Low Impact Development (LID) Feasibility Study - City of Kirkland

Kirkland LID Feasibility Study for CIP Projects MatrixKirkland Low Impact Development Feasibility Study for Capital Improvement Program Transportation Projects - MatrixLID Feasibility City of Kirkland CIP ProjectsPrepared By SvR Design Company10/29/2007LEGEND Highfor Matrix ModerateScore LowLIDApproachLow Impact Development (LID) Criteria Collaboration OpportunitiesCIP Info Other Benefits from Proposed LID ElementsCumulativePriorityValuationCIP Location (CIPProject Number)% FundedCIP w/ ROWacquisitionStormwater BasinInformationProposed LIDElementsLID StormwaterFunction FlowControl or Treatment -Compared to CIP(High = 3, Low =1)LID demonstrationpotential(High = 3, Low =1)LID Element CapitalCost - Compared to"Conventional"StormwaterManagement (Low Cost= 3, High Cost =1)Baseline LIDMaintenanceneeds/costs (Low Cost=3, High Cost = 1)Cumulative LIDValuation ScoreHigh = 12-11Moderate = 10-8Low = 7-4Ecological: stream,wetland, and/or treecanopy (High = 3,Low =1)Habitat andHuman health(High = 3, Low =1)EcologicalConnectivity(High = 3, Low =1)Other benefits(High = 3, Low =1)Comprehensive PlanFramework Goal (FG)Alignments High = 3Low =1 (SeeAppendix B)Encourages InteragencyCollaboration(High = 3, Low =1)Promotes Systemwide Carbon-neutralPatterns (High = 3,Low =1)Cumulative BenefitValuation ScoreHigh = 21-18Moderate = 17-14Low = 13-7Total LID andBenefits ValuationScore High = 33-28 Moderate = 27-21Low = 20-11Possibility of pairingwith futureredevelopment ofadjacent site's)Possible Public andPrivate MaintenancePartnerships6th St. (0059000) 100% No Moss Bay Porous Sidewalkand Rain garden inPocket Park,Reduction ofImperviousSurfaceModerate (2) Moderate (2)Function of porouspavements and smallrain gardenLow Cost (3)Difference in cost ofconcrete vs. porousconcrete is not significantand park is vegetatedLow Cost (3) 10 High (3)Nearby stream &wetlands areaLow (1) High (3)Using a currently nonprogrammedgreenspace for LIDdemonstrationHigh (3)Opportunity to useright of way bulboutsto increasepedestrian safetyHigh (3) FG-1, FG-2, FG-3, FG-5, FG-7, FG-9, FG-10, FG-11,FG-13High (3)Project may engageKirkland Planning +Public Works + ParksHigh (3) Thisproject reducesautomotive lane widthand promotesalternativetransportation, whileusing local resourcesto managestormwater.19 29 Yes: New residentialredevelopment along 6thAve. just north ofproposed CIP projectAdjacent homeownersand surroundingcommunity99 th Pl. NE & 100 thAve. (0060000)100% No South Slope Juanita -Direct Discharge toLake WashingtonSwales,StormwaterPlanters and/orRain gardens,PorousPavements,Reduction ofImperviousSurfaceHigh (3)Water quality treatmentHigh (3)Function of small pocketstormwater planters/ raingardensModerate (2)Removal of pavement andinstallation of amendedsoils and vegetationModerate (2) 10 High (3)Reduces pollutantsand peak flows toLake WashingtonHigh (3)Improvedownstreamsurface waterqualityHigh (3)Due to the stream thatflows under the projectarea and it's proximityto Lake Washington .High (3)Opportunity to useright of way bulboutsto increasepedestrian safetyalong wide ROWHigh (3) FG-1, FG-2, FG-3, FG-5, FG-7, FG-8, FG-9, FG-10,FG-11, FG-13Moderate (2) Projectmay engage KirklandPlanning + PublicWorksHigh (3) Thisproject reducesautomotive lane widthand promotesalternativetransportation, whileusing local resourcesto managestormwater.20 30 Yes: Condos are beingbuilt on Shumwayproperty; otherindications of futureredevelopmentAdjacent homeownersand surroundingcommunityCentral Way(0065000)100% No Moss Bay - DirectDischarge to LakeWashingtonStormwaterplanters within"Bump-outs",PorousPavements,Reduction ofImperviousSurfaceLow (1)Not enough space forwater quality treatmentof roadway runoffHigh (3)Function of stormwaterplanter/ rain gardenModerate (2)Removal of pavement andinstallation of amendedsoils and vegetationHigh (1) due tovisibility of the site; somemaintenance may beconducted by adjacentbusiness owners7 Low (1) thisis more of ademonstration projectHigh (3)Improvedownstreamsurface waterqualityLow (1)High-profiledemonstration projectcould lay the groundfor more projectsHigh (3)Opportunity to useright of way bulboutsto increasepedestrian safetyHigh (3)FG-1, FG-2, FG-3, FG-4.FG-5, FG-7, FG-8, FG-9,FG-10, FG-11, FG-13High (3)Project may engageKirkland Planning,Public Works and ParksHigh (3)This project reducesautomotive lane widthand promotesalternativetransportation, whileusing local resourcesto managestormwater.17 24 Yes: Lake Shore PlazaMall may be redevelopedKirkland DowntownAssociation120 th Ave. NE(0063000)100% Yes ($5,483,400 inbudget)Juanita Creek Basin Swales within areathat drains directlyto Juanita Creek(132nd to Creek)Moderate (2)Flow Control and waterquality treatment priorto direct discharge intoJuanita CreekHigh (3)Importance of localizedtreatment prior todischarging into a waterbodyHigh (1)Land acquisition may berequired for LID nearJuanita CreekHigh (1) Dueto proximity of JuanitaCreek7 High (3)Reduces pollutantsand peak flows toJuanita CreekHigh (3)Improvedownstreamsurface waterqualityHigh (3)Yes, adjacentconnections to JuanitaCreek and HourglassPondLow (1) Moderate (2) FG-1, FG-2, FG-4. FG-5, FG-7, FG-13Moderate (2) Projectmay engage KirklandPlanning + PublicWorks, Kirkland + WADept of Fish andWildlifeLow (1)Despite theapplication of LIDelements, this projectprioritizes increasingautomobile capacity15 22 Yes: New transit centerat NE 78th; Planned"urban center" for area;zoning changing toOffice/Multi-familyEvergreen HospitalMedical Center andadjacent businessesPark Lane(0064000)5% No Moss Bay - DirectDischarge to LakeWashingtonStormwaterPlanters and/orRain gardens withPorousPavements,Reduction ofImperviousSurfaceModerate (2)Reduction ofimpervious surfacesHigh (3)Function of stormwaterplanter/ rain garden andporous pavementsHigh (1)Realigning the street tocreate a living street withporous pavements andLID elements delineatingthe drive aisle andparking areasHigh (1) Dueto visibility of the site;some maintenance maybe conducted byadjacent businessowners7 High (3) ALID approach couldpotentially save muchof the existingcanopy cover byproviding more wateraccess to tree rootswill improve treehealthLow (1) Moderate (2)Connections to PeterKirk Park can beaccentuated, but this"green street" couldeventually connect tothe waterHigh (3)From an urbandesign perspective,investments in ParkLane can create a“living street” thatconnects downtownto Peter Kirk Parkand Lake StreetHigh (3)FG-1, FG-2, FG-3, FG-4.FG-5, FG-7, FG-8, FG-9,FG-10, FG-11, FG-13High (3)Project may engageKirkland Planning,Public Works and ParksHigh (3) Thisproject reducesautomotive lane widthand promotesalternativetransportation, whileusing local resourcesto managestormwater.18 25 Yes: New transit centerwill be located on 3rd St.& Park Lane, AntiqueMall site in next fiveyears, and remotepossibility of corner LakeSt. & Central Way indistant futureKirkland DowntownAssociationF:\07\07016 City of Kirkland LID\Design\Site Analysis\CIP.Matrix.v3 Page 2 of 2cCity of Kirkland LID Feasibility Study for CIP Projects | SvR No. 07016 | December 21, 2007