3 – ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
3.1 INTRODUCTION
This chapter defines the methodology that will be used by staff when evaluating the performance and
adequacy of stormwater controls. Engineers submitting plans are not required to use the same
methodology, however the results should be comparable. Engineers may be required to submit
additional data and calculations to support their results if they use alternate methodologies.
3.2 POLLUTION REDUCTION
Peak flow and total volume for water quality storms may be calculated using the Santa Barbara Urban
Hydrograph Method (SBUH) with a Type 1A rainfall distribution, or any other comparable method.
The key parameters in this calculation are the 24-hour rainfall, time of concentration, land area, and
runoff curve number. When using the SBUH method, two hydrographs must be developed and then
summed together for the calculation of peak flow and total volume from the connected and
unconnected areas of the project. Refer to section 3.2.4 for definitions of connected and unconnected
areas.
The Santa Barbara Urban Hydrograph method lends itself easily to spreadsheet applications. A sample
printout of the spreadsheet is included in Appendix C and an Excel file of the calculations is available
on the Rogue Valley Sewer Service’s website under Appendix C.
3.2.1 24-Hour Rainfall
The 24-hour rainfall used to analyze pollution reduction capabilities is 1.0-inch as described in Section
2.2.
3.2.2 Time of Concentration
The time of concentration is the time it takes for a theoretical drop of water to travel from the
furthest point in the drainage basin to the facility being designed. The traveled path typically
includes a combination of sheet flow, shallow concentrated flow, and channel flow (as defined on
page 3-3 of the NRCS TR-55 method), or any other comparable method. The time of concentration
may be calculated using the NRCS method as described in TR-55 (Worksheet No. 3). A sample
worksheet for this calculation is included in Appendix D.
3.2.3 Land Area
The land area used in the calculation is provided by the design engineer as part of the plan submittal.
3.2.4 Runoff Curve Number
Runoff curve numbers are used to categorize runoff potential based on soil types and land use. The
curve numbers were developed by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and are
published in TR-55, Table 2.2, which is included in Appendix D.
For Predevelopment conditions, the highest allowed Curve Number is 80 for any soil type, without
prior approval. A curve number of 80 represents average values for brush found in Table 2-2c of TR-
55.
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 58 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018 Chapter 3 - 2
Runoff curve numbers must be determined independently for the unconnected and connected areas
of the project site as defined below. The separate hydrographs must then be summed to determine
the total flow from the project site.
Unconnected Areas include both impervious and pervious land use areas from which stormwater
runoff originates and then sheet flows over a pervious surface before reaching an outlet. For example,
a tennis court surrounded by lawn or runoff from roofs that sheet flows over a lawn. Curve numbers
for unconnected areas in a project can be averaged on a weighted basis and a single hydrograph can
be developed for the project site.
Note: if curve number values for the unconnected areas differ by more than 20 points, then separate
hydrographs must be generated for each land use area and the hydrographs shall be summed for the
resultant flow.
Connected Areas include only impervious land use areas that are directly connected to the outlet of
the project site. For example, driveways, sidewalks and streets that discharge from a project site
without passing through a pervious surface are considered to be connected areas. The curve numbers
for connected areas shall not be weighted with those of unconnected areas.
3.2.5 Removal Efficiency
Pollution removal efficiency will vary with the type of stormwater controls used. The sizing guidelines
for stormwater controls included in Chapter 4 are presumed to meet pollution reduction standards.
For stormwater approaches not described in Chapter 4, the primary method of pollution reduction
is assumed to be sedimentation governed by Stokes Law. The system must be designed with
sufficient detention time to allow a design particle to settle out before passing through the system.
If a soil analysis is available, the design particle will be sized smaller than 70% of the sample, by mass.
If no soil analysis is available, the following is required:
• Design particle is assumed to have an effective diameter of 75 microns (0.003 inches) and a
specific gravity of 2.65.
• Oil and trash must be trapped.
• Maintenance performed within four hours.
• Design for percent removal of 75 micron particle or OK 110 in accordance with chart on page
2-4. If vendor sizing table uses another design particle size then the water quality flow will
be reduce in proportion to the particle size. Therefore if a vendor uses an average particle
size of 125 microns and the water quality flow in the vendor table is 2 cfs, then the adjusted
water quality flow in the vendor table for that model will be 2 X 75/125 = 1.2 cfs.
Approaches that use treatment processes other than sedimentation will be analyzed on an individual
basis.
3.3 FLOW CONTROL
Peak flow for flow control measures may be calculated for a 10-year, 24-hour rainfall event using the
SBUH or any other method acceptable to the reviewing jurisdiction. The key parameters in this
calculation are the 24-hour rainfall depth, time of concentration, land area, and runoff curve number.
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 59 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018 Chapter 3 - 3
An expanded discussion of the SBUH is presented in Section 3.2.
3.3.1 Design Requirements
1. All stormwater discharges must be legally authorized.
2. Where practical, only “off-line” facilities, which only receive flow from the site to be
managed, shall be used. In-line facilities that will receive flow from sources other than the
required flow to be managed, will only be permitted in areas where site limitations won’t
allow an “off-line” facility. If a facility is “in-line”, it shall be designed to pass the incoming
flow without damage to the facility or its function, and the storage increased accordingly.
3. All weather vehicle access for maintenance shall be provided to every component of the
facility.
Surface Detention Requirements: Maximum depth of water in parking lots or other areas of vehicular
or pedestrian use is 6 inches, and 4 feet in ponds not subject to vehicular or pedestrian use.
Underground Detention Requirements (Pipes, Vaults, Tanks)
1. Man access is to be provided, with access at the control structure, and at the farthest
upstream end of the system.
2. Provide a minimum of one foot of dead storage at or near the control structure for
sediment accumulation, or an additional 10% in the entire system.
3. Maximum depth to invert shall be 15 feet.
Time of Concentration: Refer to Section 3.2.2 for time of concentration methodology.
Land Area: The land area used in the calculation is provided by the design engineer as part of the plan
submittal.
Runoff Curve Number: Refer to Section 3.2.4 for runoff curve number methodology.
3.4 DESTINATION
All stormwater detention facilities must have an overflow structure capable of safely passing the 25-
year storm to an approved stormwater facility. Peak flow for destination requirements may be
calculated using the Rational Method with an ODOT Zone 6 IDF curve for a 10-year storm event (25-
year storm event for bypass calculations), or any other comparable method. Medford’s IDF curve is
required for projects within the City of Medford. The flow calculations are the same as described above
for flow control measures.
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 60 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Chapter 4 - 1 Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018
CHAPTER 4 – APPROVED Stormwater TREATMENT SYSTEMS
4.1 INTRODUCTION
Chapter 4 focuses on approved treatment systems for stormwater management. Design criteria have
been developed by the approving jurisdictions for these treatment systems (also called Best
Management Practices or “BMPs”) to meet the required performance standards (described in
Chapter 2). Developments that require additional or alternative BMPs should reference Chapter 5 –
Alternative Treatment Systems.
The following steps should be taken to select appropriate stormwater management facilities for the
site and develop submittals for review and approval:
1. Characterize the site drainage area, soil type, slopes
2. On sites characterized by the NRCS as having soils belonging to Hydrologic
groups A and B, soils infiltration rate testing must be done per Appendix B.
3. Develop a conceptual plan
4. Develop a landscape plan for any vegetated stormwater facilities (described
in Chapter 6)
5. Write a Stormwater Calculation Report (described in Chapter 6)
6. Complete a stormwater Operations and Maintenance Plan (described in Chapter 6)
7. Submit plans and report to the reviewing jurisdiction.
Simplified versus Performance Design Approach
Two design approaches, Simplified and Performance, are allowed by this manual, for some BMPs either
design approach can be utilized and for others only the performance approach may be utilized.
Simplified Design Approach:
o There are no specific education requirements for use of this approach.
o The Falling Head Test, described in Appendix B, may be used for infiltration testing
requirements.
o Only applies to projects developing or redeveloping less than 10,000 square feet.
o Must use a design sizing factor of 0.05.
o The wetted area of the SW facility shall be sized using the following equation:
SWF A = IA x SF
Where: SWF A = stormwater facility wetted area
IA = impervious area to be treated by the facility
SF = sizing factor of 0.05
Performance Approach:
o Must be performed by an engineer licensed in the state of Oregon.
o See Appendix B for infiltration testing requirements.
o Must be used for projects developing or redeveloping 10,000 square feet or more.
o Sizing factors may not be used.
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 61 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Chapter 4 - 2 Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018
BMPs for Large Sites
Depending on site characteristics including drainage area and slope, a single BMP may not be able to
treat or detain runoff from the entire site. In these cases, two or more BMPs may be required to treat
and detain runoff from the entire site. When using more than one BMP on a site, the total impervious
surface area should be divided among the systems to achieve treatment for the effective total
impervious area.
4.2 BMP SELECTION PROCESS
Green Infrastructure
As defined in Chapter 1, Low Impact Development BMPs are required to be used on sites with soils
classified as belonging to Type A or B hydrologic soil groups.
Source versus Collection BMPs
The approved BMPs are listed below in order of their location in the overall system: from the source
of rainfall to the collection system. Source BMPs intercept rainfall directly and infiltrate or
evapotranspire it, thereby reducing effective impervious area. The area of these BMPs should not be
included in the impervious area requiring treatment and detention. Collection BMPs concentrate
runoff from across a site for treatment and/or flow control in a confined area.
Flow Control: Some BMPs can be designed for both treatment and flow control. Those that can be
used for flow control are indicated in Table 4.1 below.
Table 4.1. Stormwater Management BMPs
BMP Source/Collection LID BMP? Flow Control Section
Vegetated Roofs Source LID N 4.3.1
Trees Source LID N 4.3.2
Porous Pavement Source LID Y 4.3.3
Contained Planter Boxes Source LID Y 4.3.4
Rain Garden, Stormwater
Planter and LID Swale
(Vegetated Stormwater
Facilities)
Collection LID Y 4.4.1
Soakage Trench Collection LID Y 4.4.2
Vegetated Filter Strips and
Disconnected Downspouts
Collection LID Y 4.4.3
Water Quality Conveyance
swales
Collection Y 4.4.4
Extended Detention Basins Collection Y 4.4.5
Proprietary Treatment Systems Collection N 4.4.6
Underground Detention Systems Collection Y 4.4.7
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 62 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Chapter 4 - 3 Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018
4.3 SOURCE CONTROL BMPS
4.3.1 Vegetated Roof (Green Roofs) BMP
Figure 4.1. Growing medium on this small vegetated roof was stabilized with lumber to keep it from sliding
down the steep slope.
Vegetated roofs are roof system assemblies that manage stormwater by holding rainfall in the pores
of the growing medium, the drainage layer below if used, and by plants. While the term “green roof”
is a more commonly used term, the term “vegetated roof” is more appropriate for much of Oregon
which has dry summers, where some plants are dry and inactive until the rainy season begins again.
Evaporation from the growing medium and evapotranspiration from the plants releases a high volume
of the moisture back into the atmosphere, even in winter, which is unique amongst all the BMPs in
this guidance. Vegetated roofs usually consist of a waterproof membrane, an optional drainage layer,
an engineered growing medium or soil, a layer of plants and optional mineral mulch for non-irrigated
systems.
Siting
Roof Slopes. Roofs up to a slope of 20 degrees generally will not slump and need no special design to
keep the growing medium in place. Those with slopes greater than 20 degrees require a system such
as horizontal strapping, laths, battens, or grids that prevents the growing medium and vegetation from
slumping (Figure X). These systems will also slow water flow through the assembly.
Roof Aspect. Roof aspect is the direction that a sloped roof is facing. North and east directions are
considered excellent aspects for vegetated roofs, since they have reduced exposure to the sun and
require less, and sometimes no, irrigation, depending on plant choices. South and west directions may
require increased growing medium depths and more irrigation to support plant life. Shading from
nearby vegetation and structures may reduce the need for permanent irrigation; reflection of light from
nearby structures may increase it.
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 63 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Chapter 4 - 4 Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018
Design
Depending on the scale and complexity of the project, the design of vegetated roofs may involve a
number of licensed professionals, including a structural engineer, landscape architect, architect, and/or
a “Green Roof Professional” (Green Roofs for Healthy Cities, GRP Accreditation). Refer to local building
codes for load bearing requirements.
Sizing. Vegetated roofs receive only direct precipitation and replace impervious surfaces at a 1:1 ratio.
Waterproofing Membrane. A watertight membrane must be placed at the very bottom of a vegetated
roof and must not be exposed to sunlight. Refer to building codes for specifications on appropriate
membrane material.
Root Barrier. A root barrier is always needed when an asphalt roof material is specified. Many other
membranes such as EPDM, PVC and TPO offer sufficient root penetration protection for shallow low profile
vegetated roofs. For roofs with deeper soils and larger plants and potentially trees, a root barrier may be
desired. Root barriers should not be manufactured with pesticides or chemicals, which could pollute
stormwater.
Drainage Layer. A drainage layer is sometimes placed above the waterproof membrane and root
barrier. This layer collects water seeping from the growing medium and directs it to downspouts or
gutters.
Filter Fabric. If a drainage layer is incorporated, place a filter fabric geotextile between the drainage
layer and the growing medium to keep the fine soil particles of the growing medium from draining out
of the system. However, almost all proprietary drainage layer products come with the fabric already
attached.
Access. Provide year-round access for people and maintenance equipment, regardless of roof type, for
operations and maintenance. Some common maintenance equipment and materials for vegetated
roofs include rakes, buckets, ladders, irrigation supplies, plants, and hoses.
Overflow Routing. All vegetated roofs shall include an overflow drain to deliver excess runoff to an
approved discharge point, in a manner that is safe and protects infrastructure. Most jurisdictions
require a double drain for conventional roofs which would also apply to vegetated roofs.
Growing Medium. The growing medium is an engineered soil mix that provides nutrition to the plants
and helps manage peak runoff volumes. The minimum depth for stormwater management is 4 inches,
but must be deep enough to contain adequate water and nutrients to support the chosen plants. The
growing medium should consist of a mix of 70% porous material such as screened pumice or sandy
loam, 30% organic material such as compost or fiber compost. Other growing medium mixes may be
proposed by a licensed professional willing to sign and stamp the design. Water retention rates should
be 40% by weight or greater. Bulk dry densities should be 20 to 50 pounds per cubic feet.
Mulch. If mulch is used, it must be a gravel mulch or alternative mineral mulch.
Vegetation. Follow the plant densities specified in Table A-1 of Appendix A, a landscape plan in
accordance with Chapter 6.3 must be submitted. Plantings should cover 95% of the vegetated roof area
within 3 years of planting, excluding gravel areas for buffers, maintenance access, and other
intentionally non-vegetated areas. 80% of the plants should be evergreen and active during most of
the year except the coldest parts of the winter to provide runoff reduction through interception and
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 64 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Chapter 4 - 5 Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018
evapotranspiration. When locating plants, consider that the growing medium is likely to drain more
rapidly at peaks and remain saturated longer near gutters or drains. Selected plants should only require
irrigation during periods of extreme heat.
Criteria for plant selection are as follows:
• Native species
• Adapted to the pH of the chosen growing medium.
• Sun, heat, wind, and drought tolerant.
• Successful colonizers, perennial or self-sowing.
• Easy to maintain (such as those that outcompete weeds and don’t require mowing/trimming).
• Self-sustaining (no need for fertilizers or pesticides).
• Fire-resistant if not irrigated.
• Appropriate for the soil depth and composition.
• Will not require fertilizers, pesticides, or herbicides.
Irrigation. An irrigation system is required for the first three years to establish the plants. Irrigation
should be no more than 1 inch every 10 days. After establishment, an irrigation system is
recommended, but its use should be limited to periods of extreme heat. Piping should be covered with
at last 2 inches of growing medium. Examples of irrigation systems for various roof sizes are described
in the LID Guide Chapter 3.
Standard Drawings. No standard drawings are provided for Vegetated Roofs.
Construction and Cost Considerations
Guidance on construction process and cost considerations are provided in Chapter 3 of the LID Guide.
Maintenance
Designers should include the landscape plan in the operations and maintenance manual. Plants other
than those specified in the landscape plan should be removed. This might include plants with deep
roots such as trees that might damage the membrane, plants that might become a fire hazard, and
plants on the Oregon Noxious Weed List.
Maintenance is most demanding during the 3-year plant establishment period. Ongoing inspection and
maintenance activities (including during the plant establishment period), include:
• For roofs with irrigation, water plants during the dry season with no more than 1 inch of water every
10 days. During the wet season, do not irrigate at all. Wet summers or over-irrigation may encourage
weed growth.
• Inspect the irrigation system annually. Look for exposed piping, broken irrigation heads, and especially
leaks, which could be very detrimental to the stormwater performance of the vegetated roof and
greatly increase vegetation related maintenance activities. Winterize and de-winterize the irrigation
system and make repairs as needed.
• Inspect plants in early summer and early fall for overall health and coverage. If plants are struggling,
correct the causes, which may include too much or too little water, pests, condensate from the HVAC
system, or chemical spills from rooftop equipment maintenance.
• Replace plants as needed in the fall. Sedums can be replaced by casting cuttings over the soil in the
fall.
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 65 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Chapter 4 - 6 Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018
• Install erosion control fabrics, or mineral mulch, to prevent wind erosion of growing medium when
replanting.
• Perform weeding in early summer and early fall and more often as needed, removing weeds before
they go to seed. In Western Oregon, checking for weeds in late May or early June may limit the
necessary weeding to once a year. Irrigation encourages weed growth, so weeding may be needed
more often when irrigating. Do not apply herbicides or pesticides since these pollutants will be
efficiently exported downstream.
• Inspect structures such as membrane (if visible), irrigation system, drains, parapets, and access
structures annually. As necessary, remove sediment and debris around drains and unclog. Repair the
structural integrity of the systems. Contact the manufacturer to repair leaks or tears in the membrane.
• Inspect for and correct any erosion after large storms (i.e. 1 inches in 24 hours or extreme/high
intensity cloud bursts) until plant coverage has been achieved.
• Remove trash as needed, frequency will depend on whether and how the roof is utilized by people.
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 66 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Chapter 4 - 7 Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018
4.3.2 Trees
General Description: Tree canopy can intercept rainfall and thereby reduce the overall amount of
runoff collected on an impervious surface below a tree canopy. For the purposes of stormwater
management, existing tree canopy may decrease the runoff curve number used for calculating design
flows.
New trees are often planted with developments as part of overall landscaping requirements.
The canopy of new trees shall not be included in the runoff curve reduction due to the time required
for a tree to mature enough to infiltrate rain. However, new trees will be included in stormwater
credits for a given site (Appendix F).
The following guidelines should be used to calculate the runoff curve number as it is reduced by tree
canopy. The calculation for the runoff curve number is a weighted average of the runoff curve number
multiplied by the associated area with specific surface characteristics. As described below, existing
tree canopy can reduce the impervious surface area (C=98) for the runoff curve number calculation.
Please note that in flow calculations the impervious surface area shall not be reduced by tree cover,
only the runoff curve number is reduced.
Existing Tree Canopy
Existing tree canopy must be preserved during and after construction to qualify as a reduction in
impervious surface area treatment. The minimum caliper of existing trees included in this calculation
shall be 4-inches at breast height. Existing tree trunk must be within 30-feet of impervious surface.
Divide total canopy area (in square-feet) by 2 for applicable decrease in impervious surface area in the
runoff calculation.
Example: The spreadsheet below provides an example of calculating the runoff curve number for a
5-acre site proposing 3-acres of impervious surface, leaving 2-acres of landscaping, one acre of which
is existing trees. This example assumes that half an acre of the existing trees are within 30 feet of
the proposed impervious surfaces. The first example calculates the weighted C-value not including
the area reduction associated with tree cover. The second example calculates the weighted C-value
with a decrease in impervious surface area associated with tree canopy (note the total impervious
area is reduced by half of an acre). Note the difference in the C-values. Though the reduction in the
C-value is slight, this modification can result in a significant flow reduction when calculating flow.
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 67 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Chapter 4 - 8 Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018
Figure 4.2. Example of curve number calculations
New Deciduous Trees
The minimum caliper of new deciduous trees included in stormwater credit calculations shall be
2-inches at breast height. Trees must be planted within 30-feet of impervious surface to be eligible
for stormwater credits. Assume a canopy area of 100 square-feet per tree planted when determining
stormwater credits.
New Evergreen Trees
The minimum height of new evergreen trees included in stormwater credit calculations shall be 6-
feet. Trees must be planted within 30-feet of impervious surface to be eligible for stormwater credits.
Assume a canopy area of 200 square-feet per tree planted when determining stormwater credits.
Maintenance:
Care must be given to ensure the health and viability of trees to be included in stormwater
management calculations. Pruning, mulching, and treatment for disease is required for maintaining
healthy trees. Dead trees must be replaced to continue stormwater credits.
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 68 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Chapter 4 - 9 Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018
4.3.3 Porous Pavement BMP
Figure 4.3. Porous pavers intercept rainfall and infiltrate it into the ground, the catch basin will only receive
runoff from large storm events.
Porous pavement (also known as permeable pavement and pervious pavement) is a stormwater
management facility that allows water to move through void spaces within the pavement surface and
rock below and infiltrate into underlying soils.
Siting
Infiltration Testing. Perform an infiltration test per Appendix B.
Rainfall versus Runoff. Porous pavement should be designed to only receive direct rainfall. Porous
surfaces that will receive runoff in addition to rainfall must be approved on a case by case basis.
Site Suitability for Porous Pavements Managing Runoff. Porous pavements that receive runoff from
impervious areas in addition to rainfall should be located using the same criteria as soakage trenches
(see 4.4.2 “Soakage Trench BMP”, “Siting”).
Site Suitability for Porous Pavements Managing Only Rainfall.
• Where design infiltration rates are 0.3 inches/hour or greater for roads and parking lots.
• Where design infiltration rates are 0.1 inches/hour or greater for driveways, sidewalks and trails.
• Where the seasonal high groundwater table, bedrock, or other impermeable layer is more than 18
inches from the bottom of the base rock (which is the open graded aggregate below the surface,
designed to store water until it infiltrates). If in an area of known high groundwater the reviewing
agency can request verification of groundwater depth or bedrock.
• Where surface slopes are <8%
• Where the pavements will be hydraulically isolated, meaning that they do not receive run-on from any
other areas, unless approved by the local jurisdiction.
• Preferably, situate porous pavement on native, uncompacted soil.
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 69 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Chapter 4 - 10 Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018
• Where any fill material is structural material capable of infiltrating at the design rate.
• Should not be located at sites with high usage and disposal of oil and grease, these include but are not
limited to vehicle wrecking and impound yards, fast food establishments, automotive repair shops.
Pavement Surface Types Overview
Porous Asphalt and Pervious Concrete. Porous asphalt and pervious concrete are similar to their
impervious counterparts but are made with “open-graded aggregate”, which includes few to no fines
(i.e. small particles). When bound together, interconnected voids between the aggregate allow water
to flow through.
Permeable Pavers. Permeable pavers are paver units of stone, concrete or other durable impervious
material with gaps between or within the pavers that provide voids for water to reach sub-soils. Porous
commercial pavers, like pervious concrete discussed above, are now available and need no space
between them.
Porous Flexible Paving Systems. Porous flexible paving systems are prefabricated grids made of plastics
or other solid materials finished with clean sand/gravel or turf. Grids with porous media provide a
stable surface and sometimes resemble lawn.
Porous Gravel. Conventional gravel surfaces (i.e. without a permeable sub-base) are not inherently
free draining. During conventional gravel pavement installation, soil is compacted to support vehicular
loads, and gravel with many small particles (usually a material like “¾-inch minus drain rock”, discussed
above) is installed and compacted in lifts (i.e. smaller portions of the total depth). This results in a low
void ratio with little storage for stormwater.
Gravel driveways and walkways are porous pavement alternatives that can be especially helpful in
retrofit situations where drainage problems exist. To create a porous gravel pavement, specify AASHTO
No. 3 or 5, as described on BMP 2.01, which is the same material used as base rock in other porous
pavements and has no fine particles.
Design
Hydrologic Design Criteria. Pervious pavement replaces impervious surfaces at a 1:1 ratio. The depth
of base rock for porous pavements must be designed and modeled by a licensed engineer. Model the
porous surface itself as if it were impervious and draining to the base rock with 35% void ratio equal in
size to the pavement surface area. If runoff onto the pervious surface has been approved, add these
“real” impervious areas to the model and model these to drain to the base rock too. Alternatively,
offsite runoff could be directed to a soakage trench constructed under the pervious paving, see
Soakage Trench BMP for details.
Porous Shoulders. Porous shoulders will only be allowed on private roads.
Slope. The design must address ponding below the surface to promote infiltration. Chapter 3 of the LID
Guide provides detailed design guidance for addressing slopes. In this case, a grading plan for the
subgrade should be provided in addition to a final surface grading plan.
Grading Plans. Landscape areas must be depressed to prevent sediment and debris from migrating
onto the porous pavement.
Geotextile. Install a non-woven geotextile fabric to separate the native soils from the base rock.
Hydraulic Routing. Underdrains or an auxiliary overflow must be provided for all vehicular applications.
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 70 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Chapter 4 - 11 Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018
Signage. Install signs identifying the surface as pervious and indicating that stockpiling and sealing are
not allowed on the surface.
Standard Drawings. See the standard drawings, Appendix E, for the specific pervious pavement type
selected.
Design, Construction Guidelines, Common Mistakes
Additional design guidelines for addressing slopes, avoiding clogging, construction processes, as well as pitfalls
and common mistakes are provided in Chapter 3 of the LID Guide.
Maintenance for All Porous Pavements
• Inspect landscape areas twice a year for erosion. Implement erosion prevention and sediment control
measures as needed per the Oregon DEQ Construction Stormwater Erosion and Sediment Control
Manual and replant as soon as possible per the approved plan.
• Remove trash and leaves. Frequency will vary with foot traffic and the number of trees nearby. Busy
commercial districts will need more frequent litter pick-ups than suburban or rural residential streets.
• Remove moss when it covers 10% of the surface or more. Mechanically remove during the dry season.
Do not apply mossicides.
• Notify all landscape contractors of their responsibility to help maintain the pavement. Require them to
identify an alternative place to stage and dump landscape materials.
Potholes in pervious pavement are unlikely, though settling might occur if a soft spot in the subgrade is not
removed during construction. For damaged areas of less than 50 square feet, a depression could be
patched by any means suitable with standard pavement, with the loss of porosity of that area being
insignificant. The depression can also be filled with pervious mix. The pavement may be up to 10% patched
with conventional asphalt.
• Maintain porous pavement and surrounding landscapes with integrated pest management. Fertilizers,
pesticides, herbicides, or fungicides are all pollutants with the potential to leach through porous
pavement.
• Remove snow and ice. Avoid frequent snow plowing on porous asphalt. If you must plow, keep the
bottom of the blade about one inch above the surface. Do not use cinders as they may clog the
surface. Environmentally sound, salt-free deicers may be used on any surface type. According to the
National Ready Mixed Concrete Association, deicers should not be applied to pervious concrete in the
first year after installation. Because porous pavements allow air to pass through them and the ground
tends to be warmer than the outside air, a convective process occurs that tends to melt snow and ice
much faster on porous pavements than impervious pavements.
• Inspect and maintain permanent signage, if applicable.
Test Surface Permeability. If the infiltration rate of the pavement slows over time contact the approving
jurisdiction.
Maintenance Specific to Porous Asphalt and Pervious Concrete.
• Never seal coat porous asphalt.
• Remove material on surface. The cleaning interval, which might range from every 6 months to every 3
years, should be based on possible exposure to sediments. There are three proven methods:
• Vacuuming is often recommended. If the pavement is in a public ROW where agencies sweep the
streets with a vacuum truck, then porous pavements will receive this recommended maintenance.
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 71 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Chapter 4 - 12 Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018
• Pressure washing can be done at an angle to the pavement and not directly into it. Employ erosion
control measures when pressure washing and limit the practice to areas that can’t be accessed by
mechanical equipment.
• Leaf blowers during the dry season, when material can be blown, are also an option.
• Leaf/Litter vacuums have been used successfully.
Maintenance Specific to Permeable Pavers.
• Manage weeds. Permeable paver surfaces have a tendency to grow plants in the infill spaces. Use
integrated pest management approaches such as hand-pulling, pouring hot water on weeds, or by
using a torch. Commercial maintenance services with trucks that will burn all the weeds off at once are
available in Oregon. If using a torch, adhere to all fire regulations and seasonal burning bans.
• Remove material on surface to unclog a clogged surface. Vacuum street sweeping, pressure washing,
and leaf blowing may all be used on these systems; however, operations may remove or disturb the
infill rock. Replenish it with clean rock meeting the AASHTO No. 8 or equivalent specification (BMP
Detail 5.03).
Maintenance specific to Porous Flexible Paving Systems. Refer to the specific manufacturer's
maintenance requirements. Some general guidance is as follows:
• For porous flexible paving systems with grass, maintenance is similar to turf.
• For flexible paving systems with gravel, broom or rake dislodged gravel back in place.
• Manage weeds. Use integrated pest management approaches such as hand-pulling (during the wet
weather when soils are more soft and roots can be effectively removed), or by burning or pouring hot
water on weeds.
• Inspect for bare soil, exposed rings, ruts, poorly growing grass from too much shade, and thatch.
• In the case of spills, ruts, or disturbance to access underground utilities, flexible paving systems may be
cut with a sod cutter, set aside, and put back in place after subgrade has been reconstructed.
• Avoid aeration since this machinery will damage the pavement.
• Snow plowing may be done by using standard truck-mounted snow plowing blades with small skids on
the corners to keep the bottom of the blade about 1 inch above the grass surface.
Maintenance Specific to Porous Gravel.
• Pull weeds in May and October.
• If the rock surface becomes clogged, carefully shovel the first 1 to 2 inches of rock and rinse it off.
Employ appropriate erosion control techniques. Rinse rock in a disconnected landscape area, which is
an area that does not drain to any sort of structured inlet such as an area drain or towards any surface
like a driveway or road that drains to a structured inlet.
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 72 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Chapter 4 - 13 Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018
4.3.4 Contained Planter BMP
Figure 4.4. Contained planters are a common beautification project that benefit the watershed when placed
over impervious surfaces. In a dense, “main street” application like this photo, the planter footprint shouldn’t
exceed the width of the furnishing zone (i.e. the pavement area between the curb and the walking area of the
sidewalk), which is the area where signs, benches, parking meters or other similar infrastructure might be
placed. This will ensure that sidewalk traffic is not impeded by a narrowed throughway.
Contained planters placed over existing impervious areas, on the ground or roof, intercept rainfall and
then evaporate it back into the air, even in the winter. As an alternative to depaving, place a potted
plant anywhere there is unused pavement. Acting much like vegetated roofs, contained planters can
reduce annual runoff by 40% to 60% from the area on which they are placed while also improving the
aesthetics of paved areas.
Siting
Contained planters should be placed over impervious areas only. Placing them over porous pavements
will not reduce runoff – the porous pavement is already designed to do that – and dirt washing through
the system could clog the porous pavement.
Design
Container Materials. The container must drain from the bottom. Since these will be outside year-
round, consider durability.
Avoid:
• Plastic, since it is photodegradable and will break down in sunlight and can leach phthalates, a
pollutant often found in groundwater.
• Treated wood. Even “environmentally friendly” treated wood will leach copper, which is a potent
pollutant that affects endangered aquatic species.
Suitable materials include:
• Untreated wood. Choose cedars or other naturally rot-resistant woods for more longevity. Wine
barrels cut in half are a popular aesthetic.
• Fabric “sack gardens” such as jute, hemp, flax, linen, burlap, etc. Ensure that the fabric is not treated
with fire retardants.
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 73 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Chapter 4 - 14 Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018
• Ceramics. Long-lasting and safer than plastic. Avoid containers with metal glazes that could leach into
the environment.
• Concrete or cement.
Container Size. Planters must be at least 12 inches deep for grasses and herbaceous plants and at least
18 inches deep for shrubs. Deeper containers are better suited to deeper rooting plants and take longer
to dry out than shallow containers.
The larger the container’s area, the more impervious surface it will cover, which makes it more effective
at reducing runoff.
Plant Choices. Follow one of the planting density options shown in Tables A-1 and A-2 of Appendix A.
Annual plants are suitable for use in contained planters, although native perennials that won’t require
as much irrigation after an establishment period of 2 – 3 years are preferred. Flowering plants and
vegetables that take more fertilization than non-flowering plants should be avoided, minimized, or not
fertilized.
Choose hardy species adapted to dry conditions. There are some species that will not thrive in the harsh
environment of a container, which is subject to large temperature swings and can easily dry out.
Trees are not suitable for containers as they become root bound in a container without adequate soil
volume, which impacts overall health and longevity.
A list of plants to be installed must be submitted including scientific and common names and quantities.
Soils.
• Imported soil shall be roughly 1/3 plant derived compost, 1/3 topsoil and 1/3 gravelly sand.
• Amended native planting soil mix shall be created by blending compost into the native soil at a rate of
1 part compost to two parts soil.
• Soil mix and compost must follow the specifications outlined in the General Notes, Appendix E.
• For any kind of soil, mycorrhizal treatments will make your plantings more resilient and reduce water
demand.
• For contained planters on roofs with adequate structural integrity or shallow pots on the ground, you
may want to consider purchasing engineered lightweight growing medium. See “Vegetated Roof BMP”
for soil mixes, loading capacity, and other design considerations when putting plants on roofs.
Construction
See Appendix A: Plant Specifications “Planting Technique”.
Maintenance
Since contained planters are above ground, they are more susceptible to freezing and may drain faster
than the soil around plants that are in the ground; however, maintenance for contained planters is
similar to conventional landscape maintenance practices:
• Remove weeds twice a year.
• Replenish compost to a depth of 2-3 inches annually. Avoid NPK fertilizers (nitrogen -- phosphorus -
- potassium) as nitrogen is a common pollutant found in waterways and will easily dissolve in
water, flow out of the container bottom onto an impervious surface, and likely into a pipe that
drains to a waterway. Replenishing the 2-3” of organic compost every year should provide
adequate nutrition slowly and safely. 9.B.b
Packet Pg. 74 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Chapter 4 - 15 Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018
• Repot plants with native soil and compost, or imported topsoil, on a schedule as desired or needed to
keep plants healthy. Avoid potting soil, which will over nourish plants and cause nutrient pollution as
described above.
• Irrigate per Establishment Period Irrigation guidance in Appendix A: Plant Specifications.
• Since contained planters will be on and presumably surrounded by impervious pavement or hot roofs,
water plants once a week from July to mid-September after establishment period.
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 75 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Chapter 4 - 16 Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018
4.4 COLLECTION BMPS
4.4.1 Rain Garden, Stormwater Planter, and LID Swale (aka Vegetated Stormwater
Facility) BMPs
Vegetated Stormwater Facilities collect stormwater runoff in a depression to first settle and filter out
sediment and pollutants. As stormwater comes into contact with soil and plants, pollutants are
reduced further through chemical and biological means. Stormwater quantity is reduced through
evaporation, infiltration, and evapotranspiration. Both infiltration and lined filtration facilities have
been used successfully on private property, public property, and within the public right-of-way. These
BMPs may be built in new construction, re-developments, and retrofits.
Terminology. For convenience, when this manual refers to this family of BMPs that includes rain
gardens, stormwater planters, or LID swales, the term “vegetated stormwater facility” or, in this
section, sometimes simply “facility” is used.
Choosing Between Rain Gardens, Stormwater Planters and LID Swales. While rain gardens,
stormwater planters, and LID swales are very similar in the high quality of treatment achieved through
ponding (i.e. holding water in a pond until it can infiltrate and evaporate), the volume of water ponded
differs, which affects how large they are (i.e. sizing). Stormwater planters have the smallest footprint,
while rain gardens and LID swales have larger footprints. For more guidance on how to choose the
appropriate facility for your site see Choosing the Best Vegetated Stormwater Facility Configuration in
Chapter 3 of the LID Guide.
A rain garden:
• Has gentle side slopes and may be any shape (e.g. round, kidney, etc.).
• Should be installed on flat ground (as smooth as practical)
Figure 4.5. Neighborhood scale residential rain garden six months after installation.
An LID swale:
• Has gentle side slopes but is linear in shape.
• Is installed on sloping areas, using check dams that allow water to back up, which makes LID swales
function in a similar way to rain gardens. Each cell created by the check dam ponds up before water
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 76 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Chapter 4 - 17 Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018
cascades over the check dam and into the next cell, infiltrating and evaporating along the way. At the
last cell at the bottom of the LID swale, stormwater finally may overflow.
• The longitudinal slope of an LID swale cell should be 6% or less.
Figure 4.6. An LID swale with check dams to slow the flow of water and increase infiltration.
A stormwater planter:
• May be either in- or above-ground (Figures 4.7).
• Has vertical sides created by deep curbs (in ground) or walls or a container (free-standing/above
ground) instead of gentle side slopes.
• Stormwater planters can be any shape. Those above-ground tend to be square or rectangular.
• A single stormwater planter cell may be installed on flat areas (as smooth as practical). On sloping
ground, a stormwater planter may incorporate check dams to create a series of cells where overflow
may occur in the lowest elevation cell (Figure 4.7, right).
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 77 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Chapter 4 - 18 Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018
Figure 4.7. A residential above-ground stormwater planter (left). An in-ground stormwater planter with
concrete check dams in a public street before planting (right). The centerline (looking straight up the center of
this photo) slopes at less than 1%. Concrete check dams were needed because the street slopes more than 1%.
Grades parallel to the check dam are flat.
Design Considerations
Infiltration versus Filtration. Vegetated stormwater facilities may either be designed to infiltrate into
the site’s native soils (i.e. infiltration facility) or they may be lined or partially lined to prevent infiltration
(i.e. filtration facility, also sometimes referred to as “flow-through facility”). Infiltration facilities are to
be used whenever possible, filtration facilities should only be used when infiltration is not possible.
Siting
Unsuitable Locations for All Facilities. Vegetated stormwater facilities should NEVER be installed in the
following locations:
• In other sensitive areas (i.e. wetlands or designated native habitat areas).
• Over septic systems.
• In seasonally wet areas.
Suitable Locations for Infiltration Facilities without Underdrains.
• Where the seasonal high groundwater table is greater than 24 inches from the bottom of a vegetated
stormwater facility.
• Where the bedrock or other impermeable layer is greater than 18 inches from the bottom of a
vegetated stormwater facility.
• In soils with a measured infiltration rate of at least 1.5 inches/hour.
• Where they are at least 10 feet away from an existing building foundation
• Where they are at least 10 feet from an underground tank or a retaining wall.
• In any location approved by a licensed engineer or geologist and the reviewing agency.
Locations that require Lined Filtration Facilities:
Where the seasonal high groundwater table is less than 24 inches from the bottom of a vegetated
stormwater facility.
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 78 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Chapter 4 - 19 Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018
Where the bedrock or other impermeable layer is less than 18 inches from the bottom of a vegetated
stormwater facility.
• In contaminated soils or groundwater.
• Within 10 feet of an existing building.
• For vehicular runoff, in wellhead protection areas.
Design
Infiltration Testing. Must be performed per Appendix B.
Sizing and Hydrologic Design. Requirements vary based on the design approach utilized.
Simplified Approach: A sizing factor of 0.05 must be used. This approach may be used for sites with
the following characteristics:
• Manage runoff from less than 10,000 square feet of impervious surface
• Have design infiltration rates of 0.5 inches/hr or higher
• Must use 24 inches of imported or amended growing medium.
Performance Approach: These facilities must be designed by an engineer licensed in the state of
Oregon using the methodology of Chapter 3 of this manual. The facility must have a design
infiltration rate of 0.5 inches/hr or more. The performance approach must be used when any of
the following conditions exist:
• The facility manages runoff from 10,000 sf or more.
• The facility will be lined or partially lined.
• The facility incorporates a rock trench (described in later sections below) beneath the vegetated
stormwater facility.
Surface Geometry and Water Quality Function. Design criteria for surface geometry are as follows:
• Vegetated stormwater facilities may be any shape that meets the sizing criteria for vegetated
stormwater facilities.
• Side slopes for rain gardens and LID swales, should be 33% (3 horizontal: 1 vertical) or less.
• Stormwater planters have vertical sides made of structural material like concrete, not soil.
• Bottom slopes of rain gardens and SW planters must be less than 0.5% slope in any direction
• Longitudinal slope of LID swales must be 6% or less.
• Bottom widths must adhere to the values in Table 4.2.
• Ponding depth, the depth of water allowed to accumulate in a vegetated stormwater facility, should be
a maximum of 12 inches.
• Pretreatment must be provided where stormwater enters a facility in a concentrated fashion (i.e.
piped). For design guidance on pretreatment structures refer to Chapter 3 of the LID Guide.
• Freeboard of six inches above the 10 year design storm must be provided. Less than six inches may be
provided with jurisdictional approval, where potential overflow will not impact adjacent properties.
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 79 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Chapter 4 - 20 Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018
Table 4.2. Using the above guidance, minimum geometry for rain gardens, planters and LID swales
are as follows below.
Treatment
Ponding Depth
[inches]
Minimum
Base Width
[ft]
<6 2
6-9 4.5
9-12 6
Energy Dissipation: Energy dissipation must be placed below each entry point to reduce velocity. At
the upstream end of a facility energy dissipation can also serve to distribute flow across the treatment
width. Energy dissipation must be constructed of non-biodegradable material such as concrete or rock.
Vegetation. Design criteria for vegetation is as follows:
• Must follow the landscape plan submittal requirements outlined in Chapter 6.3.
• Must follow one of the planting options outlined in Tables A-1 to A-3 of Appendix A.
• Vegetation should cover a minimum of 90% of the treatment area of the facility within three years.
• River rock is not allowed.
• Vegetation should be selected based on its tolerance to flooding and drought cycles as well as sun and
shade conditions at the site.
• Trees should be used with caution in stormwater planters, refer to Chapter 3 of the LID Guide “Tree
Planting BMP” “Siting”.
Trees: If planting trees within the stormwater feature, assume a mature tree covers 60 square feet.
The area within this 60 square feet does not need to be vegetated with herbaceous plants or shrubs.
Vegetation Establishment: The property owner is responsible for ensuring that 90% of the ground
remains covered with vegetation in perpetuity. Vegetation should be selected to reduce the need for
continual irrigation. Temporary irrigation is required for the first three growing seasons to ensure
healthy vegetation establishment. Permanent irrigation is up to the property owner and the needs of
the selected plant palette, however plants must be maintained in a vigorous, healthy condition.
Mulch. Mulch shall be either shredded wood chips or coarse compost. Mulch must be dye, pesticide
and weed free. Spread in a minimum two inch layer over bare soil or in a ring around plants to increase
water retention. Ensure that mulch does not touch plant stems.
Growing Medium. Directly below the mulch is soil, which may be:
• Imported soil that is roughly one third plant derived compost, one third topsoil and one third gravelly
sand.
• Native soil amended to a depth of 18 inches. Amend native soil with roughly 30% compost.
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 80 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Chapter 4 - 21 Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018
• Native and free-draining (infiltration rate >0.5in/hr). If a faster draining soil is beneath a slower
draining surface soil and you wish to decrease the footprint of your facility, access the faster draining
soil by replacing the native soil with an imported soil mix.
• Whether native or amended, the growing medium must be in compliance with the amended planting
soil mix specifications, see General Notes for Vegetated BMPS, Appendix E. A Seal of Testing Assurance
certification from the US Composting Council must be provided to the approving jurisdiction for
imported compost.
Inlets. Curb cuts should primarily be used to drain sheet flow directly into the facility. Example
good and bad curb inlets are provided in Chapter 3 of the LID Guide.
Check Dams: Check dams shall be used where necessary to ensure that the entire facility bottom is used for
infiltration. They should be keyed into the sides of the swale to prevent bypass and the toe of the upslope dam
should be at the same elevation as the top of the downstream dam, similar to ODOT detail RD1005, but with a
flat top. Check dams should be constructed of non-biodegradable material such as concrete or rock.
Storage Rock: If storage rock is used it must be separated from the growing medium, and any fine soil at the
bottom of the facility, by a 4 inch thick layer of separation rock (see Standard Drawings).
Impermeable Liner. No additional liner is required in monolithically poured concrete stormwater
planters. Impermeable liners must be a minimum 30-mil (minimum) thick, material which may be low
density polyethylene (LDPE), ethylene propylene diene monomer (EPDM), or bentonite clay mat per
manufacturer guidance. Liners must be installed per manufacturer specifications.
Standard Drawings. Standard drawings are provided in Appendix E for a range of facilities from those
with no formal overflow structure or amended soils to complex lined facilities that require an
underdrain, a large storm overflow structure, and imported, engineered soil.
Construction
Construction guidance is provided in Chapter 3 of the LID Guide.
Cost Considerations and Pitfalls and Common Mistakes
Detailed guidance on cost considerations and how to avoid common mistakes during design, construction and
maintenance of these facilities is provided in Chapter 3 of the LID Guide.
Maintenance
Specific maintenance activities are needed to ensure proper long-term function. Determine who is
responsible for operations and maintenance and confirm early stakeholder buy-in of maintenance
practices before determining the mix of BMPs.
Inspect the facility at least 4 times a year and perform needed maintenance as follows:
• Maintain a calm flow of water entering the facility via downspout pipes or other inlets.
o Identify erosion sources and control them when soil is exposed or erosion channels are
forming. Fill erosion channels with approved soil mix and replant per the approved planting
plan.
o Identify and correct sources of sediment and debris.
• Remove sediment and debris from:
o The pretreatment sump.
o The facility surface with minimum damage to vegetation. Remove accumulated material if it is
more than 2 inches thick or damaging vegetation.
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 81 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Chapter 4 - 22 Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018
o The facility outlet, such as overflow drain or conveyance swale.
o Curb cuts when depth exceeds ¼ inch.
• Stabilize slopes with plants and appropriate erosion control measures when soil is exposed or erosion
channels are forming. Fill eroded channels with approved soil and replant. If flows can be redirected
temporarily, redirect flows until plants establish. Check for erosion as a result of redirected flows on
the next site visit.
• Maintain the design ponding depth by:
o Repairing any structural elements that may leak from cracks or worn sealant
o Maintaining the design elevation of check dams
• Soil should allow stormwater to percolate uniformly through the rain garden.
o If the facility does not drain within 48 hours, scrape 1 inch of soil out of the facility and scarify
to 3 inches.
o If facility does not drain after scraping 1 inch, remove another 1 inch.
o If facility does not drain after scraping 2 inches, salvage plants, till and replant the facility.
• Vegetation should be healthy and dense enough to provide filtering while protecting underlying soils
from erosion with at least 90% coverage of bare soil in three years.
o Replenish mulch until vegetation is established and shading the bottom of the facility.
o Remove fallen leaves and debris from deciduous plant foliage.
o Don’t string trim ornamental grasses, sedges or rushes. These may be raked.
o Don’t prune shrubs into balls, natural growth will more effectively treat stormwater.
o Low mow and no mow seed mixes should be mown a maximum of three to four times a year
for aesthetics and to reduce fire risk.
o Remove nuisance (i.e. plants blocking the inlet) and non-native and invasive vegetation (i.e.
weeds such as Himalayan blackberries and English Ivy) when discovered.
o Remove dead vegetation and woody material before it covers 10% of the rain garden surface
area. Vegetation shall be replaced in compliance with the approved landscape plan and as
soon as possible based on season. If unable to replace immediately prevent erosion of the area
with best management practices.
o Irrigate per guidance provided in Appendix A: Plant Specifications “Establishment
Maintenance”.
o Maintain vegetation using integrated pest management per Appendix A: Plant Specifications
“Integrated Pest Management”.
• Exercise spill prevention measures when handling substances that can contaminate stormwater.
Correct releases of pollutants as soon as identified:
o Make sure the area is safe to enter
o Block the outflow of the BMP
o Block the inflow of the BMP
o Stop the release of the hazmat
o Clean up the flow path to the BMP
o Clean out the BMP, replacing soil, and vegetation as necessary.
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 82 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Chapter 4 - 23 Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018
4.4.2 Soakage Trench BMP
Figure 4.8. A soakage trench with a perforated pipe (right) and a sumped catch basin (left) that catches debris
and sediment. A down turned pipe, as shown on the outlet side of the sumped catch basin improves sediment
removal. For high sediment areas, such as roadways, two catch basins with down-turned pipe outlets may be
used in series. Image adapted from City of Portland, Bureau of Environmental Services (City of Portland BES [c],
2006).
Soakage trenches (i.e. infiltration trenches, recharge beds) are excavated trenches filled with coarse
stone (i.e. storage rock) and wrapped in non-woven geotextile that receive runoff via a pipe and store
it in the rock voids until it is able to infiltrate into surrounding soils. The primary difference between a
soakage trench and a vegetated stormwater facility is that water is injected underground via a pipe,
rather than infiltrating through the soil surface.
UIC Authorization (not always required)
Soakage trenches are relatively shallow facilities and are generally only considered a UIC if injection
occurs via a perforated pipe.
If perforated pipe discharges water to the subsurface, then the soakage trench IS considered a UIC and
requires authorization. Contact DEQ to find out about current UIC regulations and whether
authorization will be required for your project. DEQ’s UIC webpage:
http://www.oregon.gov/deq/wq/wqpermits/Pages/UIC.aspx.
Siting
Runoff from any surface may be directed to a soakage trench, as long as hazardous materials, toxic substances,
or petroleum products are not used, stored, or handled in the area drained by the soakage trench. Consult
with local jurisdiction on distance allowed from the public right-of-way.
Suitable Locations for Soakage Trenches:
• In soils with a design infiltration rate of at least 0.5 inches/hour.
• On land slopes with less than 20% grade. A setback of 100 feet is required for slopes greater than 20%.
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 83 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Chapter 4 - 24 Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018
• Where the bedrock or other impermeable layer is deeper than 24 inches from the bottom of the
soakage trench.
• Where they are 10 feet from a building foundation.
• Where they are 5 feet from a property line.
• Where they are outside septic fields, contaminated soils and landslide areas.
The following restrictions apply to soakage trenches:
• Cannot be located within 100 feet of a water supply well.
• Cannot intersect the groundwater table. Soakage trenches shall have at least two feet of vertical
separation from the seasonal high groundwater table.
Siting soakage trenches near newly planted trees. Soakage trenches without perforated pipes may be
located within the projected mature canopy area of a newly planted tree; however, soakage trenches
with perforated pipes should be located at a distance of 1.5 times the projected mature canopy spread
(i.e. how big the canopy will be when the tree is fully grown) from the trunk to the perforated pipe to
avoid root damage to the pipe.
Design
Several variations of soakage trenches are briefly described below.
Soakage Trench at the Surface. This variation incorporates rock all the way to the existing or proposed
grades and usually receives runoff from an adjacent surface.
Soakage Trench beneath Landscape Areas. These facilities have a cover of soil and vegetation.
Soakage Trench beneath Porous Pavement. This variation adds additional rock underneath porous
pavements and directs concentrated runoff from other areas to the bottom of the rock with
perforated pipes laid out along the bottom.
Soakage Trench beneath Impervious Pavement. Soakage trenches may be installed beneath
impervious pavement with an impermeable membrane to separate the soakage trench from the base
rock of the impervious pavement.
Hydrologic Modeling and Sizing. Soakage trenches must be sized by a licensed engineer to meet the
performance criteria outlined in Chapter 3 of the RVSQDM based on a measured infiltration rate of 1.5
inches and a minimum design infiltration rate of 0.5 inches.
Pretreatment. To prevent clogging from sediment pretreatment must be included. Options for pretreatment
include a sump, lined rain garden or stormwater planter, a proprietary system with filter media, or if runoff will
only be from roofs gutter screens may be used.
Dimensions. Minimum width of two feet.
Sub-surface and Ground Slopes. The facility bottom should be sloped between 0 and 0.5%. Design the
bottom elevation of the trenches to match existing contours to achieve this desirable flat bottom,
reduce excavation, and allow for the maximum effective storage volume as water infiltrates.
Soakage trenches running across contours that exceed 0.5% slope should be stepped down the slope
by creating underground berms. This will ensure that the soakage trench infiltrates intended runoff
volumes instead of just conveying it to the lowest elevation. Slopes at the ground surface may exceed
0.5% without impacting facility function; however, for soakage trenches at the surface, additional rock
will be needed to backfill to surface grades.
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 84 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Chapter 4 - 25 Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018
Piping. Refer to the current Oregon Plumbing Specialty Code for specifications on piping materials and
cleanout sizing and spacing requirements. For maintenance purposes, a minimum diameter of 6 inches
is recommended. Non-perforated overflow pipes to an approved discharge point may be needed. If
perforated pipes are placed at the bottom of the facility, control structures are required to ensure
infiltration of the water quality storm.
Observation Wells/Cleanout Pipes. Install at least 1 observation well near the center of the facility or
in its lowest point and every 50 feet. Observation well piping should be a 6 inch diameter non-
perforated pipe. Equip the end above ground with an operable cap.
Storage rock. AASHTO No. 57 or equivalent uniformly graded aggregate is required. Alternatively,
concrete or plastic vaults with open bottoms can be used. These chambers may be useful in areas with
high water tables or shallow impermeable layers (typically bedrock or fragipan).
Geotextile Fabric (aka Filter fabric). Non-woven geotextile fabrics should line the trench. Segments
should overlap a minimum of 12 inches. Alternatively, the bottom layer of filter fabric can be replaced
with 6 inches of separation rock.
Vegetation. For the soakage trench beneath landscape areas, choose plants that will tolerate drier
conditions. Follow one of the options outlined in Tables A-1 and A-2 of Appendix A. Do not plant large
shrubs or trees over facilities that include pipes. See Chapter 6.3 for landscape plan submittal
requirements.
Standard Drawings. See Appendix E.
Construction Guidance and Cost Considerations
Detailed construction steps and cost considerations are provided in Chapter 3 of the LID Guide.
Maintenance
Specific maintenance activities are needed to ensure proper long-term function. Determine who is
responsible for operations and maintenance and confirm early stakeholder buy-in of maintenance
practices before determining the mix of BMPs.
Inspect the facility a minimum of 4 times per year during each season and after major storms and
perform needed maintenance as follows:
• Maintain manufactured structures like silt basins and water quality manholes per manufacturer’s
operations and maintenance guidelines.
• Confirm via the observation port that the facility is emptying out/infiltrating. Clogged facilities must be
completely reconstructed or relocated.
• Remove debris from pipes and other conveyance.
• Repair or replace damaged pipes.
• For soakage trenches that receive runoff from adjacent surfaces, sediment and debris will tend to clog
the surface of the facility. Vacuum sediment from rocks. If water can no longer drain into the facility,
clogging of the top geotextile has occurred. Using sediment control techniques such as compost berms
and biobags, remove and clean rock on the surface. Replace the geotextile fabric on the top, being
careful not to damage the fabric on the sides. Place the cleaned rock back over the geotextile fabric.
Dispose of sediment in trash destined for the landfill. Sweeping regularly will reduce the likelihood of
clogging. High traffic areas will clog faster than low traffic areas.
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 85 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Chapter 4 - 26 Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018
4.4.3 Dispersion BMPs: Vegetated Filter Strips and Disconnected Downspouts
Figure 4.9. Example of sheet flow from a patio to a newly installed vegetated filter strip.
Dispersion is a BMP that spreads runoff over a landscape area specifically to reduce pollution and
runoff, and is suitable for a variety of roadside applications and development densities. Vegetated filter
strips typically run parallel to an impervious surface, commonly walkways and driveways, and are gently
sloped away from the impervious surface. They must be completely vegetated to filter and reduce
velocity as runoff flows through. Downspout disconnection redirects runoff from an underground
stormwater pipe to a landscaped or mulched area for infiltration.
Siting
Dispersion BMPs shall be located according to the following guidance:
• In areas where the seasonal groundwater table is at least 2 feet below the surface.
• On slopes < 15%
• 5 feet from property lines.
• 10 feet from a building with a basement or 10 feet from where a neighboring building foundation
could allowably be constructed in the future.
• 2 feet from a building without a basement (i.e. slab on grade, crawl space, pier, or post foundations)
• Not over or towards septic drain fields.
Design
Criteria for Vegetated Filter Strips. Vegetated filter strips must be sized using the methodology of
Chapter 3 of the RVSQDM and follow the criteria outlined below. The location for the filter strip must
have a design infiltration rate of at least 0.5 inches per hour.
• Maximum impervious area flow paths of 75 feet.
• The longitudinal length of the vegetated filter strip should match the length of the impervious area
draining to it.
• Maximum impervious lateral slope (i.e. lateral equals direction perpendicular to centerline of a
sidewalk or a road) of 5%.
• Maximum impervious longitudinal slope of 4%.
• Vegetated filter strip lateral slope between 1 and 15%.
• Maximum vegetated filter strip longitudinal slope of 2%.
• The filter strip width must be determined according to sizing criteria established by ODOT:
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 86 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Chapter 4 - 27 Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018
o 2% sloped filter strip to treat 4 feet of pavement for every 1 foot of filter strip
o 5% sloped filter strip to treat 3 feet of pavement for every 1 foot of filter strip
o 10% sloped filter strip to treat 2 feet of pavement for every 1 foot of filter strip
o 15% sloped filter strip to treat 1.5 feet of pavement for every 1 foot of filter strip
• Incorporate a level spreader to distribute flow across the entire filter strip (described in next section).
• See the Dispersion BMP section of Chapter 3 in the LID Guide for a figure that illustrates the above
specifications.
Criteria for Downspout Disconnections.
• Maximum impervious area of 700 square feet/downspout
• Include a splash block or pad
• Include downspout extensions to protect against flooding the adjacent building (see “Siting” above). A
6-foot long downspout extension should be used for minimal excavation foundations (see Chapter 3 of
the LID Guide “Minimal Excavation Foundations BMP”) and 10-foot long extension should be used for
buildings with full basements.
• Provide a minimum vegetated flow path of 50 feet sloping between 2% and 5% away from buildings.
This may include natural areas or riparian buffers.
• Discharge from a downspout disconnection must not flow over an impervious surface.
Design Considerations. Where SW infrastructure is not required, buildings can be designed without
gutters or downspouts so that runoff can sheet flow from the roof into a vegetated filter strip below.
Impervious areas should slope toward the filter strip rather than toward a curb or catch basin. In
parking lots and driveways, avoid the use of curbs and gutters which prevent sheet flow from reaching
vegetated filter strips.
Level Spreader. Level Spreaders should be included in every vegetated filter strip to redistribute flows
evenly across the facility, except on highways and roads where a gravel shoulder is proposed or already
exists, or on roads with gravel parking edges.
• Length: Match length of vegetated filter strip and impervious area.
• Width = 12 inches, Depth = 9 inches (This will ensure that the level spreader is wider than it is deep,
avoiding a UIC.)
• Use crushed aggregate meeting the coarse aggregate specification in BMP 2.02: Specifications or any
other angular, open-graded rock with a maximum diameter of 3 inches.
• Set the elevation of the level spreader ¼ inch lower than the pavement, which meets ADA accessibility
requirements.
Signage. Because vegetated filter strips look similar to a regular garden, permanent signage or
demarcation, such as fencing (even as simple and attractive as a 2 foot tall post and chain fence) or
road marking to prevent long-term compaction is required.
Growing Medium. Growing medium in filter strips must be one of the following:
• Imported soil that is roughly one third plant derived compost, one third topsoil and one third gravelly
sand.
• Native soil amended to a depth of 18 inches. Amend native soil with roughly 30% compost.
• Native and uncompacted.
Mulch. Use mulch meeting the specifications in General Notes for Vegetated BMPs. Apply mulch during
the establishment period of 3 years. After that, vegetation should have adequate structure to hold and
cover soil, shading out most weeds.
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 87 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Chapter 4 - 28 Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018
Vegetation. Vegetation in the dispersion area should be well established with at least 95% cover of lawn
or perennial native landscape (groundcover, grasses, shrubs, and/or trees) within 3 years. Plant
numbers must be in accordance with one of the options presented in Tables A-1:A-3 in Appendix A.
Place less dense vegetation at the upstream edge of the filter strip or downspout discharge. Flooding
can occur when dense vegetation at the mouth of a downspout extension or the edge of a vegetated
filter strip causes water to back up. See Chapter 6.3 for landscape plan submittal requirements.
Standard Drawings. See Appendix E.
Cost Consideration and Pitfalls and Common Mistakes
These are discussed in Chapter 3 of the LID Guide.
Maintenance
Specific maintenance activities are needed to ensure proper long-term function. Determine who is responsible
for operations and maintenance and confirm early stakeholder buy-in of maintenance practices before
determining the mix of BMPs.
• Mow and trim grasses to lengths appropriate to the type and species of grass. Longer grass is generally
better.
• Identify and correct sources of sediment and debris.
• Inspect for and remove excess sediment (maximum depth of 2 inches) that may affect vegetation
growth in the dispersion area or the level spreader. Dispose of sediment in trash destined for the
landfill.
• Replace vegetation as needed. If a plant did not do well, choose a different plant.
• Repair eroded areas where channels have formed by filling them with soil, lightly compacting them
with tamping or boot compaction, and re-establish vegetation. Do not fill eroded channels with mulch.
If possible, redirect flows around the establishing vegetation for 3 months. Inspect other areas around
redirecting device (i.e. sandbag) to ensure that this redirection is not causing additional erosion. If
plants receiving redirected flows are small or not very sturdy and erosion is or may occur, biobags (a
sediment control measure, which is a bag with compost or shredded wood chips) will allow water to
enter the vegetated filter strip slowly and may be a better way to prevent erosion than redirecting
flows.
Level Spreader Maintenance.
• Use a flat shovel, remove the rock to a depth of at least 6 inches. Install appropriate erosion control
techniques (see the DEQ’s “Construction Stormwater Erosion and Sediment Control Manual) such as
biobags or wattles. Hose off the rock on a plastic tarp. Place the clean rock back and dispose of
sediment and organic matter in trash destined for the landfill.
• Remove weeds twice a year if enough sediment accumulates to grow weeds but not enough
accumulates to warrant cleaning the rock.
• Clean rock before the angular rock is completely buried in sediment. Frequency will depend on the
type of pavement and if any uphill landscape areas draining across the pavement are stabilized. Roofs
generally contribute the least amount of sediment, although roofs near highways will have more
particulates deposited on their surface. Generally for roads, sediment will increase with the number of
cars on them.
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 88 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Chapter 4 - 29 Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018
4.4.4 Water Quality Conveyance Swales
Figure 4.10. A water quality conveyance swale with dense mature vegetation that provides filtering of
stormwater runoff.
Water quality conveyance swales treat stormwater by conveying it through the substrate and
vegetation, rather than relying on infiltration. These facilities are not considered LID because water
quality treatment is mainly achieved by filtration and settlement provided by the plant structure and
growing medium rather than infiltration and evaporation. Swales must be planted with dense
vegetation to filter the stormwater and should be integrated into the overall site design and used to
meet landscaping requirements.
Swales should be built and planted early in the construction sequence so that vegetation can become
established. Once the swale is cut to grade it should be fenced off to prevent construction traffic and
staging of materials within the swale.
Water quality conveyance swales may be unlined, partially lined, or fully lined depending on where
they are located.
Siting
Water Quality Conveyance swales should not be located in sensitive areas (ie. Wetlands, riparian areas,
designated critical habitat, or under existing tree canopies), unless approved by the local jurisdiction,
or over septic systems. Fully Lined facilities that are at grade have no setbacks.
Design and Sizing Guidelines
Sizing: Water Quality Conveyance swales must be designed to have a minimum residence time of 9 minutes. If
surface runoff will enter the swale at multiple locations along its length such that residence time is less than 9
minutes, designers must incorporate check dams to increase the residence time. There is no
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 89 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Chapter 4 - 30 Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018
simplified/prescriptive approach to sizing allowed, minimum requirements are listed below, unless otherwise
approved by the reviewing jurisdiction.
Dimensions and side slopes:
• Minimum bottom width is one foot. If the bottom width is wider than four feet, a flow spreader is
required for every 50 feet of length to uniformly redistribute the flow across the bottom width.
• Maximum depth of the water quality flow is 4 inches, flow should not be higher than 2/3 the height of
the vegetation.
• Maximum side slopes of the treatment zone are 3 horizontal to 1 vertical for densely vegetated swales
and 4 horizontal to 1 vertical for swales that will be mowed.
• Vertical walls may be used in tight spaces. The width of the swale bottom must be increased such that
the treatment area that would have been provided in the 3:1 side slopes is provided in the swale
bottom. The bottom width to wall height ratio must be at least 2:1.
• Longitudinal slope must be 0.5% or greater. Longitudinal slopes greater than 6% require installation of
check dams.
• Manning’s n value must be a value between 0.22 and 0.24.
• Freeboard of six inches above the 10 year design storm must be provided. Less than six inches may be
provided with jurisdictional approval, where potential overflow will not impact adjacent properties.
Flow Spreaders: Use non-biodegradable materials for the flow spreader.
Energy Dissipation: Energy dissipation must be placed below each entry point to the swale to reduce
velocity. At the upstream end of a swale energy dissipation can also serve to distribute flow across the
treatment width. Energy dissipation must be constructed of non-biodegradable material such as
concrete or rock.
Waterproofing/Liner: Swales within 10 feet of a building must be lined with minimum 30 mil EPDM,
HDPE, or approved equal. Liners may be partial or full.
Check Dams: When slopes exceed 6% check dams must be installed. They should be keyed into the
sides of the swale to prevent bypass and the toe of the upslope dam should be at the same elevation
as the top of the downstream dam, similar to ODOT detail RD1005, but with a flat top. Check dams
should be constructed of non-biodegradable material such as concrete or rock.
Growing Medium: Native soil may be amended to a depth of 18 inches or an imported soil may be used
in the top 12 inches of the swale. Amend native soil with roughly 30% compost. Imported soil should
be roughly one third plant derived compost, one third topsoil and one third gravelly sand. The growing
medium requirements apply to the treatment area of the swale. Lined and partially lined facilities may
have a growing medium depth of 12 inches if only installing herbaceous plants, but must have a growing
medium depth of 24 inches for shrubs, to provide adequate substrate for plant roots to establish.
Whether native or amended, the growing medium must be in compliance with the amended planting
soil mix specifications, see General Notes for Vegetated BMPs, Appendix E. A Seal of Testing Assurance
certification from the US Composting Council must be provided to the approving jurisdiction. To find
out more about STA certified compost and for a list of entities selling STA certified compost visit the US
Composting Council website.
Ground Stabilization: All ground within the swale must be stabilized with either erosion control matting
or mulch. Where there is potential for rilling erosion control matting must be installed.
Erosion Control Matting: If specifying matting below the 10 year flow depth of the swale, high
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 90 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Chapter 4 - 31 Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018
density, ODOT Type E, erosion control matting should be used to hold the soil in place until
vegetation becomes established. Matting must be 100% biodegradable, photodegradable matting
is not allowed. If seeding, place seed and then install erosion control matting. If planting, install
erosion control matting and then install plants through the matting. Matting is not required on
slopes 4:1 or shallower that have been hydroseeded per Table A1 in Appendix A.
Mulch: Mulch shall be either shredded wood chips or coarse compost. Mulch must be dye,
pesticide and weed free. Spread in a minimum two inch layer over bare soil or in a ring around
plants to increase water retention. Ensure that mulch does not touch plant stems.
Vegetation: The entire facility must be planted with vegetation, including bottom and side slopes,
which should be established as soon as possible after the swale is constructed. Native plants are
preferred. A minimum of 90% of the ground within the treatment zone must be vegetated at maturity.
Dense vegetation can be achieved either through installation of herbaceous plants and shrubs or
through use of a native, no-mow seed mix, as specified in Appendix A, Tables A-1:A-3. The amount of
standing water that plants can tolerate, as well as the amount of irrigation that will be required to
maintain plants should be considered during plant selection. Vegetation in swales with liners should be
carefully chosen to avoid impacting the liner, trees should not be planted in lined facilities. Plant layout
should comply with the Water Quality Conveyance Swale Planting Detail 8.03.
Landscape Plan: A planting plan must be submitted that indicates the species and location, by
hydrologic zone (see BMP 8.03), of all plants within the stormwater feature. A table listing the scientific
and common name of each species, quantity, installation size and spacing should also be included. See
Chapter 6.3 for submittal requirements.
Vegetation Establishment: The property owner is responsible for ensuring that 80% of the original
plants survive and that 90% of the ground remains covered with vegetation in perpetuity. Vegetation
should be selected to reduce the need for continual irrigation. Temporary irrigation is required for the
first three growing seasons to ensure healthy vegetation establishment. Permanent irrigation is up to
the property owner and the needs of the selected plant palette, however plants must be maintained
in a vigorous, healthy condition.
Inlets/Outlets/Underdrains: Underdrains must be included in fully lined swales. Unlined and partially
lined swales should not include underdrains.
Standard Drawings. See Appendix E.
Cost Consideration and Pitfalls and Common Mistakes
These are discussed in Chapter 3 of the LID Guide.
Maintenance
Specific maintenance activities are needed to ensure proper long-term function. Determine who is
responsible for operations and maintenance and confirm early stakeholder buy-in of maintenance
practices before determining the mix of BMPs.
Inspect the facility at least 4 times a year and perform needed maintenance as follows:
• Maintain a calm flow of water entering the facility via downspout pipes or other inlets.
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 91 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Chapter 4 - 32 Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018
o Identify erosion sources and control them when soil is exposed or erosion channels are
forming. Fill erosion channels with approved soil mix and replant per the approved planting
plan.
o Identify and correct sources of sediment and debris.
• Remove sediment and debris from:
o The pretreatment sump.
o The facility surface with minimum damage to vegetation. Remove accumulated material if it is
more than 2 inches thick or damaging vegetation.
o The facility outlet, such as overflow drain or conveyance swale.
o Curb cuts when depth exceeds ¼ inch.
• Stabilize slopes with plants and appropriate erosion control measures when soil is exposed or erosion
channels are forming. Fill eroded channels with approved soil and replant. If flows can be redirected
temporarily, redirect flows until plants establish. Check for erosion as a result of redirected flows on
the next site visit.
• Maintain the design ponding depth by:
o Repairing any structural elements that may leak from cracks or worn sealant
o Maintaining the design elevation of check dams
• Soil should allow stormwater to percolate uniformly through the rain garden.
o If the facility does not drain within 48 hours, scrape 1 inch of soil out of the facility and scarify
to 3 inches.
o If facility does not drain after scraping 1 inch, remove another 1 inch.
o If facility does not drain after scraping 2 inches, salvage plants, till and replant the facility.
• Vegetation should be healthy and dense enough to provide filtering while protecting underlying soils
from erosion with at least 90% coverage of bare soil in three years.
o Replenish mulch until vegetation is established and shading the bottom of the facility.
o Remove fallen leaves and debris from deciduous plant foliage.
o Don’t string trim ornamental grasses, sedges or rushes. These may be raked.
o Don’t prune shrubs into balls, natural growth will more effectively treat stormwater.
o Low mow and no mow seed mixes should be mown a maximum of three to four times a year
for aesthetics and to reduce fire risk.
o Remove nuisance (i.e. plants blocking the inlet) and non-native and invasive vegetation (i.e.
weeds such as Himalayan blackberries and English Ivy) when discovered.
o Remove dead vegetation and woody material before it covers 10% of the rain garden surface
area. Vegetation shall be replaced in compliance with the approved landscape plan and as
soon as possible based on season. If unable to replace immediately prevent erosion of the area
with best management practices.
o Irrigate per guidance provided in Appendix A: Plant Specifications “Establishment
Maintenance”.
o Maintain vegetation using integrated pest management per Appendix A: Plant Specifications
“Integrated Pest Management”.
• Exercise spill prevention measures when handling substances that can contaminate stormwater.
Correct releases of pollutants as soon as identified:
o Make sure the area is safe to enter
o Block the outflow of the BMP
o Block the inflow of the BMP
o Stop the release of the hazmat
o Clean up the flow path to the BMP
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 92 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Chapter 4 - 33 Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018
o Clean out the BMP, replacing soil, and vegetation as necessary.
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 93 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Chapter 4 - 34 Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018
4.4.5 Extended Detention Basin
An extended detention basin receives stormwater and releases it slowly over time, to provide peak
flow control. The basin completely drains between storm events. The primary treatment process of
an extended detention basin is sedimentation.
Design Considerations: Slopes and depth should be kept as mild as possible to avoid safety risks.
The pond must have an overflow capable of spilling storms larger than the design event.
The discharge rate for pollution control is significantly smaller than the discharge rate for flow control.
The basin should be designed with at least two discharge controls, one at a low level for water
quality discharge rate and one at a higher level for the flow control discharge rate.
Design Requirements:
• Maximum Hydraulic Loading Rate is 2.0 ft³/ft²/day (This is equal to the settling velocity of the
design particle, 75 microns diameter = 0.003 inch, specific gravity =
• 2.65).
• Maximum outflow rate for pollution control = 2/3 of design daily inflow rate.
• Maximum outflow rate for flow control = pre-development discharge rate.
• Maximum slope = 3 horizontal to 1 vertical.
• Minimum orifice size = 1-inch. The orifice structure shall be designed to prevent clogging and
provide access for maintenance.
• The distance between all inlets and the outlet shall be maximized to facilitate sedimentation.
• The minimum length-to-width ratio is 3:1, at the maximum water surface elevation. If this ratio
cannot be maintained the basin must be equipped with baffles or islands to increase to flow distance
between inlet and outlet.
• The maximum depth of the pond at overflow level shall be 4 feet.
• Minimum freeboard at design depth is 1 foot.
Location: Extended detention basins must be located within the public right-of-way or on a dedicated
public open space tract. The outlet control structure must be accessible to maintenance vehicles via
an all-weather road.
Materials: Extended Detention basins are appropriate for all soil types. Native or imported topsoil
should be used in the top 12-inches of the basin. Soil should be 75 – 80% compacted.
Sizing: Extended detention basins are sized based on Hydraulic Loading Rate for pollution control and
based on the total volume for peak flow control.
Pollution Control: Sizing for pollution control is based on the Hydraulic Loading Rate, which is the
daily inflow divided by the surface area of the basin under the design storm. The maximum hydraulic
loading rate is 2.0 ft³/ft²/day. The minimum required volume for pollution control is equal to 1/3 of
the daily inflow rate.
Peak Flow: Sizing for peak flow is based on the volume which must be detained to meet the pre-
development discharge rates. The flow control device for peak flow control should be located above
the maximum elevation reached during a water quality storm event.
Overflow: The emergency overflow spillway should be set at a level higher than the maximum
elevation of the peak flow design storm.
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 94 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Chapter 4 - 35 Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018
Landscaping: Soil must be amended with compost meeting the specifications provided in General
Notes for Vegetated BMPs. Vegetation within and around extended detention basins must be
capable of withstanding drought conditions during the summer months and temporary submergence
during winter months. Turf grass is acceptable in areas where irrigation and mowing is provided by a
private party. Landscaping must be in accordance with one of the options outlined in Tables A-1 and
A-2 of Appendix A. See Chapter 6.3 for landscape plan submittal requirements.
Operations and Maintenance: The primary maintenance concern with extended detention basins
is the potential for the outlet control structure to become clogged by debris. These structures
should be cleared of debris and trash annually in the fall and inspected at least quarterly, under
both wet and dry conditions, to ensure that they are operating properly.
Excessive vegetation is generally not a problem unless it blocks the outlet controls, becomes a fire
hazard, or becomes an eyesore. Under these conditions the vegetation should be pruned or mowed.
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 95 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Chapter 4 - 36 Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018
4.4.6 Proprietary Treatment Devices
Figure 4.11. Stormtech Chambers are one example of a stormwater treatment technology that has been pre-
approved by the Rogue Valley Stormwater Advisory Team.
Proprietary treatment devices may be used when Low Impact Development and Green Infrastructure
are determined to be infeasible and where the soil is not Hydrologic Soil Group A or B. The proposed
treatment device must either be on the list of Pre-Approved Proprietary Stormwater Treatment
Technologies for use under the Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, located in Appendix G, or on
the Washington Department of Ecology’s Technology Assessment Protocol – Ecology (TAPE) Approved
Stormwater Technologies List, https://ecology.wa.gov/Regulations-Permits/Guidance-technical-
assistance/Stormwater-permittee-guidance-resources/Emerging-stormwater-treatment-technologies.
Depending on the device chosen, a treatment train approach may be needed. Devices from the TAPE
approve list must meet the following criteria:
• Devices must have a General Use Level Designation (GULD) or a Conditional Use Level Designation
(CULD).
• The Design Manual’s performance standards for suspended solids will be considered met by devices
designated by TAPE for either Pre-Treatment or Basic Treatment.
• The Design Manual’s performance standards for oil/grease will be considered met for devices
designated by TAPE for Oil Treatment.
4.4.7 Underground Detention
Underground detention consists of underground vaults or oversized pipes used to detain stormwater.
Underground detention systems should be designed to meet the peak flow requirements stated in
Chapter 2. These systems do not meet the water quality design standards and should be coupled
with other BMPs for this purpose.
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 96 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018 Chapter 5-1
CHAPTER 5 – ALTERNATIVE TREATMENT SYSTEMS
5.1 INTRODUCTION
The Best Management Practices (BMPs) identified in Chapter 4 represent the pre- approved
systems that designers can use without submitting justification and performance calculations. One of
the goals of this manual is to foster innovative stormwater design practices. This chapter specifies the
additional information that must be provided to gain approval for alternative stormwater quality
treatment systems.
5.2 TREATMENT PROCESSES
The designer must identify the type or types of processes that will provide stormwater treatment.
5.2.1 Gravity Separation
In gravity separation, stormwater is allowed to stand for a specified period of time under quiescent
conditions while suspended solids settle out. An analysis of gravity separation systems is included in
Section 3.2.
A subset of gravity separation is the vortex-type separators. These are typically pre- engineered
proprietary systems that are designed to achieve higher solids removal rates in small areas.
5.2.2 Coagulation and Precipitation
Coagulation and precipitation both involve adding chemical additives to stormwater to induce
suspended solids and colloids to coagulate into larger particles. The larger particles are then more
readily removed through gravity separation or filtration.
Coagulation and precipitation are highly sophisticated processes and are typically only used to
remove phosphorous and metals from stormwater. These are not pollutants addressed by this
manual at this time. The use of coagulation or precipitation is discouraged due to high maintenance
and operation costs and must be justified in every case. Design submittals must include a thorough
description of the chemical process along with maintenance schedules and estimates of chemical
consumption.
5.2.3 Inert Media Filtration
Inert media filtration involves the removal of suspended solids and attached pollutants by passing the
water through a bed of material such as sand or fabric. The removal efficiency of the filter will depend
on the loading rate and the porosity of the filter media. This process does not remove dissolved
pollutants.
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 97 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018 Chapter 5- 2
5.2.4 Sorptive Media Filtration
Sorptive media filtration differs from inert media in that dissolved pollutants can be chemically
bonded to the media. This is particularly useful for removing heavy metals, nutrients such as
phosphorous, or organics such as oil and grease. The type of media will vary depending on the target
pollutants. Sorptive media filtration is generally used when there is a known pollutant that must be
removed.
5.3 PERFORMANCE CRITERIA
5.3.1 Design Storm
Stormwater treatment systems must be designed to meet water quality standards under the Water
Quality Design Storm, as defined in Chapter 2. The systems must also have the ability to by-pass
flows from a peak flow storm as defined in Chapter 2.
5.3.2 Performance Criteria
Stormwater treatment systems must meet the pollution removal criteria as defined in Chapter
2.
5.4 TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT PROTOCOL
Proprietary Treatment Systems that are not on the Washington Department of Ecology’s TAPE
approved list may be evaluated by the approving jurisdiction for use. Data must be collected and
submitted to the jurisdiction in accordance with the Technical Guidance Manual for Evaluating Emerging
Stormwater Treatment Technologies (TAPE).
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 98 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018 Chapter 6 - 1
CHAPTER 6- SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
6.1 INTRODUCTION
This chapter defines requirements for design calculations, construction plans, landscape plans, and
operation and maintenance plans that must be submitted to ensure compliance with stormwater
treatment and flow control requirements. Stormwater treatment facilities (SWF) designed to treat less
than 10,000sf of impervious surface may utilize prescriptive sizing criteria outlined in this manual and
do not need to be prepared by a licensed engineer. Stormwater facilities designed to treat 10,000sf or
more of impervious surface, provide flow control, or use alternate sizing criteria, cannot use
prescriptive sizing criteria and must be prepared by an engineer licensed in the state of Oregon.
6.2 DRAFTING STANDARDS
Stormwater construction plans must be submitted for review in electronic format, except public
improvement plans for which three sets of 24 x 36 plans must be submitted. Plans must be drawn to a
standard scale of 1 inch = 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, or 60-feet, with English units. Plans must include the
following information:
1. North Arrow and Scale
2. Site street address
3. Plan Set: project location map, utility, grading, site plan, erosion prevention and sediment
control plans, relevant standard details.
4. Plans should show all ROW, easements, property lines and setbacks
5. Plan view of any SWFs; with all elevations and dimensions necessary to complete calculations
in the SWF report and build the SWF.
6. Profile view of SWF(s) with related elevations and dimensions to complete calculations in the
SWF report and build the SWF.
7. Detail(s) for the SWF outlet structure with related elevations and dimensions to complete
calculations in the SWF report and build the SWF.
8. Proposed stormwater discharge location
9. General Notes and specifications for the SWF
6.3 LANDSCAPE SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
Landscape specifications and plans are required for all vegetated stormwater facilities. At this time,
there is no required species list for vegetated stormwater facilities, however species should be carefully
selected for the site conditions, see Appendix A, Criteria for Choosing Plants for guidance. In general,
shade loving species of the Willamette Valley will not survive in Rogue Valley SWF that do not have
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 99 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018 Chapter 6 - 2
deep shade at project completion. Landscape specifications and plans must address all factors needed
to ensure plant survival and must include:
1. Delineation of all vegetation to be preserved on-site
2. Statement on whether imported or amended soil will be used and reference to the soil
specifications from the required General Notes. The required General Notes must be included
in the construction plan set.
3. A planting plan that indicates the size, species and location, by hydrologic zone, of all plants
within the facility. See Appendix A, Figure A.1 for guidance on hydrologic zones, as well as the
standard drawings for the BMP chosen.
4. Plant table that contains scientific and common names, plant size, number and spacing
5. If applicable, seed mix type and volume
6. Irrigation plans for establishment and long term (if different)
7. Location of any proposed or existing trees to be used for SW credits
6.4 STORMWATER CALCULATION REPORT
Design calculations per Chapters 2 and 3 of this manual must demonstrate that treatment and flow
control is provided for all runoff generated from developed or re-developed impervious surfaces on the
subject property. A Stormwater Calculation Report must be submitted that includes the following:
1. Cover sheet which includes: project name, property owner’s name, site street address, map and
tax lot, submission/revision date
2. Page numbers on each page of the document, can be hand numbered.
3. Engineer of record’s contact information, Engineer’s Stamp (only required for facilities treating
10,000sf or more of impervious surface and/or providing flow control)
4. A short narrative to explain the project and how the SWF design meets the requirements of the
Rogue Valley Stormwater Quality Design Manual (RVSQDM).
5. Drainage map showing redevelopment conditions, contours and sources of all on and offsite
stormwater flows for each stormwater facility
6. Site conditions including soil types, offsite drainage, existing contours
7. Infiltration testing results as applicable
8. Takeoffs showing impervious area acreage to be developed/redeveloped, and pervious area
acreage
9. Takeoffs showing total site disturbance area acreage.
10. Design assumptions used to size SWF including variables and their sources, design storms and
software used
11. Design calculations, as required for each facility
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 100 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018 Chapter 6 - 3
12. Pre and post development time of concentration calculations (only required for sizing facilities
treating 10,000sf or more of impervious surface and/or provide flow control)
13. For each facility treating 10,000sf or more of impervious surface and/or that provides flow
control, hydrographs and peak flow calculations for the following storm events:
a. 1 inch, 24hr treatment storm (post-developed)
b. 10yr, 24hr (pre & post developed)
c. 25yr, 24hr (post-developed, for facility bypass/overflow calculations)
14. Design layout and specifications from the manufacturer for any proprietary SWF
15. Bypass calculations (only for facilities treating 10,000sf or more of impervious surface and/or
provide flow control)
6.5 PROPRIETARY SYSTEMS
Proprietary systems used for stormwater treatment must be on Washington Department of Ecology’s
Technology Assessment Protocol – Ecology (TAPE) list of approved Stormwater Technologies List.
Devices must have a General Use Level Designation (GULD) or a Conditional Use Level Designation
(CULD). The Design Manual’s performance standards for total suspended solids will be considered met
by devices designated by TAPE for either Pre-Treatment or Basic Treatment. The Design Manual’s
performance standards for oil/grease will be considered met for devices designated by TAPE for Oil
Treatment. Depending on the device chosen, a treatment train approach may be needed.
The Stormwater Advisory Team (SWAT) consisting of Rogue Valley stormwater permit holders has
approved some proprietary devices not approved by TAPE. A list of these devices is located in Appendix
G. Designers wishing to use proprietary stormwater systems that have not been approved by TAPE or
the SWAT, refer to section 5.4.
6.6 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN
Stormwater facilities for private developments that do not serve the public will be required to have a
Stormwater Facilities Operation and Maintenance Plan that requires the owner of the property to
maintain the facility to ensure peak performance. The Operation and Maintenance Plan must include
the following sections:
1. Contact Information
2. Declaration of Covenants, signed and recorded on the deed of the property
3. Subdivision Operations and Maintenance Agreement (If Required)
4. Stormwater Facility Access Diagram/Route
5. Civil Plans for Stormwater Facility Construction
6. Inspection and Maintenance Action Checklists
7. Proprietary Stormwater Components Operation and Maintenance Information (If Used)
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018 Chapter 6 - 4
8. DEQ Hazardous Spill Response Fact Sheet
6.7 STORMWATER FACILITY EASEMENT
Stormwater facilities that serve the public will require the owner to provide a Stormwater Facility
Easement, Appendix I. The easement will allow the jurisdiction access to the property for the purpose
of constructing, installing, maintaining, and/or inspecting the SWF.
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018 Definitions - 1
DEFINITIONS
Applicant: Any person, company, or agency required by Rogue Valley Sewer Services (RVS) or any of
the jurisdictions adopting this manual required to comply with the standards set forth in this
Stormwater Manual (see applicability above).
Average Daily Traffic (ADT): The total traffic volume during a given time period, ranging from 2 to 364
consecutive days, divided by the number of days in that time period, and expressed in vpd (vehicles per
day).
Best Management Practices (BMPs): Methods of managing stormwater that meet or attempt to
meet water quality standards as determined by the DEQ and local governing agencies.
Structural BMPs: The design and construction of physical structures that provide stormwater
management. Structural BMPs are included in the technical aspects of this Manual, i.e. Detention
Ponds, Catch Basins, Porous Pavement, etc.
Non-Structural BMPs: Intangible methods of stormwater management including pollution removal
standards, ordinances governing stormwater management, public education of stormwater quality,
etc.
Capacity: The capacity of a stormwater drainage system is the flow volume or rate that a facility (e.g.,
pipe, pond, vault, swale, ditch, drywell, etc.) is designed to safely contain, receive, convey, reduce
pollutants from or infiltrate stormwater that meets a specific performance standard. There are
different performance standards for pollution reduction, detention, conveyance, and disposal,
depending on location.
Catch Basin: A structural facility located just below the ground surface, used to collect stormwater
runoff for conveyance purposes. Generally located in streets and parking lots, catch basins have
grated lids, allowing stormwater from the surface to pass through for collection.
Combination Facilities: Systems that are designed to meet two or more of the multiple objectives of
stormwater management.
Common plan of development: The overall plan for development of land, including any pre-existing
development, and approved plans for future development.
Constructed Treatment Wetlands: Wetlands (see definition) designed and constructed for the
specific purpose of providing stormwater management. (See attached brochure from the Oregon
Department of State Lands.)
Contained Planter Box: A structural facility filled with topsoil and planted with vegetation. When
placed over impervious surfaces such as sidewalks or rooftops, contained planter boxes intercept
rainfall that would otherwise contribute to stormwater runoff.
Control Structure: A device used to hold back or direct a calculated amount of stormwater to or from
a stormwater management facility. Typical control structures include vaults or manholes fitted with
baffles, weirs, or orifices.
Conveyance: The transport of stormwater from one point to another.
Detention Facility: A facility designed to receive and hold stormwater and release it at a slower rate,
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018 Definitions - 2
usually over a number of hours. The full volume of stormwater that enters the facility is eventually
released.
Detention Tank, Vault, or Oversized Pipe: A structural subsurface facility used to provide flow
control for a particular drainage basin.
Development: Any human-induced conversion of previously undeveloped or pervious land to
impervious surfaces whether public or private, including but not limited to construction, installation, or
expansion of a building or other structure, land division, street construction, drilling, and site alteration
such as dredging, grading, paving, parking or storage facilities, excavation, filling, or clearing.
Development Footprint: The new or redeveloped area covered by buildings or other roof
structures and other impervious surface areas, such as roads, parking lots, and sidewalks.
Destination: The ultimate discharge point for the stormwater from a particular site. Destination
points can include drywells and sumps, soakage trenches, ditches, drainageways, rivers and streams,
off-site storm pipes, and beneficial uses or re-uses (see the definition for Stormwater Re-use).
Drainage Basin: A specific area that contributes stormwater runoff to a particular point of interest,
such as a stormwater management facility, stream, wetland, or pipe.
Dry Detention Pond: A surface vegetated basin used to provide flow control for a particular drainage
basin. Stormwater temporarily fills the dry detention pond during large storm events and is slowly
released over a number of hours, reducing peak flow rates.
Drywell: A structural subsurface facility with perforated sides or bottom, used to infiltrate
stormwater into the ground.
Eco-Roof: A lightweight low-maintenance vegetated roof system used in place of a conventional
roof. Eco-roofs provide stormwater management by capturing, filtering, and evaporating rainfall.
Erosion: A mechanical process soil movement by water or wind.
Erosion Control Matting: A product made of various materials including straw, coconut fiber, and jute
that is attached to the soil purpose to reduce exposure of the soil to wind and precipitation, which
cause erosion.
Extended Wet Detention Pond: A surface vegetated basin with a permanent pool of water and
additional storage volume, used to provide pollution reduction and flow control for a particular
drainage basin. The permanent pool of water provides a storage volume for pollutants to settle out.
During large storm events, stormwater temporarily fills the additional storage volume and is slowly
released over a number of hours, reducing peak flow rates.
Flow Control: The practice of limiting the peak flow rates and volumes. Flow control is intended to
protect downstream properties, infrastructure, and resources from the increased stormwater runoff
peak flow rates and volumes resulting from development.
Flow-Through Planter Box: A structural facility filled with topsoil and gravel and planted with
vegetation. The planter is completely sealed, and a perforated collection drain is placed in its bottom
and directed to an acceptable disposal point. The stormwater planter receives runoff from impervious
surfaces, where it is filtered and retained for a period of time.
Green Infrastructure: Green infrastructure (GI) is a term that has evolved, originally referring to a
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 104 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018 Definitions - 3
strategic landscape approach to using open space for environmental, social, and economic benefits. GI
now more often refers specifically to an approach for managing stormwater runoff that relies on using
natural processes in the soil and vegetation to infiltrate, evapotranspirate and/or harvest stormwater
runoff. Rain gardens, bioswales, and pervious paving are all examples of green infrastructure.
Impervious surface/ area: Types of impervious surface include rooftops, traditional asphalt and
concrete parking lots, driveways, roads, sidewalks, and pedestrian plazas. Note: Slatted decks
are considered pervious. Gravel surfaces used for vehicular traffic are considered impervious.
Infiltration: The percolation of water into the ground.
Infiltration Planter Box: A structural facility filled with topsoil and gravel and planted with
vegetation. The planter has an open bottom, allowing water to infiltrate into the ground.
Stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces is directed into the planter box, where it is filtered and
infiltrated into the surrounding soil.
Infiltration Rate, Design: The infiltration rate measured on site and divided by three.
Infiltration Rate, Measured: The infiltration rate that is measured on site using one of the methods
described in Appendix B.
Inlet: The point at which stormwater from impervious surfaces or conveyance piping enters a
stormwater management facility. The term “inlet” can also be used in reference to a catch basin
(see definition).
Low Impact Development (LID): LID's goal is to mimic a site's predevelopment hydrology by using
design techniques that infiltrate, filter, store, evaporate, and retain runoff close to its source.
Techniques are based on the premise that stormwater management should not be seen as stormwater
disposal. Instead of conveying and managing / treating stormwater in large end-of-pipe facilities located
at the bottom of drainage areas, LID addresses stormwater through small landscape features located at
the lot level.
Low Impact Development Guidance Manual: As of September 2018, this manual was still in
development. Once complete, this manual will provide additional guidance on how to create
project teams, lay out sites and design stormwater management for effective low impact
development. In addition, this guidance manual will include references to research on which low
impact development principles are based.
Manufactured Stormwater Treatment Technology: A proprietary structural facility used to
remove pollutants from stormwater.
Maximum Extent Practicable (MEP): See definition of Practicable.
Mycorrhizal fungi: A beneficial fungi that grows in association with plant roots. The mychorhizae helps
the plant absorb water and minerals from the soil.
Off-site stormwater facility: Any stormwater management facility located outside the property
boundaries of a specific development, but designed to reduce pollutants from and/or control
stormwater flows from that development.
Oil-Water Separator: A facility designed to remove oil and grease from stormwater.
On-site stormwater facility: Any stormwater management facility necessary to control stormwater
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018 Definitions - 4
within an individual development project and located within the project property boundaries.
Operations and Maintenance (O&M): The continuing activities required to keep stormwater
management facilities and their components functioning in accordance with design objectives.
Outfall: The point at which stormwater is discharged from a contained conveyance system, such as a
pipe, to a surface drainage system.
Pollutant: An elemental or physical product that can be mobilized by water or air and creates a
negative impact on the environment. Pollutants include suspended solids (sediment), heavy metals
(such as lead, copper, zinc, and cadmium), nutrients (such as nitrogen and phosphorus), bacteria and
viruses, organics (such as oil, grease, hydrocarbons, pesticides, and fertilizers), floatable debris, and
increased temperature.
Pollutants of concern: Watershed-specific parameters identified by the Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality (DEQ) as having a negative impact on the receiving water body. Pollutants
of concern can include suspended solids, heavy metals, nutrients, bacteria and viruses, organics,
floatable debris, and increased temperature.
Porous Pavement: The numerous types of pavement systems that are designed to allow
stormwater to percolate through them and into subsurface drainage systems or the ground.
Post-Developed Condition: As related to new or redevelopment: A site’s ground cover after
development.
Practicable: Available and capable of being done as determined by the agency with stormwater
quality jurisdiction, after taking into consideration cost, existing technology, and logistics in light of
overall project purpose.
Pre-Developed Condition: As related to new development: A site’s ground cover prior to
development. Pre-developed condition, as related to redevelopment, is a site’s natural ground cover
prior to any development taking place.
Public facility: A street, right-of-way, sewer, drainage, or other stormwater management
facility that is either currently owned by a public agency or RVS or will be conveyed to a public agency
or RVS for maintenance responsibility after construction. A stormwater management facility that
receives direct stormwater runoff from a public right-of-way shall become a public facility provided
that adequate maintenance easements are in place.
Public works project: Any development or utility improvement conducted or financed by a local,
state, or federal governmental body.
Redevelopment: Any development that requires demolition or complete removal of existing
structures or impervious surfaces at a site and replacement with new impervious surfaces.
Maintenance activities such as top-layer grinding and re-paving are not considered to be
redevelopment. Interior remodeling projects and tenant improvements are also not considered to be
redevelopment. Utility trenches in streets are not considered redevelopment unless more than 50%
of the street width is removed and re-paved.
Retention Facility: A facility designed to receive and hold stormwater runoff. Rather than storing
and releasing the entire runoff volume, retention facilities permanently retain water on-site, where
it infiltrates, evaporates, or is absorbed by surrounding vegetation. In this way, retention facilities
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018 Definitions - 5
reduce the total volume of excess water released to downstream conveyance facilities.
Roof Garden: A heavyweight roof system of waterproofing material with a thick soil and vegetation
cover. Roof gardens provide stormwater management by capturing, filtering, and evaporating rainfall.
Runoff: Stormwater flows across the ground surface during and after a rainfall event.
Runoff Curve Number: Defined in Section 3.2.4 (see Appendix D for list).
Sand Filter: A structural facility with a layer of sand, used to filter pollutants from stormwater.
Santa Barbara Urban Hydrograph (SBUH): A hydrologic method used to calculate runoff
hydrographs.
Seal of Testing Assurance (STA): The US Composting Council’s Seal of Testing Assurance Program
(‘STA’) is a compost testing, labeling and information disclosure program designed to give you the
information you need to get the maximum benefit from the use of compost.
Sedimentation: The process of depositing soil particles that were suspended in water or air.
Soakage Trench: A long linear excavation backfilled with sand and gravel, used to filter pollutants from
and infiltrate stormwater into the ground.
Storm Event: As used in this manual: Any precipitation that falls within a defined time period and
geographic area.
Stormwater: As used in this manual: Water runoff that originates as precipitation on a particular site,
basin, or watershed.
Stormwater Management: As used in this manual: The overall culmination of techniques
used to reduce pollutants from, detain and/or retain, and dispose of stormwater to best preserve or
mimic the natural hydrologic cycle, or to incorporate sustainable building practices by reusing
stormwater, on a development site. Public health and safety, aesthetics, maintainability, capacity of
existing infrastructure and sustainability are important characteristics of a site’s stormwater
management plan.
Stormwater Management Facility: A single technique used to treat, detain, and/or retain
stormwater to best preserve or mimic the natural hydrologic cycle, or to fit within the capacity of existing
infrastructure, on a development site.
Stormwater Re-use: The practice of collecting and using stormwater for purposes such as irrigation
and toilet flushing.
Sump: As used in this manual: A large public drywell (see definition) used to infiltrate stormwater
from public streets. The term “sump” can also be used to reference to any volume of a facility below
the point of outlet, in which water can accumulate.
Surface Waters: See Water Body.
Tenant Improvements: Upgrades made to the interior or exterior of buildings.
Time of Concentration (T of C): The time it takes stormwater runoff to travel from the most distant
point on a particular site or drainage basin to a particular point of interest.
Total Suspended Solids (TSS): All matter organic and inorganic material suspended in water.
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 107 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, July 2018 Definitions - 6
Underground Injection Control (UIC): A federal program under the Safe Drinking Water Act,
delegated to the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), which regulates the injection of
water below ground. The intent of the program is to protect groundwater aquifers, primarily those
used as a source of drinking water, from contamination. For information on UICs see Oregon
Department of Environmental Quality’s UIC page.
US Composting Council: A non-profit trade and professional organization promoting the recycling of
organic materials through composting.
Vegetated Filter Strip: A gently sloping, densely vegetated area used to filter, slow, and infiltrate
stormwater.
Vegetated Infiltration Basin: A vegetated surface facility that temporarily holds and infiltrates
stormwater into the ground.
Water Body: Water bodies include rivers, streams, sloughs, drainages including intermittent streams
and springs, ponds, lakes, aquifers, wetlands, and coastal waters.
Water Quality Conveyance Swale: A long, narrow, trapezoidal or circular channel, densely planted with
a variety of trees, shrubs, and grasses, or seeded with a native mix. Stormwater runoff from
impervious surfaces is directed through the swale, where it filters through the vegetation and
soil, allowing pollutants to settle out.
Water Quality/ Pollution Reduction Facility: Any structure or drainage device that is designed,
constructed, and maintained to collect and filter, retain, or detain surface water runoff during and
after a storm event for the purpose of maintaining or improving surface and/or groundwater quality.
Water Quantity/ Flow Control Facility: Any structure or drainage device that is designed,
constructed, and maintained to collect, retain, infiltrate, or detain surface water runoff during and
after a storm event for the purpose of controlling post- development quantity leaving the development
site.
Watercourse: A channel in which a flow of water occurs, either continuously or intermittently, with
some degree of regularity. Watercourses may be either natural or artificial.
Wet Pond: A surface vegetated basin with a permanent pool of water, used to provide pollution
reduction for a particular drainage basin. The permanent pool of water provides a storage volume
for pollutants to settle out.
Wetland: An area that is inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and
duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances does support, a prevalence of
vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands include swamps, marshes,
bogs, and similar areas except those constructed as water quality or quantity control facilities.
Specific wetland designations shall be made by the Corps of Engineers and the Division of State Lands.
9.B.b
Packet Pg. 108 Attachment: DesignManual revised July 2018 (1117 : Rogue Valley Storm Water Design Manual)
City of Central Point
Staff Report to Council
ISSUE SUMMARY
TO: City Council
DEPARTMENT:
Public Works
FROM: Matt Samitore, Parks and Public Works Director
MEETING DATE: March 28, 2019
SUBJECT: Resolution No. _______, Approving Amendment No. 1 to
Intergovernmental Agreement with Jackson County for Improvement and
Elimination of Railroad Crossings and Authorizing the City Manager to
Execute Agreement
ACTION REQUIRED:
Resolution
RECOMMENDATION:
Approval
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In 2017 the City approved a resolution authorizing the City
Manager to execute a First Amendment to the Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with Jackson
County for approval for the Twin Creeks Rail Crossing but the executed amendment was
misplaced after it was sent to Jackson County and never adopted. The City has received a
request to execute a new Amendment to the IGA, and to include updated provisions as noted
below.
In 2017 the Oregon Department of Transportation asked the City to redo the rail crossing order
for the Twin Creeks Rail Crossing opening, and the closure of the Seven Oaks Rail Crossing.
Part of that revision required the City and Jackson County to redo the approved IGA. Since the
last IGA was signed, ODOT has funded the improvements to Scenic Avenue. Additionally, the
revised agreement gives the city time to complete any additional safety concerns or welded rail
requirements that may be needed as part of the ODOT project. Under the prior IGA, the City
agreed that in exchange for the financial flexibility from Jackson County, the City would take
jurisdiction of another County street within the City limits, Bursell Road. Jackson County
agreed to do a chip seal on Bursell Road prior to the City taking over jurisdiction.
Since 2017 Jackson County has completed the chip seal on Bursell Road and the City completed
a resolution on the jurisdictional transfer and has been maintaining the road. ODOT has started
preliminary conversations on the Scenic Signal and Rail Crossing upgrades. Discussion of the
scope associated with the project is to occur this spring 2019.
The revised IGA reflects all of these changes.
9.C
Packet Pg. 109
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS: The financial impact will be maintenance of Bursell Road
immediately. Depending on the extent of the ODOT Scenic Avenue project, the City may need
to contribute to the project depending on final design requirements.
LEGAL ANALYSIS: None.
COUNCIL GOALS/STRATEGIC PLAN ANALYSIS:
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Amendment No. 1 to the IGA.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: City staff recommends a motion to approve the resolution
approving Amendment No. 1 to that Intergovernmental Agreement with Jackson County and the
City of Central Point for Improvement and Elimination of Railroad Crossings and authorizing
the City Manager or his designee to execute the agreement.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Seven Oaks IGA_2019
2. IGA Railroad Crossing Amendment No 1 Round 2
9.C
Packet Pg. 110
Res. No.___________; March 28, 2019 Page 1
RESOLUTION NO. ______________
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THAT INTERGOVERNMENTAL
AGREEMENT WITH JACKSON COUNTY AND THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT FOR
IMPROVEMENT AND ELIMINATION OF RAILROAD CROSSINGS AND AUTHORIZING
THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT
Recitals:
A. In 2010 The City and Jackson County entered into an intergovernmental agreement
(IGA) for the opening of the Twin Creeks Rail Crossing and subsequent closure of the
Seven Oaks Crossing.
B. In 2017 the Oregon Department of Transportation elected to redo the Rail Order for the
Twin Creeks Crossing and Seven Oaks Closure. The new order required an amendment
to the IGA with Jackson County. The amendment was originally prepared and approved
by the City in 2017, but was not approved by the County at that time.
C. Jackson County has revised the IGA acknowledging that the City has taken jurisdiction of
Bursell Road as part of the original IGA and may finish any safety improvements that
may be warranted after the Oregon Department of Transportation improvement project
at Scenic and Highway 99.
The City of Central Point resolves as follows:
Section 1. The City hereby approves Amendment No. 1 to the IGA, as set forth on the attached
Exhibit “A” and authorizes City Manager or his designee to sign said Amendment to the IGA.
Passed by the Council and signed by me in authentication of its passage this _____ day
of March, 2019.
_______________________________
Mayor Hank Williams
ATTEST:
______________________________
City Recorder
9.C.a
Packet Pg. 111 Attachment: Seven Oaks IGA_2019 [Revision 1] (1120 : IGA - Jackson County for Twin Creeks Crossing)
Intergovernmental Agreement Amendment No. 1 - ................. 1
AMENDMENT NO. 1
TO THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT
BETWEEN JACKSON COUNTY AND THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT
For
IMPROVE AND ELIMINATE RAILROAD CROSSINGS
This FIRST AMENDMENT to the intergovernmental agreement, originally made and
entered into on February 3, 2010, by and between Jackson County, Oregon, a political
subdivision of the State of Oregon, hereinafter referred to as “County”, and the City of Central
Point, Oregon, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as “City” is made and entered
into effective __________ 2019. County and City are collectively referred to as “Parties”.
The Parties agree as follows:
1) AGREEMENT section titled, “County Responsibilities” paragraph 1 which reads:
A. Elimination of an At-Grade Crossing. County agrees that upon completion of the
upgrades by City to the Scenic Avenue rail crossing as described in City
Responsibilities paragraph 2A, below, County will initiate the legal process to
eliminate the Seven Oaks Road rail crossing identified as ODOT Crossing No. C-
447.70 or some other public at-grade crossing on the Siskiyou mainline in
Jackson County, subject to approval by the ODOT Rail Division.
Shall be amended and replaced in its entirety as follows:
A. Elimination of the Seven Oaks Road Rail Crossing. As the City has passed
County agrees that upon receiving a Rresolution 1505 from City requesting a
jurisdictional road exchange of Bursell Road from County to City, the County
will eliminate the Seven Oaks Road rail crossing identified as ODOT Crossing
No. C-447.70. County will complete this work before the City opens the Twin
Creeks rail crossing (ODOT Crossing No. C-446.35) and may do so in any
manner of County’s choosing.
B. County agrees to complete needed asphalt maintenance patches and apply a chip
seal pavement treatment to Bursell Road before October 31, 2017.
2) AGREEMENT section titled “City Responsibilities” paragraph 2 which reads:
A. Improvement of Scenic Avenue Crossing. The existing rail crossing at Scenic
Avenue and Highway 99, which is identified as ODOT Crossing No, C-447-10 is
in need of upgrading. City agrees to construct the necessary upgrades to that
crossing to the satisfaction of County and the ODOT Rail Division, including
necessary elevation changes, vehicle traffic signals, and an interconnection with
the crossing signals. The City will complete all engineering design, right-of-way
purchase, permit acquisition, public notice and coordination, construction, and
construction inspection. These upgrades will be constructed at City expense. The
City will provide the County engineered plans for our review and approval prior
to construction. The City agrees to begin work on such project as soon as
practicable and to pursue completion with reasonable diligence.
9.C.b
Packet Pg. 112 Attachment: IGA Railroad Crossing Amendment No 1 Round 2 [Revision 1] (1120 : IGA - Jackson County for Twin Creeks Crossing)
Intergovernmental Agreement Amendment No. 1 - ................. 2
B. Elimination of an At-Grade Crossing. If the Board of Commissioners agrees to
remove the Seven Oaks Road crossing identified as ODOT Crossing No. C-
447.70, or some other public at-grade crossing on the Siskiyou mainline in
Jackson County, City agrees that upon completion of the upgrades to the Scenic
Avenue crossing as described in City Responsibilities at paragraph 2A, City will
reimburse County for the costs to eliminate said crossing.
Shall be amended and replaced in its entirety as follows:
A. Improvement of Scenic Avenue Crossing. The existing rail crossing at Scenic
Avenue and Highway 99, identified as ODOT Crossing No, C-447-10 is in need
of upgrading. The jurisdiction of this intersection is presently under the Oregon
Department of Transportation (ODOT) on Highway 99, under County jurisdiction
west of Highway 99, and under City jurisdiction east of Highway 99. ODOT has
currently funded improvements to the intersection with a current construction
schedule of 2020. The City agrees to work with ODOT on the design and safety
improvements. The City, or by and through ODOT, will complete all
engineering design, right-of-way purchase, permit acquisition, public notice and
coordination, construction, and construction inspection for the improvements
currently funded for 2020. In the event ODOT’s funded project described herein
does not fully address reasonable safety concerns of Jackson County, the City
agrees to construct such additional reasonable safety improvements as mutually
agreed by City and County, including upgraded crossing arms and signal timing
equipment, and associated engineering design, right-of-way purchase, permit
acquisition, public notice and coordination, construction, and construction
inspection. The City, or by and through ODOT, will provide the County
engineered plans for review and approval prior to construction. Notwithstanding
the foregoing, in the event such additional safety improvements include a
requirement that City install in excess of 100 feet of continuous welded rail to
allow for interties between the Scenic and Twin Creeks rail crossings, City may
seek additional funding from other sources, excluding Jackson County, to offset
such additional unanticipated costs. Said additional safety improvements to the
Scenic Avenue Crossing as mutually agreed between City and County, shall be
completed by December 31, 2033.
B. Elimination of the Seven Oaks Road Rail Crossing. The City agrees to complete
an engineering design, secure needed right-of-way and to pay for all demolition
and construction costs to remove the Seven Oaks Road crossing identified as
ODOT Crossing No. C-447.70.
C. By October 31, 2017, the City shall pass a resolution requesting a jurisdictional
road transfer of Bursell Road from the County to the City.
3) APPORTIONMENT FOR FUNDING section which reads:
A. City shall pay all construction costs for the elimination of the Seven Oaks Rail
crossing identified as ODOT Crossing No. C447-70, or some other public at-
grade crossing on the Siskiyou mainline in Jackson County. The County will
provide an engineered design for this closure.
9.C.b
Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: IGA Railroad Crossing Amendment No 1 Round 2 [Revision 1] (1120 : IGA - Jackson County for Twin Creeks Crossing)
Intergovernmental Agreement Amendment No. 1 - ................. 3
B. City shall pay for all costs associated with upgrades to the Scenic Avenue
crossing discussed in paragraph 2A and as identified as ODOT Crossing No. C-
447.10.
C. County shall pay for an engineered design for the elimination of the Seven Oaks
Rail crossing identified as ODOT Crossing No. C447-70, or some other public at-
grade crossing on the Siskiyou mainline in Jackson County.
D. In the event insufficient funds are appropriated for the payments under this
Agreement and the County has no other lawfully available funds, then the County
may terminate this Agreement at the end of its current fiscal year, with no further
liability or penalty to City. The County shall deliver written notice to City of such
termination no later than thirty (30) days from the determination by the County of
the event of non-appropriation
Shall be amended and replaced in its entirety as follows:
A. City shall pay all design, right-of-way and construction costs for the elimination
of the Seven Oaks Road rail crossing identified as ODOT Crossing No. C447-70.
B. City shall pay, or secure state or federal grants to pay for, all costs associated with
upgrades to the Scenic Avenue crossing discussed in paragraph 2A and as
identified as ODOT Crossing No. C-447.10.
C. County shall pay for all costs to complete asphalt patching and chip seal of
Bursell Road.
D.C. In the event insufficient funds are appropriated for the payments under this
Agreement and the County has no other lawfully available funds, then the County
may terminate this Agreement at the end of its current fiscal year, with no further
liability or penalty to City. The County shall deliver written notice to City of such
termination no later than thirty (30) days from the determination by the County of
the event of non-appropriation.
4) Except as expressly amended by this Amendment, all terms and conditions of the
Intergovernmental Agreement remain in full force and effect.
5) This Amendment is effective on the date that this Amendment is fully executed by the
Parties.
JACKSON COUNTY OREGON CITY OF CENTRAL POINT
__________________________ ____________________________
Danny Jordan Date By Date
County Administrator Title
Approved as to Legal Sufficiency
9.C.b
Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: IGA Railroad Crossing Amendment No 1 Round 2 [Revision 1] (1120 : IGA - Jackson County for Twin Creeks Crossing)
Intergovernmental Agreement Amendment No. 1 - ................. 4
________________________
Sr. Assistant County Counsel
9.C.b
Packet Pg. 115 Attachment: IGA Railroad Crossing Amendment No 1 Round 2 [Revision 1] (1120 : IGA - Jackson County for Twin Creeks Crossing)
City of Central Point
Staff Report to Council
ISSUE SUMMARY
TO: City Council
DEPARTMENT:
Public Works
FROM: Matt Samitore, Parks and Public Works Director
MEETING DATE: March 28, 2019
SUBJECT: Consideration of Rogue Valley Transit District request for a Bus Stop at
5th and East Pine
ACTION REQUIRED:
Motion
RECOMMENDATION:
None Forwarded
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Rogue Valley Transit District (RVTD) has encountered
issues with the right turn movement from E. Pine onto North Second Street since the
improvements were completed in downtown Central Point along Pine Street. In an effort to
resolve these issues, RVTD decided to reverse their existing bus route so that buses would no
longer be making the problematic right turn. Subsequently, a new bus stop was installed on
the south side of East Pine between 6th and 7th Streets. Soon after reversing the route,
RVTD received a request to consider moving the new bus stop location from one of its
passengers, who was having issues getting to the new stop.
In February of 2019, the City Council agreed to revise the bulb-out at 2nd and E. Pine to allow
for RVTD to reverse its route back to its original configuration. However, RVTD informed staff
a few days after the council’s decision that it wouldn’t be reversing the route as the new route
offered logistical improvement for RVTD and its ridership. Given the new dilemma, City and
RVTD staff members brainstormed new bus stop locations in areas associated with low levels
of on-street parking along Pine Street. After much consideration, the only viable intersection
capable of accommodating a new bus stop location was near 5th Street in front of the Grange
Hall.
RVTD has provided a picture which depicts the conceptual modifications that would have to be
implemented to the planter/landscaping area to make it viable for RVTD as a pickup/drop off
solution. As you will see, the existing street tree could remain, but the landscape planter width
would have to be reduced.
Another alternative option could be to reverse the sidewalk and planter locations. This option
would take a small redesign and cost more as all the irrigation/plumbing would have to be
redone as well as demolition and re-pouring of the adjacent sidewalks.
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS: None at this time.
10.A
Packet Pg. 116
LEGAL ANALYSIS: N/A
COUNCIL GOALS/STRATEGIC PLAN ANALYSIS:
Strategic Plan 2020 Transportation Goal 1- Ensure citizens can get where they want to be,
when they want to be there, enjoy the trip, and eliminate the stress of travel.
Strategic Plan 2020 Downtown Revitalization and Beautification Goal 3 – Promote a pleasant
and safe Downtown environment that is characterized by ease of use for pedestrians and those
in vehicles accessing our businesses.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: None at this time.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: I move to direct staff to pursue a new RVTD bus stop located
at….
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Pine and 5th Street Bulbout Redesign april 2019
10.A
Packet Pg. 117
Pine and 5th Street Pic with Bus
10.A.a
Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: Pine and 5th Street Bulbout Redesign april 2019 (1121 : RVTD Bus Stop on E.Pine)
Door Positions Needing Sidewalk
10.A.a
Packet Pg. 119 Attachment: Pine and 5th Street Bulbout Redesign april 2019 (1121 : RVTD Bus Stop on E.Pine)
Concept Drawing with Planter Removal
10.A.a
Packet Pg. 120 Attachment: Pine and 5th Street Bulbout Redesign april 2019 (1121 : RVTD Bus Stop on E.Pine)
Area Measurements
10.A.a
Packet Pg. 121 Attachment: Pine and 5th Street Bulbout Redesign april 2019 (1121 : RVTD Bus Stop on E.Pine)