Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-08-23E IDIAN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR IDAHO MEETING AGENDA City Council Chambers 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho Tuesday, August 23, 2016 at 6:00 PM 1. Roll -Call Attendance X Anne Little Roberts X Joe Borton X Ty Palmer X Keith Bird X Genesis Milam X Luke Cavener X Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Community Invocation by Tim Pusey with Valley Shepherd Church of the Nazarene 4. Adoption of the Agenda Adopted 5. Consent Agenda Approved as noted A. Approve Minutes of August 9, 2016 City Council Meeting B. Tyler Technologies - New World License and Services Agreement for the Not -to -Exceed Amount of $48,580.00 Vacated C. Amended Development Agreement for Centrepoint (H-2016-0057) with Blue Marlin Investments, LLC. located near the northwest corner of N. Eagle Road and E. Ustick Road, in the SE 1/4 of Section 32, Township 4N, Range 1E D. Agreement for Extension of Domestic Water Service Outside Meridian City Limits with West Ada School District for Mary McPherson Elementary School at 1050 East Amity Road E. Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Easement between the City of Meridian and the Roman Catholic Diocese of Boise within St. Ignatius School F. Water Main Easement between the City of Meridian and Western Ada Recreation District Next to Storey Park Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda Tuesday, August 23, 2016 — Page 1 of 5 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. G. Sanitary Sewer Easement between the City of Meridian and Woodside Harris, LLC within Southern Highlands Subdivision No. 3 H. Storey Park Temporary Construction Easement Between the Western Ada Recreation District and the City of Meridian Pedestrian Pathway Easement Between New Oaks LLC and the City of Meridian for a Multi -Use Pathway in Oaks South Subdivision No. 4 J. License Agreement Between Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District and the City of Meridian for a Multi -Use Pathway in Oaks South Subdivision No. 4 K. Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Easement between the City of Meridian and TTS Idaho LLC within Third Street Square Subdivision 6. Community Items/Presentations A. Mayor's Office: Appointment of Rob McCarvel to Seat #2, Reappointment of Keith Bird to Seat #6, and Appointment of Rick Ritter to Seat #7 of the Board of the Meridian Development Corporation B. Resolution No.: 16-1158: Appointment of Rob McCarvel to Seat #2, Reappointment of Keith Bird to Seat #6, and Appointment of Rick Ritter to Seat #7 of the Board of the Meridian Development Corporation Approved C. Solid Waste Advisory Commission: Republic Services Annual Rates Adjustment Amended Report for Solid Waste Collection Services 7. Items Moved From the Consent Agenda 8. Action Items Land Use Public Hearing Process: After the Public Hearing is opened the staff report will be presented by the assigned City planner. Following Staff's report the applicant has up to 15 minutes to present their application. Each member of the public may provide testimony up to 3 minutes or if they are representing a larger group, such as a Homeowners Association, they are allowed 10 minutes. The applicant is then allowed 10 additional minutes to respond to the public's comments. No additional public testimony is taken once the public hearing is closed. The City Council may move to continue the item for additional information or vote to approve or deny the item with or without changes as presented. The Mayor is not a member of the City Council and pursuant to Idaho Code does not vote on public hearing items, unless to break a tie vote. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda Tuesday, August 23, 2016 — Page 2 of 5 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. A. Public Hearing: TEFRA Hearing for Cole Valley Christian Schools Hearing held per TEFRA requirement B. Public Hearing Continued from June 28, 2016 for Browning Plaza (H-2016- 0008) by SLN / Boise -Waltman, LLC Located 505, 521, 615 and 675 Waltman Lane Continued to 10/25/2016 1. Request: Two (2) Year Time Extension on the Preliminary Plat to Obtain the City Engineer's Signature on a Final Plat C. Public Hearing Continued from June 28, 2016 for Waltman Property (aka Browning Plaza) (H-2016-0038) by SLN Planning/Boise-Waltman, LLC Located 505, 521, 615, and 675 Waltman Lane Continued to 10/25/2016 1. Request: Modification to the Development Agreement to Remove the Requirement (#5.1.8) for Corporate Drive to be Extended North of the Site from the Ten Mile Creek South to Waltman Lane D. Final Plat for Bainbridge Subdivision No. 4 (H-2016-0094) by Brighton Investments, LLC Located East of N. Black Cat Road, Midway Between W. Chinden Boulevard and W. McMillan Road Continued to 9/6/2016 1. Request: Final Plat Approval Consisting of Thirty -Six (36) Building Lots and Four (4) Common Lots on 13.03 Acres of Land in an R-8 Zoning District E. Final Plat for TM Crossing Subdivision No. 1 (H-2016-0099) by Brighton Investments, LLC Located at the Northeast Corner of S. Ten Mile Road and 1-84 Approved 1. Request: Final Plat Approval Consisting of 20 building lots and 1 common lot on 36.54 acres of land in the C -G Zoning District F. Public Hearing Continued from August 16, 2016 for Creason Creek No. 1 (H- 2016-0087) by ULC Management, LLC Located Near the Southeast Corner of N. Linder Road and W. Ustick Road Denied 1. Request: Modification to the Development Agreement to Allow the Developer to Receive Four (4) Building Permits Prior to Recording a Final Plat G. Final Plat Approval Continued from August 16, 2016 for Creason Creek No. 1 (H-2016-0087) by ULC Management, LLC Located Near the Southeast Corner of N. Linder Road and W. Ustick Road Approved Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda Tuesday, August 23, 2016 — Page 3 of 5 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. 1. Request: Modification to the Final Plat to Alter the Number of Buildable and Common Lots and to Move the Multi -Use Pedestrian Pathway Out of the Nampa Meridian Irrigation District's Easement and Into a Common Lot and to Update the Landscape Plan, Plat and Open Space Calculations H. Final Plat for Volterra Heights Subdivision No. 2 (H-2016-0095) by Cottonwood Development, LLC Located South of W. McMillan Road and West of N. Ten Mile Road Approved 1. Request: Final Plat Approval Consisting of Twenty -Eight (28) Single Family Residential Building Lots and Four (4) Common Lots on Approximately 21.5 Acres in the R-8 Zoning District I. Final Plat for Vicenza Subdivision No. 3 (H-2016-0096) by Cottonwood Development, LLC Located North of W. McMillan Road; Between N. Black Cat Road and N. Ten Mile Road Continued to 9/6/2016 1. Request: Final Plat Approval Consisting of Twenty -Eight (28) Buildable Lots and Four (4) Common Lots on Approximately 10.62 Acres in the R-4 Zoning District J. Final Plat for Vicenza Subdivision No. 4 (H-2016-0097) by Cottonwood Development, LLC Located North of W. McMillan Road, Between N. Black Cat Road and N. Ten Mile Road Continued to 9/6/2016 1. Request: Final Plat Approval Consisting of Seventeen (17) buildable Lots and Three (3) Common Lots on Approximately 5.01 Acres in the R-4 Zoning District 9. Department Reports A. Presentation of West Regional Emergency Services Master Plan B. Legal Department Report: Alcohol Beverage Catering Permit Ordinance C. Community Development: Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) PY15 Substantial Amendment: Public Service D. Community Development: Transportation Programs and Projects Update - Discuss Ada County Highway District's Draft FY2017-2021 Integrated Five - Year Work Plan (IFYWP), the Idaho Transportation Investment Program (ITIP), and COMPASS' Change in Motion Report Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda Tuesday, August 23, 2016 — Page 4 of 5 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. E. City Council: Discussion on Performance Auditor Position 10. Future Meeting Topics 11. Executive Session per Idaho State Code 74-206 (1)(c): To acquire an interest in real property which is not owned by a public agency; and 74-206A (1)(a) a governing body or its designated representatives may hold an executive session for the specific purpose of: (a) Considering a labor contract offer or to formulate a counteroffer Into Executive Session 9:25pm Out of Executive Session 11:02pm Adjourned 11:02pm Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda Tuesday, August 23, 2016 — Page 5 of 5 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 A meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:00 p.m., Tuesday, August 23, 2016, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd. Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Joe Borton, Keith Bird, Genesis Milam, Ty Palmer, Luke Cavener and Anne Little Roberts. Others Present: Bill Nary, C.Jay Coles, Jaycee Holman, Caleb Hood, Josh Beach, Warren Stewart, John Overton, Mark Niemeyer, and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll-call Attendance: Roll call. X_ Anne Little Roberts X _ _Joe Borton X__ Ty Palmer X_ Keith Bird __X__ Genesis Milam __X__ Lucas Cavener _X Mayor Tammy de Weerd De Weerd: Okay. I'd like to welcome all of you to our City Council meeting. For the record it is Tuesday, August 23rd. It's 6:00 p.m. We will start with roll call attendance, Mr. Clerk. Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance De Weerd: Item No. 2 is our Pledge of Allegiance. If you will all rise and join us in our pledge to our flag. (Pledge of Allegiance recited.) Item 3: Community Invocation by Tim Pusey with Valley Shepherd Church of the Nazarene De Weerd: Item No. 3 is our community invocation. Tonight we will be led by Pastor Tim Pusey. He is with our Valley Shepherd Church of the Nazarene. If you will all join us in the community invocation or take this as an opportunity for a moment of reflection. Thank you for joining us. Pusey: Thank you. Heavenly Father, your word says this is the day that the Lord has made. We will rejoice and be glad in it. And we have much to rejoice in today as we reflect on your blessings in our lives and we thank you -- we thank you for this day and for all of its blessings . For life and health and for food to eat and a roof over our heads and family and friends and , Lord, we thank you for this community tonight and yet we humbly acknowledge our need for what you alone can do in our lives. For peace in the hearts and minds of people. For hope that sees beyond all the hardships and difficulties in life. And for love that's truly Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 2 of 72 unconditional and unwavering in our lives, the kind of love we find in you. Tonight I would pray for your special blessing upon our City Council and our Mayor. Lord, guide them in all the business that will take place this evening. May the wisdom of Solomon and the courage of David and the love of Jesus permeate all they do tonight and we'd ask that yo u would continue to bless the people of Meridian and the word that you would teach us all to love as Christ has loved us. In Christ's name we pray, amen. Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda De Weerd: Thank you. Item No. 4 is adoption of the agenda. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: On the Consent Agenda, 5-B, request to vacate this from the agenda. On Item 6-B, the resolution number is 16-1158. Under Action Items. 8-B, the request by applicant to continue until October 25th, 2016. Item C, request by applicant to continue to October 25th , 2016. And Item 8-D is asked by the applicant to continue to September 6th , 2016. Item 8-I, request by applicant to continue to September 6th, 2016. Item J has been requested by the applicant to move to September 6th, 2016. And with that I move that we approve the amended agenda. Borton: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve the agenda as amended. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 5: Consent Agenda A. Approve Minutes of August 9, 2016 City Council Meeting C. Amended Development Agreement for Centrepoint (H- 2016-0057) with Blue Marlin Investments, LLC. located near the northwest corner of N. Eagle Road and E. Ustick Road, in the SE 1/4 of Section 32, Township 4N, Range 1E D. Agreement for Extension of Domestic Water Service Outside Meridian City Limits with West Ada School District for Mary McPherson Elementary School at 1050 East Amity Road Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 3 of 72 E. Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Easement between the City of Meridian and the Roman Catholic Diocese of Boise within St. Ignatius School F. Water Main Easement between the City of Meridian and Western Ada Recreation District Next to Storey Park G. Sanitary Sewer Easement between the City of Meridian and Woodside Harris, LLC within Southern Highlands Subdivision No. 3 H. Storey Park Temporary Construction Easement Between the Western Ada Recreation District and the City of Meridian I. Pedestrian Pathway Easement Between New Oaks LLC and the City of Meridian for a Multi-Use Pathway in Oaks South Subdivision No. 4 J. License Agreement Between Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District and the City of Meridian for a Multi-Use Pathway in Oaks South Subdivision No. 4 K. Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Easement between the City of Meridian and TTS Idaho LLC within Third Street Square Subdivision De Weerd: Item 5 is our Consent Agenda. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: As stated earlier, Item 5-B has been asked to vacate from this agenda and with that I move we approve the Consent Agenda -- the amended Consent Agenda and for the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest. Borton: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Any discussion by Council? Madam Clerk. I mean Mr. Clerk. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; P almer, yea; Little Roberts, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 4 of 72 Item 6: Community Items/Presentations A. Mayor’s Office: Appointment of Rob McCarvel to Seat #2, Reappointment of Keith Bird to Seat #6, and Appointment of Rick Ritter to Seat #7 of the Board of the Meridian Development Corporation B. Resolution No.: : Appointment of Rob McCarvel to Seat #2, Reappointment of Keith Bird to Seat #6, and Appointment of Rick Ritter to Seat #7 of the Board of the Meridian Development Corporation De Weerd: Okay. Item 6-A under the Mayor's Office. Council, in front of you I have three appointments of the four seats to bring to you tonight for appointment of Rob McCarvel for Seat No. 2. The reappointment of Keith Bird to Seat No. 6. And the appointment of Rick Ritter to Seat No. 7. These will be through the end of their terms and I would ask if there are any questions ? Don't all jump in at once. If there are no questions I would entertain a motion. Milam: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mrs. Milam. Milam: I move that we approve the appointment -- or Resolution No. 16-1158 appointing Rob McCarvel to Seat No. 2, reappointment of Keith Bird to Seat No. 6 and appointment of Rick Ritter to Seat No. 7 of the board of the Meridian Development Corporation. Cavener: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 6 -B. If there is no discussion by Council, I would ask for roll call attendance. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea. De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: I know that we have one of the three here -- well, two of the three. But, Rick, do you have any comments? Really? Wow. Please let the record note. Well, thank you for your interest and your willingness to serve our urban renewal district. Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 5 of 72 C. Solid Waste Advisory Commission: Republic Services Annual Rates Adjustment Amended Report for Solid Waste Collection Services De Weerd: Okay. Item 6-C is under our Solid Waste Advisory Commission and at this time I know that there is an item that we didn't quite cover last -- last week I think we talked about this and I will turn this over. Remling: Good afternoon, Madam Mayor and Council. Rodney Remling with Republic Services. Business controller. 11101 West Executive Drive, Boise, Idaho. That's correct, Mayor. We presented to SWAC, but inadvertently left one rate off of the presentation to this Council and that would be the fourth rate down on your second page for commercial combination lock replacement . This is for secured commercial containers that are secured by our customers and if that lock breaks or is lost, damaged in some way, they might request a replacement. That's what this rate is for. It would only incur if a customer requested it for those purposes and the charge requested is 27.53 and that's the only change we have. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Council, any questions? Bird: I have none. Cavener: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: I do have a question. A couple, actually. I didn't see on this sheet anywhere any cost associated with the grass collection program and I'm curious if I have missed that and, if so, my apologies. But, if not, if you could articulate what that rate is and I guess I was just looking for some form of an update on the success of that program. Remling: That is a voluntary program -- or service. It's not a required service and that's a very small amount of the service. I would request that we take that offline. But that is probably less than 200 customers who signed up for that and I'd have to guess at the rate, so -- I would have to re -- and just take it off. Cavener: Madam Mayor, maybe a follow up then. Are there other voluntary services that aren't reflected on the sheet that we have been provided? Remling: That are -- no. Cavener: That would be the only one? Remling: That should be on here and I'm surprised that it's not. I didn't take a second to look for it. Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 6 of 72 Klein: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: You were behind Rodney, so I had no idea who was talking. It's like I know someone is here. Klein: Madam Mayor and Council, I believe -- Republic Service. Rachele Klein. 111 -- or, excuse me, 2130 West Franklin Road, Meridian, Idaho. 83642. And I believe we bill that directly, because it's not added -- it's not a franchise service and it's not -- so it's billed independently by Republic. So, it wouldn't show up on this rate sheet that's approved by Council, so -- and I did -- Councilman Cavener e-mailed me and so I would like to actually offer to take the grass collection program offline and do a workshop for anybody who is interested in that and also an update on what's happened with the regional composting facility that's going to be hopefully open next year, if you guys are interested in more information about that, but -- De Weerd: I think that would be awesome. Klein: Thank you. Cavener: Thanks. De Weerd: Okay. Any further questions from Council? Cavener: Madam Mayor? Sorry. I have an additional question. Can you give us just some -- I guess high level explanation about how our rates and our rate increases compare to some of the other municipalities in the area that you serve? Are they the same because of the GPI or are the rates increase more or less? Remling: The rate increases are very, very similar. All of the contracts have various CPI adjustments -- in another words, they use a different CPI or a different time frame. When you stack the CPIs up -- it's been about a year since I've done that, but I have analyzed the CPI changes by month and by type over a period of five or six years, I don't remember exactly, and CPI change was very, very similar. Only when municipalities changes the indices that they are using do you see a change. So, if you were to change the indices you might see a significant increase or decrease, because you're moving from indices to indices, but generally the indices move in tandem and your rate changes are very similar to what we have seen over the last year and a half. It doesn't look like I answered your question. Cavener: I was just curious if our increase is more or less than compared to the other municipalities surrounding us. Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 7 of 72 Remling: They are very similar. We have different -- different time frames and we have a consolidated rate schedule that we can bring back to you. Again, I'm going to have to be offline, but Meridian's are about the middle -- Meridian's rates are about the middle of our rates. Klein: Okay. Sorry. I'm -- I'm perhaps the world's worst over-the-shoulder consultant here. You actually have a great setup, because you have somewhat of a discount. This is the only contract that we have that's 90 percent of CPI. So, you have a fairly low CPI. You have the all items Western index, which is pretty standard. It's below the -- there is a water, sewer, garbage index, which has been generally more reflective of our actual costs and -- and you guys are in this great bucket with all items in the western U.S. and so it's lower and this year it was -- for a residential rates it was just over one percent, but you're the only city that I know of that only hits 90 percent of that index. So, you're actually better off than most cities if you ask me, but if you ask Rodney, he's the real numbers guys, but just so you know, this is the only contract I know that's scaled like that. Remling: Rachele is correct on the -- on the calculation of it. However, they are very, very similar. I mean you're 1.2 -- you're 1.02 percent of residential. You're 1.04 overall. The indices range in that range. I mean they are very close. Cavener: Madam Mayor. I hate that I'm belaboring this. I guess I still don't feel like that I have got a direct answer. Is our increase more or less than the other municipalities that surround us? Klein: Are you asking just for residential rates? Cavener: Correct. Sure. Klein: Okay. So, yours would be -- I mean like just -- like Rodney is saying that they all went up. Yours went up one percent and it depends on which rate level you have. So, if you have a small container it's going up . You know, you have a variable cart rate, the smallest cart rate -- you know, I'm guessing here, but let's say it's 14, 16 and 18, roughly. So, you figure one percent of just the service and not the cart rent, so -- I mean it's really small and compared to others it's probably with pennies one way or another. But you guys are -- Remling: In actual rate change you're looking at a penny or two. Cavener: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Council, is there any further questions on this item ? If not, Mr. Nary, the next steps are to bring an ordinance back or a resolution? Nary: Madam Mayor, because of -- because of the -- the one fee that hadn't been brought to you, they are going to begin the process of the noticing for the Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 8 of 72 fee. So, they pushed it back a couple weeks. I think it originally was supposed to come for the public hearing on the 6th, I believe. Now they have pushed it I think to the 20th. So, they just need to do the process of the advertising and they will have a public hearing. De Weerd: Okay. Perfect. And I guess maybe as part of that if he can have the -- the different cities and what their rate increases are, that would -- that would answer some questions. Okay. Thank you. Item 7: Items Moved From the Consent Agenda De Weerd: Okay. There were no items moved from the Consent Agenda. Item 8: Action Items A. Public Hearing: TEFRA Hearing for Cole Valley Christian Schools De Weerd: We will move to Item 8 under Action Items. Council, this first item is a public hearing to -- as part of funding for Cole Valley Christian School. They are required to have a public hearing. I am opening this public hearing and want to talk about the purpose of this hearing. The hearing time appears in the notice that was published and if anyone is here for that hearing we will ask them to provide testimony. But it would be nice to know, as I have instructions here to talk about the public hearing, what I'm supposed to say, other than it's a public hearing. This is a requirement for this funding as I understand it. So, is someone here from Cole Valley? Would you like to make comment? Carr: I'm Brad Carr, superintendent of Cole Valley. Madam Mayor. De Weerd: Nice to see you. Carr: Nice to see you again, too. This is a formality. Just like you said, I'm about as aware of what the needs are of this as you are. We are simply refinancing our public bond funding -- or their nontax -- their tax exempt bond, so we have to do a public -- public hearing. And we are refinancing our building here, as well as we just purchased the church that's in our parking lot, the Apostolic Church, and we are looking to finish off our project on the corner of 2nd 1/2 and Carlton Street with removing the crack house and turning it into something beautiful. De Weerd: Well, I can tell you your field looks awesome. Carr: Thank you. De Weerd: And what a nice improvement to that whole area. Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 9 of 72 Carr: Yeah. We want to finish that off. We are going to remodel that house and have it look nice, with a nice garden area there and it should be really nice when it's done. De Weerd: Yes. I was part of the discussions on what we envisioned that house could be once you bought the property, so -- I'm excited to hear what your decision is. Carr: Well, we are going to keep the house and remodel it. It's going to look very similar on the outside to what it originally looked like as a little Craftsman house. The inside will be a meeting room and restrooms and things like that. De Weerd: Very cool. Well, thank you for being here and thank you for being such a great community partner. Carr: Thank you very much. De Weerd: So, we hope to have some of your students on the Mayor's Youth Advisory Council this year. Carr: I know you do and we are working on that. Thanks. De Weerd: Thank you. This is a public hearing and it is a hearing on -- that is required by the public financing to be on a public entity's agenda for the public to comment. Is there any member of the public who would like to provide comment on this item? Okay. Hearing none, I will officially close the public hearing and -- now what? Nary: Madam Mayor, I don't know there is anything to approve. De Weerd: Okay. Nary: Other than the -- De Weerd: Just need the public hearing. Nary: That's what I understand. De Weerd: Okay. Well, you know, just -- you're blessed. Holman: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: We are so experienced at this. But thank you for asking. Holman: Madam Mayor, question for Bill. Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 10 of 72 De Weerd: Mrs. Holman. Holman: Or Mr. Nary. There is a form that we sign saying the public hearing happened and all of that and I believe, Mr. Carr, the Mayor signs that, so I don't know if we need any sort of approval for her to sign that document. Nary: It's simply acknowledging that the hearing was held and I think that's -- that's all that's necessary. I don't think the Council has to approve that. I think the acknowledgment that we have had the heari ng -- this is for the -- just for the record, it's called the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act, so I think the acknowledgment can be signed by the Mayor without any additional action of Council. B. Public Hearing Continued from June 28, 2016 for Browning Plaza (H-2016- 0008) by SLN / Boise-Waltman, LLC Located 505, 521, 615 and 675 Waltman Lane 1. Request: Two (2) Year Time Extension on the Preliminary Plat to Obtain the City Engineer's Signature on a Final Plat C. Public Hearing Continued from June 28, 2016 for Waltman Property (aka Browning Plaza) (H-2016-0038) by SLN Planning/Boise-Waltman, LLC Located 505, 521, 615, and 675 Waltman Lane 1. Request: Modification to the Development Agreement to Remove the Requirement (#5.1.8) for Corporate Drive to be Extended North of the Site from the Ten Mile Creek South to Waltman Lane De Weerd: And thank you for telling us with TEFRA means. Okay. So, we will move to the next item and that's Item B that has been requested to continue to October 25th. I would ask staff if there -- if you could, on the record, just give us the reason this request was made. Hood: Madam Mayor, the reason I believe that they are asking for another extension is there is some interest in the property and they are doing some due diligence to figure out if the changes that they are looking at potentially doing will fly and get a concept plan put together. So, that would hold true for both B and C on the agenda this evening. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Council, I would need a motion to continue -- Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 11 of 72 Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Bird: I would move that we continue the public hearing on H-2016-0008 and H-2016-0038, until October 25th, 2016. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion. Do I have a second? Borton: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to continue both Items 8-B and 8-C to October 25th, 2016. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. D. Final Plat for Bainbridge Subdivision No. 4 (H-2016- 0094) by Brighton Investments, LLC Located East of N. Black Cat Road, Midway Between W. Chinden Boulevard and W. McMillan Road 1. Request: Final Plat Approval Consisting of Thirty- Six (36) Building Lots and Four (4) Common Lots on 13.03 Acres of Land in an R-8 Zoning District De Weerd: Okay. Item 8-D is a final plat also requested by the applicant to continue to September 6th. If I could ask the reason for this continuation. Hood: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, that one I'm not sure of. I'm pinch hitting for Sonya, but I don't -- she didn't put it in my cheat sheet, so -- but I know the applicant's representative is here, so they can explain a little bit better. Bird: Well, there was a reason. De Weerd: Good evening. Wardle: Good evening, Madam and Members of the Council. Mike Wardle of Brighton Corporation. 12601 West Explorer Drive. This item and the other two items, I and J on your agenda that have also been requested for deferral, are abutting properties and you will recall when we revised the Bainbridge preliminary plat several years ago there was a 15 foot corridor that we had proposed along the southern boundary in anticipation of kind of mirroring that. So, these -- that's the reason that these were deferred together, so that we could work out details, which were primarily worked out yesterday and will come back to you on this with recommendations for approval in both cases. So, unless you have questions that would be the short answer. Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 12 of 72 De Weerd: Thank you so much. Wardle: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Council, this item has been requested to continue to the 6th of September. Do I have a motion? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we continue the final plat H-2016-0094 to September 6th, 2016. Palmer: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to continue Item 8 -D to September 6th. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. E. Final Plat for TM Crossing Subdivision No. 1 (H-2016- 0099) by Brighton Investments, LLC Located at the Northeast Corner of S. Ten Mile Road and I-84 1. Request: Final Plat Approval Consisting of 20 building lots and 1 common lot on 36.54 acres of land in the C-G Zoning District De Weerd: Item 8-E is a final plat for H-2016-0099. I will ask for staff comments. Hood: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. As I just mentioned, I'm going to cover for Sonya this evening on this project, this final plat, called TM Crossing. It is the first phase in the subdivision . The site consists of 36.54 acres of land, zoned C-G. It is located at the northeast corner of I-84 and South Ten Mile Road within the recently established urban renewal district. There were -- or are 50 preliminary plat lots and four common lots, what you see before you this evening. It is, again, the first phase of that, which consists of 20 commercial building lots and one common. You do have a letter in your packet from the applicant, dated August 18th, and, then, a follow-up memo from staff dated the 23rd of August today. There was a meeting, as Mr. Wardle just mentioned, yesterday to discuss some of the comments that were brought forth in his letter dated May 18th and after that meeting we have agreed to some changes to the conditions for approval, so I'd like to read those into the record and if you have any questions we can certainly run through them. We would recommend that site specific number one there be no change to that one . Condition number four, Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 13 of 72 to correct the engineer's name as requested by the applicant. Condition -- site specific conditions number ten and 11, that we would delete those and remove those entirely. And general conditions number three, amend those as requested. Number eight under general conditions, amend as requested. Number 19, amend as requested. And number 23 amend as requested by the applicant. As you know, the applicant is here, but we, basically, again, concurred with the changes requested in his letter dated August 18th and I would stand for any questions. De Weerd: Thank you, Caleb. Council, any questions? Wardle: Madam Mayor, once again, Mike Wardle of Brighton Corporation. 12601 West Explorer Drive in Boise. As you're, obviously, aware from what we prepared and provided, there were some significant issues still to be resolved in meetings yesterday, Mr. Stewart and Mr. Turnbull and the other Mr. Wardle got together and addressed the significant issues relative to the pressure irrigation system. The conclusion was that we will make provision for that eventuality, but the city staff also acknowledges that there are some challenges that they face in order to make that a reliable and consistent possible source . So, the recommendations or concurrence notations of staff this evening address all of those issues and unless you have questions I would not take mo re of your time. De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions? Okay. Wardle: Thank you very much. De Weerd: Okay. Council, if there is no questions or comments, I would entertain a motion. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we approve the final plat H-2016-0099 and to include staff and applicant comments. Borton: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 8 -E. Mr. Clerk, will you call roll. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea. De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried. Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 14 of 72 MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. F. Public Hearing Continued from August 16, 2016 for Creason Creek No. 1 (H- 2016-0087) by ULC Management, LLC Located Near the Southeast Corner of N. Linder Road and W. Ustick Road 1. Request: Modification to the Development Agreement to Allow the Developer to Receive Four (4) Building Permits Prior to Recording a Final Plat De Weerd: Item 8-F is a public hearing continued from August 16th on H-2016- 0087. I will open this public hearing with -- this continued public hearing with staff comments. And this was about a specific item. Beach: Correct, Madam Mayor. This is both the development agreement modification and less so the final plat modification, but they are one and the same application number, so the direction from Council last week was to meet with the applicant to discuss and come up with possible conditions for allowing up to -- it was four this -- the original application was for four early starts with permits. The applicant has since requested only two early start programs -- and as you see in the memory before you and on the slide that I will show here, staff did our best in conjunction with the applicant and the legal department to come up with some -- some conditions that feel a little bit more comfortable now, but there are still come concerns as to issues that could arise based on previous experience doing -- doing things like this, but there are the conditions here. Originally last week we just said C, we have modified that a little bit to its present form as with D through J that were some -- some concerns that the Legal Department brought up. I'm not sure if Mr. Nary has some addition al insight on this application, but we have discussed it thoroughly with Fire and Public Works, Development, as well as Legal and this is the best that we could come up with at this time. De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions -- Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: -- for the applicant. Yes, I'm sorry, Mr. Nary. Nary: That's okay. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, if -- if you look at all the conditions, part of the dialogue discussion last week was the risk to the city, both for the early starts, if they are built to the wrong place, what happens if people move in, they sell, the city won't give occupancy because of those things, so we have tried to capture that in these conditions, but, in my opinion, it's still not a good idea. The process exists for a reason and it isn't just because the Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 15 of 72 government loves process, but because we want to make assurance that in the future that the land is divided properly, that it's recorded properly, that the easements are -- are recorded properly, that the requirements of development are vetted properly and doing them out of sequence like that more often than not ends up with a problem. So, we have tried to capture as much as we can. I don’t know if -- you know, if nothing happens, then, it's great, but as I mentioned last week, we would like some direction or guidance on do we need to establish an alternative process and what it takes. As you see, we went from one additional comment last week to allowing this to eight and that's for two lots. I can see someone else coming in with a large scale sub and saying I want to build 400 homes and I only want ten early starts and that doesn't seem like very many, but that's ten individual things that we have to try to come up with. So, we have tried to capture your concerns. If the question, again, is is there a risk to the city, the answer is yes. I don't know how significant it is, because nothing has happened yet. So, that's I guess my cautionary tale of what we have tried to put in here and for you to think about in that particular request. There isn't a concern of the second request about the modification to the plat about the -- in regards to I think the creek and the pathway and those kinds of things. That's not the issue. It really is these early starts that it can be problematic. De Weerd: Thank you. Cavener: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: Question for staff. Josh, if I heard you right, it sounds like in addition to the conditions that have been outlined, staff still has some additional concerns, but I didn't hear you share what those were. I thought it might be poignant to -- and I don't know if that was what you were looking for, Mr. Nary, if there were additional -- Beach: Sure. So, Madam Mayor, Council Member Cavener, that is, essentially, what our concerns are. Like Mr. Nary said, we have a process and as you see based on the -- the time that was spent coming up with these conditions, these early starts tend to take a lot more staff time to track to make sure that there are no issues to make sure that the homes are constructed in the setbacks when we don't have a legal lot. So, we have to make sure that -- go through some extra steps to make sure that the home is constructed how it needs to be , where it needs to be. It's a little bit difficult to make sure that all those things are taken care of, as well as to track potential staff changes, depending on how long it takes for this process to go through, making sure everyone's aware. So, it can be problematic. Cavener: Madam Mayor, additional follow up? Josh, I hate to put you on the spot on this one. Are these types of requests -- we are starting to see more often Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 16 of 72 from developers or have you had conversations with the development community about doing early starts and does that pose a bigger question that regardless of the decision here tonight do we need to look at some other processes to respond to the demands of the development community? Beach: As far as personally, I don't have personal experience as to whether or not the development community is in favor of these or not. I'm not as knowledgeable about that. I know that in the past year and a half that I have been with the city we have had two or three different subdivisions that have asked for this. One being that the one that the applicant mentioned last -- last week, DaVinci Park, as well as another one that we approved earlier this summer for the White Acre Subdivision. But I -- I don't from personal experience know whether the DaVinci Park has had any issues. The White Acre project is very early in the development, but as we were going through this and kind of analyzing it a little bit more, we are seeing the potential issues that could arise and I don't -- like Mr. Nary said, I don't know that we will have an issue, but there are some risks there. De Weerd: Okay. Beach: I'm not sure if that directly answers your question. De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions for staff? Would the applicant like to make comment? Good evening. Unger: Madam Mayor and Council, Bob Unger, ULC Management. 6104 North Garrity Lane, Boise, Idaho. 83714. Representing CS2, LLC. I think, you know, as Josh pointed out, you know, I met with staff last Thursday to discuss our hearing from last Tuesday and I proposed some modifications to the 5 -1-C and we had a great meeting. We discussed some of the issues and concerns. Staff made some additional modifications to what I had proposed and, then, this afternoon I got the additional conditions D through J provided by Legal staff and, first of all, I want to -- I want to say we are -- we are fine with those conditions. We have no issues with those. I mean I think Legal staff did a great job of putting specific conditions in there that protect the city and I think that was a big concern by the Council. And as staff said, we have decided to modify a request from -- down from four early starts to two early starts and the reason for that is -- Josh, can you pull up -- do you have that map? Beach: I don't think I do have it in the slides, Bob. Unger: Okay. We have specifically identified two lots. One on -- we have two parcels in the north section of this phase of t he project. We have two parcels. We have identified one lot that is located in one parcel and one lot that is located in the other parcel. In the event that something where to go astray, we would have a house on one parcel and a house on another parcel and they could move Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 17 of 72 forward, you know, ultimately, and get a C of O based upon those two individual parcels and parcel numbers. What we would provide for -- for our builder is a metes and bounds legal description that matches identically the dimensions an d locations of these two lots that we are proposing to build on. And I do have to correct myself from -- from last Tuesday evening when the question came up about the purchase of the lot from the builder. The way -- as I understand now after discussing it with the -- with the owner, the way that works is that the builder buys a particular piece of property based upon that metes and bounds legal description, which is prepared by our surveyor. He pays us for that piece and the legal description is retained by the title company until such time as the plat is recorded. So, we do get paid by the builder at that time and not down the road . Okay? So -- and that's one of the -- one of the reasons that we are requesting these two early starts is to help our cash flow and also to allow the builder to get an early start on the two model homes. We have two different builders and they would each have one model home that they would be able to show, you know, as soon as the plat is recorded. They would be able to show and start hopefully selling other homes within the subdivision. I know that -- and I said it last week, you know, DaVinci Park, we got two early starts based upon the two parcels that we had. There were no issues whatsoever on those two early starts. We went out with our surveyors, we staked the lots properly. The buildings were built on the lots. They met all of the setback requirements and when the plat was recorded they matched perfectly. So, it's something we have done before. We know the process to make sure that we don't run into any issues . But, once again, as legal staff has pointed -- put in the conditions, we would assume all responsibilities and release the city of any liabilities if that were to happen. So, based upon that, we would hope and ask for your approval and I will stand for any questions. De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Not being a legal mind, but I know you can sit here, you can sign papers and everything else that releases the city from any responsibility, but let me tell you something, if it happens and it's not like the normal process or the normal legality that we always do, I can guarantee you that we are going to put money out to defend ourselves. We are going to be listed. De Weerd: Any other questions for the applicant? Thank you. Unger: Okay. Thank you. Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 18 of 72 De Weerd: This is a public hearing on this item for the development agreement. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony on this item? Okay. Council? Milam: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mrs. Milam. Milam: I move that we close the public hearing on H-2016-0087. Little Roberts: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on Item 8-F. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Milam: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mrs. Milam. Milam: I don't have a motion. I'm really torn on this. I -- I would like to help the developer out. I don't like the city taking risk. They have somewhat of a proven track record, so I keep going back and forth and if these things are going to come for -- forth in the future, we probably should have -- I know we already have procedures, but if we are going to have an alternate procedure it should probably include some additional fees to cover the additional staff time and -- I mean that's just a thought. I feel for them. I want to have -- I'd like to help them move their project along. I don't think they are going to have a problem. I also don't want to set a precedence so that every developer comes in and wants to have early starts and creates problems, because somebody's headed down this road, so -- Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: So, I have a question for Chief Niemeyer, although the hearing is closed. I don't know if we need to reopen it to gather that information or not. No? Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Borton, if you're just asking staff a question I don't -- we don't need to worry about that. Borton: Chief, when you look on the map that's up there -- what was provided earlier -- and I failed to mention this when Mr. Unger was up here -- I think it was Lots 2 and 3, the lots closest to the existing fire hydrant across the street, were two of the four lots proposed to be early starts and now appears as though one of Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 19 of 72 the two early start lots is four lots to the north, if I'm orienting that right. Is that still within the acceptable distance from the existing fire hydrant? Niemeyer: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilman Borton, I did talk to Chief Palmer. Chief Palmer and Rick Jackson met with the applicant. We are still within 150 feet of that fire hydrant, so we can lay enough supply line during construction if we were to have a fire in that area . Borton: Even at that new lot location? Niemeyer: I just texted Chief Palmer to confirm that and he did to review of that and approve it. De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions? Palmer: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Palmer. Palmer: While we are asking staff questions, I got a question for Josh. You had brought up White Acre. How does -- how do these two lots -- I guess how does this situation compare to what we did with White Acre? Beach: Do you have a rough time period? Palmer: I don't know off the top of my head. I can pull up that development agreement if you would like me to look at that while you're deliberating up there or -- Palmer: Sure. And the reason I ask is because I -- I remember there was a -- there was no concern about the head start on -- on those two lots. I remember, you know, we were just getting after the developer about how quickly he could get the sidewalk in, because he needed enough dirt to have to berm and, then, put the sidewalk on and he wasn't going to have that in phase one and that was the entirety of the discussion. I don't remember any concern over him getting -- getting moving. Stewart: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Warren. Stewart: I was not here at the hearing last week to hear all of the testimony, but I did want to provide -- and Councilman Cavener -- or Councilman Cavener asked a question about other similar situations. We did not have exactly in this format, but similar situation where we were asked to approve c onstruction in advance of the normal process. A couple of instances that I can think of -- The Oaks Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 20 of 72 development, we allowed them to build some model homes and start one of the phases of the subdivision before they had off -site infrastructure available to serve that and without going into a lot of details , that turned out very badly for us. The other one was the Overland Park Apartments. We allowed them to start construction on the Overland Park Apartments in advance of having infrastructure in place to serve that with a lot of promises and everything else and without going into detail that turned out very badly for us, too. So, I would just be cautious. Anytime we have a tendency to go outside of our normal process, the checks and balances that we have in place to make sure that certain things are done before we allow other things to move forward , they are thrown out of timing and out of whack and unless you've got people that are just babysitting those things it gets very difficult to monitor. So, just a word of caution. It may not be exactly this situation, but it is similar. De Weerd: Thank you, Warren. Okay. Any other questions from Council? Okay. Do I have a motion from Council? Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Nary. Nary: Before you get to your motion, I was looking at the White Acre application that Councilman Palmer asked. So, in that particular instance part of the difference is that the developer was going to retain ownership of the parcel. So, he was going to build them and retain ownership and, then, they could plat it and, then, they would be sold. These are going to sell in conjunction with the building -- with the building of the lot. So, it's a little bit different. So, that's the difference I think between those two. Hood: And Madam Mayor? Can I just follow up a little bit on that? I was going to -- going to point this out. But that is one of the -- the process we have established also protects a developer, because in this scenario if lots -- they aren't lots yet, but they are metes and bounds legal descriptions of real prope rty that someone else owns now, they have to sign that final plat. They are now a signatory on the plat with the developer, so any land -- if you own it your John Hancock goes on the Mylar that gets signed and recorded down at the county's office. If by some chance this deal goes bad with the builder now and they say I'm not signing the plat, we don't have a final plat anymore, because legally they have to sign the plat. So, part of that process, again, so people don't sell property ahead of development -- I'm not saying that will happen here, but it has happened before. It's almost the reverse of these old farm houses that are out there and they split them off and, then, you develop around it, it's almost the inverse of that where you have somebody now that's building a new lot, but they don't want to be part of the subdivision anymore, they said, no, I don't want to be part of your HOA or for whatever reason and they don't sign the plat. So, again, it just makes it a lot cleaner if we have got -- the legal description is a lot and Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 21 of 72 block and not a metes and bounds description that we -- everyone understands what that is and can move forward. So, just another -- and if I may just real quick, what I would propose -- and certainly you guys provide us the direction and we can come up with something. It will probably mirror real similarly the conditions you see here tonight. But I don't -- I don't personally believe that we should come up with a process to do this. I think it would be better on a case-by- case, one-off basis, if there is justification for it, we will look at it, will get with Fire, whoever those folks are, and we will say here is the package. I will be honest, we probably won't recommend them very much -- approval of that very often, but instead of saying -- you know, kind of encouraging folks to do this, I think we can still look at it like we are doing now, but I think it maybe gives the wrong impression to -- and I don't disagree. I mean I want to help the development community where we can, but as Warren states and Bill stated, not every time, but these blow up in our face a lot of times and it becomes just a headache . So, that is just my two cents. De Weerd: Thank you, Caleb. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I -- I feel that this is something that I personally can't back right now and I do feel bad, because it was another public entity, as I understood, that held it up and they do need to get started before the snow flies. But I -- I just don't think that I'm ready to put the city out on the limb that I think we are putting it out on . I probably -- it will probably -- it will probably go perfect, no worries, but there is always that chance that it won't. So, with that I would move that we deny H- 2016-0087, the modification to development agreement to allow developer to receive four building lots prior to recording of final plat. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion. Do I have a second? Borton: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to deny the request for the early start and the modification. Any discussion? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: I do among several other things. I agree with Caleb with regard to a process or not. These very well might be best considered as one off, rare, unique circumstances with special findings that oftentimes might not be appropriate for the very reasons why we have the process that's been described Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 22 of 72 by our staff. So, I agree with the motion and I also agree with not opening the door to try and facilitate doing things out of order as requested , unless there is a really unique circumstance. De Weerd: Okay. Any further discussion? Mr. Clerk, will you call roll. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, nay; Little Roberts, yea. De Weerd: The motion passes. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE NAY. G. Final Plat Approval Continued from August 16, 2016 for Creason Creek No. 1 (H-2016-0087) by ULC Management, LLC Located Near the Southeast Corner of N. Linder Road and W. Ustick Road 1. Request: Modification to the Final Plat to Alter the Number of Buildable and Common Lots and to Move the Multi-Use Pedestrian Pathway Out of the Nampa Meridian Irrigation District's Easement and Into a Common Lot and to Update the Landscape Plan, Plat and Open Space Calculations De Weerd: Item 8-G is a final plat continued from August 16th on H-2016-0087. Beach: So, this was continued again from -- from last week. Essentially, the applicant is looking to modify the final plat fairly minimally. As you see on the left is the currently approved final plat. This is the -- the landscape plan. The applicant is proposing to take the pathway outside of the Nampa -Meridian Irrigation District easement due to their requirements and to modify what was Lot 4 to a common lot and to place the pathway through that common lot. With that there are a couple other changes that are required. Plat note number seven -- currently this plat does not indicate a Lot 4, Block 1, as a common lot for the subdivision. The plat note needs to be revised to indicate this as a common lot that shall be owned and maintained by the HOA and also to modify condition 5-B to read Lot 4, Block 1, shall be designed to include the ten foot wide multi-use pathway and landscape standards set forth in the UDC, et cetera. Staff is recommending approval and I will stand for any questions you have. De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions? Is the applicant here? Nary: It's the same project. Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 23 of 72 De Weerd: Oh. No comment? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: If there is no comment, I would move that we approve Item H-2016- 0095, final plat for Volterra Heights Subdivision. Milam: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion -- Nary: The one before. Borton: Sorry. Wrong one. Strike that. The final plat for H-2016-0087 -- Milam: Second. Borton: -- for Creason Creek. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve Item 8 -G. Any discussion from Council? Mr. Clerk. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea. De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. H. Final Plat for Volterra Heights Subdivision No. 2 (H-2016- 0095) by Cottonwood Development, LLC Located South of W. McMillan Road and West of N. Ten Mile Road 1. Request: Final Plat Approval Consisting of Twenty-Eight (28) Single Family Residential Building Lots and Four (4) Common Lots on Approximately 21.5 Acres in the R-8 Zoning District De Weerd: 8-H is a final plat that Mr. Borton was trying to move this agenda along. We will hear this one on H-2016-0095. I will ask for staff comments. Beach: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this -- there really are no issues with this. This is a final plat. The entire office of W.H. Pacific was out of town Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 24 of 72 last week, so we were not able to get the e -mail in agreement with all staff conditions. We did receive that e-mail today. The applicant is in agreement with all of the conditions of the -- of the final plat. De Weerd: Thank you, Josh. Council, any questions for staff? Does the applicant have any comments? Thank you. Milam: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mrs. Milam. Milam: I move that we approve H-2016-0095, final plat for Volterra Heights Subdivision. Bird: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 8-H. Any discussion from Council? Mr. Clerk, will you call roll. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea. De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. I. Final Plat for Vicenza Subdivision No. 3 (H-2016-0096) by Cottonwood Development, LLC Located North of W. McMillan Road; Between N. Black Cat Road and N. Ten Mile Road 1. Request: Final Plat Approval Consisting of Twenty-Eight (28) Buildable Lots and Four (4) Common Lots on Approximately 10.62 Acres in the R-4 Zoning District De Weerd: Item 8-I has been requested to continue to September 6th and we heard the previous explanation on -- on this request. Council, do I have a motion to continue? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we continue the final plat on H-2016-0096. Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 25 of 72 Borton: Second. Bird: To September 6, 2016. I'm sorry. De Weerd: Second agrees? Borton: Second agrees with the date. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to continue Item 8 -I to September 6th. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. J. Final Plat for Vicenza Subdivision No. 4 (H-2016- 0097) by Cottonwood Development, LLC Located North of W. McMillan Road, Between N. Black Cat Road and N. Ten Mile Road 1. Request: Final Plat Approval Consisting of Seventeen (17) buildable Lots and Three (3) Common Lots on Approximately 5.01 Acres in the R-4 Zoning District De Weerd: Item 8-J is also requested to continue to September 6th. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we continue H-2016-0097 to September 6th, 2016. Borton: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to continue Item 8 -J to September 6th. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 9: Department Reports A. Presentation of West Regional Emergency Services Master Plan De Weerd: Item 9-A is under Presentation from our Fire Department and I will turn this over to Chief Niemeyer. Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 26 of 72 Niemeyer: Madam Mayor, Members of Council, good evening and thank you. It looks like we just lost our person -- could you possibly click on the presentation? So, we will -- I will preface this while we get the presentation up . This will be a little bit longer than my normal presentations, so I do thank you for your time this evening as we go through this. About two months ago I did present each one of you with a copy of our regional master plan. Again, 186 pages, it's hard to pack that into ten minutes, so this will be a little bit longer. This is an informational presentation, so I hope to gather some dialogue, some conversation, and some questions that you may have, with a goal of coming back to you within 30 days after you've had a chance to kind of digest the information, with the hope that you will look to adopt the master plan and, hopefully, in between that time reach out -- reach out with any questions that you may have . If I lose my voice I'm sorry, I kind of got some chest congestion in San Antonio and I'm hoping it's not the Zika virus. It was raining all the time and big mosquitoes out, so I apologize for that. So, just a little bit of back history on how we got here and I know I have talked to you about this before as well, but just to recap, this started as a project between the City of Meridian and the Meridian Rural Fire District, looking at how growth and current conditions and, then, future growth conditions are going to affect us and how we plan for that appropriately. As we had that conversation and I was discussing this with the Mayor and with Councilman Borton, our liaison, and the district commissioners, we also understood that that growth is happening also in fire districts around us. So, how do we effect growth together. I have mentioned before the last thing we want to do is build a fire station and have another jurisdiction build one a mile away and, then, answer to the taxpayers of why didn't you coordinate this better. So, we did reach out to our partner agencies, our neighboring agencies. As you all know, we had Star Fire District jump on board both through the approval of their board and , then, financially to help support the project. Kuna, we reached out to them, they made the decision not to participate at this time. The other jurisdictions in Ada County had recently completed a master plan. That discussion and approval with Star led to a discussion with their partners that have the same issues of border growth and so that's how we got to the point where we got four agencies involved in this plan. Since that time Nampa has also been in discussions with us about how their boundaries are going to grow with ours and how we look at that in the future as we move forward. I told you how much I love this. So, an overview of the process. Once we elected to go with a consultant, Emergency Services Consulting International, they conducted site visits on November 16th through the 19th. During that time we also had formed a citizen task force. One of the things that I requested during the development of this plan -- I have been a part of planned development before. Typically you have with consultants a citizen group that comes in for one evening and so it's about two hours and they get an analysis from the citizens and feedback from the citizens . I have always found that to be a little bit deficient in my mind. I would like a citizen's group that goes through the entire process. So, beginning, middle, and end and that's what we did with this project. So, you can see there the citizen task force made up of citizen representatives from each of the jurisdictions , including the City of Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 27 of 72 Meridian and the Meridian Rural Fire District. Met on November 18th, met on February 24th and, then, met on April 13th. During the site visit ESCI also conducted an environmental scan. They met with elected officials, the internal fire department staff and, then, also with those citizens. From there they took the information that they gathered, along with data that we had provided to them. Did an evaluation of the current conditions that we have today and, then, looked at future system demand and how that future system demand could be planned for. And, then, they looked at also future delivery system models and how we could, then, deliver service to meet the demand for the future. And, then, lastly, they produced the -- the report that you have in front of you. That is not what I wanted. A little help. I really don't know much about this slide. I didn't develop it. De Weerd: Do you have a plat? Niemeyer: I don't. I do not have a final plat to review. All right. We will try again. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: Real quick. Chief, can you remind us -- the agencies that were all participating in the financial contribution towards this effort? Niemeyer: Absolutely. So, the agency that participated were the Meridian Rural District, the City of Meridian, Star Fire Protection District, Middleton Rural Fire Protection District and the city of Caldwell. The total cost was 70,000 dollars. We allocated that equally based on the number of stations is the most fair way we could come up with a compensation that paid for the entire plan . Thank you. So, an overview of the services provided. This was an overview that we did give the citizens as well as they went through their process . So, currently the Meridian Fire Department provides the following services today. Fire suppression in all structures, all vegetation fires, and all other fires. We provide emergency medical services with the ALS non-transport license. ALS meaning Advanced Life Support. We do provide vehicle rescue and extrication operations at the operations level. What that means at the operations level is that we have the knowledge and the training and the tools and the skills and ability to go out and perform that function. So, we do cut up cars, we -- that's a bad term. We do extricate folks from vehicles when they are in crashes. Cut up cars is not the right term. We do provide in Meridian fire cause and origin determinations, so when we do have a fire, our investigators go out and identify the cause of the fire and where that fire started. We do provide fire code development, inspection, and enforcement. We do provide fire and life safety public education through our public education division. The last two we provide what's call ed the awareness level. Both hazardous materials response and, then, still and swift water rescue Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 28 of 72 response. The awareness level means that we are aware and trained and educated in hazardous materials and in swift water and still water rescue, but we do not have the capability to do that on our own. Hazardous materials are done through regional teams in the state of Idaho. Our two teams that support us are the Boise hazmat team and the Caldwell hazmat team. Those are the two regional teams we have in this area. Still and swift water rescue require you have a dive team. We don't have a dive team. The city of Boise has a dive team. Eagle Fire Department has a dive team. The sheriff's department has a dive team. So, if we do have a rescue that involved anybody getting in the water, we do have teams that help support us. So, those are the services that we provide today. It was also important to at least discuss the services we don't provide, to make sure the citizens that went through this understood what we do and what we don't provide. Currently we don't provide technical rescue. Rope. Confined space. Trench. Heavy machinery and building collapse. Technical rescue involves a lot of training and a lot of funding, quite honestly. It's expensive to maintain. The one thing that does concern us -- I have had conversations with Dennis Teller and Tom Barry about this -- is when our water department goes into the wells and does a confined space entry , make sure that they understand we are not their rescue team right now. We do not do confined space. So, we do have contingency plans for that. They notify us every time they go into the well, so we are aware of every time that you go in the well. But that is a service that we understand that we should be providing. It is a matter of looking into the future to determine if we need to provide that service . Some others are very obvious. ARFF. We do not have an airport. I appreciate the city not having an airport. Having airport firefighting is a whole new ballgame and so we don't have to worry about ARFF from the city. Tac Med. Those are tactical paramedics attached to law enforcement. Typically to the SWAT teams. The tactical paramedics -- I don't have a lot of interest in our paramedics carrying guns right now. Ada County does have a team. Sorry, John, I apologize. Ada County does have a team that is attached to the SWAT teams with Ada County. Community paramedicine is an -- is an evolution in medicine where the paramedics are getting out in the community doing follow ups. When somebody goes into the ER and comes out, the community paramedics are going out and doing follow-ups to ensure that the proper care is being given. What that has done is we are seeing a massive reduction in reentries into the ER from folks that have an issue as they -- as they get discharged. Currently Ada County Paramedics is providing that service. We do not do ambulance transport. Incident management teams. I talked a little bit earlier about we do incident scene management or incident command . An incident management team is when you have a very significant large -scale event and you need to bring in an incident management team. So, logistic support, it's planning support, it's financial support. There is a lot of discussion right now on a regional team approach, because no city, including the city of Boise, has the resources to be able to provide that service. There has been some discussions on a regional approach to that. Emergency management is done through Doug Hartman's office through -- used to be ACON. I believe now it's the Ada County Disaster Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 29 of 72 Services Department. I'm taking a swag there. I can't remember what their new name is. Doug Hartman's office. And, then, arson investigation. We do not do arson investigation. To do that under the code we have to have our investigators deputized. We have a great relationship with Meridian PD. We have actually sent a couple of their folks back to the national fire academy for arson investigation, so we work very closely with Meridian PD. The other thing you need to have if you're going to do arson investigation , if you watched -- whatever it is. Boston Fire or whenever that -- Chicago Fire. I don't watch it. You have to have the storage space and capacity to store evidence for a period of X amount of years. We do not have that capacity. So, arson investigation -- we have had a great relationship. We are going to continue that in the future. So, as we went through the citizen survey -- and one of the things that I was really fortunate enough to experience when we went to Washington on the Priorities of Government exercise and talking to cities that had done that, we, essentially, did our own little mini version of a Priorities of Government exercise within the fire service and asked the citizens what do you want. Where are your priorities as far as fire service and the services we offer. Not surprisingly, fire suppression and emergency medical response one and two. As we talked -- and Jaycee Holman can attest to this. As we talked to cities throughout Washington, typically what they saw in their Priorities of Government exercise were law enforcement, patrol and fire suppression was one and two in various forms and so this did not surprise us. Fire prevention services, code enforcement, was number three. Community education was number four. And, then, kind of distant fourth and fifth -- or fifth and sixth I guess would be hazardous materials, response, and technical rescue response. Quite honestly, those are low-frequency, high-risk type calls that just doesn't get the public eye quite a bit. So, it wasn't surprising to us to see how the citizens ranked the services they wanted. The citizens were also asked what should be the planning priorities of the fire department moving forward. The first two did not surprise us at all. Insure technical competence of the responders. They want to make sure and know that when the responders come out they are trained well and they are going to do a good job. So, that did not surprise us. And, then, second was improve the outcomes of the emergencies we respond to. Don't let my house burn completely down. Make sure you get to us quickly and improve the outcome of my father , wife, husband that is having a heart attack, et cetera. And so those two did not surprise us. The third was really a planning function to make sure that our capital improvement plans and the way we maintain what we have is maintained and so completely agree with that. Again, didn't really surprise us a whole lot to say we want to make sure we ensure our facilities and equipment are reliable and functional. We don't want you showing up and having things not work. Kind of the fourth and fifth were a little bit surprising. The fourth was partner with Allied Emergency Services agency to improve services and increase efficiencies and, then, the fifth was established performance standards that match community expectations. I will talk a little bit about that when we get to the response time discussion. It was an interesting dialogue. Then you can see the last two. Utilize technology data and analysis for sound decisions. For me this was a little Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 30 of 72 tough, because I believe that we should be using data and analysis to make good informed decisions moving forward. But from a citizen standpoint it was lower on their priority list as far as planning. And, then, last was partner with community to manage costs. That one was also very interesting for me to see. I was expecting that to be a lot higher. Last thing with the citizen survey they were asked about staffing, response and cost. Obviously, we had to give a little bit of background information to them on the cost that it takes to run a fire department and so when it came to staffing they were asked do you feel the fire department is understaffed, overstaffed or appropriate. The vast majority were in that appropriate. Obviously, there is a big chunk there in understaffed as we talk about how many resources it takes to get to the scene. But I believe that we are doing a good job collectively when we respond with mutual aid to meet the staffing needs as far as some of our emergencies go. On the response side, nobody thought we were too heavy. Seventy-five percent -- overwhelming majority said we feel that the response that you send out is appropriate . And, then, 25 percent felt that it was a little bit too slow or too light. And, then, on cost we did have 6.2 percent say we are too expensive and we had 37 percent say we were appropriate. Forty-three percent said continue to explore and find new fiscal tools to meet the demand of the service. So, as far as the projections go, the ESCI presented in their plan. I know you have seen this before -- or a version thereof -- have been here in front of other master plans or other planning that has been done by other departments. You have seen this graphic in the COMPASS 2040 projections. It is very similar. ESCI took a look at it two different ways. One is a forecast total and one is a growth rate total. I believe the forecast total more accurately resembles the COMPASS 2040 projections. The growth rate tool is simply looking at historical growth in the past and, then, using a formula to -- to project that out. You'll see some discrepancy there, but either way what you're looking at is a steady increase through 2040. We've seen that in many presentations that -- that have been before you in the past. Likewise they project out what our call volume is going to be and so just as population is going to increase, we know population drives calls for service and so we anticipate that as population increases, so, too, will the call volume. As far as the break out there goes -- and Councilman Bird and I have had several discussions about that other category. I know he really, really likes that. The NFIRS is the National Fire Incident Reporting System that we are required to report to the federal government on a monthly basis. They have this other category that we are required to report. It contains about 30 different call types within that other category. I don't personally agree with all the categories bein g put into an other category, but they are nonetheless. So, you can see the break out that ESCI projects as far as the fire response calls, the medical calls, and the other category. And we will get into all the details of all those call types, but it ranges everything from a false alarm, a commercial fire alarm, a residential fire alarm, a good service call, somebody has a smoke detector chirping, they need us to come out and take a look at it. But it also can get in some call types that, quite honestly, I believe lie within the Fire EMS category. I don't have control over how we report that, that's a federal requirement, so I will leave it at that. Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 31 of 72 You know my opinion on -- on the reporting side. And, then, ESCI also does a projection of budget. Obviously, this is a projection as we know, annual to annual budget cycle can change, the budget impact can change, so this is just what they project based on historical budget analysis prior to 2016 . I can tell you that there is a typo there. This is not 20116 year, its 2016. I couldn't change that in the graphics, so that was a typo on their part. So, getting in the responses and the piece within the master plan that discusses responses -- and I will come back to this picture a little bit later. This was taken, as you can see, July 8th of this year. Typically you think of our truck company going out on structure fires and on fires that we need the truck to participate in. This was a pretty unique situation as a gentleman that was on a -- on a residential roof and he had fallen from one peak down to the lower level of the roof . Was hurt pretty bad. The only way we could get him down was actually bring our ladder truck out and you can see him up on the Stokes basket . That was the only way possible to get him down. We looked at doing ground ladders and it was not safe to do so. Our truck does have a variety of uses, other than just the structure fires they respond on. So, this is an overview of the emergency by agency. You can see us in the second column there. ESCI when they did their analysis go and looking at year end, we actually do a calendar year. So, we do January 1 through December 31st. That ties in with some of the CAD systems and some of the data that we can retrieve. When ESCI came in we had not yet completed 2015. That's why they looked at 2013 and '14. We had two years worth of full data. So, you can see the climb there between the two years. I can tell you in 2015 our total call volume was 6,300 calls. So, you can see where that would have moved the line is about a 17 percent increase in call volume. This year we are tracking to meet about the same as we have for 2015. You would think -- we have grown a little bit, you would think the call volume would be more. Part of that -- that maintenance is we are not going on some of the medical calls that we were going on in the past three years. As we transitioned into a new CAD system we identified some call types that did not need to send multiple units and multiple resources to the calls, so that's why we are kind of maintaining -- even though overall our calls for service are probably going to be going up. So, in our responses -- again, one of the great findings of the trip that we went on in Washington was to see how departments are using outcomes to talk about the services they provide and looking at their programs that they have and what are those outcomes that makes -- make sense, that you can track events and you can report on. So, while these are not adopted, these are suggestions that we have within the department as we went through and looked at the master plan and in response to it and these are very common key indicators or -- or performance measures if you will or outcomes of two different types of responses. From the fire responses -- one of the goals of the fire department is to keep a fire contained to the room or area of origin. We are going to see a video and I'm going to ask for your considerations. It's about five minutes. But we talk about why that is very important to us. Now, we talk about either room of origin in a residential fire or we talk about area of origin. You're going to see a picture of a fully involved trailer fire , where we want to keep that fire contained to Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 32 of 72 that single unit and not let it spread to the units next to it and that will become important as we continue the discussion. We do want to have zero fire-related deaths, both civilian and firefighters. We know that's not completely within our control. We had a death last year that she succumbed to smoke inhalation. But the goal of our organization of any fire department is that we have zero civilian or firefighter related deaths. Also to maintain a one hundred percent civilian rescue rate, meaning we still have time to get in the structure, find somebody that is down inside the structure and get them out, and the fire hasn't progressed enough that we simply cannot go inside and the other one is an economic im pact outcome and that is that we maintain a higher rate of dollars saved and dollars lost. As you can imagine when somebody has a house fire and they are completely burned out of their home, it displaces the entire family. As a result of that sometimes those folks need to take time off from work just to deal with the aftermath of that. That's a loss to the employer, it's a loss potentially to the person who lost the home. On the commercial side, if we can save a structure and get them back in business sooner, we know the economic impact that that causes. I can tell you in Meridian we have had commercial structure fires in which we stopped the fire and we were able to get them back in business fairly quickly. There was a business in town here -- and I won't say who it was, but it was six years ago, that the fire had spread enough that they were out of business for about five to six months. That had a very significant impact on them, it had a very significant impact on their employees as well who were out of work for six months. So, we know that if we can get there quicker and change that discourse of dollars saved and dollars lost, we can have an economic impact on the community in a positive way. On the EMS and rescue response side as far as outcomes, we want to maintain a 75 percent cardiac arrest save rate. You may ask why not a hundred. The reality is as a paramedic for 24 years not all cardiac arrests are savable. That is the reality. Sometimes the heart just simply doesn't have enough activity that we can do anything with. However, we do want to maintain a 75 percent cardiac arrest save rate. What that means is they walk out of the hospital and they go on to have a productive life. There is a lot there and not just on the response side, but on the prevention side. So, there is two pieces to that puzzle in having good prevention, good messaging, early 911 notification and, then, we have the tools and resources to get there quickly and turn that around. Extrication is another benchmark for us. We know when somebody is trapped in a vehicle we need to get them out. Oftentimes when somebody sustains that kind of damage in a vehicle time becomes of the essence. They are injured to the point we need to cut that car open and get them ou t. Our goal is to have that done within 15 minutes of the scene arrival . That may sound like a long time, but if you consider it takes about two to three minutes to get all the equipment out, the generators going, the tools going, that leaves us about 12 minutes to finish that cut. As you can imagine, you have seen some of the pictures of those extrication of those cars. That's a pretty quick -- pretty quick out. STEMI EKG, we have heard a lot from the American Heart Association about heart attacks and the importance of early notification. One of the things on the EMS side that we do that speeds up the recovery and the treatment of those Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 33 of 72 folks is we have EKG capabilities. The new STEMI protocol. STEMI stand for ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction, if you all want to know what the acronym was. The quicker we can get an EKG sent to the cardiologist at the cath lab in the hospital the quicker we get that patient directly into the cath lab. It used to be that we would take heart attack patients, we would take them to the ER, they do a bunch of research and studies and give a bunch of medications -- it was about another 45 minutes before they got to a cath lab. The cath lab is the end benefit. You go in, you open up the arteries, you get blood flowing again. We have now got a process by which we bypassed the ER when we can confirm an MI like this, bypass the ER, they go right into the cath lab. That's a benefit to the community. And, then, lastly, critical trauma patients, we want to get them off the scene within 15 minutes. This is considered a golden hour when it comes to critical trauma. We are not the end-all prevent -- we are not the end. The treatment is in the OR for these folks and so the quicker we can get them to the OR, much like we just talked about the cath lab, quicker we can get them into the OR the more chance they have for survivability. So, getting these folks off the scene within 15 minutes, I can tell you that's a short time frame. A lot needs to be done when you have a critical trauma patient. There is IVs, there is fluids, there is medications, there is airways -- that's a lot of work in a short amount of time, but that is the goal. So, talked about a video and it's about five minutes and what I want to talk about just a little bit is on the response time -- there is a lot of questions that have been asked what does it matter? What does it matter if we get there quickly? And I think this video does a really good job explaining why it does matter. This was done by the NIST -- which is National Institute -- I'm going to start this while I talk. The National Institute of Standards and Technology. This is not a fire department supported organization. They are an independent organization and they did this in conjunction with Underwriters Laboratory. If you're familiar with safety science, you will see a lot of UL stickers on a lot of the things we buy. UL is Underwriters Laboratories. So, what they wanted to do is compare what's called Legacy room contents and construction and there is no other way I can put it, other than to say this is the stuff that was in my grandmother's house. We are talking about wood furniture that was wood, it was thick, it was heavy it's kind of like the old '66 Chevelle, it was big and heavy and lasted. So, they took those -- those Legacy room contents and, then, looked at Legacy Construction. Construction back 30 years ago was bigger beam stuff. It was big wood. Today in our modern furnishing what you're going to see is what you will find in your home today, the type of furniture you have, the draperies you have and, then, with our construction, if you look around as buildings are being constructed here in Meridian you see a lot of two by four and two by six construction. We know that burns faster than thicker wood. So, what they did is started a fire in both of these. I can tell you the environment here is exactly the same. The temperature is the same. The air flow is the same. And so they started these two fires what you're going to see progress is on the left-hand side, again, they were started at the same time. On the right- hand side you're starting to see that fire burn and you're starting to see that black smoke. If you compare that to what's on the left you do not see that black smoke. What's on the right is Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 34 of 72 a lot of plastics and so we are seeing that burning and what that's doing is causing a whole lot of toxic smoke. As this fire progresses you're going to see from the top black smoke start to work its way down . Obviously, on the left you see that fire still burning. It's barely a fire. So, as that -- as that black smoke comes down -- and keep in mind the front of these two buildings for this scientific demonstration, those are very open, so you're seeing that smoke escape because of the way they set this up. Imagine that that's a doorway and it's keeping that smoke contained within that room -- granted it is a small room, but it is a pretty good example of what occurs. As that black smoke starts to fall -- and we are going to see it here in a little bit where it's going to get real thick. At that point the temperature of that smoke is a thousand degrees or greater. You can see on the left-hand side that room is still very livable. In fact, it's probably livable enough that somebody could grab their water hose and put it out. The picture on the right we are past the point that a homeowner can put this out themselves. The hope is we have got an early notification through smoke detectors and by this time the fire department has been notified. We are two minutes and 45 seconds into this. What you're going to see next as this progresses is that black smoke is going to get thicker and it's going to come down even more. You probably heard me talk in the past or if you have gone through fire ops 101 you have heard them talk about flash over and what flash over is -- you're going to see it and it's going to be very graphic. It is the point at which all that gas up at the top of that room gets super heated enough that it ignites. It creates its own ignition mechanism. At that point of flash over that room is not livable. In fact, in this current situation right here, if we are not out by now, we are very hot and it's probably not survivable . But you will see there is the flash over. So, the black smoke, that gas that was up in the ceiling, got hot enough it ignited on its own and, then, it creates this massive fire. So, when we talk about response and why is it important that we get there quickly, this is one of the examples. Now, there is a second piece to this that is the prevention that we can do and the public outreach that we can do. So, I'm providing a little bit of education here. If this were to occur in your home in a room , what we would hope that you would do is exit quickly, but close the door behind you. The reason that this fire is burning so fast and so quickly is it has oxygen. It has a place to grab more fuel. By closing the door you're going to keep that fire contained hopefully within that room to where we can get there, open the door, and extinguish it. We do know that every room has sheetrock. There is a fire rating on sheetrock. But when a fire is burning this hot the sheetrock doesn't last very long. So, we get through the sheetrock. Our biggest concern with a fire like this is it's going to get through the ceiling -- the sheetrock in the ceiling and get up into the attic space. Once it gets in the attic space imagine your trusses in your house, two by fours all throughout it, that wood is going to burn quickly. So, oftentimes when we get there you will see us poking holes in the ceiling of those rooms that have burned to make sure that fire has not extended up into the attic space. So, there you can see that this goes on a little bit. We were at flash over at three minutes and 40 seconds in this room. It usually takes, in the best circumstances, about two minutes for a homeowner to recognize they have a fire Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 35 of 72 and, then, notify us and get out. So, now we are already two minutes behind the eight-ball. So, you can see how quickly this fire can spread without an early notification or early response. In my grandmother's home in her room you can see we are now at 28 minutes and we still haven't achieved flash over in that Legacy furniture. So, the message here is building construction has changed and the contents within our homes has changed significantly over the last 30 years and that does affect how quickly we need to get there . So, this was from the master plan. The video wasn't, obviously. You don't have a video within your master plan there. But when we talk about those fires, what does it take -- how many people does it take to effectively mitigate a problem and so this is what's known as effective response force in the fire service world. How many folks does it take for each call type that you go on? The graphic -- and I'll start on the right. Low risk call types. We are talking about a very simple EMS call. We are talking about an isolated dumpster fire. We are talking about an isolated car fire in which we may need to have one or two units there to mitigate the problem . That's a pretty low risk and we can manage that with fewer resources, obviously. The moderate risk is what your typical structure fire is today, given no extreme situations as far as weather goes. So, if it's not 105 degrees out or it's not 20 degrees out, we can mitigate that with this amount of personnel. They are all assigned a task, whether it's suppression, whether it's rescue, whether it's ventilation, cutting off electricity and the power to the home, so we don't get shocked, whatever those things are, they need to be done to moderate the risk or to minimize the risk. That would be an at risk category. This is standard that we do today throughout the valley. A typical structure fire response on the initial alarm is three engines, a truck, and a battalion chief. That's consistent with every department in the valley today. Now, you had extreme weather to that, one way or the other you add wind. I noticed it was windy this evening when we came in. You add wind to that or you add multiple exposures next to the structure on fire, we are going to bump that up and have more resources on scene . It just takes more people to pull hose lines, protect the structures, et cetera. The maximum risk is one that quite honestly hope we never see , but we know it happens. Maximum risk here. The last one I can find in Meridian -- we did have the Washington Street apartment fire that did take a lot of resources to put out , but that was still not even a maximum risk. Last one we had here was the Meridian High School fire and many of you were here and remember that very well. But we see more recent examples of that throughout the valley. We had the Middleton High School fire that took half the high school out. We had the Oregon Trail fire in Boise in which you had 37 of 39 resources there and most recently in Nampa we had the old Mercy Hospital fire . That was a big maximum risk because of the number of people it takes to put those fires out. So, with that we take a look -- and the ESCI does this, they compare firefighters per thousand, that's a benchmark they use to meet those effective response forces and the folks it takes do that job. When they look at this they look at it within a population band. So, our population band that they compared us against, you can see there at the bottom with 50,000 to 99,000 -- 99,999 -- a tongue twister for me. And so they compare how do you -- how do you look regionally. Region means the Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 36 of 72 west. The 12 western states. Obviously, national is just an entire look nationally. So, we are at about .67 firefighters per thousand. I know it's hard to compare us against any department in the west, because we start talking about where we live and value and all that. A comparison locally. Caldwell is at .69. Nampa is a .72. And Idaho Falls is at a 1.9, to give you an idea of where we are. Where this matters most to me is do we have enough folks on duty to do the job . I don't know about comparing ourselves to others, that -- I look at what we do and do we have enough folks to do the job. So, I think that -- you need to take this with a grain of salt. I know I do. So, then, looking at our incidences historically. Again it took that 2013 to 2014 data -- two years worth of data and said where are your incidences happening today. It was a look at current evaluations. As you can see right there in the middle Cherry Lane and Meridian is where our biggest concentration of calls are. Ironically, that is the hardest place, believe it or not, for us to get to in five minutes, even from the four stations that surround it, because of road speeds and traffic that one is difficult for us. As you can see we have some other hot spots over around St. Luke's. We have quite a few calls that occur in that St. Luke's area and, then, also at Eagle and Fairview and we are seeing those calls on the rise. I know law enforcement is seeing the same thing. Seeing a lot of increased activity in call volume in 2015 at that Eagle and Fairview area. So, we know where our hot spots are. The rest of it as far as the yellow, that 31 to 300 incidents within the two-year study period is just a reflection of more residential. You can see where our heaviest call volumes are where you might have more commercial activity. So, response time recommendation. One of the things that we talked about early on when we got the approval to move forward with this master plan was to look at adopting and developing a response time standard. This is something that's been discussed I know by my predecessor and, then, by me over the last seven years is trying to come up with some recommendation that we could compare our data to and have an expectation so the community knows what to expect. This picture I want to bring you back to, it -- when we talked about how many folks it takes to do the job. I was actually on his fire. If you don't recognize it, this is the trailer park right directly behind Idaho Pizza. I believe it was 3rd. I would have to look at that again. So, a fully involved trailer. These burn quickly. The problem with trailers like this is that they have a lot of windows, they are very compact spaces, so as soon as those windows break we feed the fire , so they are very difficult to get to and put out and keep that damage minimized. The challenge with this fire -- number one it was 98 degrees out that day. Number two, you can see the exposures both to the left and the right. That's a concern for us. That requires more resources to get on scene and look to mitigate that problem . You can see that the fire has already spread. It's gotten into that pickup truck on the left-hand side. We have the tree on fire on the backside of this structure and, then, we have the two trailers next to it that we are receiving a lot of heat and starting to receive damage. So, this was one of those calls where we requested additional resources to help mitigate those things on the left and right of this -- of this fire. So, we talk about response time and travel time. What makes that up and where are the conflicts and what are the challenges with that. The two things we focus Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 37 of 72 on when we talk about travel time and trying to establish a travel time standard -- one is geography. Are our stations located such that they can achieve whatever travel time we set. We don't drive a hundred miles an hour contrary to popular belief. Law enforcement maybe. We don't. So, we have a speed limit requirement. We have a driving requirement. And so when it comes to geography are we stationed well enough that we can respond to mitigate the issue. I will tell you the NFPA recommendation -- NFPA is the National Fire Protection Agency. They come out with standards in the fire service and recommendations. Their recommendation is four minutes of travel. They do that for two reasons. One is flashover. They are trying to recommend that you get there before flashover occurs. And, then, on the EMS side we know after six minutes of a cardiac arrest with no activity at all, brain death occurs and so that's where the standard came from. That's the history behind the standard. And, then, we talk about reliability. Reliability is is the call volume maintained well enough to allow the unit within that subdistrict -- so, I will take Station One as an example. They have a boundary. Is their call volume maintained well enough that they can actually respond to a call in their district or is the call volume high enough in that district that they are not available to respond to the call that occurs. Typically that requires a little bit of overlap coverage to maintain that. Ideally departments should strive for an 85 percent reliability factor, meaning 85 percent of the time the unit at sub-district is available to handle the call with in that district. Currently right now our Stations Two through Five are running anywhere from 82 to 86 percent. We do have a problem with Station 1. It's at 72 percent. We will talk a little bit about that later. So, then, to cap -- recap total response time. We focused on travel time there in those last two. Focus on total response time. There is three components to a total response time. One is the call processing time. Meaning the time from when the phone rings to the time a button is pushed to notify us. That's currently done through the Ada County Dispatch Center. We don't have a lot of control over how long it takes, other than to continue to meet we have -- and I will tell you Sheriff Bartlett has been very receptive to the conversation. I will give him a lot of credit. He's doing a great job. But we have had call processing times up to three, four, and five minutes before we get notified. It's too long. We will see what that standard should be. Turned out time is from the time the station is alerted and we have a call until the time we roll the wheels out the bay and start heading out to that call. And, then, travel time is simply the time it takes from point A to point B and there is some challenges with that that we have discussed in the past, traffic, weather, et cetera. So, the recommendation within the master plan. This is getting to the heart of the recommendation. There is the call processing time -- and this is the national standards through NFPA 1221 -- should be 60 seconds or less 90 percent of the time. That's moving. But part of the challenge we have right now is the call taker is taking the call, they get the nature of the emergency and the address, but they are still answering a whole lot of questions. We are trying to propose as soon as you get the address and the nature of the call, push the button and let us know and we can start that process to get in route. You can follow up with all your follow-up questions that you need to ask to get us more Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 38 of 72 information. As ESCI looked at that they could not analyze what our current call processing time is from the dispatch center. There wasn't enough data provided from them for ESCI to be able to analyze what that is. That's a challenge and I have talked to Sheriff Bartlett about that. We have done some local analysis. Boise fire has done a lot of analysis on this. We do know that they are over. We have indications there has been three, four and five minute call processing times. The one thing I will just mention here -- and it's worth mentioning -- is that throughout the valley we are actually looking at a process that's called station alerting. Station alerting is a system that's tied to the dispatch center. As soon as -- much like I alluded to earlier, as soon as we get the address and the nature of the call, it will send out a signal to the station, it will notify the station, even though the call taker is still getting the information , you actually get an automated voice -- it's a real human voice recorded -- and it will say engine 31, car fire, Meridian City Hall and at that time the call taker is still taking additional information, but that gets us started. Spokane Fire Department has been using this for about five years. They have shaved about 90 seconds off their call processing time by implementing this solution. We feel it's a very viable solution. I believe the dispatch center is open to the conversation about that and so we will certainly keep you updated as we move forward in looking into that . The turnout time, the standard is what we want to abide by. Sixty seconds or less for EMS calls, 90 seconds or less for fire-related calls. Both of those are done 90 percent of the time. As ESCI analyzed our data, we are at 99 seconds. That's a 90th percentile. Meaning 90 percent of time we doing this in 99 seconds or less. So, by far of the four agencies that participated in this, we were well above everybody else. So, our guys do a good job once they get notified of getting moving. The challenge I will make to you -- and this will be an honest engine moment, if -- you can try this if you like, I don't say you have to, but try it if you like. Set your alarm clock for 3:00 o'clock in the morning, have it go off, get dressed, get your boots on and get out in your car and back it out of the garage and see if you can do it in 60 seconds. If you do it I will buy you lunch. It is challenging and I will trust you if you do it. The recommended travel time that's built within the plan itself -- I go back to the NFPA standard or -- or recommendation of four minutes. The challenge with that four minute standard is I have not found a fire department anywhere in the US , including the chief of the department that was the chairman of NFPA 1710 that established that four minutes, it is costly to do and it takes a ton of resources to do and so the departments that I have talked to around the country, nobody is doing a four minute standard because it's simply not achievable. So, as we look we said, well, what does make sense? What is affordable? What still gets us there in a quick time frame. So, we started discussing the idea of looking at travel time objectives based on population density. The population density as you see here, urban and metro densities are greater than 2001 people per square mile. Suburban densities are anywhere from 1001 to 2000 people per square mile . Rural densities are 51 people to a thousand people per square mile and our frontier densities are 0 to 50 people per square mile . It's not livestock. That's people per square mile. This -- this graphic in this population density concept Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 39 of 72 follows the fire service accreditation model as well as far as densities go and how you respond to those. I did have the opportunity to sit down with Bruce Chatterton and have him review what we were proposing as far as the travel time based on population density and I can tell you Bruce said there is a lot of merit in what we are looking at. What it allows you to do -- and it just -- by its very nature you can see where this is going. The more densely populated an area, the quicker the response time expectation is. I think that's the standard community expectation. From a planning perspective it helps us to understand as we grow when do those response time expectations change. It becomes far less subjective and actually puts some objectivity to it and so the recommendation is for our urban metro densities it's a five minute travel time 90 percent of the time. In our suburban densities it's a seven minute travel time 90 percent of the time. In our rural densities nine minutes 90 percent of the time. And in the frontier densities, which we don't have any of, is 15 minutes 90 percent of the time. I can tell you this is a travel time objective . The other three agencies involved in this have adopted, as well as Nampa is looking at this as well as an adoption possibility for their -- for their service. So, how does that look? This look right here represents that four minute travel time. You can see where we cannot get -- if we were to adopt a four minute travel time. ISRB, if you see in the upper left- hand corner, ISRB is the Idaho Survey and Rating Bureau. It's Idaho's version of ISO. The insurance companies use that as they -- they look at homeowners insurance and commercial insurance. That is their recommendation. That's where they give you maximum points in the ISRB. Again, from a financial standpoint, a planning standpoint, it's very difficult to achieve if you ever want to do this model. So, looking at the model we are proposing, this would be the urban and metro. I think if you attended the presentation by SCI during the discussion you saw the maps up on the wall, I certainly have those still and be more than happy to sit down with you and go over those. This is what can be achieved -- rating is over in the right-hand corner -- within a five minute travel. This does assume that every unit is in their quarters when the -- when the call comes out. We talked about reliability a little bit. This graphic done through a GIS system assumed that we are all in quarters and all available to respond. That's the coverage that you would get in a five minute travel time. Seven minute travel time you can see that expands out a little bit to cover more of o ur -- our southwest region and also the northwest region and, then, a nine minute travel time covers pretty much our entire response area and, obviously, 15 minutes is going to cover it all. There is another visual map just showing the different layers. The five minutes, the seven minutes, the nine minutes and the 15 minutes. So, what can we do today if we adopt these standards? Again, this was a regional look, but it does match what we can do here in Meridian . Under that metro urban classification and the five minute travel, we can do that 85 percent. We can cover 85 percent of what we need to in that five minute travel with those densities. In the suburban we can cover 90 percent of that. So, we would meet that 90 percentile benchmark that we would be shooting for. The rural is a lot more difficult and, again, we don't have a lot of rural. Typically what we see in our rural map -- if we look at a map and put those population densities Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 40 of 72 in, there is a lot of farm ground even within the City of Meridian that simply hasn't developed and so you have nobody living there, because it's still a large chunk of farm ground. That's a lot of our rural. We still have quite a bit of rural in our southwest and a little bit to our northwest as well. The frontier, again, we don't have any, but those departments that do, very difficult to achieve even in 15 minutes, but that would be the goal. So, when we talk about reliability -- and this is a concern to us as we have looked historically at what we are doing and that's call volume in conjunction with the stations that we have and so if you look back in 2013, 81 percent of the time we had just a single call going on in the district -- in the coverage area. That has jumped down to 78.6 percent and you can see where the secondary calls and the third layer calls are increasing. So, that reliability piece as far as a travel time adoption does also take into account how reliable are you to be able to respond in that subdistrict to meet that travel time expectation that is adopted. So, this is something we will keep an eye on as we move forward. Certainly Station Six, when we build that, that's going to help with this reliability, because a large portion of where Station Six is going to go is currently being covered by two engines, either Station One or Station Four. Station Four is the only engine company -- only station we have south of the freeway, so when they go out on a call the entire south Meridian is uncovered. And so Station Six will help that and should change this graphic once that station is put in. This is simply a graphic -- it was within your -- the presentation within the report. This just shows the coverage area that we have with our one truck company. The challenge with the truck company is that they respond throughout the entire coverage area for the district. Anytime there is a structure fire -- we talked about the typical structure fire response three one and one, three engines, one truck, and a battalion chief. That truck is going throughout the entire district, not just within the geographical area that's shown here within the representation. So, moving into the recommendations found within the plan , there was specific Meridian fire management recommendations that the ESCI recommended. The first is provide performance evaluations for all employees . We do that today and so as I met with Don Bivens, who was our liaison to ESCI, this was simply put in as a reminder to continue doing that and it was a reinforcement statement to continue doing performance evaluations. The second was to establish a regular review process for department policies. Like many departments we are good at producing policies. We are not as great at doing an annual review or a regular review of those policies to make sure they still make sense. So, certainly the fire department does not agree with this recommendation. The third is to conduct a critical task analysis for common response times -- response types. You saw this when we did the effective response force analysis in looking at all those different call types and how many folks does it take on scene to mitigate an issue. As an example of that, we have done some of this critical task analysis already. We know on a very standard medical call -- an earache, a belly ache, it takes an engine company and an ambulance and sometimes just an ambulance, sometimes just an engine company. We know on a cardiac arrest where we are rotating crews on CPR every two minutes under the new standard, it takes more resources to do that than what we would have on a -- on a simple medical call. Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 41 of 72 So, we agree with this recommendation in going through all the different call types we have and conducting that critical task analysis, So, it's very transparent how many do we need on these different call types to mitigate the problem. Fourth is to develop and adopt a new strategic plan guide for the workforce. As you know, we did develop a strategic plan in 2011 . We have completed that plan. We are due for a new one, quite honestly, and so in September we are going on a retreat, it's a joint management-labor retreat to talk about for the next 24 months what are those things we want to focus on. We will bring the conversation back to Council to get your input as well. Where do you want to see us focus our efforts so that we do have -- I'm not going to call it a strategic plan -- the city has a strategic plan. What we are going to be developing is a tactical plan for the next 24 months. So, we do agree with that recommendation. Develop a policy of services offered by the department that have since been done and so that was that first two slides that you saw that I shared with you. The next is provide a six minute review, a QA of a featured policy the beginning of every training session. I had asked Lieutenant Overton the company that came in and developed their department policies was Lexipol. Lexipol. The gentleman that owned Lexipol for a long time was Gordon Graham. If you have ever seen Gordon Graham speak, he's a former sheriff or city office -- in California somewhere. Overton: Captain with California Highway Patrol. Niemeyer: Captain. He went on to become an attorney with -- law enforcement attorney and, then, he went and furthered himself and became a risk manager and so this is a big thing that Gordon Graham , if you ever listen to him speak, always says is that at the beginning of every training session take six minutes to review a policy. So, that was put in here as a recommendation. The fire department does agree with that recommendation. The next is enhance the Meridian fire website, adding a description of services provided. Quite honestly, I believe our website is very informative . We have added two components in the last year. One is an Ask The Chief button and I know Casey Emory has been very excited about this. It's a -- it's a button that the folks can push and ask me any question they would like and we are getting on average two or three a week where folks are engaging with us, asking questions. It could be something from a -- I have got a chirping smoke detector, how do I change the battery, to a code question. It ranges all over the place. But we have gotten great feedback and great results from that ask the chief question. We have also added to our website a survey. So, if we go out and -- and serve a member of our community to have access to a survey that they can go in and give us feedback , we have been receiving incredible feedback from that. We also send out surveys for responses. We have -- we send 60 out every month and we have gotten great feedback on that. So, it's a way for us to gauge are we meeting the public's needs. So, with that recommendation we feel the website is pretty robust and we are pretty proud of it and pretty happy with it . We are always looking to add to if we need to. But with that recommendation we are pretty -- pretty happy with Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 42 of 72 where we are at. The next is to examine the cross-staffing workload, response times, and unit reliability at Station One. We did mention that early as we talked about reliability and the ability to meet travel time expectations. That is something that we are aware of and are looking into. So, we do agree with that recommendation. Adopt response time performance objectives. I agree with that one, because it's been one of the things I was hoping to get out of this master plan is to set those expectations of the Council and the community. The next one, implement a community risk reduction program. For the last five years we have been heavily engaged with our community on smoke detectors and carbon monoxide detectors and we have been very successful at that. That's an example of community risk. How can we reduce that risk to our community. We also provide a car seat inspection program in which we are trying to get in , help folks install their car seat properly so we are reducing the risk that potentially they could have in a wreck. We know there is more to do. We have elderly fall education that we have always wanted to pursue. We have a lot of elderly folks that fall in their homes simply because their homes are not situated in a way to prevent that. That's an example of community risk. We do agree that we need to further explore ways that we can get out in our community and help reduce that risk. With the staffing recommendations, implement regular labor management meetings to improve two-way communication. Obviously, communication is always difficult in every department. Certainly we -- we have that challenge as well. One of the things that we have been challenged with quite honestly, is when we moved out of the fire station we are closer to our satellite locations, we created some space and some void between us and, nonetheless, we know we need to improve that. So, three months ago we started meeting monthly with the union leadership to talk about the issues that are facing them . That's been very productive. We have a retreat coming in September, a joint labor management retreat where we are going to talk about strategic initiatives and that -- and that workflow moving for the next 24 months. So, we are working to improve that communication. Communication is always a challenge. As I get older I am less reliant on technology. E-mails can only go so far and, as you know, when you -- when you have satellite location you tend to get inundated with e-mails and that's not always the best way to communicate. So, we are also looking at doing quarterly all-hands meetings where folks can come in, we provide a state of the department address and talk about the things that we are doing currently and those are some of the ways. We do agree with this recommendation. Develop and implement a quality assurance program for all EMS responses. With your approval -- and I thank you for your support -- as was presented in the budget this year, we have a shared cost position to the EMS Joint Powers Agreement, which we are sharing in the cost of a -- of an EMS quality assurance individual. That's a state requirement, so we are going to be getting that accomplished through shared resources. So, we thank you for your support. That one has been done. The next is implement a safety committee to review accidents. This is something we don't have today and certainly recognize and agree with the need for it. We have discussed this with our partners. They are in the same boat as well. And so we are hoping to work together to develop a safety committee. Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 43 of 72 When any department does have an accident there is a panel that will review that accident, look at what could have been done to prevent that accident , and provide recommendations for change if we need to . So, we are working on that currently. Consider creating a logistics position. We discussed that at this year's budget. I appreciate the Mayor taking us to task and saying work with your partners, because nobody else has this and everybody needs it. And so how do we work together to get that accomplished. Additional staffing in the training division. At the time that ESCI came in and did that we did not have our budget process going yet. Certainly I want to thank Council for their support and the positions that we are getting in the FY-17 budget if all goes well and goes through to meet that need. Station One is a redundant repeat -- consider staff if that is the case. That is what's needed. And the last one, implement ARV, alternative response vehicles. You had that presentation from me ten, 11, 12 months ago. Do I still believe in the concept of ARVs? Yes. But I know that needs a lot more dialogue, a lot more conversation, a lot more research. So, while we agree with the recommendation to look into it , we are certainly not here saying that is what we have to do. I think it -- it requires some more dialogue. I think there is some benefit to it, but certainly that's something we can have dialogue in the future on. Training recommendations. Develop and adopt comprehensive emergency driving training. It is typically known as EVOC in public safety Emergency Vehicle Operations Course. We have not been doing this. We do the driver training through the city, as far as the ICRMP requirements. We do an engineer development program, which is a 12 week program for up and coming engineers that will be driving our apparatus, but we recognize that we do need to put on a more comprehensive emergency driver's training on an annual basis. Something every department that I have talked to is struggling with, but we do agree with that recommendation. Continue efforts to provide a 14 week recruit academy. That is ongoing. We start recruit academy September 6th with our -- our planning partners, so we are sharing in the cost of that academy. So, we are very excited about that and we will certainly continue that. The burn room on the training grounds at Station One -- when that tower was built it has a very nice burn room in it . The challenge that we didn't know back then is that those tiles go bad quickly and so in order fo r us to continue to burn in there we need to make sure those tiles are replaced on a regular basis. We have since implementing a plan and we actually had a plan two years ago that we have been working on to get those tiles continually replaced so that we can still burn in that burn room in a safe manner. And, then, continue examination of budget efforts for a two-story burn house, confined space prop. This is a very long-term goal. This is part of the build out of the scenario village over at the training center. As that builds out that's something that we are going to look at and potentially propose if it makes sense. So, then, the regional strategies that you will find within the report -- you see the list there. I will tell you the ESCI is very jaded, if I can say that in the right way, on separating out your dispatch center to a specific fire and EMS only dispatch center. I don't know that I agree with that recommendation. I have talked to Sheriff Bartlett about this. I do believe we can improve the dispatch center, but I feel that working with the Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 44 of 72 sheriff is a better route to go than separating out. I know Meridian has some experience on creating its own dispatch center. We don't want to do that. So, I have talked with Sheriff Bartlett quite a bit, as well as Chief Malott has talked to Sheriff Bartlett. In September there is going to a group put together of elected officials, fire chiefs, and the sheriff to talk about the issues that fire is facing. We have some pretty -- pretty glaring examples of significantly delays -- significant delays in getting notified. We requested to Nampa about three weeks ago -- I was talking to Chief Malott in San Antonio. It took 21 minutes to get us notified when they needed help. So, those are things that we know can happen and an occur and the sheriff is aware of those. So, we don't necessarily agree with the fire and EMS specific dispatch center. We agree with working with the sheriff on that. Implement a regional records management system. One of the things that's being pushed in the fire service is how do we share our data and share our information to look at are we seeing trends in fires, are we seeing trends in EMS calls, community risk. I can tell you this one is moving forward. RMS as it's commonly known. Records management system is where we input all our run reports. We have been using Firehouse for years. IT was about ready to throw it out the window. I was throwing it out the window. Regionally we have gone to a product called ESO. So, truly we are going to be under one records management system that will allow that sharing of information and data and collaboration. Implement peak activity units. Again, this is not a recommendation that I feel is appropriate for Meridian. Certainly now. If we get to the point where we are running 15,000 to 20,000 calls a year, that is probably a discussion point. Peak activity units are very common in the private sector. You will see them -- if you go into Oregon you will see the Department of Transportation vehicles parked on the side of the road. That's because their data shows every morning at 7:00 o'clock we have an accident right here. I can tell you we see that a little bit in the valley. In Nampa at Franklin every morning there is typically an accident or a fender bender. We see it at Meridian Road as people are trying to merge. We can track that data. Peak activity units are meant to say put the unit where the call is anticipated to occur. But, again, that's really in a system where you're running 15,000 or more calls and you're trying to add supplemental staff to meet the demand. So, as far as a recommendation goes, they -- they put that in every plan, I can tell you that. I've seen it before. And it's not something I feel is appropriate to look at now. And, then, explore regional cooperation opportunities -- activity and as we mentioned the jointly staffed truck companies is a big thing in the fire service now. As I went back to San Antonio and met with fire chiefs across the country, there is a lot of this occurring, because, quite honestly, truck companies are expensive to staff and buy. And, then, joint purchasing. As far as functional consolidations go, looking at logistics -- we were talking about that already -- apparatus maintenance, mobile repairs, things that we can do together to help contain costs somewhat and just create better effectiveness by working together. The last two are certainly ones of much longer discussion and a lot more research and information needed to even consider the last two. So, that's what regional cooperation looks like. I would add Nampa into this mix. We still have Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 45 of 72 cooperation with agencies outside of these five , but not to the level that we have with these -- with these other four I should say. So, that's what -- that's a map that it looks like when you talk about regional cooperation. So, we do want to give one example of what ESCI wanted to highlight in that example of a regional efficiency and effectiveness. Star Station Two, which is down on Highway 44, that was built by a previous fire chief. It was never staffed. It's a big station and it's -- it's a pretty nice station. But it was never staffed. It sat dormant. It sat empty. So, there was a lot of cost in that for nothing. When the new chief came in -- Chief Greg Timinisky, he looked at that and said what can we do here . I can tell you a little bit of background on our -- our vehicle maintenance and repair. When I first came in we were sending our engines all over the place and , quite honestly, the service we were getting was terrible. I kept asking our providers for reports, even to tell me what our tire depth, things as simple as that, and we couldn't get that out of them. So, we made the decision about a year into my tenure as a fire chief we contracted with Hughes Fire Department. Hughes is who we order our fire engines from. They had a service technician at the time, he is a certified emergency vehicle technician, so he knows how to work on fire apparatus. They are pretty specific. The challenge we had there at the time is that Hughes was mobile. So, it was actually done through a pickup and a trailer, the gentleman, ironically, lives in Meridian. He always has. But he was traveling to Montana, traveling to Idaho Falls, he was traveling all over the place. So, our service was when he was here. With the -- with the vacancy at Star Station Two, between the chief and their commissioners, they said why couldn't we put on a maintenance division and take care of our fleet and take care of those around us to give them better cost and so they did that. They, ironically, hired the guy from Hughes that lives in Meridian and so he is now the mechanic for seven agencies here in the valley down at Star Station Two. We are getting better service, better cost, and so the result has been very positive and ESCI felt that was the highlight of how you can look at things regionally and achieve something good and so it was worth mentioning. Just about ready to lose my voice. Good timing. So, with that, again, this was an information presentation. What I'd like to do is come back to you within 30 days after you have had time to digest it, certainly reach out to me and ask questions and, hopefully, adopt this plan. With the adoption I want to be careful there. What I'm looking for is the adoption to say we want you, chief, to pursue these things, knowing that it still has a fiscal impact that needs to be presented to you. It still needs to be judged based on their recommendation and knowing there is still dialogue that occurs even though you say we adopt the plan, that is your green light to pursue those things. Maybe we find that we don't want to pursue them, maybe we find that we do, but it would, then, hold us accountable to provide you updates on what we are achieving. So, with that I would stand for any questions. I would ask -- thank you for your -- your attention. De Weerd: Thank you, chief. Council, any questions or comments? Bird: Madam Mayor? Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 46 of 72 De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: If you want to -- if you want to be here until about 12:00 o'clock I can start. I -- to be blunt, this reminds me of about a 2000 plan that was brought by North Ada. If you look back and go through the things, I think you will find that there is a reason that the four big players are not involved. Boise, Nampa, Kuna and Eagle. I think you will also look -- if you look through the ones that are involved, with the exception of Meridian, they have had their problems or are having their problems. To me it looks like a way that our citizens get to finance stuff. I do have a bunch here. To -- to be fair to everybody -- and Mark and I have discussed most of this and agree to disagree. I will get this typed out in a -- in a form and get it to you and all the Council people to look it over and stuff. I mean I have got pages of it that -- questions that I had and -- and questions that -- and I will get it to you, Mark. So, I just -- if -- you know, if we are looking -- if we are looking at saving money by buying equipment together and stuff, we can do like the police do. We can have a state bid. We don't have to be a member of a management team. We have mutual aid agreements with everybody and I -- I have always encouraged that while we have had -- while we have been doing most of the aiding, that's great. We have -- and you can't -- you know, when you start comparing us to Nampa and Caldwell with the staff and everything, you got to realize Nampa and Caldwell have had fire departments since the early 1900s and their buildings and stuff are old. Twenty years from now -- you know, we were 9,000 people when we hired our second full -time fireman and he wasn't even a firefighter. It was a chief. So, we don't have and -- and you and I have discussed this more that we don't have the fires that the older -- have, because our buildings are -- you know, most of our commercial are sprinkled, which is a great thing. So, I think the matrix that I sent -- and I've done -- I have had this with the same thing with the police all the years I have been on here. The matrix item is am I satisfying the taxpayers of Meridian, Idaho. I could care less whether New York City or whoever -- whatever, I could care less about them. Are we taking care of our citizens for the dollar they are getting and you know what I think? I think we are. I will get this out to you, Mayor -- to everybody. Because I don't want to stay here. De Weerd: Me either. Any other comments? Chief, I would like to thank you for that -- that summary. I think it was really good and I believe that Councilman Bird did bring something up and -- and it was acknowledged in this report. Meridian does have the fortune of having newer construc tion and much of our community is built to newer fire codes and that's reflected in our numbers. Fires per thousand, we were at 1.9 versus Caldwell of 5.5 or the regional average at 2.4. Our fire loss is impressive and I think that's a testament to our -- our staff and the training and the preparedness that our fire loss per capita is ten dollars versus the regional average of 34 and, you know, compared to Caldwell at 38 or Star at 73, I believe our citizens can take comfort in if they do have a fire hopefully we don't have the scenario on the right , we are more on the left and the incidence per thousand were around 56 and the original average is 83.4 versus Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 47 of 72 Caldwell at 86.8. But at some point we are going to -- as we continue to age our inventory those things are going to start to -- to balance out perhaps and we need to be prepared. I like your summary and I would love to have that summary as part of this document. They did an executive summary and it was -- it was to the whole plan. They do divide it up into different sections that you have brought into PowerPoint, but I do think that you need to look at this as the chief and say what are those things you're agreeing with. If you want this Council to adopt this, I think it's important to -- to say you don't agree with all of it and what you do agree with at least then having the conversations and those kind of things and it might even address what some of Mr. Bird's concerns might be. You might have the same concerns. So, I appreciated the overview. That was very thorough. I found it extremely more important and more helpful than the summary I went to by our consultants. Niemeyer: Agreed. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Mark, I got a couple requests. Could I get your fire department policies? Niemeyer: You can. Bird: A copy of it? And I will get it distributed in my deal. And I have asked for this since 1998 and I never have been able to get it. I would like to know how many calls are responded to from our stations. Because that station alert thing don't work if they are not in the station. Niemeyer: Councilman Bird, I appreciate the question. We have had the conversation -- Bird: And I know -- I know your -- your hands are tied on some of that. Niemeyer: Yeah. The data points to obtain that -- Bird: If you can pull out the magic rabbit and get that, I would appreciate it. Niemeyer: I will do my best. De Weerd: Any other questions or comments at this point? I know that the chief did mention that he would be coming back and I would like to get your feedback on what you have. Borton: Madam Mayor? Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 48 of 72 De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: Briefly. Chief, I -- thank you as well for the summary and for the work on this and the efforts at collaboration. And you have talked about this area that is of particular interest to me is the establishment of some objective measures for those response times. Niemeyer: Yes. Borton: And I would be interested at perhaps the next Council meeting to hear the Council's respective ideas on that, with the proposal and the tiered concept for response times. That's really helpful I think for this long-term planning as to station locations, how and if an ARV concept could ever be rolled out. We need to have some ability to consistently measure and plan for those and I think a response time matrix like that allows us to do it. Whether at those numbers or not, I would love to hear that discussion. Niemeyer: And, Councilman Borton, thank you for your comments. To your point, establishing response time standards is a local jurisdiction issue. Bird: That's right. Niemeyer: It really is. And so what was presented to you, if you have other ideas or thoughts or what you would like to see, certainly I hope you will reach out to me, we can have those conversations and, then, bring that back to another conversation at Council. Bird: Okay. De Weerd: I do know that our police department had a number of comments and, Lieutenant Overton, I guess I would ask you for what those were. Overton: Madam Mayor, Council Members, I'm not aware of comments that they have had to this plan, but I do want to thank the fire chief for talking so nicely about our assistance to the fire department as we try to make their situation safe upon their arrival and we would like to keep the guns and you keep the houses . Niemeyer: Thank you. De Weerd: Apparently Lieutenant Overton didn't want to do it on the record, but perhaps you can have a side conversation . I do know this might be one of the few last remaining City Council meetings that you attend and definitely wanted you to have an opportunity for a last word. Niemeyer: Madam Mayor, if I might, you opened the door. I will tell you I did have Lieutenant Overton prior to Council starting look at me and say I have Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 49 of 72 always wanted to be a firefighter. The comment was made. Jaycee Holman was a witness, so -- just saying. De Weerd: Oh, God. Okay. Anything further from Council? Bird: No. Niemeyer: Thank you. Bird: Thanks, Mark. B. Legal Department Report: Alcohol Beverage Catering Permit Ordinance De Weerd: Thank you. I need to find my agenda. Sorry. I wil l turn this over to Mr. Nary for his legal report. Department Report. Nary: Thank you, Madam Mayor. That's a fairly tough act to follow. I will try to keep it to less than an hour from the chief's presentation. There as a law change in July. The state legislature changed the liquor catering permit law. We have previously followed the state law, which, basically, sets a limit on the amount and basically requires that it be processed through the licensing agent and that it be approved by the police. And these are for everything from weddings that are serving liquor with a licensed liquor distributor or as well as special events like Rock The Village and other types of activities like that or events in the park. So, they all have to have liquor catering permits. So, the change was three fold. First, they allow it now. It used to be a three day limit. Boise proposed a five day limit, because they have extended concerts or extended events that go beyond three days and the problem had been that they usually have to have two different vendors, who had two different methods of operation and sometimes they could be problematic. So, they now allow up to five days. We don't have any events like that at the present, but that may happen in the future. Second, they require now that we put -- every liquor catering permit that we approve has to be uploaded to the Idaho State Police website , so that the Idaho State Police is aware, since they are the main control and enforcement of the Idaho liquor laws, that they are aware of where these activities are occurring. Third, they added the fire marshal into the process, so that the fire marshal has to approve the location and the layout and how it's going to be done. So, what we are proposing is that we created an ordinance so the people understand there is -- there is an actual process they need to follow, so that we have -- we can make sure it gets properly filed with the state police, it's properly reviewed by fire and police before it's issued and the only real change that we are proposing, besides just having an ordinance in place, which we don't currently, is that we have a deadline for submission and in discussing it internally, we came up with three days as three days -- three business days prior to the event, so we have enough time to process, make sure we get the appropriate approvals. We looked at other cities Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 50 of 72 in the area. City of Boise. Some have no -- no regulations at all. City of Boise has a five day requirement. City of Blackfoot, Coeur d'Alene, and McCall have a three day requirement, city of Star has a ten day requirement and the cities of Emmett, Hailey and Horseshoe Bend have a 14 day requirement. Again, as we discussed it, three days -- three business days prior to the event gives us at least a little bit of time to do that, because we have had people literally coming at 3:00 o'clock on a Friday afternoon to get a liquor catering permit and we are running around trying to get someone to sign off on it. It's -- it was more potential for error when that happened and so that's why we are suggesting a three day limit and, again, the process is all -- the rest of what the state statute requires, so that Chief Palmer can review it for the fire marshal side , Lieutenant Colaianni reviews these for the police and that, basically, the clerk is the funnel point for all of that and, then, issues the actual permit to the -- to the event. Do you have any questions about that or concerns? A time limit issue? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: Real quick. Do you run this -- have you run this past area caterers and restaurants, some of the folks that might be utilizing this? Nary: We haven't. We were introducing it to you first, so had planned on bringing it back whenever you would like and if that's the direction you would like we can take it to people like -- we don't have a lot of event centers. The Village is probably our largest. I don't know -- I will check with Lieutenant Colaianni and the clerk's office if -- if we get much for some of those hotels, then, we can run it by them and see if they have any issues or concerns before we bring it back . Like I said, the three days -- you know, it's one of those things -- if people are really organized three days is more than enough time to get it done, but they are not always really organized and so that's part of the problem . We don't get -- we have seen an uptick in the numbers. In looking through they did 85 of these in 2012, 144 last year, 157 this year so far. And, again, many of them are very simple. They are weddings and things like that, but they have to have liquor and it's not at somebody's house, so they have to have a liquor catering permit, so they can be very simple to do, but, again, if they are not very astute in doing these types of things that's usually where the problem occurs. Cavener: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: Madam Mayor, in a -- in a previous employment capacity I did a significant amount of these throughout the city of Boise and I think the five day was always sometimes a challenge in that you would decide the weekend before you would like to serve alcohol the following weekend and five days was Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 51 of 72 somewhat difficult to swing. To Mr. Nary's point, I think any organization that's organized, a three day notice seems to be sufficient. I think it would meet the needs of organizations that plan these types of events, as well as our regular citizens that want to serve these types of products at their own personal house. I think three days is -- Nary: Okay. De Weerd: Okay. Any other comments? Nary: All right. We will contact some of our venues first and, then, report back with that and an ordnance for you. Thank you. C. Community Development: Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) PY15 Substantial Amendment: Public Service De Weerd: Thank you. Item 9-C is under our CDBG and -- oh, there is Sean. I saw you out in the audience. Kelly: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Hopefully this won't be too long. So, what we are looking at is a substantial amendment to the action plan for this -- this current year and since we have two new Council Members that haven't been through a special amendment process I just kind of wanted to go over what that meant and procedurally what that is and what we are tied to just a little bit before we talk about the actual special amendment. So, a substantial amendment action plan -- again it's procedural side work and our consolidated plan -- our five year consolidated plan and what it dictates is when we change a project so much -- and in this case it's a 25 percent increase or decrease -- in this case it's a decrease and a little bit of an increase to another -- or a complete change in priority, we are forced to do a substantial amendment. It triggers our citizen participation plan from our consolidated plan, which means a 31 day public comment period, so in another 30 days or so I will come back before Council and ask for -- I will recommend something tonight and ask Council to approve that with a public hearing. Another note there, too, we like to think that when we program things into an action plan that there is a pretty good idea that they are going to expend, that project is going to move forward. The reality is -- and we know what the reality that's not always the case. Even with that expectation some projects look very well, very well organized, ready to go forward and something can happen. In this particular case it's kind of unfortunate the small dollar amount, because on a larger project 25 percent wouldn't even trigger, but because we are talking about public service dollars, we have a 15 percent public service dollar cap in any given year and so since this is two public service -- or one public service that's not able to move forward in the way that they wanted to -- it's a smaller dollar amount, but the idea here is to reallocate that to another public service and the same year that public service has already Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 52 of 72 approved, so that we are still meeting that need for -- underneath that 15 percent cap. So, in this case CATCH is Charitable Assistance to The Community's Homeless. We have tried to work with them for the last two years. Speaking with their executive director again this year, because of some things that are -- they are barriers to them being able to carry out their plan, which is rapid rehousing of homelessness or homeless, it's just very difficult for them to execute the way that they do in Nampa and Boise here in Meridian and a lot of that is just because of services, it becomes very easy to validate someone's immediate homelessness when you have a shelter to pull them out of it and so we have tried to lessen some restrictions over the last year. CATCH thought that they could do it again this year and really use those dollars wisely. Case management for these individuals, unfortunately, they are just not able to do that at this time, not in Meridian and I'm willing to take questions on those, too. So, what we do have is Meridian Food Bank is ready and willing to absorb that cost. As of right now this is -- we don't have end of the year numbers yet -- 44,000 individuals have been served by the Meridian Food Bank and our allocation to them right now is about 31,200. So, this would be taking money from CATCH, who knows that this is happening, giving it to Meridian Food Bank, who is ready and willing to spend that -- to spend those funds to continue to serve within that 15 percent. So, staff's recommendation is just what I just described, which is to take those 10,000 dollars within -- within public service funds, move them from CATCH. This would leave CATCH with some funds, because they have actually still been working in Meridian, it's not -- not to the extent that they really hoped that they could in this last year, but that 10,000 dollars -- De Weerd: Sean, excuse me. Do you -- I think Dean gets a lot of feedback from the conversations on the side. If we could limit those. Sorry. Sorry, Sean. Kelly: That's okay, Madam Mayor. Totally fine. That's my recommendation to move the 10,000 dollars from CATCH to the Meridian Food Bank. It's within the 15 percent public service cap. Both organizations are well aware of what would happen if this were the case -- both acknowledge that this is something that they would like to be able to do. What would follow from this -- I would come back to Council on the 27th, we would ask for a public hearing and we -- I would ask Council for that particular -- the reason why this is important to get done before the end of the year, September 30th, other -- other projects that are capital projects or public projects, we can use those monies very easily in every -- in other years. We can do -- use 2013 money in a 2016 project if it's still there. Public service dollars and admin dollars, those get very messy wh en you try to start bleeding the years, so if we can capture it in one year, that's probably -- that's the best. That would be my recommendation. Madam Mayor, I would stand for any questions that Council may have. De Weerd: Thank you, Sean. Any questions from Council? Bird: Madam Mayor? Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 53 of 72 De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Sean, explain to me on the CATCH thing the -- the roadblocks that HUD has put up there. It's -- we don't have a homeless shelter to pick out of, is that what I understand or -- what about -- I mean Nampa and Boise has got homeless shelters and I'm sure some of the people are Meridian people. Kelly: Madam Mayor, Councilman Bird, that's absolutely true. It's not that we don't have one. It's the HUD's definition of homelessness for the immediate -- the ability to immediately identify someone as needing rapid rehousing is the absolute most -- most absolute definition of homelessness which you can apply from HUD, which is someone who does not have -- if they are not living in a habitat suitable for human habitation and so anything else , which is not exactly that, they don't meet that definition. Yes, you're absolutely right, we can look at Boise Rescue Mission or some of the other shelters or look at Nampa shelters, but, then, you're also looking for third-party to validate that they came out of Meridian and we started this two years ago with CATCH that was something the city put -- it was a restriction that we put on them internally, self-inflicted if you will, that they would be -- that they would verify that they came out of Meridian in the best way they could, which was very difficult. We tried to loosen that restriction just to say, listen, if we can possibly get that -- that's not a HUD restriction, that was our restriction and we removed that and it's still very difficult for rehouses in Meridian. De Weerd: Thank you. Milam: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Ms. Milam. Milam: Turn my mike on. Okay. I will ask you the question I was trying -- I was asking Luke. Probably better directed towards you. So, you mentioned that there were 44,000 individuals fed from the food bank last year or this year. So, I was thinking, wow, that's almost half of Meridian's population. So, if half of Meridian's population is getting food from the food bank, are they feeding people from other communities? Kelly: Madam Mayor, Council Member Milam, what that is is it's monthly counts tabulated. So, as of July 44,000 people have come through to receive benefit. We are looking at some of the same people of 2,000, 3,000 people that are getting the benefit -- and I apologize if that was confusing, but we tabulate that number, because that's how it's based off of what they are giving out on food and so it would be no different then, 44,000 people getting that particular benefit. So, they do have some revolving members come through. Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 54 of 72 Milam: Thank you. Kelly: No, half of Meridian is not going to the food bank. De Weerd: Appreciate that clarification. Okay. Anything further? Okay. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: Procedurally, if the recommendation is set a hearing on the 27th for the public to comment on this proposed amendment -- is that correct? Kelly: Madam Mayor, Council Member Borton, yes, that's -- the procedure is there. It's in our com plan, so I have already set this up in motion for you. So, I just come here to let you know what that recommendation is and, then, we will hold that public hearing. Borton: Okay. Kelly: So, I don't think there is any additional action for Council tonight. Borton: Okay. Kelly: The decision would come from the recommendation on 27th. Borton: Okay. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Sean. Kelly: Thank you, Madam Mayor. D. Community Development: Transportation Programs and Projects Update - Discuss Ada County Highway District's Draft FY2017-2021 Integrated Five Year Work Plan (IFYWP), the Idaho Transportation Investment Program (ITIP), and COMPASS' Change in Motion Report De Weerd: Okay. Item 9-D. All things transportation. Hood: Well, kind of, sort of. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, a couple of things have come up since we did the all things transportation meeting not too long ago, so I just wanted to get them in front of you. I did prepare a memo to that effect that hopefully you have seen or it's in your packet anyways, dated August 18th. There are really three or four things that I just want to highlight for you. One is an update on ACHD's 2017 to 2021 integrated five year work plan. I Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 55 of 72 just gave to the clerk a spreadsheet that I mentioned in the -- the memo. What that is is a summary, basically, of all the intersections and roadways in the county that are in the hopper, if you will, for potential widening improvement in Ada County. On the left-hand side is the -- the number and I have highlighted the ones that kind of looks grayed out a little bit in yours, but I have highlighted the ones that are in -- that are within Meridian or our area of impact. So, if you will see there are quite a few that are in Meridian. Again, I didn't count them, but probably half, roughly, maybe a little bit less -- 40 percent anyways are in Meridian or are our area of impact. And, again, this is county wide. This is from ACHD. And what this spreadsheet does is it's the way that ACHD begins to look at projects for programming. So, it's not the end-all-be-all. Number one doesn't necessarily mean it's going to be in the integrated five year work plan, but it means on the far right-hand column it scores the best. It has the highest cost- benefit ratio. We have been through this before. I'm not going to go through all the -- the inputs that get to the adjusted cost benefit. You can see them there. But just to show you kind of where some projects that are in Meridian stand, because I'm not planning on going through all of these projects , but I wanted you to have access to it and you can see in the one, two, three, four -- the fifth column is the -- the status, basically, of where it's at. So, that's the construction year. You can see if it's -- if it's got a year, obviously, that's self-explanatory. PD is preliminary development. That means it's just getting ready to go into the program with a year, but it's not quite there yet and, then, UF is even a little bit further out than that, so it would be UF, then, PD and, then, get a year and, then, even further out than that, future FTR. Future. So, again, future is kind of out there somewhere, it's on the radar, but it's not really -- it's probably in the CIP, but it hasn't made its way into this five year programming document. So, I did want to just highlight for you some of the projects -- the major changes is what we typically call this, because, again, I'm not going to run through all of the roadway and bridges and intersections and maintenance projects, but some of the more key projects and what changes have occurred year over -- or at least potential to occur year over. So, this is the draft 2017 to 2021. So, if there is any comments we want to make to ACHD to their commission, we have until September 9th to do so. So, the changes -- the major changes. New projects. Linder Road from Cayuse Creek Drive to Chinden Boulevard. So, this is by the high school, basically, and Paramount north to finish that section off. So, it's improved to that light at Cayuse Creek. This would improve it all the way to Chinden Boulevard to make that -- that stretch complete. The next one -- that one is a new project with a 2021 construction year. Linder Road, Ustick to McMillan, that's entering the program and preliminary development. Lake Hazel and Eagle intersection is entering the program as an unfunded project . Linder Road and the Union Pacific Railroad Crossing is entering the program in 2020 and I will put a pin in that, because I will talk about another project here in just a minute. Black Cat Road and the Union Pacific Railroad Crossing upgrade. This is entering the program in 2018. So, two upgrade railroad crossings, 2018 and 2020, done in conjunction with the state and UP, obviously. And, then, Locust Grove Road, Puffin Street to Overland Road, pedestrian improvement is entering Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 56 of 72 the program in preliminary development. So, there are six new products, if you weren't tracking along. There is six new projects that enter the program this year. There are three projects that are advancing. So, they already were in the program and they are -- they are either getting a year or advancing in the program with the new year. So, Eagle Road, Amity to Victory, is going from preliminary development to 2021. Eagle Road and Amity Road, the dual lane roundabout, so that one is currently a single lane round about. Upgrading that to a dual lane roundabout from preliminary development to 2021 and State Highway 69 or Meridian Road, Lake Hazel Road intersection, advances from unfunded to 2021. And some of these mirror or overlap with what ITD is planning to do. Obviously, there is a joint partnership between the highway district and ITD to do like an intersection improvement and the railroad crossings. So, now some of the bad news. Delayed projects. By the way, there were three advanced projects. The delayed projects. Linder Road, Franklin Road to Pine Avenue. So, this one is being delayed from 20 19 to 2020. So, it slips one year. But if you remember, I mentioned the railroad crossings, that's to coordinate that construction so you don't do the road one year and, then, the railroad crossing the next year and, then, you're in a construction zone for almost two years. Wish it could have been the other way and they could have advanced the railroad to meet up with the roadway project, but they are delaying it because -- De Weerd: Yeah. This project has been delayed over and over and over. Hood: That's right. Madam Mayor, this was actually part of the Pine intersection widening at Linder -- time flies. I don't remember. Three, four years ago when that intersection was reconstructed and they pulled it out, because they couldn't coordinate with UP's contractor to get it done at that time. So, yeah, it has been delayed and rescoped and falls back, so -- the other ones being delayed is the Ten Mile-Amity Road intersection. Some of the notes on why that one is being delayed. Some of the roadway widening to get their needs to occur first. It didn't make sense to blow up the intersection with only a two lane roadway for two miles down to get there. So, doing some of that -- the roadway widening first. And, then, finally Eagle Road adaptive traffic signal improvements is being delayed from 2017 to 2018, largely because of ITD -- I don't remember exactly why ITD was pushing that back, but I did hear that from -- from the state. And, then, there is one removed project and, again, this kind of goes to that Ten Mile corridor. So, Ten Mile, Victory Road to Overland Road, was in the program and they are proposing to remove that at this time. The warrants just aren't there. So, it's still on the spreadsheet to continue to track and see what happens with level of service and crashes and those types of things, but it is coming out of the program for now. So, that is, again, a very quick, down and dirty summary of major projects. You have all of them again here in the spreadsheet. We historically -- you know, again, we sent our priorities to ACHD back in the spring -- in March and so they have done all the updates to the program and spits back out this -- this draft program and my question, I guess, is do we want -- do we have any comments on this. Realizing you haven't read the whole document, Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 57 of 72 it's several hundred pages long, I don't know -- I haven't read it, just to confess, but -- Justin probably hasn't either, but -- De Weerd: I bet he has. Hood: -- realizing you haven't looked at the whole thing, are there any comments just from what I have shared with you or do you want a little more time to think about this, do your own research -- it's available. I have put a link in the memo that I prepared to look at the document . You can look at just roadways, just intersections, the entire document. Bridges. You know, whatever you -- they do a nice job of what kind of segregating it, too. But you can look at the entire document. My opinion, I think we thank ACHD. I don't see anything that looks out of place here in my opinion. It's generally more good news than bad and I really don't see any bad news. You know, Ten Mile corridor is a high priority corridor, but kind of down where they are talking about taking this project out. It's Kuna and really City of Meridian isn't down there and so as far as our constituency and just overall ACHD is looking out for the entire county, not Meridian or Kuna, but, again, just with my City of Meridian employee hat on I don't see that being a big issue at this time. I don't get any phone calls from anyone down there -- Ten Mile between Victory and Overland really complaining about that. Again, most of the traffic is -- De Weerd: Well, you might have that opportunity next week during our town hall in south Meridian when we provide comment on the road improvements and I did come across the -- the document as I was looking up Mr. March over there or whatever calendar month you were, Mr. Borton, but found the North Meridian plan and how we worked with developments that were occurring in that area to progress intersection improvements ahead of the road widening to get traffic moving. ACHD has been diligent at looking at those intersections and seeing how we could move traffic through them , but I do know that that will be a conversation and, hopefully, we have extended an invitation to ACHD to be on hand to hear the -- the comments from the south side residents. So, anyway -- Hood: Madam Mayor, maybe just a little bit on that. So, I have not -- Justin, obviously, is here and we could invite him now. I have been talking with your staff about that town hall and coordinating with them, but I -- I don't know that they have formally been invited or anything like that. We are asking just kind of a sneak peek at that town hall and I actually meet with your chief of staff on Thursday morning I think to discuss this a little bit more -- talk about some of the questions and we are going to be putting some roadways out there and say, hey, where -- where should we ask ACHD to invest some of their money in south Meridian. So, you're right, it is a good opportunity to get some of that feedback at the town hall. De Weerd: And we heard it during the listening tours -- and, Justin, for the record, it is a week from tomorrow on the 31st at Hillsdale Elementary School at Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 58 of 72 -- beginning at 6:30 and it really will focus on developments and some kind of activities are on the south side of 84. Hood: That's one item tonight. So, again, I will propose again a letter -- De Weerd: Hold up for a second. Mr. Palmer. Palmer: Madam Mayor. As the southernmost councilman in Meridian -- De Weerd: Southernmost? You don't have a drawl. Sorry. Palmer: More southern than y'all. I -- to your point that you made at that -- that Ten Mile falling back, it's definitely accurate. I work in Eagle and I take State to Linder to Chinden to Ten Mile and take Ten Mile all the way to Amity, even though I live at Locust Grove and Amity, to avoid Locust Grove and Eagle and all that and I never -- traffic isn't a problem at 5:00 o'clock, 5:15 on Ten Mile, so -- De Weerd: Oh, is that in the morning or in the evening? Palmer: The evening. I took it today. I left the office at 5:07. So, right there during what should be the mess, Ten Mile was really easy. So, I think your -- your points are definitely there and I love seeing Locust Grove so many times on here now. De Weerd: Well, just avoid Ten Mile starting tomorrow through -- through Sunday. It's going to be closed. Just FYI. Milam: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mrs. Milam. Milam: Caleb, is there any way we can get number five moved up? Hood: Madam Mayor -- Milam: The traffic today was -- talking about no traffic -- backed up from Ustick to Pine. Hood: Okay. You guys are touching on two of the other things I was going to make you aware of . One was the Ten Mile closure and the other one is an update on Ustick-Meridian intersection and the Locust Grove to Linder. So, widening of that intersection and, then, the two miles going -- roughly a mile either direction to tie in with the existing intersection. So, tomorrow ACHD on their agenda is set to approve a contract with Knife River to begin that seven million dollar project to include the intersection with work anticipated to start in Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 59 of 72 September. So, that's about as quickly as it's going to go, if not -- you know. Yeah, that's going to -- it's happening. So, I mean I don't want to jinx anything. They need to officially approve the bid from Knife River, but it looks like they are going to -- so, yes, that -- Milam: I thought it was happening, but then it -- Hood: It will come off this list -- until it's constructed it stays on the list. So, once it's constructed and, then, it will be pulled off this list. Again, five is -- is moving forward. Milam: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Hood: And, then, just, again, because it's already been brought up, do some work at the water treatment facility and some manholes in Ten Mile, it's going to be closed for the next couple of days from Pine -- between Pine and Franklin on Ten Mile. And while I'm at it -- kind of going out of order a little bit, Eagle Road also is going to be closed for night work -- not closed. They will at least leave one lane open on Eagle Road between Franklin and Fairview beginning tonight, so don't be on the road -- don't go to work too early -- between 10:00 p.m. and 5:00 a.m. they are going to be adding the additional northbound lane on Eagle Road between Franklin and Fairview. So, construction zone there overnight. I don't know how long that project is expected to last, but -- but it will be a night project. So, that should help anyways with the a.m. and p.m, peak stuff, so -- but got that out of the way. Back to the -- back to the integrated five year work plan. Are there any other questions? Did we want to make any comments to ACHD on the draft? And, again, if you need more time to look at it, there is a link, we can do that. I have reviewed it. I think -- again, I already told you what I think, so -- De Weerd: Thank you. I think you provided a great overview and I think we need to send out a letter to ACHD thanking them for looking seriously at some of these projects and where they can -- adding the new projects, that's usually unheard of and greatly appreciated. Certainly advancing a couple of these are -- are critical, so just state our thanks and our appreciation that they continue to work closely with our staff and certainly the electeds. That is appreciated. Hood: Okay. I will put that letter together. De Weerd: Any other comments from Council? Hood: I will prepare that for your signature. Okay. Thank you. So, just a couple more things then. And I'm on page two now of the memo. It's programming time of year. So, the Idaho Transportation Department's five year plan is also open and available online for review. Not quite as many projects in Meridian on the state facilities, but I listed them there and the one I want to just kind of highlight for everybody is US 20-26, Chinden Boulevard, between Locust Grove and Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 60 of 72 Eagle. I realize that entire corridor is not in Meridian, part of it's in Boise and Eagle, but that is the first step of widening the corridor to Linder and, then, on to State Highway 16 and points beyond. So, that is in there. The reason I bring this up, again, is just the online commenting system for ITD was down. That's unfortunate, because I know we did a big push to get people to comment on that and we are doing it again, but the public comment period is open until August 26th now. It closed on July 30th, but their system was down, so if you commented using their interactive map , they didn't get it. So, they are leaving the public comment period open again. Borton: Until Friday? Hood: The 26th. Yeah. So, again, I have listed in the memo the other projects that are in Meridian. I'm not going to read to you. Hopefully you can see those, but -- De Weerd: If you use social media, if you would encourage Meridian residents to reach out and provide comment. Certainly we -- to avoid if there would be another glitch, so we have Adam Rush, his e-mail address that you can feel more comfortable sending an e-mail rather than going on an online that -- that was kind of a hassle to begin with, so we do have an e-mail address if you would prefer that and -- we do have points that were pulled together from Caleb and Robert, along with the 20-26 work group, so we can get that out to you all. Hood: And, then, again, just -- as this all kind of goes in together and all the transportation agencies tend to do this type of thing the same time of year , so the regional transportation improvement program, which is through COMPASS, but it mirrors the state's program for the projects that are in our area. That public comment period is also open and it's open through September 19th. A couple of projects I want to call out in there is the Five Mile Creek pathway that parks applied for as a TAP grant this last year. It's in the program and preliminary development at 388,000 dollars. There is a match required with that. But a large chunk of that is federal -- so, that Five Mile Creek pathway is taking us up by the wastewater treatment facility and, then, two other things I want to just -- just highlight again and this project shows up in ACHD's integrated five year work plan and the state's ITIP and, then, also in the TIP for the region. But State Highway 69 and Lake Hazel, that's one where I do on a fairly regular basis -- there have been some crashes out there and so it's -- even though it's only half I think of that intersection technically in Meridian, I wanted to bring that to your attention. Also Hubbard, which is again south, but Lake Hazel and Hubbard both are shown in the TIP. And, then, the 20-26, Locust Grove to Eagle. One more thing I just wanted to mention is the Center Cal project. So, they are also going to be adding an additional southbound lane on Eagle Road and that's being pushed back to next year. It was supposed to be done this year and they are pushing it back to fiscal year 2017. So, those are kind of the major changes that are just some products I wanted to highlight for you there. And with that -- Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 61 of 72 De Weerd: Caleb, as you talked about Center Cal, when -- when is the plan for Records? Hood: Madam Mayor, I have not heard an update on that, but I think I know that -- and I think you know as well, that both the plan -- the construction drawings have been reviewed and approved by both the highway district in th e City of Meridian. I think it's just a matter of time and the time being this year -- I mean I just don't know exactly when to give you a date to say this is when they are going to be out there moving dirt, but I've heard this year, so -- De Weerd: Justin, do you know? Thank you for being here. Lucas: Always glad to be here, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. For the record, Justin Lucas representing Ada County Highway District, 3775 Adams Street, Garden City, Idaho. As Caleb said, we have reviewed and approved all those plans. The way I understand the Stars agreement, it did not strictly tie them to an exact time frame on that improvement. So, really it is in the developer's court. ACHD is pursuing a project extending Records north of that section and so we are hoping that we can coordinate those projects very closely and have Records from Wainwright all the way down to Fairview once that project is complete and timeline wise, to my knowledge there is nothing holding them up on the administrative side. This is purely in the -- in the developer's court right now. So, not really an answer, but the best I have tonight. De Weerd: Thank you. Hood: And, Madam Mayor, I just had one other thing just to highlight in the -- in the memo. At the last COMPASS board meeting Charlie Rountree asked me to just bring this information to the Council so you're aware of it. The board just approved the -- what they call a change in motion report, which, basically, is a report card on how they are doing on the elements in the long range transportation. How are we doing as a region meeting these -- there is 37 different target areas and so what I put in your packet are just some snapshots on what the change in motion report is. I just copied and pasted from their website and, then, I looked at it afterwards and if you go to the last page they had some glitches as they were updating that . The -- the numbers that you see on that last sheet are inaccurate and I let Carl Miller know and he's since updated it online, but what you see in the packet is wrong. So, it says zero percent of our population can walk to a grocery store in 15 minutes or less. This is another community in the region. It's not ours. So, some of those things -- yeah. Yeah. So, that's wrong. What you see on the website now is accurate. So, I apologize for that. But, again, just want to make you aware of that and if you want to see the entire document with those performance monitoring for all the communities, again, there is a link in your packet and with that, Madam Mayor, that ends my presentation. Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 62 of 72 De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions for Caleb? I just want to thank you again for your work with ACHD and -- and staying on top of things as usual. So, thank you. E. City Council: Discussion on Performance Auditor Position De Weerd: Okay. Item 9-E is a City Council discussion and I will turn this over to Joe Borton. Borton: Madam Mayor. De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: I will get the -- the conversation started on this. The performance auditor position -- it came up I guess again more recently when we were addressing budget considerations and -- and trying to knock off center what had been discussed for, quite frankly, a year now -- is the idea of an auditor-type position and what those job performance measurement s, job duty specifics would be and trying to craft and create a job description has culminated in what I believe the Mayor circulated to everybody last week, if not the week before, of the most recent draft of what is now entitled what a strategic performance analyst position might be, how -- what functions and essential duties it would perform. It was sent to all of us with an idea that we can provide each other or the Mayor some comments and feedback and one of the areas that had -- and one of the issues that started this whole process was trying to facilitate the Mayor and Council's need to have assistance for those audit-type services -- a fresh perspective on a case-by-case basis, either within a department or within a particular program. At least that's where I understood the -- the position was to have started. What I see before me has evolved somewhat to try and capture some of the other areas that -- that the city is trying to address with kind of a focus on data-driven decision-making and trying to have this position provide some of those benefits to the Council. One of the bullet points on this also makes reference to -- and it's the last one on the draft -- that this position would respond to and coordinate requests for program audits and budget performance, requests made by the Mayor and/or the Council. Part of our discussion and I guess -- I don't know if that's for now -- to provide additional feedback to the Mayor and each other is some -- some comfort -- does that capture with enough specificity the -- the need of the Council to be able to direct this individual to perform those audit-type of services. If you wanted to know in department X about program Y and get some -- some data on how it's performed, on the expenses associated with it, just coming up with a type of an example, this position could be tasked by the Council to do that. At least that was some of the intent that this position all started with in the first place. So, my sense is that the discussion is whether or not any or all of us are comfortable with this description. If so, great. And, if not, let's talk about Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 63 of 72 specific language that might better capture what the original intent of this wa s with regards to those audit-type services. So, that's -- all of that past work -- Councilman Bird kind of led the charge and delegated some to Councilman Cavener and I and we really didn't do -- Bird: You did good. Borton: But this is where we are at. So, this is the latest job description. Speak now and share your thoughts. We want to make sure this -- if this is going to go forward that it's something that we are all supportive of and it captures what we all originally intended. De Weerd: Any discussion? Little Roberts: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mrs. Little Roberts. Little Roberts: I guess coming in with this a little bit late in the game, I'm still not real clear on some things, so -- where it says in multiple places regarding direction by City Council -- and maybe Councilman Borton can answer this better. Does that mean like we make a motion each time we direct -- because I certainly can't see all of us potentially directing this and I'm going to go with position, not person. De Weerd: I believe when Mr. Nary talked about the ability of Council to direct is as a body and not as individuals. So, it would need to be from the direction of City Council as a whole. Little Roberts: Okay. De Weerd: As a majority. Mr. Nary, did I answer that correctly? Nary: That is correct. Little Roberts: Madam Mayor, follow-up? So, Mr. Nary, does that mean it does come each time we -- the Council would potentially direct that person it would have to come in the form of a motion? Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Little Roberts, one of the -- one of the questions that's always been about this position is how would it function on a day-to-day basis. So, the Idaho Code makes it very clear that the personnel responsibilities of the city belong either to the Mayor or city manager if you're a city manager form of government. So, the only way the Council has any authority over directing personnel is if they are appointed, because all of the appointed officials of the city work for the Mayor on a daily Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 64 of 72 basis, but also work for the Council, because your appointment is how they are in -- in their position. What you could do -- and, again, I think some of it is trying to define the specifics, but I mean what -- what you could do is have a work plan that the Council, then, approves on what they are doing or any issues come up on an occasional basis on that, then, they could also come to the Council to say, you know, is this the direction you want us to follow, but the person would still work for the Mayor as well. So, I mean that's why I think the discussion point has been -- is trying to capture the things that Council has thought and felt was a need, as well as other needs of the city, to try to cover a variety of different things. But if that's not what the group wants to do, that's fine, too, but, you're right, part of you -- you have highlighted exactly what the problem that the code has left us with is that it isn't -- it isn't -- the Council isn't meant to manage employees directly. The Council can certainly direct the type of work that the position might do, but they don't day to day operate by signing time cards, doing performance reviews, approving vacations, those kinds of management things, in addition to directing the workload. So, I don't know if that answers your question, but that's why the -- the discussion has been from the legal perspective that it really needs to be an appointee and , then, Council certainly can, then, have a role in what the workload or what the priorities of the workload could be in conjunction with the Mayor, so -- does that help? Little Roberts: Yes. Thank you. Nary: Okay. De Weerd: Any other comments? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: As I understand it, this is a discussion. We can talk ten minutes or two hours. It's not -- we're not adopting, approving a job description, we just wanted to see who is on what page and if there is alternative language or structure or reporting or appointment versus -- if we haven't shared that with each other or with the Mayor, let's keep this ball rolling and share it. Cavener: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: A couple of thoughts. When -- when I review a job posting, the first things that are on the top I view as the most important and when you look at essential duties and responsibilities, again, the ones that are the first are probably the ones that are most important. And so I look at this, what I see first and foremost is a lot of this position built around a strategic plan, which I didn't Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 65 of 72 hear Councilman Borton really touch on in his introductory comments and to me a lot of what is encapsulated into this position that Councilman Borton touched on, to his point you find much later in the -- in the position and so to me what I see is some of the things that we -- Council both past and present have talked about as being an area of importance, have fallen to much lower priority than some of the items related to the strategic plan. I think the strategic plan is important, it has its merits, I question, though, if we are setting a position up for failure if, you know, specifically related to their involvement in the department only relates specifically to the strategic plan. I think we also need to have, quite frankly, a frank discussion about where this position does fall in the org cha rt, specifically related to an appointed position or someone who serves within another department. Personally I think that this position should be independent. I know when we have talked a lot as Council we have seen that there has been some beneficiaries in this position being somewhat independent. As I have talked to other municipalities across the country, one comment that has rang true, which is that if -- if this is truly what you want to look into and want to explore, that position needs to have a certain level of independent action. So, for now I think that will summarize some of my comments, at least related to some concerns about this position as it is specifically created. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: The original intent when we started this a couple three years ago -- De Weerd: Last year. Bird: No. Mr. Rountree -- I think it was for last year's budget, which was in 2015. But anyway -- or 2014. It was -- to me this description -- and pardon my ignorance, because it's been -- I've only -- I have only looked for one job in my life and I didn't even have to have a job description and that was 60 years ago, so I am not familiar with a lot of this stuff. But to me we have got -- we got a strategic overseer of the strategic plan and, then, we have got an auditor. I think we need to decide whether we want this put into one person -- and it definitely should be an appointed person. I am not familiar with the state statute that Bill's talking about, but I will guarantee you I will get familiar with it, because other cities council people have appointed people or -- I don't know how Boise does theirs or Nampa does theirs, but they do. Anyway, I think it's something that we need to -- to really continue to find out -- first, do we want -- do we -- I mean if I look through this it's going to -- somebody's going to be an awful -- awful good employee and be a lot more disciplined than this kid is. I -- I think it's -- and I appreciate the Mayor getting this out for us and everything. But I think we need to decide whether we want one to do the performance management of this strategic plan, which is a major job in itself and, then, an auditor that goes through -- what we had discussed was Gadrey -- isn't that -- McGadrey? Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 66 of 72 De Weerd: McGadrey. Bird: A person like that at the Council level. So, it's something that we -- we need to continue with. Mr. Borton and Mr. Cavener, I appreciate you guys taking the lead on this and, Mayor, this is great. I -- we have got to come up with something and I don't think one person can do all these duties and responsibilities. That's my experience. De Weerd: Well, certainly it started out of HR and Finance in December and, then, our new CFO HR and myself, Robert, and Jaycee sat down with the feedback that we have received collectively and tried to -- to look at -- and focus on performance and developing better tools to look at program efficiencies and effectiveness related not only to the strategic plan, performance of giving tools to Council to give a better indicator on how -- how the investment of not only budget dollars, but also time resources are moving the needle in the direction that the Council and the elected officials who would like to see it and so it was trying to find a balance and a reasonable expectation in job performance and being able to do that. In an early conversation I had was by drilling into what programs are done in each department and having an understanding of where budget dollars and resource and time, talent, are invested, it gives a better overview and it builds a sense of trust to go in to do a more in-depth audit, whether it's -- what is the tipping point in triggering a particular new program to do a cost-benefit analysis versus I'm going in and looking if policies are followed and travel expenses, those kind of things. So, I think relationships are important and this will bring the person at the ground level in working with departments and seeing how they can build better efficiencies and transparency to our citizens and where time and resources are being spent and, in turn, accountability to those programs. So, that -- that is the result. We hear the discussion about this position. I think at some point a decision needs to be made at Council do you want to move forward with this FTE or do you want to -- to move forward without it and anything that would be recommended can go through the budget process in a future budget years if -- if it's determined those needs are a priority and a budget funding priority. So, certainly we can continue these conversations, but at some point I think -- we are just looking for direction. Cavener: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: I'm happy to provide I guess direction from my perspective. I think to Councilman Bird's point, I think we need to move forward with this position . I just don't necessarily think that the job description that has been drafted is reflective of what the position should be. So, that would be my recommendation is that we continue to move forward, but perhaps either work with the Mayor, perhaps the Council President or Councilman Borton and maybe a couple members of -- of Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 67 of 72 city staff to re-examine this job description to maybe work with an outside HR company to come up with a more accurate job description that meets I think the desire of the Council, but I still think that this position is warranted, although some of the essential duties and responsibilities and job summary to me are not reflective of what this Council has previously discussed. Palmer: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Palmer. Palmer: Hey, I'm glad you beat me to the mic on your second comment . I echo what Councilman Cavener has stated, especially with regards to his point about independence. When I was first introduced I guess to the position and as discussions have gone on since, I really like the idea of it being separate from really the rest of staff, even to the point of the office or the cubicle being in either the area where our desks are in the Council area or in a separate building, so that there is no -- that there is less opportunity for buddy-buddy and for potential I guess embarrassment or retaliation for what that position might bring forth to us, because I feel like that's the point is that they need to identify issues, if they are there, and have no fear in bringing them forward, so that we can work on them, rather than being in a position where they are in a position to make favorites or to overlook things, because they are close to those around them. And so a previous iteration of the job description, you know, I liked and, again, I agree with Councilman Cavener, I don't think this is what it is we are looking for. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I think we need to -- I think Councilman Cavener had a good point, I think we need to sit down with yourself and -- a couple of us and HR and work out -- I just think this is an awful busy job description, you know, and, like I said, I'm -- I'm definitely not the person to -- to be -- I know what I envisioned this employee being, but putting it down in a job description -- I'm not the one to probably write it. I can sit and tell you and you write it down and tell me what's legal and what isn't, you know, but I think we need to go forward with it, but I think we need to sit down yourself -- I would recommend Council Borton and Councilman Cavener and Crystal and let's see if we can't work out a description that's satisfactory -- and then -- and, then, if we -- if we don't pick up the -- the management analyst well enough, that's something you can bring back to us for years -- or something that may be you can add to one of your people. I don't know. De Weerd: I think the whole challenge has been trying to get an understanding of what -- what we are trying to address with this position and what -- what existing positions, directors or Finance, is not providing that Council sees a full- time need to fill and I guess that's been the struggle we've had in trying to help Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 68 of 72 this along is we haven't gotten a clear idea of , number one, what -- what do you want this position to do that other positions are not currently doing and is it a full- time position or is it a part-time position. Is -- is this something a consultant could do if you want the independence. I don't see how you can be an employee and have that separation of not being a friend to anyone in the city. I -- it's -- some of the things I hear -- I'm not sure how we can fill the bits and pieces I have heard tonight. So, I would love to sit down and get some maybe sound -- sound bites of particular duties and responsibilities, so that we can see if we can craft something and make sure it's something that would be a position that would be successful, so -- Bird: That would be successful for the citizens of Meridian. De Weerd: For the citizens of Meridian. Bird: Agreed. De Weerd: Okay. Bird: Council, you all agreed? Borton: Yes. Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: A couple thoughts that can be explored going forward, the concept of whether it could be appointed or not I have not heard. I don't know if that's -- what that would entail. Councilman Cavener's idea of perhaps we expend a little bit of resources and have an outside HR consultant assist and facilitate and put some hard deadlines, maybe that's worth exploring as well. Of the discussion those are two things that were of particular valuable to at least move the ball. I -- I have this -- this childhood flashback -- and I'm not that old, but -- but the old thermometers -- and it was odd, but fun when we would break and -- you shake the thermometer and every now and , then, it would break and one of the things you would do on the kitchen counter is you -- Milam: Play with the mercury. Borton: -- mess with the mercury and it would move and I would be kind of p oke around and it would always jump around and I feel like I'm playing with mercury a little bit. It's not as much fun. We kind of know what this description shouldn't be, but we really don't know what it should be. So, we can continue to poke around and maybe we will get there, but if an outside consultant helps, great, let's do it. And to the extent that there is specific language that says this person shall do X, let's say it. E-mail it, handwrite it, do something. Put it down and say it. Otherwise, we are saying, well, we don't want them to do that. All right. Well, Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 69 of 72 what do you want them to do? All right? Let's -- for each other and the Mayor and maybe the HR consultant can help us do it, provide some clarity. You know, the ones -- the one sentence among others that I thought this captured well wa s responding to and coordination of requests for program audits and budget performance by the Mayor and City Council and that started to capture a sentence that addressed the audit concept. But, otherwise, I fear we are going to be playing with Mercury for three more years. So, if we have language of exactly what it should do, let's share it. Milam: Madam Mayor? And, then, a thought. If you can't come to an agreement on what the job description is, instead of playing with mercury for three years, we can put that money into a consulting budget, though as much as I hate wasting money on outside consulting -- and I think it's done way too much -- you know, as long as it's done thoughtfully and kind of use that consulting to maybe figure out - - not to create a plan, but to do the expectations that you're looking for in an employee one at a time -- like this is -- one of the things that we want them to do is this. So, hire somebody to do that and, then, see is that really what we want somebody to do and you may have to put it together the hard way by having somebody go through and do it and, eventually, they come up with that position or it may just be something that you only need a consultant every once in a while to take care of. Little Roberts: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mrs. Little Roberts. Little Roberts: It seems like we went to the time and the trouble with the departments and the city to do the strategic plan and it just seems like if we had somebody that is monitoring and coming alongside with the departments regarding their implementation and process of the strategic plan, that most of those things that we are looking for come under that. That anything regarding efficiencies and things like that should all be -- are all incorporated within the strategic plan to make that and those goals successful. De Weerd: I see we have work to do in trying to -- first I guess we need to understand what the -- the individual thoughts are on -- you know, I guess we were looking at it that the Council wanted greater assurance as how we are spending our money and how that money is being spent is -- is moving the dial and being fiscally responsible to our citizens and following policy and those kind of things and so we looked at it in terms of that performance manager and -- and looking at -- at it in that fashion. So, I guess there is a couple of different ways to -- to look at this and what I think would be helpful for each of you is to maybe write three or four bullet points of what those priority expectations are of what you would like a person to do and that would be a great starting point . Bird: Good idea, Mayor. Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 70 of 72 De Weerd: So -- and, then, we can -- we can huddle with the team that Mr. Bird has assigned and see if we can start at that point. Bird: Thank you. Item 10: Future Meeting Topics De Weerd: Okay. Anything further on this one? If not, anything to consider under Future Meeting Topics? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: May I say one thing? If you guys -- Mark give an awful good presentation, but this is a lasting item for you young taxpayers. Make sure you read this book. If you haven't read it, make sure you go through it and write down notes and stuff. I will get -- I will get my things out to you here this week and I will -- I will be talking, but make sure -- I don't know how many of you have read it, but look it over. It's -- it's a very important item and whichever way your decision goes is -- is a very important decision and you need to be on top of it. De Weerd: And I -- I think it would be helpful, chief, if you can get the PowerPoint to City Council for their information and I know that Councilman Borton mentioned putting an agenda item on for -- not next week, because that's a special meeting, but the first week in September to discuss response time s. I believe you wanted that discussion? Borton: Yeah. Madam Mayor, I think in -- just as part of the master plan discussion and if something were to be adopted, whether it's the plan at its broadest sense or a portion of which, which is a response time calculation, whether that's in two weeks or in a month -- De Weerd: Yeah. I think there is probably a great deal that needs to be done behind that, then, this is another strategic plan topic is -- is levels of service and what those cost. Yeah. So, at least come back the first week to say this is a proposed timeline to have a -- a discussion at the level that I think Council would need to have when you might be able to come back . So, at least report back on that. Does that sound reasonable or do you want even more time to even put that together? Niemeyer: Yeah. Madam Mayor -- De Weerd: Maybe I should ask Lieutenant Overton. Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 71 of 72 Niemeyer: Yeah. He -- he would have some input. I think 30 days to come back and have that discussion -- I would like to allow 30 days. As Councilman Bird alluded to, to read the report, go through the PowerPoint, have some time to ask questions, certainly reach out to us. We can meet at any time. I know I have received one request already from a Councilman. So, I would like that 30 day window to have that discussion and read through the report and then, have a discussion on the agenda for that. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: And, then, the scope, chief, that you're requesting is not a discussion necessarily just on the response time portion -- Niemeyer: Correct. Borton: -- but broader than that. Niemeyer: Correct. Borton: Okay. Item 11: Executive Session per Idaho State Code 74-206 (1)(c): To acquire an interest in real property which is not owned by a public agency; and 74-206A (1)(a) a governing body or its designated representatives may hold an executive session for the specific purpose of: (a) Considering a labor contract offer or to formulate a counteroffer De Weerd: Okay. Very good. I'm sure Mr. Clerk got that all; right? On top of it. Okay. Item 11 is Executive Session. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we go into Executive Session as per Idaho State Code 74 -206(1)(c) and also 74-206(a)(1)(a). Milam: Second. Borton: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to adjourn into Executive Session. Mr. Clerk, will you, please, call roll. Meridian City Council August 23, 2016 Page 72 of 72 Roll Call: Bird, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. EXECUTIVE SESSION: (9:25 p.m. to 11:02 p.m.) Bird: So moved. De Weerd: Wait. Wait. Wait. Wait. Okay. Do I have a motion to come out of Executive Session? Bird: So moved. Cavener: Second. De Weerd: All those in favor say aye. All ayes. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Bird: Move we adjourn. Cavener: Second. De Weerd: All those in favor. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11:02 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) MA OR T Y DE WEERD DATE APPROVED �Q°FtATEDq� G ATTEST: w C. JAY C Lt: , CITY CLERK m jD1AN Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: August 23, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: 5A PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Approve Minutes of August 9, 2016 City Council Meeting MEETING NOTES 9 APPROVED Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: August 23, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: 5B PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Tyler Technologies Tyler Technologies - New World License and Services Agreement for the Not -to -Exceed Amount of $48,580.00 MEETING NOTES Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: August 23, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: H-2016-0057 ITEM TITLE: Centrepoint Amended Development Agreement for Centrepoint (H-2016-0057) with Blue Marlin Investments, LLC. located near the northwest corner of N. Eagle Road and E. Ustick Road, in the SE 1/4 of Section 32, Township 4N, Range 1 E MEETING NOTES 9 APPROIED Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS ADA COUNTY RECORDER Christopher D. Rich 2016-079095 BOISE IDAHO Pgs=10 DAWN TRIVOLIS 08/25/2016 11:45 AM CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO $37.00 SECOND ADDENDUM TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT PARTIES: 1. City of Meridian 2. Blue Marlin Investments, LLC Owner/Developer THIS SECOND ADDENDUM TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT is dated this % day of , 2016, ("SECOND ADDENDUM".), by and between City of Meridian, a municipal corporation of the State of Idaho ("CITY"), whose address is 33 E. Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83642 and Blue Marlin Investments, LLC, an Idaho limited liability company whose address is 1940 Bonito Way, Suite #160, Meridian, Idaho 83642, hereinafter called OWNER/DEVELOPER. RECITALS A. City and OWNER/DEVELOPER entered into that certain Development Agreement that was recorded on December 8, 2006 in the real property records of Ada County as Instrument No. 106191305 ("DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. A First Addendum to Development was recorded on January 9, 2014 as Instrument No. 114002255. B. City and OWNER/DEVELOPER now desire to amend the Development Agreement (Instrument no. 106191305) and the First Addendum to Development Agreement (Instrument No. 11400225) with this Second Addendum to Development Agreement, as it pertains to the property listed in Exhibit "A", which terms have been approved by the Meridian City Council in accordance with Idaho Code Section 67-6511. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. OWNER/DEVELOPER shall be bound by the terms of the original Development Agreement and the First Addendum to Development Agreement as it pertains to the property listed in Exhibit "A", except as specifically amended as follows: 4. USES PERMITTED BYTHIS AGREEMENT: 4.1.a All future development shall comply with the design standards listed in UDC 11- 3.-19 and the Architectural Standards Manual, as applicable per UDC 11 -5B -8B. 4.1. b Future construction on the subject site shall be generally consistent with the Master Site Plan submitted with MI -06-008, (excluding the Kohl's parcel, #50532449210) and including the Conceptual Development Plan(Exhibit B)and Conceptual Building Elevation (Exhibit C) Centrepoint — MDA H-2016-0057 Page 1 submitted with H-2016-0057 for the northwest corner of the site as determined by the Community Development Director. All lots with frontage on Eagle Road, and all lots that border the western and northern property boundaries shall contain freestanding buildings. If a future proposed building is not generally consistent with the Master Site Plan or conceptual development plan for the northwest corner of the side (as applicable), then the development agreement shall be modified accordingly. 4.1. c The following uses shall not be allowed on any lot adjacent to the western or northern property boundary (shown on the Master Site Plan (pads 9-18, 21-24 and the Family Center) that borders a residential district, including the County RUT district: • Outdoor arts, entertainment or recreation facility • Outdoor stage, music venue, arts, entertainment or recreation facility • Cemetery • Church or place of religious worship • Fuel sales facility, truck stop • Hotel and motel • Industry, information • Industry, light • Mortuary • Nursery or urban farm • Recreational vehicle park • Temporary use • Vehicle sales or rental and service • Vehicle washing facility, unless as an accessory use on Lot 8, Block I Centrepointe Subdivision) • Wireless communication facility andlor tower • Wireless communication facility, amateur radio antenna 4.1.d That all future buildings on the subject property will be required to submit a Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) application prior to construction. And all future buildings adjacent to Eagle Road and Ustick Road will be required to obtain Design Review approval prior to construction. 5. CONDITIONS GOVERNING DEVELOPMENT OF SUBJECT PROPERTY. Owner/Developer shall develop the Property in accordance with the following special conditions: 5. La All future uses on proposed lots or parcels within the annexation area shall be required to comply with the amended Section 4 of the Development Agreement and the City's Unified Development Code 5.1. b The Developer shall provide a public or private road located as generally shown on the conceptplan (Exhibit B). Centrepoint — MDA H-2016-0057 Page 2 5. 1. c Five pedestrian walkways that connect the lots adjacent to Eagle Road and the main shopping area shall be included with this development. These walkways shall be generally located as shown in the submitted Master Site Plan and shall be distinguished from the vehicular driving surfaces through the use of pavers, colored or scored concrete, or bricks. The walkways shall be constructed prior to occupancy of any adjacent building. 5.1. d Three public/pedestrian gathering areas shall be generally located as shown in the submitted Master Site Plan. These gathering areas shall be constructed of steel, wood, brick, stucco or other similar materials and shall provide between 200- 400 square feet of covered gathering space. The gazebos for the gathering areas shall be consistent with the elevations attached as Exhibit "C" and Exhibit "D" of the original Development Agreement. The gathering areas shall be constructed prior to occupancy of any adjacent building. 5.1.e Exclusive of any public street or driveway stub, a 10 foot wide street landscape buffer designed in accordance with UDC 11-3B-7 shall be constructed adjacent to Jasmine Lane along the northern boundary of the subject property. In addition to the landscape buffer, trash compactors or loading docks shall be prohibited along the north side of any future buildings located along the northern boundary of the subject property. 5. If The west elevation of buildings located on the east side of the proposed North Centre Point Way (buildings designated as A, C, F, G, H, K, L, M on the Master Site Plan) shall contain architectural elements and enhancements including but not limited to, variations in the materials, colors, and facades that help to soften the appearance of these westerly elevations which are visible from, the proposed public street, North Centre Point Way. These variations shall account for a minimum of 20 percent of the fagade. All trash compactors, docks, or loading areas along these elevations shall be fully screened. 5.1.g Buildings identified on the Master Site Plan as Retail A, C, H, K, M shall have architectural elements and landscaping features that break up any long fagade or wall that faces a main drive aisle or parking area. These architectural elements shall include at least two changes in materials or colors, and some modulation in the fagade, including but not limited to, columns, cornices, extrusions, glass or other architectural enhancements. 5.1. h Future buildings along the western and northern property boundaries (abutting Champion Park Subdivision or Jasmine Lane) shall, in the case of commercial development, not exceed 35 feet in height, and in the case of multi family development, not exceed 40 feet in height. 5.1.j Developer agrees to grant a permanent easement to City for the construction and maintenance by City of a low profile "Welcome to Meridian" monument sign fronting Eagle Road at a location selected by Developer within the northerly 380 feet of the Property frontage, based on sign design criteria mutually acceptable to City and Developer. The Developer has also agreed to enter into discussions with the City on a Centrepoint — MDA H-2016-0057 Page 3 potential cost -share arrangement for the entryway sign after the City has established the cost and appearance of the sign. 5.11 The applicant shall fence off the Champion Park micropath from the future storage facility. S. 1.1 Construction of the storage facility may commence prior to the final plat being recorded; however, all improvements including the construction of CentrePoint Way shall be constructed and the final plat recorded prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. 2. OWNER/DEVELOPER agrees to abide by all ordinances of the City of Meridian that are consistent with the terms of the Development Agreement, the First Addendum and this Second Addendum and the Project Site shall be subject to de -annexation if the DEVELOPER, or their assigns, heirs, or successors shall not meet the conditions of this Second Addendum as herein provided, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian that are consistent with the terms of the Development Agreement, First Addendum and this Second Addendum. 3. If any provision of this Second Addendum is held not valid by a court of competent jurisdiction, such provision shall be deemed to be excised from this Second Addendum and the invalidity thereof shall not affect any of the other provisions contained herein. 4. This Second Addendum sets forth all promises, inducements, agreements, condition, and understandings between OWNER/DEVELOPER and City relative to the subject matter herein, and there are no promises, agreements, conditions or under -standing, either oral or written, express or implied, between OWNER/DEVELOPER and City, other than as are stated herein. Except as herein otherwise provided, no subsequent alteration, amendment, change or addition to this Second shall be binding upon the parties hereto unless reduced in writing and signed by them or their successors in interest or their assigns, and pursuant, with the respect to City, to a duly adopted ordinance or resolution of City. 5. Except as herein provided, no condition governing the uses and/or conditions governing development of the subject Project Site herein provided for can be modified or amended without the approval of the City Council after the City has conducted public hearing(s) in accordance with the notice provisions provided for a zoning designation and/or amendment in force at the time of the proposed amendment. 6. This Second Addendum shall be effective as of the date herein above written. 7. Except as amended by this Second Addendum, all terms of the Development Agreement and the First Addendum shall remain in full force and effect. Centrepoint — MDA H-2016-0057 Page 4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have herein executed this agreement and made it effective as hereinabove provided. OWNER/DEVELOPER: Blue Marlin Investments, LLC CITY OF MERIDIAN C Mayor Tamgide Weerd PpjkATE04 ATTEST: C7w of fpAHo SEAL �ayeee-L.' City Clerk Centrepoint — MDA H-2016-0057 Page 5 STATE OF IDAHO, ) ): ss County of Ada ) On thisday of ' w , 2016, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally'appear ed :3-e Vj pony-( , known or identified to me to be the - of Blue Marlin Investments, LLC and acknowledged to me that he executed the same with authority on behalf of Blue Marlin Investments, LLC. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year in this certificate first above written. o®®eooeo 0 0 e a i t ArA<p®® 0\E L. GQ" rIOTARy°•° (SEAL) = ° ®• PUBLIC eao® X�' '�MO 1�\�°°°°® STATE OF IDAHO ) ss County of Ada ) &iv Notary Public for Idaho Residing at: My Commission Expires: bf -1 241 On this DZ7-:, day of u. c1 a �S� , 2016, before me, a Notary Public, personally appeared Tammy de Weerd and -ee1- man, know or identified to me to be the Mayor and Clerk, respectively, of the City of Meridiaii'wAocRecuted the instrument of behalf of said City, and acknowledged to me that such City executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year in this certificate first above written. Centrepoint — MDA H-2016-0057 Notary Public for Idaho Residing at:�ie� Commission expire: Page 6 EXHIBIT .A Legal Description of Property Subject to Development Agreement rune 1, 2016 Oil Quadrant Page 1of2 Consult(ng. Inc. RXHIBIT "A» CENTR.I`POI NTE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT MODIFICATION A puree) located in a,portion of the Southeast % of Section 32, Township 4 Nardi, Range I Eest, Boise Meridian, City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, said parcel being more particularly described as follows. Commencing at the Southeast comer of said Section 32, thence along the Saudi line of said Section North 89°4439" West 1328.23 feet to the Last 11l e Comer common to said Section 32 and to Section 5, Township 3 North, Range I East, Boise Meridian; thence leaving said South line North 00129'45" East 38.00 feet along the West line of the East 112 of said Southeast 114 to the north Right -Of -Way line of Fast Ustick Road; thence continuing North 00029145' East 1333.57 feet to the POINT OF BIC, GIIVNING; thence North 00°29'45" East 113.56 feet; thence, North 28°00'31" West 238.36 feet; thence, North 25°08'01" West 2S,02 feet; thence, North 44052'43" West 99.30 feet; thence, North 31°39'43" West 201.40 feet; thence, North 47°3943" West 44,31£eet; thence, South 89146'53" East 659.37 feet to a point on the proposed West Right -Of -Way line of said North Centrepoint Way; thence, along said proposed West Riplit-Of-Way South 00000'00" West 4144 feet; thence 76.99 feet along a curve to the right, said curve having a radius of200,00 feet, a delta angle of 21103125" and along obord bearing South 11°01'42" West 76.52 feet; thence, South 22003'25" West 248,15 feet; thence, 95.13 feet along a. curve to the left, said curve having a radius of 250.00 feet, a delta angle of 21 °48'04" and a long chord bearing South 11 °09'23" West 94.55 feet; thence, 1904 W. Overland • Bof % ID 83705 + Phone 12081 342 -DO? 1 r FQx (4Bl 342-0092 - www,quadront.cc Civil Engineering • Surveying CentrePoint »- MDA H-2016-0057 EXHIBIT A Exhibit "A" Centrepointe DA Modification, June 1, 2016 lQuadl ant Page 2 of 2 Consulting, Inc. South 00°15'21" West 175.47 feet; thence depattingfrom said proposed West Right -Of - Way line South 89059156" West 202,35 feet; to the POINT OR BE, Said parcel contains 231,409 square feet or 5.31 acres more or less. CURVE TABLE LINE LENGTH BEARING JUNE 1, 2010 589'46'83"E _ 659.37' N CHORD LENGTHCi PAGE 2 OF 2 ��i�di N44'52'43"W L4 25,02' N25'08'01"W 76,99' 200.00 22'03'25" N00'29'45"E U qW 5i kJ EA�y a I U POINT OF BEGINNING -uNj 202.35' rQn D Do S159,59,56"w X�4 NO0'29'4S"E� - 38.00' 1/16 CORNER I _ 5 _ 1328,23'SECT1oN CORNER —�'� �4 q EAST USTICK ROAD CP&F 98089065 FINE TABLE L1 42.41-' 500'00100"W L24-4. 1` N4.7'39'4 -3"W EXHIBIT B WIN DA MODIFlOAT10N Lau1m w M 41 1/4 of % 3s, r. K, R1C.. JLM, U N Qu Ca d ra of nmcFMUM04wAmam,aura Consulting, Inc, CURVE TABLE LINE LENGTH BEARING CURVE LENGTH RADIUS DELTA. ANGLE CHORD BEARING CHORD LENGTHCi L3 99.30' N44'52'43"W L4 25,02' N25'08'01"W 76,99' 200.00 22'03'25" N00'29'45"E CentrePaint –MAA H-2016-0057 CURVE LENGTH RADIUS DELTA. ANGLE CHORD BEARING CHORD LENGTHCi 95.13' 25Q.OQ' f' 8'04" 511'09'33"W 94.55' C2 76,99' 200.00 22'03'25" Sli'Ot'�F2"W 76.62' Proposed Conceptual Development Plan to Replace Exhibit A-1.0 in the Existing Development Agreement CentrePoint — MDA H-2016-0057 EXHIBIT C Proposed Conceptual Building Elevation for the Storage Facility Entrance CentrePoint — MDA H-2016-0057 Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: Auqust 23, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Extension of Domestic Water Service Outside City Limits 5D Agreement for Extension of Domestic Water Service Outside Meridian City Limits with West Ada School District for Mary McPherson Elementary School at 1050 East Amity Road MEETING NOTES U A` CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS RECORDING REQUESTED BYAND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: CityClerk City of Meridian 33 E. Broadway Avenue Meridian, ID 83642 ADA COUNTY RECORDER Christopher D. Rich 2016-079050 BOISE IDAHO Pgs=6 LISA BATT 08/25/2016 10:06 AM CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO $25.00 (Space Above For Recorder's Use) AGREEMENT FOR EXTENSION OF DOMESTIC WATER SERVICE OUTSIDE MERIDIAN CITY LIMITS: 1050 E. AMITY ROAD This AGREEMENT FOR EXTENS12N OF DOMESTIC WATER SERVICE OUTSIDE MERIDIAN CITY LIMITS is made this 23 day of 4yAWtT , 2016 ("Effective Date"), by and between the City of Meridian, a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of Idaho, ("City"), and Joint School District No. 2, doing business as West Ada School District, an Idaho school district and body politic and corporate of the State of Idaho ("District") (collectively, "Parties"). WHEREAS, District is the owner of parcel number S113438500, located at 1050 East Amity Road, Ada County, Idaho, as described in Exhibit hereto (hereinafter "Subject Property"), which real property is located outside of Meridian City limits; WHEREAS, the City is authorized by Idaho Code section 50-323 to, inter alfa, develop, operate, and maintain a domestic water supply, and the City does exercise such authority, including by the adoption and enforcement of Title 9, Chapters 1 and 4, Meridian City Code; and WHEREAS, as part of the Amity Road and Meridian Road Waterline Extension project, the City will construct a water main along the south side of the Subject Property, and District wishes to connect to such water main; NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged and agreed, and in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants herein contained, and in consideration of the recitals above, which are incorporated herein, the Parties agree as follows: I. COMMITMENTS BY DISTRICT. A. Connection to water. District shall connect Subject Property to the City water system. District shall be responsible for any and all costs related to such connection, including permitting, construction, and materials, and for all water connection fees including, but not limited to, hookup, assessment, meter installation, and inspection fees. AGREEMENT WITH DISTRICT FOR EXTENSION OF DOMESTIC WATER SERVICE OUTSIDE MERIDIAN CITY LIMITS PAGE 1 OF 6 B. Connection to sewer. Upon the occurrence of a Triggering Event District or District's successor shall connect Subject Property to the City sewer system. District shall be responsible for any and all costs related to such connection, including permitting, construction, and materials, and for all sewer connection fees including, but not limited to, hookup, assessment, and inspection fees. C. Payment for City services. District shall pay City all applicable fees and costs for water services provided, as such are calculated and billed by City as set forth herein and established by law or City ordinance according to the metering, accounting, and billing systems and practices established under Meridian City Code and/or the policies of the City of Meridian. The exclusive remedy for disputes, objections, or appeals regarding such fees and charges shall be hearing before the Board of Adjustment under the procedures set forth in Meridian City Code. D. No cross -connection. District shall abide by and comply with any and all applicable provisions of law, which shall specifically include, but shall not be limited to, compliance with Title 9, Chapter 3, Meridian City Code and/or any and all similar ordinances subsequently adopted, which prohibit the installation and/or maintenance of a cross -connection to the City's water system. E. Triggering Event. 1. Definition. "Triggering Event," as such term is used herein, shall mean any of the following: a. Annexation of the Subject Property into the City of Meridian. b. Sale or lease of the Subject Property or any portion thereof or appurtenance thereupon to any person or entity other than the District. c. Redevelopment or subdivision of the Subject Property by any person or entity. d. Failure, abandonment, replacement and/or removal of the private septic system on Subject Property or any portion thereof, excepting maintenance and repairs. e. Any verifiable, substantial increase in demand upon City water services to or upon the Subject Property. 2. Effect. Until the occurrence of any Triggering Event, District may continue to maintain and use the existing private septic system at the Subject Property without penalty therefor, so long as all such maintenance and use is undertaken in full compliance with all applicable laws. Upon the occurrence of any Triggering Event, District or their successor(s) in interest shall connect the Subject Property any and all occupiable buildings then located upon the Subject Property to the City sewer system. Upon connection and provision of City sewer service to the Subject Property, District and/or the successive landowner(s) shall disconnect and discontinue the use of any and all private septic or sewer systems on the Subject Property other than the City sewer system. F. Consent to Annexation. District specifically agrees that, as a specific consideration of City's willingness to enter into this Agreement, District shall, and hereby does, provide perpetual consent to annexation of the Subject Property into the City of Meridian at such time the Subject AGREEMENT WITH DISTRICT FOR EXTENSION OF DOMESTIC WATER SERVICE OUTSIDE MERIDIAN CITY LIMITS PAGE 2 OF 6 Property becomes eligible for annexation. This provision shall comprise evidence of District's consent to annexation and shall be binding upon all subsequent purchasers, heirs, or assigns of the Subject Property. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, this provision shall be binding upon the District and upon any and all successors in interest of the District and/or to the Subject Property, and shall survive, inter alfa, the occurrence of any Triggering Event and/or hookup to City water or sewer services. II. COMMITMENTS BY CITY. A. Stub and meter. City shall install a stub from the City water system to the Subject Property B. Water services. At all times relevant hereunder, City shall provide water service to the Subject Property, subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement and any and all applicable laws and City ordinances. C. Billing. City shall bill District monthly for water services provided, as such are calculated and billed by City as set forth herein and established by law or City ordinance according to the metering, accounting, and billing systems and practices under Meridian City Code and/or the policies of the City of Meridian. Upon the occurrence of any Triggering Event and the hookup and provision of City sewer service to the Subject Property, City shall bill District, and/or or the successive landowner(s) or successors in interest, monthly for both sewer and water usage, and District or District's successors shall pay same. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, this provision shall be binding upon the District and upon any and all successors in interest of the District and/or to the Subject Property, and shall survive, inter alfa, the occurrence of any Triggering Event and/or hookup to City services. D. Recordation. City shall record this Agreement at City's cost, and shall submit proof of such recording to District. III. GENERAL PROVISIONS. A. Default. Any failure to perform the terms and conditions of this Agreement, or any portion thereof, shall be a default hereunder. In the event of a default, the non -defaulting party may serve a written Notice of Default upon the defaulting party by the method set forth herein. Except in case of an imminent or realized threat to the public health, safety, or welfare, the defaulting party shall have thirty (30) days following delivery of such notice to cure or correct the default before the non -defaulting party may seek any remedy as provided herein. B. Enforcement. This Agreement shall be enforceable in Ada County courts by either City or District, or any respective successor in interest thereof. Remedies available to City shall include, but shall not be limited to, termination of sewer and/or water service to District and/or to any sewer or water user located on the Subject Property. C. Notices. Any notice desired by the Parties or required by this Agreement shall be deemed delivered after deposit in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: AGREEMENT WITH DISTRICT FOR EXTENSION OF DOMESTIC WATER SERVICE OUTSIDE MERIDIAN CITY LIMITS PAGE 3 OF 6 City: City of Meridian Attn: Public Works Department Director 33 E. Broadway Ave. Meridian, Idaho 83642 District: West Ada School District Attn: Superintendent 1303 E. Central Drive Meridian, Idaho 83642 Either Party may change its address for the purpose of this section by delivering to the other Party written notification of such change, establishing a new address for noticing purposes, in accordance with the requirements of this section. D. Time is of the essence. The Parties acknowledge and agree that time is strictly of the essence with respect to each and every term, condition, and a breach and default hereunder timely perform any of the obligations hereunder shall constitute by the Party so failing to perform. E. Binding upon successors. Except as otherwise specifically provided herein, this Agreement shall be binding upon any and all owners of the Subject Property, any and all subsequent owners thereof, and each and every other person acquiring an interest in the Subject Property. Nothing herein shall, or shall be construed to, in any way prevent t the ale or alienation including but Subject Property, or any portion thereof, except that any sate not limited to any Triggering Event, shall occur subject to the provisions of this Agreement, and any successive owner or owners shall be both benefited and bound by the conditions and restrictions herein expressed. F. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, such provision shall be deemed to be exised herefrom and the invalidity thereof shall not affect any other provision or provisions contained herein. G. Attorney fees. Should any litigation be commenced between the parties hereto concerning this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled, in addition to any other relief as may be granted, to court costs and reasonable attorney fees as determined by such court. This provision shall be deemed to be a separate contract between the Parties and shall survive, inter alfa, any default, termination, or forfeiture of this Agreement and the occurrence of any Triggering Event and/or hookup to City services. H. Final Agreement. This Agreement sets forth all promises, inducements, agreements, conditions, and understandings between City and District relative to the subject matter hereof, and there are no promises, agreements, conditions, or understandings, either oral or written, express or implied, between City and District, other than as are stated herein. No subsequent alteration, amendment, change, or addition to this Agreement shall be binding upon the Parties unless set forth in writing and duly executed by both Parties or their successors in interest. AGREEMENT WITH DISTRICT FOR EXTENSION OF DOMESTIC WATER PAGE 4 OF 6 SERVICE OUTSIDE MERIDIAN CITY LIMITS I. Non -waiver. Failure of eithef Party to promptly enforce the strict performance of any term of this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver or relinquishment of any Party's right to thereafter enforce such term, and any right or remedy hereunder may be asserted at any time after either party becomes entitled to the benefit; thereof, notwithstanding delay in enforcement. All rights and remedies herein enumerated'shail be cumulative and none shall exclude any other right or remedy allowed by law. Likewise, the exercise of any remedy provided for herein or allowed by law shall not be to the exclusion of any ether remedy. J. Compliance with laws. Throughout the course of this Agreement, the Parties shall comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, and codes of Federal, State, and local governments. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Idaho, and the ordinances of the City of Meridian. The City's ordinances appertaining to the regulation, control, and use of its sewer and water systems, and any prospective amendments to and/or recodifications thereof, are specifically and without limitation incorporated into this Agreement as if set forth fully herein. K. Advice of attorney. Each party warrants and represents that in executing this Agreement, it has received independent legal advice from its attorney or the opportunity to seek such advice. L. Approval Required: This Agreement shall not become effective or binding until approved by the City Council of the City of Meridian. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the Effective Date first written above. WEST ADA SCHOOL DISTRICT: Dr. Mary An anells, Superintendent STATE OF IDAHO ) ss: County of 00a. ) I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this /L day of # , 2016 before the undersigned, a Notary Public in the State of Idaho, personally appeare ary Ann Ranells, proven to me to be the person who executed the said instrument who executed the instrument on behalf of West Ada School District, and acknowledged to me that West Ada School District executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal, the day and year in this certific' e written. Notary% L-0 A A J 11�4 Public for Idaho 11(� t�OTAjtk Residing at ! lenk?u ee _jjjfjq Idaho ' My Commission Expires: L1� AGREEMENT WIT� EXTENSION OF DOMESTIC WATER SERVICE OUTSIDE MERIDIAN CITY LIMITS PAGE 5 OF 6 CITY OF MERIDIAN: l� BY: Tammy de Week( STATE OF IDAHO Mayor Attest: 'o�QORATeogvcG � s llaycmL Hol tan, City C C7(vuf � 0 E j1A ® Gam/ ss County of Ada ) I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this Z✓ day of , 2016 before the undersigned, personally appeared Tammy de Weerd and � , known or identified tome to be the Mayor and Clerk, respectively, of the City of Meridian wtfo"e�cec " the instrument on behalf of the City of Meridian, and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year in this certificate first above written. �•.•'� FI+..�• Notary Public for Idaho Residing at _, Idaho 'SAR y My Commission x Tres: AGREEMENT WITH DISTRICT FOR EXTENSION OF DOMESTIC WATER SERVICE OUTSIDE MERIDIAN CITY LIMITS PAGE 6 OF 6 Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: August 23, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: 5E PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Easement Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Easement between the City of Meridian and the Roman Catholic Diocese of Boise within St. Ignatius School MEETING NOTES 9 APPROVED Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS ADA COUNTY RECORDER Christopher D. Rich 2016-079048 BOISE IDAHO Pgs=9 VICTORIA BAILEY 08/25/2016 09:49 AM CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO $34.00 SANITARY SEWER AND WATER MAIN EASEMENT THIS INDENTURE, made this —L day of , 4�,/,`t, 20 between / t' -se o Jfl ! a e 15 the parties of the first part, and hereinafter called the Grantors, and the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, the party of the second part, and hereinafter called the Grantee; WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Grantors desire to provide a sanitary sewer and water main right-of-way across the premises and property hereinafter particularly bounded and described; and WHEREAS, the sanitary sewer and water is to be provided for through underground pipelines to be constructed by others; and WHEREAS, it will be necessary to maintain and service said pipelines from time to time by the Grantee; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the benefits to be received by the Grantors, and other good and valuable consideration, the Grantors do hereby give, grant and convey unto the Grantee the right-of-way for an easement for the operation and maintenance of sanitary sewer and water mains over and across the following described property: (SEE ATTACHED EXHIBITS A and B) The easement hereby granted is for the purpose of construction and operation of sanitary sewer and water mains and their allied facilities, together with their maintenance, repair and replacement at the convenience of the Grantee, with the free right of access to such facilities at any and all times. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the said easement and right-of-way unto the said Grantee, it's successors and assigns forever. IT IS EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED, by and between the parties hereto, that after making repairs or performing other maintenance, Grantee shall restore the area of the easement and adjacent property to that existent prior to undertaking such repairs and maintenance. However, Grantee shall not be responsible for repairing, replacing or restoring anything placed within the area described in this easement that was placed there in violation of this easement. Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Easement REV. 04/29/16 THE GRANTORS hereby covenant and agree that they will not place or allow to be placed any permanent structures, trees, brush, or perennial shrubs or flowers within the area described for this easement, which would interfere with the use of said easement, for the purposes stated herein. THE GRANTORS hereby covenant and agree with the Grantee that should any part of the right-of-way and easement hereby granted shall become part of, or lie within the boundaries of any public street, then, to such extent, such right-of-way and easement hereby granted which lies within such boundary thereof or which is a part thereof, shall cease and become null and void and of no further effect and shall be completely relinquished. THE GRANTORS do hereby covenant with the Grantee that they are lawfully seized and possessed of the aforementioned and described tract of land, and that they have a good and lawful right to convey said easement, and that they will warrant and forever defend the title and quiet possession thereof against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said parties of the first part have hereunto subscribed their signatures the day and year first herein above written. GRANTOR: r ak dr ie-4on 0 !� 1 tide a'c Address Secretary STATE OF IDAHO ) ) ss County of Ada ) On this 1 -- day of , 20 , before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, p •sonally appeared CI& r. 9e Lo -w r -en and a. t- {i A,% d'o r` , known or identified to me to be the, - and Secretary, respec ively, of the corporation that executed the within in rumen', and acknowledged to me that such corporation executed the same. MEOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day written. Easement 'V NOTARY PUBLIC FOR DAHO Residing at: J� ` , D ( Commission Expires: J REV. 04/29/16 RPTED AU�. GRANTEE: CITY OF MERIDIAN ° a � ily or Tammy de W e�'. , Mayor m� n t,- FR SEAT fr `� � tiT k� 0 the TREASV� Attest by -Jae :Te e§, City Clerk xz' A '7A Approved By City Council On: ` .F` { STATE OF IDAHO, ) . ss. County of Ada ) On this '0"d day of �� ��T , 20 I(,, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared Tammy de Weerd and�o n to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Meridian, I a o, an �vho executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. ' YINC$•••. O _. O •��•. ,,' STA •�'': NOTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO Residing at: 1 f') Commission Expi s: �7 -aol k Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Easement REV. 04/29/16 July 29, 2016 Project No. 115210 THE LAND GROUP, INC. Exhibit "A" St. Ignatius School WATER AND SEWER EASEMENT DESCRIPTION An easement situated in a portion of Government Lot 1 of Section 30, Township 4 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: COMMENCING at the Northwest Section Corner of said Section 30, marked by a brass cap monument; thence on the west section line of said Section 30, South 00025'09" West, 1069.50 feet, to a point, from which the West One Quarter Corner of said Section 30 bears, South 00°25'09" West, 1591.61 feet; thence leaving said west section line, South 89052'46" East, 48.00 feet to a point on the easterly right-of-way line of North Meridian Road; thence on said right-of-way line, North 00°25'09" East, 14.23 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence continuing on said right-of-way line, North 000 25'09" East, 20.49 feet; Thence leaving said right-of-way line, North 77° 51'53" East, 44.13 feet; Thence North 000 25' 03" East, 187.78 feet; Thence North 83° 52'47" East, 124.72 feet; Thence North 34° 21' 18" East, 12.07 feet; Thence South 79° 21' 18" West, 31.99 feet; Thence North 89° 34' 51" West, 142.33 feet to a point on the aforementioned easterly right-of-way line; Thence on said right-of-way line, North 00° 25'09" East, 20.00 feet; Thence leaving said right-of-way line, South 89° 34'51" East, 120.03 feet; Thence North 00° 25'09" East, 9.00 feet; Thence South 89° 36'27" East, 20.00 feet; Thence South 00° 25'09" West, 9.01 feet; Thence South 89° 34' 51" East, 0.36 feet; Thence North 79° 21' 18" East, 50.05 feet; Thence North 34° 21' 18" East, 58.55 feet; Thence South 89' 33'36" East, 394.23 feet; Thence North 77° 57'41" East, 121.14 feet; Thence North 00° 25' 16" East, 332.38 feet; Thence South 89' 34'43" East, 20.00 feet; Thence South 00' 25' 16" West, 51.75 feet; Thence South 89° 33'36" East, 298.62 feet to a point on the easterly boundary line of Parcel "A" as shown on Record of Survey Number 10478, Ada County Records; Thence on said easterly boundary line, South 00° 29'32" West, 20.00 feet; Thence leaving said easterly boundary line, North 89' 33'36" West, 298.60 feet; Thence South 00° 25' 16" West, 276.70 feet; Thence South 77° 57'41" West, 139.39 feet; Thence North 89° 33'36" West, 385.77 feet; Thence South 34° 21' 18" West, 27.90 feet; Site Planning • Landscape Architecture • Civil Engineering • Golf Course Irrigation & Engineering • Graphic Design • Surveying 462 E. Shore Drive, Suite 100 • Eagle, Idaho 83616 • P 208.939.4041 • www.thelandgroupinc.com Thence North 790 21' 18" East, 68.23 feet; Thence South 89° 34'54" East, 430.14 feet; Thence South 000 25'03" West, 272.58 feet; Thence North 890 52'48" West, 140.78 feet; Thence South 000 27'51" West, 10.06 feet; Thence North 89° 32'09" West, 20.00 feet; Thence North 00° 27' 51" East, 9.94 feet; Thence North 89° 52'48" West, 346.70 feet; Thence South 00° 08' 36" East, 21.99 feet to a point on the southerly boundary line of Parcel "B" as shown on Record of Survey Number 10478, Ada County Records; Thence on said southerly boundary line, North 89° 52'46" West, 20.00 feet; Thence leaving said southerly boundary line, North 00° 08'36" West, 41.99 feet; Thence South 890 52'48" East, 25.42 feet; Thence North 00° 17' 49" East, 22.68 feet; Thence South 89° 42' 11" East, 20.00 feet; Thence South 00° 17'49" West, 22.62 feet; Thence South 89° 52'48" East, 462.26 feet; Thence North 00° 25' 03" East, 232.69 feet; Thence North 89° 34'54" West, 159.15 feet; Thence South 00° 26'24" West, 25.56 feet; Thence North 89° 33'36" West, 28.77 feet; Thence North 00° 26'45" East, 25.55 feet; Thence North 89° 34'54" West, 220.29 feet; Thence South 79° 21' 18" West, 86.29 feet; Thence South 34° 21' 18" West, 41.30 feet; Thence South 83° 52'47" West, 116.11 feet; Thence South 00° 25'03" West, 185.97 feet; Thence South 77° 51'53" West, 64.62 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. The above described easement contains 1.45 acres, more or less and is subject to all existing easements and right-of-ways. PREPARED BY: THE LAND GROUP, INC. Michael S. Femenia, PLS. 07/ 29/ 2016 fi Site Planning • Landscape Architecture • Civil Engineering - Golf Course Irrigation & Engineering - Graphic Design • Surveying 462 E. Shore Drive, Suite 100 - Eagle, Idaho 83616 • P 208.939.4041 - F 208.939.4445 - www.thelandgroupinc.com Bj OHVOl NV101H3W ' 1N3W3SV3 H3M3S ONd H31VM 1` a 100H3S SMUNDI OIS ® �Ma g nfli, 1181HX3 y ml 6 gg ~ tl � � :aN11aaUS i a h z w Lu — � w w rr --- w I M � od w IIN � aWQ W I a LU II W LU to II Ali ii I ILII cn III n II CDLU� III z I I ED U_ w II II ¢ 2 III � No I I d N LO II II cm LU Ilii II 00 cc lc W cc z W ' z J I W W I� LU 11��----.�1 JW F- J --------- 09*6901-------- 391651 11' 1992 160,99-00N CD T M *— V L1) W c T U T LL U O M M �' Ln N W W M W J m Q LU F-- Cr U Z a w z H J W C(-- _ O N y W O Z T ate/ CD Cid/ W i CD cc3 ad BEE3 y 4 WV 6S:LO 1e 9t9Z 6Z W'AePPd :Papald aleO eluawa! OTWIS Papoy lse1 6+W'OLZSLLAN4xa luawasea iaMas �aleM BZLO9t\spglyxa�/,auns\pea\OLZSIt\Sl9Z\:6 wope30101O O \ OA ti h z w Lu — � w w rr --- w I M � od w IIN � aWQ W I a LU II W LU to II Ali ii I ILII cn III n II CDLU� III z I I ED U_ w II II ¢ 2 III � No I I d N LO II II cm LU Ilii II 00 cc lc W cc z W ' z J I W W I� LU 11��----.�1 JW F- J --------- 09*6901-------- 391651 11' 1992 160,99-00N CD T M *— V L1) W c T U T LL U O M M �' Ln N W W M W J m Q LU F-- Cr U Z a w z H J W C(-- _ O N y W O Z T ate/ CD Cid/ W i CD cc3 ad BEE3 y 4 WV 6S:LO 1e 9t9Z 6Z W'AePPd :Papald aleO eluawa! OTWIS Papoy lse1 6+W'OLZSLLAN4xa luawasea iaMas �aleM BZLO9t\spglyxa�/,auns\pea\OLZSIt\Sl9Z\:6 wope30101O 8a minm NVIGIUM Ole €3 a 5 1N3W3SV3 H3M3S (INV H31VM � s 100H3S SflliVNJ1 '1S p a �r►.►r�� 4 �aflu 1181HX3 H � -------� 7 1 oZI 1 J � _ _ l,£i �� 0 1 1 ---------LO LO z 1 11 I �C', ofsS�� I II I I I II II I I J - 1 11 j 000 1051 I I J LO C:) m I ill mLn I I i IIMI w U) ¢ o II IIJI cc � JI I IN LuLo �o hI I I °-� 00 C/3 <� I I I C/)I z o LU Cco l IJ ¢ I IM w i II I I IJ ¢ LU II II I I i I i J LU II IIMI I I I J cr- co LU IM J co J `� Obl J J JI �q z J W co N I I I , n J W LU OLl El .05'690 L L L' G99Z 160-93.00N LU W co LU J m ifs LU CD 0 Z LU Z� J w C _ O T co H R W i CD ow cc Cho AMR 3 CD Ml KI WV 00901¢ 91OZ 6Z 4a *PVA PBOW WO eluawa) aHlw:Rg PaUold ISeI OMP'OtZSllU luawaseauamasiateMgZL09l\sl1QI4 v�aNns\pea\OIZSIL\SLOA:6 :uogeoololU ;3 oNval NVIGIU w �' S 1N3W3SV3 H3M3S (INV H31VM R JAI 100H3S SOUVNDI '1S gu8n 1181HX3 a .11� 9 � :a@11aa45 � a 0, 101 a O O d' U O M W W U) W J m ¢ H W V Z w d z� J LL W O N y W I -- 4 WV OO:90 to 9tOZ 6Z W'AePPJ :P AOM step Bivawat BMIW AS Ps0sld tsel 6MP*OtZgttutM)uawasea IaMaSIatBMBZ1091\SU4Ry \.(an]ns\Pea\OtZStt\StOtVb :us0easlsit{ Y0 LO O \ cc d7 0, 101 a O O d' U O M W W U) W J m ¢ H W V Z w d z� J LL W O N y W I -- 4 WV OO:90 to 9tOZ 6Z W'AePPJ :P AOM step Bivawat BMIW AS Ps0sld tsel 6MP*OtZgttutM)uawasea IaMaSIatBMBZ1091\SU4Ry \.(an]ns\Pea\OtZStt\StOtVb :us0easlsit{ g UNtlUI 1N�W�Stl3 �13M�S ONtI b�1dM Ntl10183Wm� Ile Um a� 100H3S SIIUVNOI 1S O ,�i�� 4 �,G,, 118IHX3 41 = d' :apll laayg x q e H m W CD 401 cc Boo od Iv G3 3 y 11 YNOO:9Ole91OZ6ZAnf'Aeppi ppoldelRO eluawa} Gjjw:6g patlold Isel 6enp'OLZSI l y�pca luawases aaxas rayeM BZLO9l\s>Iglyxa�IaNns\pea\OLZSL l\SLO2\ 6 :uopeao) OIU CV00 O CV CD 0 U-) CD f-- a) 0 ti O N r' CV ti CD d' Co Oto m N (D r Lf) I` U') N N M iT- CT CO N Z co ti d' CD ci N 0 T N N M N W d0' r 0 V.' N N N N N N O M T N N N co 0 r CO CO too w+ LU � J .Q Cc CD w_ w_ w_ w_ w Cc 2 w w_ w w_ w_ 2 w_ w_ w_ w_ w w F _Z M CD T O co Z Cb 0 r CO M 00 M CI' ;t • CD LO -�r o0 00 ti M M COCo W Q M N M M m NM M LC) N Lo N Cl) d' Lo T T 'ti' O LO N LLO M C N LO 00 O W 0 00 o O O 0 M 0 O O 0 0 00 0 O O 0 0 I` 0 0 co 0 0 M 0 r' 0 M 0 O O CD 0 O O U') T �' -- 0 N M N M N M N N Lo N Lr[) cn W U) O z 0p z O z O z CD � M 0 O ti ■= m 000 M Z Cn Cn 000 to Z 000 Z C/) 000 Z O z 000 Z Cn M M CID Cn J J J J J J J J J J J J J J W zMLO 0 O T N M LC) Z T N CO V' LO CO I-- 00 0 O T N CO 'Czl- LC) Co J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J H m W CD 401 cc Boo od Iv G3 3 y 11 YNOO:9Ole91OZ6ZAnf'Aeppi ppoldelRO eluawa} Gjjw:6g patlold Isel 6enp'OLZSI l y�pca luawases aaxas rayeM BZLO9l\s>Iglyxa�IaNns\pea\OLZSL l\SLO2\ 6 :uopeao) OIU 00 r— CNo G C00 ti M ti a) N r IMC) ti O O 0 ~ m O cn V Z N L j 0 N 0 I,- M 0 N 0 co ti d' CD ci N 0 T N N M w+ W d0' r N V.' N N r co T N cf' N T o7 O LLo co a) Cl) r CO — J .Q Cc CD w_ w_ w_ w_ w w 2 2 w_ w w_ w_ 2 w_ w_ w_ w_ w w F _Z M CD T O co N M CD M CO T r 'LY' CO M 00 T 00 r' d" LP) M C=) 00 � r LC) 0 O T 00 � O M CD CO M COCo W Q M N M M m NM M LC) N f` t!') m co r N T N � Cl) a-) N NF- LO N & M r' N N LLO M C N LO 00 O W 0 00 o O O 0 M 0 O O 0 0 00 0 O O 0 0 I` 0 0 co 0 0 M 0 r' 0 M 0 O O 0 0 0o 0 O O 0 0 OC) O O 0 0 0o O O 0 0 co 0 O O J m C/3 cn C/3 cn z w cn z cn z U) cn z cn z z z M z z W z T N M d' LC) CO t` DD 0 O r J N co co '�Y' co LO co co Il- 00 co 0 O J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J H m W CD 401 cc Boo od Iv G3 3 y 11 YNOO:9Ole91OZ6ZAnf'Aeppi ppoldelRO eluawa} Gjjw:6g patlold Isel 6enp'OLZSI l y�pca luawases aaxas rayeM BZLO9l\s>Iglyxa�IaNns\pea\OLZSL l\SLO2\ 6 :uopeao) OIU O m Cl C O O C r Co 0 10 N r M z N � N O O Cl) Lo N M W d0' r N V.' 0~o T T r M T N T Cn N o7 O LLo LO a) Cl) r CO .Q Cc (,Dw w_ w_ w_ w_ w w 2 2 w_ w w_ w_ 2 w_ w_ w_ w_ w w F Z CO 0 0 M M I� 00 O0 f 0 r 0r- p) T 00 Eo CD r CD T — Lo O LLO O N O LC) r r M r CV LC) LCO N LO N T LO LO N N LO r N T N 'dr M LO N CT' CO LO N Co M Co N '�Y' M T N T N M M ti Ln L17 N Wo cm oooM m� o o 00 Cn O Z O Z Il- Z O Z 00 Z M Z ti Cn 00 Z O Z 00 Cn O Z co Cn O cn 0o Cn t— Z CO Z 00 Cn ti Z O Z zMLO 0 O T N M LC) CO I` 00 0 O 'J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J H m W CD 401 cc Boo od Iv G3 3 y 11 YNOO:9Ole91OZ6ZAnf'Aeppi ppoldelRO eluawa} Gjjw:6g patlold Isel 6enp'OLZSI l y�pca luawases aaxas rayeM BZLO9l\s>Iglyxa�IaNns\pea\OLZSL l\SLO2\ 6 :uopeao) OIU Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: August 23, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: 5F PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Water Main Easement Water Main Easement between the City of Meridian and Western Ada Recreation District Next to Storey Park MEETING NOTES 9 APPROVED Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS ADA COUNTY RECORDER Christopher D. Rich 2016-079053 BOISE IDAHO Pgs=6 LISA BATT 08/25/2016 10:08 AM CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO $25.00 WATER MAIN EASEMENT THIS INDENTURE, made this //day of, 20&r between ffelSk " d, 01 6�l'CrFPCi�7 ,ifs GAJ the parties of the first part, and hereinafter calle the GRANTORS, and the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, the party of the second part, and hereinafter called the GRANTEE; WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the GRANTORS desire to provide a water main right-of-way across the premises and property hereinafter particularly bounded and described; and WHEREAS, the water main is to be provided for through an underground pipeline to be constructed by others; and WHEREAS, it will be necessary to maintain, service and subsequently connect to said pipeline from time to time by the GRANTEE; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the benefits to be received by the GRANTORS, and other good and valuable consideration, the GRANTORS do hereby give, grant and convey unto the GRANTEE the right-of-way for an easement over and across the following described property: (SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT A and B) The easement hereby granted is for the purpose of construction and operation of a water line and their allied facilities, together with their maintenance, repair, replacement and subsequent connection at the convenience of the GRANTEE, with the free right of access to such facilities at any and all times. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the said easement and right-of-way unto the said GRANTEE, it's successors and assigns forever. IT IS EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED, by and between the parties hereto, that after making repairs, performing maintenance, replacements or subsequent connections to the water mains, GRANTEE shall restore the area of the easement and adjacent property to that existent prior to undertaking such procedures. However, GRANTEE shall not be responsible for repairing, replacing or restoring anything placed within the area described in this easement that was placed there in violation of this easement. Water Main Easement REV. 08/02/16.doc THE GRANTORS hereby covenant and agree that they will not place or allow to be placed any permanent structures, trees, brush, or perennial shrubs or flowers within the area described for this easement, which would interfere with the use of said easement, for the purposes stated herein. THE GRANTORS hereby covenant and agree with the GRANTEE that should any part of the right-of-way and easement hereby granted shall become part of, or lie within the boundaries of any public street, then, to such extent, such right-of-way and easement hereby granted which lies within such boundary thereof or which is a part thereof, shall cease and become null and void and of no further effect and shall be completely relinquished. THE GRANTORS do hereby covenant with the GRANTEE that they are lawfully seized and possessed of the aforementioned and described tract of land, and that they have a good and lawful right to convey said easement, and that they will warrant and forever defend the title and quiet possession thereof against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said parties of the first part have hereunto subscribed their signatures the day and year first herein above written. 6_C <-- r) President ��J� t Secretary ' S4rl--P-/ -:�& E 'A Address �Midto,tj /b h5COY 6 5'd— STATE OF IDAHO ) ss. County of Ada ) On this d day of kAV,4 , 20 16 , before me the undersigned, a Notary Pblic in and for said State, l� rsonally appeared �,�1/�N� 1� ��1nrf and UaA ON )A, Win k- (— , known or identified to me to be the President and Secretary, respectively, of the corporation that executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that such corporation executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official eal the day and year first above written. NOTARY PUBLIC FOR Dntn Residing at: �Ch Commission Expires: % ��I--- (01 a a emen REV.08/02/16.doe GRANTEE: CITY OF MERIDIAN ^QpRA?EDA `00 �'��y "r W Tammy def, IVlayor IDAHO SEAL { �2r "'he TREAgv�(G AttestbyJayq'ce 10/h' i an, City Clerk Approved By City Council On: 4 1/ )E STATE OF IDAHO, ) ss County of Ada ) On this �day oftrt l l9ttAsST , 20 1 (o , before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared Tammy de Weerd and jays® C.�A known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Meridian, and who executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. 0 � w .�'. 'STATE, �,^ •'46,/49.0' (.,J NOTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO Residing at:V,--- i � Commission Expir C,, —_19 Water Main Easement REV. 08/02/16.doe Exhibit A Legal Description City of Meridian Water Easement A parcel located in the NW Y4 of Section 18, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, and more particularly described as follows: Commencing at a Brass Cap monument marking the northwest corner of said NW'/, from which a Brass Cap monument marking the northeast corner of said NW '/ bears N 89020'05" E a distance of 2401.71 feet; Thence N 89020'05 E along the northerly boundary of said NW'/ a distance of 1092.65 feet to a point; Thence leaving said northerly boundary S 0°40'03" W a distance of 414.24 feet to a 5/8 inch rebar marking the northeast corner of that parcel shown as Parcel A on Record of Survey No. 8737, records of Ada County, Idaho; Thence along the northerly boundary of said Parcel A the following described courses: Thence N 51 052'37" W a distance of 133.04 feet to a 5/8 inch rebar; Thence N 38052'29" E a distance of 16.49 feet to a 5/8 inch rebar; Thence N 51007'31" W a distance of 19.67 feet to a 5/8 inch rebar; Thence S 38052'29" W a distance of 29.76 feet to a 5/8 inch rebar and the POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence leaving said northerly boundary S 53°09'29" E a distance of 27.33 feet to a point; Thence S 38°01'29" W a distance of 28.01 feet to a point; Thence N 53009'29" W a distance of 6.93 feet to a point; Thence S 36050'31" W a distance of 27.31 feet to a point; Thence N 53009'29" W a distance of 8.00 feet to a point; Thence S 80°50'31" W a distance of 122.87 feet to a point; Thence S 36°50'31" W a distance of 40.71 feet to a point on the southerly boundary of said Parcel A; Thence N 52°17'11" W along said southerly boundary a distance of 20.00 feet to a point; Thence leaving said southerly boundary N 36°50'31" E a distance of 48.48 feet to a point; Thence N 80050'31" E a distance of 122.87 feet to a point; L - 0 Western Ada Pool Job No. 16-45 (___-----Land Surveying and Consulting Page 1 of 2 Thence N 36°50'31" E a distance of 3.89 feet to a point on the northerly boundary of said Parcel A; Thence along said northerly boundary a distance of 29.84 feet along the arc of a 66.00 foot radius non -tangent curve left, said curve having a central angle of 25054'16" and a long chord bearing N 51 °49'37" E a distance of 29.59 feet to a point; Thence continuing along said northerly boundary N 38052'29" E a distance of 14.76 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. This parcel contains 4,760 square feet and is subject to any other easements existing or in use. Clinton W. Hansen, PLS NPL LAND Land Solutions, PC CD GAS T E s August 3, 2016 11118 <,iLrTF 0� W HP Land blutio We 4 65 Page 1 - 5 1 ��Land surveying and consulting Job No. - CITY OF MERIDIAN - WATER EASEMENT - EXHIBIT B 12 7 13 18 0 Of z 0 WA BASIS OF BEARING N89'20'05"E CITY OF MERIDIAN STOREY PARK POINT OF - BEGINNING L12_ � 'r"""EAgE�ENT AREA=„ 76 Cb 122.87 E. FRANKLIN RD. 1092.65' — PARCEL S1118223084 WESTERN ADA RECREATIONAL DISTRICT 213 E. FRANKLIN RD. MERIDIAN DAIRY AND STOCK SHOWS INC L LA NO 1ST "I CURVE # 11118 0 p IF \N W. LENGTH 29.84' 2401.71- 7 1/4 18 LLa: n I U tf %Am Jim k n !, Us Land Surveying and Consulting 231 E. 5TH ST., STE. A MERIDIAN, ID 83642 (208) 288.2040 1208) 288.2557 fax www.landsolutlons.b iz LINE TABLE LINE # LENGTH DIRECTION L1 16.49' N38'52'29"E L2 19.67' N51'07'31"W L3 29.76' S38'52'29"W L4 27.33' S53'09'29"E L5 28.01' S38'01'29"W L6 6.93' N53'09'29"W L7 27.31' S36'50'31 "W L8 8.00' N53'09'29"W L9 40.71' S36'50'31 "W L10 20.00' N52'17'11"W L11 48.48' N36'50'31"E L12 122.87' N80'50'31"E L13 3.89' N36'50'31"E L14 14.76' N38'52'29"E CURVE TABLE RADIUS DELTA BEARING CHORD 66.00' 25'54'16" N51'49'37"E 29.59' LLa: n I U tf %Am Jim k n !, Us Land Surveying and Consulting 231 E. 5TH ST., STE. A MERIDIAN, ID 83642 (208) 288.2040 1208) 288.2557 fax www.landsolutlons.b iz Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: August 23, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: 5G PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Sanitary Sewer Easement Sanitary Sewer Easement between the City of Meridian and Woodside Harris, LLC within Southern Highlands Subdivision No. 3 MEETING NOTES A P P R 0 Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS ADA COUNTY RECORDER Christopher D. Rich 2016-079041 BOISE IDAHO Pgs=5 LISA BATT 08/25/2016 09:31 AM CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO $22.00 SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT IAKI THIS INDENTURE, made this, t day of ► , 20 Ito between ���` �- HaMS, [.-�� he parties of the first part, and hereinafter called t e Grantors, and the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, the party of the second part, and hereinafter called the Grantee; WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Grantors desire to provide a sanitary sewer right-of-way across the premises and property hereinafter particularly bounded and described; and WHEREAS, the sanitary sewer is to be provided for through an underground pipeline to be constructed by others; and WHEREAS, it will be necessary to maintain and service said pipeline from time to time by the Grantee; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the benefits to be received by the Grantors, and other good and valuable consideration, the Grantors do hereby give, grant and convey unto the Grantee the right-of-way for an easement for the operation and maintenance of a sewer line over and across the following described property: (SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT A and B) The easement hereby granted is for the purpose of construction and operation of a sanitary sewer line and their allied facilities, together with their maintenance, repair and replacement at the convenience of the Grantee, with the free right of access to such facilities at any and all times. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the said easement and right-of-way unto the said Grantee, it's successors and assigns forever. IT IS EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED, by and between the parties hereto, that after making repairs or performing other maintenance, Grantee shall restore the area of the easement and adjacent property to that existent prior to undertaking such repairs and maintenance. However, Grantee shall not be responsible for repairing, replacing or restoring anything placed within the area described in this easement that was placed there in violation of this easement. THE GRANTORS hereby covenant and agree that they will not place or allow to be placed any permanent structures, trees, brush, or perennial shrubs or flowers within the area Sewer Main Easement REV. 08/02/16 described for this easement, which would interfere with the use of said easement, for the purposes stated herein. THE GRANTORS hereby covenant and agree with the Grantee that should any part of the right-of-way and easement hereby granted shall become part of, or lie within the boundaries of any public street, then, to such extent, such right-of-way and easement hereby granted which lies within such boundary thereof or which is a part thereof, shall cease and become null and void and of no further effect and shall be completely relinquished. THE GRANTORS do hereby covenant with the Grantee that they are lawfully seized and possessed of the aforementioned and described tract of land, and that they have a good and lawful right to convey said easement, and that they will warrant and forever defend the title and quiet possession thereof against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said parties of the first part have hereunto subscribed their signatures the day and year first herein above written. , I /JI'l -_ ' `__ ___ - 1) dt /�t�tetfiw-� M�.wV){'►r to2S S. Pie r c Address E"31t, cj4A0 Secretary STATE OF IDAHO ) ) ss County of Ada ) On this I r day of -� , 20LIP, before me, the Undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, pe sonally appeared ,TdLjVW A4 a known or identified to me to be the President and Secr`ary, respectively, of the corporation that executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that such corporation executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and%y8 rii�' eve written. 11 ® I � NOTARY PABLW FOR IDA pusResiding at: � ®®� �� Commission Expires: �0, ,�' ® @Osseo Sewer Maiit _ i OV n���® REV. 08/02/16 MT Tammy de OF MERID City Clerk Approved By City Council On: STATE OF IDAHO ss Cily of IOA1d0 SEAL County of Ada ) On this 23 ve'l day of LK , 20 (lo , before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared TAMMY DE WEERD and T- C.C&O 9Q 6M -A -M known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Meridian,' Idaho, and who executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. ,9 e J NOTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO Residing at: ) o CommissionEx�s low � jl'lnn� . ^^ `` � • • v ••••••STATE Q,.•: Sewer Main Easement REV. 08/02/16 FA b'1 A DESCRIPTION FOR CITY OF MERIDIAN SEWER EASEMENT SOUTHERN HIGHLANDS SUBDIVISION NO. 3 A utility easement located in the N1/2 of Section 32, T.3N., R.1E., B.M., City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the C -N 1/16 corner from which the NW1/16 bears North 89044'45" West, 1335.96 feet; thence South 3804754" West, 443.35 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; thence South 46°35'24" East, 5.76 feet; thence North 43°24'36" East, 108.20 feet; thence South 46005'35" East, 340.22 feet; thence 20.47 feet along the arc of a curve to the left with a radius of 119.00 feet and a central angle of 9°51'20", and along chord of 20.44 feet and bears South 55052'21" West; thence North 46005'35" West, 315.81 feet; thence South 43024'36" West, 108.03 feet; thence North 46035'24" West, 25.91 feet; thence North 43049'28" East, 20.00 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; E NW 1/16 BASIS OF BEARING "W N89'4445 1335.96' Ah 20.47 20.44 S 55'52'21" W SEC 32 C—N 1/16 SEC 32 fLLL_ \] ,ya pix _ \ N REAL POINT �'3� OF BEGINNING <- tx SFO dv S,7; \ \\ SOUTHERN HIGHLANDS SUBDIVISION NO. 3 BLOCK 6 cl 25 100 Oft 05 50 150 ". �O SCALE: 1 = 50' GPS LINE TABLE LINE LENGTH BEARING 0 sG c- L1 5.76 S46'35'24"E L2 25.91 N46'35'24"W CL 7729 L3 20.00 N43'49'28"E s � ��coF OF \ RY G, c CURVE TABLE CURVE RADIUS LENGTH CHORD CHORD BRIG. DELTA Cl 5:\ISC Projects\Sky Mesa 15-130\dwg\Meridi,nsewezEXd.dwg 5/20/2016 1:25:41 PM MDT IDAHO I EXHIBIT DRAWING FOR JOB NO. 16-025 _ 14ITE1WATERTowERST. CITY OF MERIDIAN SEWER EASEMENT SHEET No. ' SURVEY SUMERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 ITE 130 SOUTHERN HIGHLANDS SUBDIVISION NO. 3 _ GROUP, P.C. (208)846-8570 LOCATED IN THEN 1/2 SECTION 32, T.3N., RAE., B.M., DWG. DATE _ — CITY OF MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO 05-20-16 119.00 20.47 20.44 S 55'52'21" W 9'51'20" Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: August 23, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: 5H PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Storey Park Temporary Construction Easement Storey Park Temporary Construction Easement Between the Western Ada Recreation District and the City of Meridian MEETING NOTES Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: City Clerk City of Meridian 33 E. Broadway Avenue Meridian, ID 83642 ADA COUNTY RECORDER Christopher D. Rich 2016-079038 BOISE IDAHO Pgs=10 LISA BATT 08/25/2016 09:15 AM CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO $37.00 (Space Above For Recorder's Use) TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT This TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT ("Easement") is made on August 23, 2016 ("Effective Date"), between the Western Ada Recreation District, a body corporate and politic established under the laws of the state of Idaho, whose address is 30 E. Franklin Road, Meridian, Idaho ("Grantee"), and the City of Meridian, a municipal corporation established under the laws of the state of Idaho ("Grantor"). WHEREAS, Grantee is renovating the Meridian Pool, and desires to use a portion of property owned by Grantor for staging materials and equipment during such renovation, and Grantee is willing to allow such use; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the benefits to be received by Grantor, and other good and valuable consideration: I. Temporary easement. Grantor does hereby give, grant and convey unto Grantee a temporary easement over and across the premises and property described in Exhibit hereto ("Premises"), as depicted in Exhibit B, for the uses depicted in Exhibit C, for the time period described in Exhibit D, for the purpose of staging materials and equipment during the renovation of the Meridian Pool. To have and to hold the said easement and right-of-way unto the said Grantee, shall be temporary. II. Term. This Easement shall expire on April 7, 2017. III. Restoration of easement. Grantee specifically agrees that within thirty (30) days of the conclusion of Grantee's use of the Premises for the purpose described herein, Grantee shall restore the Premises and adjacent property to that existent prior to such use, as directed by the Director of the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department or his designee. If Grantee fails to restore the Premises as described in this paragraph, Grantor may undertake such restoration, and Grantee shall be responsible for all costs related thereto. Grantee shall reimburse Grantor for the cost of necessary repairs and/or restoration within fourteen (14) days of Grantor's invoice for such costs. TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT — WARD PAGE I OF 9 IV. Compliance with laws and policies. Grantee shall be responsible for ensuring that any and all use of the Premises is in compliance with all laws and with Grantor's policies regarding use of its parks and/or facilities. V. Termination. A. Grounds. Grounds for termination of this Easement shall include, but shall not be limited to; an act or omission by either party which breaches any term of this agreement; an act of nature or other unforeseeable event which precludes or makes impossible the performance of the terms of this agreement by either party; or a change in or occurrence of circumstances that renders the performance by either party a detriment to the public health, safety, or welfare. B. Process. Either party may terminate this Easement by providing fourteen (14) days written notice to the other at the address above. Such notice shall include a description of the breach or circumstances providing grounds for termination. A twenty-four (24) hour cure period shall commence upon provision of the notice of intention to terminate. If, upon the expiration of such cure period, cure of the breach or circumstances providing grounds for termination has not occurred, this Easement shall be terminated upon mailing of notice of termination. VI. Assignment. This Agreement and each and all of the terms and conditions hereof shall apply to and are binding upon all employees, agents, contractors, officials, officers, servants, guests, invitees, successors, and assigns of the parties. VII. No agency. Neither Grantee nor Grantee's employees, agents, contractors, officials, officers, servants, guests, and/or invitees shall be considered agents of Grantor in any manner or for any purpose whatsoever in their use and occupancy of the Premises. VIII. Indemnification. Grantee and each and all of Grantee's employees, agents, contractors, officials, officers, servants, guests, invitees, successors, and assigns shall indemnify and save and hold harmless Grantor from and for any and all losses, claims, actions, judgments for damages, or injury to persons or property and losses and expenses caused or incurred by Grantee or any employee, agent, contractor, official, officer, servant, guest, invitee, successor, or assign of Grantee, at or in its use of the Premises or any lack of maintenance or repair thereon and not caused by or arising out of the tortious conduct of Grantor. IX. No warranty. Grantor makes no warranty or promise as to the condition, safety, usefulness, or habitability of the Premises; Grantee accepts the Premises for use as is, both at the Effective Date of this Agreement and throughout Grantee's use of the Premises. X. Non -waiver. Failure of either party to promptly enforce the strict performance of any term of this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver or relinquishment of any party's TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT - WARD PAGE 2 OF 9 right to thereafter enforce such term, and any right or remedy hereunder may be asserted at any time after the governing body of either party becomes entitled to the benefit thereof, notwithstanding delay in enforcement. XI. Exhibits. All exhibits to this Agreement are incorporated by reference and made a part of this Agreement as if the exhibits were set forth in their entirety in this Agreement. XII. Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the parties and supersedes any and all other agreements or understandings, oral or written, whether previous to the execution hereof or contemporaneous herewith. XIII. Applicable law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Idaho. XIV. Approval required. This Agreement shall not become effective or binding until approved by the respective governing boards of both Grantor and Grantee. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have hereunto subscribed their signatures the day and year first herein above written. GRANTOR: OTAR), Charlie Rountree, President Western Ada Recreation District STATE OF IDAHO ss: County of Ada ) I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this A? day of , 2016 before the undersigned, a Notary Public in the State of Idaho, personally appe ed Charlie Rountree, proven to me to be the person who executed the said instrument who executed the instrument on behalf of Western Ada Recreation District, and acknowledged to me that Western Ada Recreation District executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal, the day and year in this certificate first above written. Notary Public for Idaho /! Residing at l �t-� , Idaho My Commission Expires: TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT - WARD PAGE 3 OF 9 CITY OF MERIDIAN: C Tammy de Wde/d Mayor Attest: Clay Cole"s, ity STATE OF IDAHO ) SS: County of Ada ) eoRPZEa nuo�sr e 2c'O �o CH" „r w 1 E IDIA— IDAHO SEAL ') I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day of Pr , 2016 before the undersigned, personally appeared Tammy de Weerd and C.Jay Co es, known or identified to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Meridian, who executed the instrument on behalf of the City of Meridian, and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREO jjiAve'hereui tc year in this certificate f stvea, tle is set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and !-ttary'Public for Idaho � - ng at E.a�J-e- Idaho y Commission Expires: L - :D 1� -,;)-6) br to somelip, Of ZINC '••. r4, ,zto •'•. STATF' .••• TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT - WARD PAGE 4 OF 9 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF TEMPORARY EASEMENT AREA A parcel of land being a portion of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 18, T.3N., R.1E., B.M., Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, and more particularly described as follows: COMMENCING at the North 1/4 comer of said Section 18, marked by a brass cap; thence along the North line of sold Section 18 South 89020'05" West 1309.06 feet to the Northeast comer of Government Lot 1 of said Northwest 1/4 of Section 18; thence along the East Me of said Government Lot 1 South 00"40'03" West 47.44 feet to a point on the South right-of-way line of East Franklin Road as shown on Record of Surrey No. 7077 on Nie under Instrument No. 105148458 In the Office of the Recorder for Ada County, Idaho, marked by an Iron pin; thence along said South right-of-way line South 88°03'42" West 9.80 feet to the JOINT OF BEGINNING thence South 00'SY34" West 96.29 feet to a point of curve; thence along the arc of a curve to the right 54.75 feet, said curve having a radius of 85.00 feet, a central angle of 36"64'24", and a tong chord bearing South 19°17'45" West 53.81 feet to a point; thence South 37°44'57" West 56.49 feet to a point; thence South 52°1629" East 79.23 feet to a point; thence South 63061'27" East 99,22 feet to a point of curve, thence along the arc of a curve to the right 50.65 feet, said curve having a radius of 45.00 feet, a central angle of 64029'33", and a long chord bearing South 31 °36'40" East 48.02 feet to a paint; thence South 00038'06" West 260.43 feet to a point; thence North 89'41'47" West 107.61 feet to a point; thence North 00038'57" East 210.91 feet to a point; thence e North 51 52'37" West 144.97 feet to a point, marked by an Iron pin; thence North 3852'29" East 16.49 feet to a point, marked by an iron pin; thence North 51®07'31" West 19.67 feet to a point, marked by an Iron pin; thence South 38°52'29" West 44.522 feet to a point of curve, marked by an Iron pin; thence along the are of a curve to the right 55.71 feet, said curve having a radius of 66.00 feet, a central angle of 48°21'47", and a long chord bearing South 63003'22" West 54.07 feet to a point, marked by an iron pier; thence South 87°18'13" West 173.68 feet to a point, marked by an Iron pin; thence South 87`14"16" West 174.08 feet to a point on the East right-of-way line of South Main Street, thence along said East right-of-way line North 01 °16'04" East 34.86 feet to a point; thence North 87000'43" East 339.85 feet to a point of curve; thence along the arc of a curve to the left 29.72 feet, said curve having a radius of 35.00 feet, a central angle of 48°38'40", and a long chord bearing North 62'41'23" East 28.83 feet to a point; thence North 38'2Z04" East 184.37 feet to a point of t4a; thence ajoag the aro of a cure to the left 79.48 feet, said c-,jhaving a radius of 45.00 feet, a "nlral angle of 37'32`02°', and a long chord bearipq North 19'36'03' Earl 2506 feet to a point, thence North '5(0 ' Easl 96.10-) fact to a poirt on said South right-of-way Wre of East Pranklin Road; thence along said Soulh r thj-of--v y 1. North 88"OX42" Last 36.21 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING, TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT - WARD PAGE 5 OF 9 ulvyffylDylv ID MAP OF TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT AREA EASEMENT EXHIBIT AT STOREY' PARK FOR WESTERN ADA RECREATION DISTRICT LYING IN THE NW 1/4, SECTION 18, T.N., RJE, BX, ARIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO 0 50 loo 200 SCALE a,4 FEE*r I' = (O0' F.-675, F. FRANKLIN ROAD S 89"20'05' W 2401,71' 13 1[19288,03, 36,2 N 00 *50,02, E z vi S 3a'52'29" w 44.52'11 1.0 ,r -j6 N 87*00'43" F, 339-85' 7 1,4_06, ----- 87-14'16" W 878'13! -------- in 141E GOR. GOV. LOT NoRTq TABL5 1/4 COR. 7 RADIUS 1104,06' 18 E k, CHORD S 00'40'03' W 66600' 47.44' 55,71, Sj 158.03-4X' W 54.07' 9,90, MOO, S 00'50'34' 54.75 ss W 96.29' 53,81, S 37-44-57- W 45,00' 64,291331 71).23' [fW/ w > 67— 4 38 5�A29- 5 /Z/ 0�/,CE ✓ 16.49' N 01 16 04 E �4 34,86' 47 AREA IN EASEMENT 71,965 Sq. Ft, (1,65 ACRES) TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT —WARD PAGE 6 OF 9 CURVE TABL5 CURVF RADIUS DELTA LENGI'Hi BEARING CHORD C— 1 66600' 48 *21'47" 55,71, 5 G3103'22" W 54.07' C-2 MOO, 36 *54'P4" 54.75 ss S 19`(7'45'' W 53,81, c— 3 45,00' 64,291331 $0.65, S 31;36'4C" E 48.02' C- 4 3-3.00' 48'38'40" 2912' 14 621-41-23- r 28,83' C-5 1 45.00'--1— 37`32'02" 1 29.46' bl JV36-03" r TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT —WARD PAGE 6 OF 9 EXHIBIT C LOCATIONS OF AUTHORIZED USES WITHIN TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT - WARD PAGE 7 OF 9 EXHIBIT D TIMELINE OF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY Id Task game Duration 5tart Finish r 13 '16 Ma 22 ''1 ilii 31 '16 6ct ll'16 Dec 18 '16 Feb 2fi '17 N T I S I W1 I S 1 T M F T S W1 S T M 1 NTP Mobilization Demo Existing Buitding Demo Pool Deck and Wading Pool Pool Buiding Foundation Renovate Existing Pool _ Construct New Activity Pool Plumbing Ground Work Place Exterior Ramp and Stairs Place Pool Deck and Sidewalk at Building Prep. Floor Slabs Place and Cure Floor Stabs Framing & Sheathing Install Root Curbs Base Layer Under Shingles Install Shade Structures and Metal Stairs Plumbing Rough in Electrical hough In Install Single Ply Roofing Fire Sprinkler Rough in HVAC Rough in Install Windows and Storefronts Stone Veneer Insulation and Drywall Install Elevator Stucco First two Coats of Paint Instal l Pool Equipment Polished Concrete Floor Covering Ceramic Tile 1 day 2 days 110 days/ 5 days 15 days 60 days 50 days 10 days 10 days 10 days s days 5 days 35 days S days 5 days 10 days 210 days 15 days 5 days '10 days 10 days 5 days 15 days 20 days %10 days 15 days 10 days 20 days 10 days 10 days j5 days Mon 8/29/16 Mon 8/29/16 1ue 8/30/16 .Wed 8/31/16 ;Thu 9/1/16 ;Wed 9 14 i6 / :Thu 9/8/16 Wed 9/14/16 ;Thu 9/15/16 Wed 10/5/16 'Thu 9/15/16 "Wed 12/7/16 Thu 9/29/16 .Wed 1217116 iThu 1016/16 Wed 10119/lf Thu 10/6/16 awed 10119/lf `Thu 10/6/16 Wed 10/13/1 ,Thu 10/20/16 Wed 10/26/1. Thu 10/27/16 Wed 11/2/16 Thu 11/3116 Wed 12/21/1E Thu 12/22/16 Wed 12/28/1 Thu 12/22/16 Wed 12128/lE Thu 12/22/16 Wed 1/4/17 Thu 12/22/16 Wed 1/4/17 'Fri 12/23/16 iThu 1/12/17 Thu 12/29/16 `Wed 1/4,117 Thu 12/29/16 Wed 1/11/17 Thu 12/29/16 Wed 1/11/17 Thu 1/5/17 Wed 1/11/17 Thu 1/12/17 %Ved 2/1/17 Fri 1/13/17 Thu 2/9/17 :Fri 1113/17 Thu 1/26/17 Thu 2/2/17 "Wed 2/22/17 ; Fri 2/3/17 ,Thu 2/16/17 Fri 2/10/17 ,Thu 3/9/17 Fri 2/10117 Thu 2/23/17 ;Fri 2/17/37 Thu 3/2/17 ;Fri 2117/17 ;Thu 2/23/17 wlf MoblBzatloi� Demo Existing Bulidln t beck and Wading Pool eufding Found 'ha Renovate Existing Pp 1 Constfulct New Activi" Fool Plumbing /around I Vork Place Exterior Ramp an: tafrs I beck and Sidewalk at a Ing PrepI if Stabs Place and Cure A or Stabs Framing heathing install Roof Curbs Base 4 er lander Shingle Install Shade Struct i and Metal Shur himbtng Rough t Etectrieat Rough 1 ln� ti ItSingle Pty Roofln Ile Sprinkler Rough i HVAC Rough I install Wit ows and Storefronts Stone Veneer nsutation and Drywall Install Elevator St co First two Coats of P ' Install Pool Equlpme Polished toncret Floor Covering CeramtcTlle 2 3 4 5 12 13 6 9 10 7 8 11 14 16 17 1B 19 15 20 21 22 23 25 26 24 27 30 33 28 32 Project Meridian Poot Renovatlor Date: Wed 8/17/16 Task "`_ " Milestone ♦ Critical AIM111111111HEM Progress Page 1 TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT — WARD PAGE 8 OF 9 M Task Name Duration Start Flndsia r 13 '15 Ma 22 '1 tu131 '16 bct9 'iG Pee 18 'ib Feb 26 '17 T 5 W S T Mt F T 5 W S T M 34 Electrical Trim Fire Sprinkler Trim HVAC Trim Plumbing Trim Final Coat of Paint Instal I Specialties Pool Startup Clean u Punch Wt 10 days !Fra 2/17/17 'Thu 3/2/17 5 days Fri 2/24/17 Thu 3/2/17 5 days Fri 2/24/17 ,Thu 3/2/17 15 days ,Fre 2/24/17 ;Thu 3/16/17 5 days Fri 3/3/17 Thu 3/9/17 40 days Tri 3/3/17 Thu 3/16/17 5 days ;Fri 3/19/17 Thu 3/16/17 11 days Fri 3/17/17 ;Fri 3/31/17 Electrical Trlm Fire sprinkler Trim HVAC Tdm PlumbingTrlm Final Coat at Pal Air07 Install Spedaltl Pool Startup Clean up/ Punct ttst 35 35 37 29 3fi 31 3§ Project: Meridian Pool Renovatio . Date! Wed 8/17116 Task Milestone ♦ CrAlcai ALTIMBIREIVILTIEM& Progress Page 2 TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT — WARD PAGE 9 OF 9 Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: August 23, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: 51 PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Pedestrian Pathway Easement Pedestrian Pathway Easement Between New Oaks LLC and the City of Meridian for a Multi -Use Pathway in Oaks South Subdivision No. 4 MEETING NOTES mt APPROVED Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS ADA COUNTY RECORDER Christopher D. Rich 2016-079096 BOISE IDAHO Pgs=5 DAWN TRIVOLIS 08/25/2016 11:45 AM CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO $22.00 PEDESTRIAN PATHWAY EASEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of_ , 2016, between New Oaks LLC, hereinafter referred to as "Grantor", and the City of Meridian, an Idaho municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Grantee"; WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Grantor is the owner of real property on portions of which the City of Meridian desires to establish a public pathway; and WHEREAS, the Grantor desires to grant an easement to establish,a public pathway and provide connectivity to present and future portions of the pathway; and WHEREAS, Grantor shall construct the pathway improvements upon the easement described herein; and NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: THE GRANTOR does hereby grant unto the Grantee an easement on the following property, described on Exhibit "A" and depicted on Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein. THE EASEMENT hereby granted is for the purpose of providing a public pedestrian pathway easement for multiple -use non -motorized recreation, with the free right of access to such facilities at any and all times. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, said easement unto said Grantee, its successors and assigns forever. THE GRANTOR hereby covenants and agrees that it will not place or allow to be placed any permanent structures, trees, brush, or perennial shrubs or flowers within the area described for this easement, which would interfere with the use of said easement, for the purposes stated herein. IT IS EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED, by and between the parties hereto, that the Grantor shall repair and maintain the pathway improvements. Pedestrian Pathway Easement — Oaks South No. 4 THE GRANTOR hereby covenants and agrees with the Grantee that should any part of the easement hereby granted become part of, or lie within the boundaries of any public street, then, to such extent such easement hereby granted which lies within such boundary thereof or which is a part thereof, shall cease and become null and void and of no further effect and shall be completely relinquished. THE GRANTOR does hereby covenant with the Grantee that it is lawfully seized and possessed of the aforementioned and described tract of land, and that it has a good and lawful right to convey said easement, and that it will warrant and forever defend the title and quiet possession thereof against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said Grantor has hereunto subscribed its signature the day and year first hereinabove written. GRANTOR: NEW OAKS LLC V ,r BY: Thomas M. Coleman Jr. Its: President of Coleman Communities, Inc. Manager of Coleman Homes LLC Manager of New Oaks LLC STATE OF IDAHO ) ss County of Ada ) On this day of f26, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared Thomas M. Coleman Jr., known or identified to me to be the Manager New Oaks LLC that executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that such company executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year fist above written. NOIARY PU I FOR I AHO Residing at: Commission Expires: OF Pedestrian Pathway Easement — Oaks South No. 4 GRANTEE: CITY OF MERIDIAN _„aPTEoa� w �/ C Tammy de W e , Mayor Y(. !(1llj,q \`-' "N F SEAL Attest by C.fay Vo es, City Clerk Approved By City Council On: STATE OF IDAHO ) ss. County of Ada ) On this day of ProxsT , 2016, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared TAMMY DE WEERD and C.JAY COLES, known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Meridian, Idaho, and who executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. •p,p11//11• .•• FINc�•••• Z ,o. •W,,x. Pedestrian Pathway Easement — Oaks South No. 4 NOTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO Residing at: &- / b Commission Exp es: EXHIBIT "A" August 4, 2016 DESCRIPTION FOR MERIDIAN CITY MULTI -USE PATHWAY EASEMENT PROPOSED THE OAKS SOUTH SUBDIVISION NO.4 An easement located in the North % of Section 33, T. 4 N., R 1 W., B.M., City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows; Commencing at the NE corner of the NW '/a of the NE 1/4 of said Section 33, from which the N'/a corner of said Section 33 bears North 89116'45" West a distance of 1317.68 feet; thence along the easterly boundary of the W'/z of the NE 1/4 of said Section 33 South 00°28'24" West a distance of 1626.31 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence continuing along said easterly boundary South 00°2824" West a distance of 28.08 feet; Thence leaving said boundary South 86°12'09" West a distance of 137.29 feet; Thence North 68°53'35" West a distance of 96.86 feet; Thence South 87°53'29" West a distance of 968.67 feet; Thence North 85°08'05" West a distance of 91.22 feet; Thence North 00°19'00" West a distance of 28.11 feet; Thence South 85°08'05" East a distance of 92.05 feet; Thence North 87°53'29" East a distance of 85.12 feet; Thence North 24°17'46" East a distance of 18.83 feet to a point on a curve; Thence 39.17 feet along the arc of a non -tangent curve to the left, said curve having a radius of 85.00 feet, a delta angle of 26'24'17", and a long chord bearing South 78154'22" East a distance of 38.83 feet to a point of tangency; Thence North 87053'29" East a distance of 803.63 feet to a point of curvature; Thence 45.80 feet along the are of a curve to the left, said curve having a radius of 85.00 feet, a delta angle of 30°52'21 ", and a long chord bearing North 72127'l 9" East a distance of 45.25 feet; Thence South 32°58'52" East a distance of 8.00 feet; Thence South 00°28'24" West a distance of 17.13 feet; Thence South 68°53'35" East a distance of 86.45 feet; Thence North 86°12'09" East a distance of 133.20 feet to the POINT OF BEGINING. Said easement containing 43,750 SF, more or less. \o,Ap,L LAND y� \S r Ix 11118 X �� TF 0 5� 2ToNW.NP� 151109-pathease.docx EXHIBIT "B" IR A C-4 O P N� a'voaiv� �+5a�e `N ry W it Sd e°Q o �zl icn © (aQO G- �d.U� Z6— L14Q. V� to Li z z "8 cn r cNNNwV i I i 1 N O � vi co — I UJ I C9 � I --- N O zCnI.: z ma •.n -N m 0i 0 -- N zl LU 2: I ( -- OEn B a — a al 9 u LcJJ O W V C co V) 3 i OR �s F— v) Q O Q �I J��EY O 5 tib, yd 00-0 0- Q �Q zIx vv 11�� `` 3 W M LU O W LU� � r Odd I 0 N_. b N I!y Z r G o c o o cm z t z z C-4 O P N� d' ry W it Sd e°Q o r to © (aQO G- c Z6— L14Q. Omi W z d' ry e°Q d r to aN Omi W z z m cNNNwV N O � Q UJ m �Z zCnI.: ma •.n -N a 4 Cl)V1 Hz LU 2: foe 9 u LcJJ O W V C co V) n w'n LL F— v) Q O Q rrni 0- Q �Q zIx vv 11�� O Z a U LU O W LU� � W z a. a rr a. d r to aN r o z , o N O 6� Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: August 23, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: 5J PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: License Agreement Between Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District and the City of Meridian for a Multi -Use Pathway in Oaks South Subdivision No. 4 MEETING NOTES Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: August 23, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: 5K PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Easement Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Easement between the City of Meridian and TTS Idaho LLC within Third Street Square Subdivision MEETING NOTES Y1 APPROVED Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS ADA COUNTY RECORDER Christopher D. Rich 2016-079047 BOISE IDAHO Pgs=8 DAWN TRIVOLIS 08/25/2016 09:49 AM CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO $31.00 SANITARY SEWER AND WATER MAIN EASEMENT THIS INDENTURE, made this 12th day of August , 2016_ between TTS Idaho LLC , the parties of the first part, and hereinafter called the GRANTORS, and the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, the party of the second part, and hereinafter called the GRANTEE; WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the GRANTORS desire to provide a sanitary sewer and water main right-of- way across the premises and property hereinafter particularly bounded and described; and WHEREAS, the sanitary sewer and water is to be provided for through underground pipelines to be constructed by others; and WHEREAS, it will be necessary to maintain, service and subsequently connect to said pipelines from time to time by the GRANTEE; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the benefits to be received by the GRANTORS, and other good and valuable consideration, the GRANTORS do hereby give, grant and convey unto the GRANTEE the right-of-way for an easement over and across the following described property: (SEE ATTACHED EXHIBITS A and B) The easement hereby granted is for the purpose of construction and operation of sanitary sewer and water mains and their allied facilities, together with their maintenance, repair, replacement and subsequent connection at the convenience of the GRANTEE, with the free right of access to such facilities at any and all times. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the said easement and right-of-way unto the said GRANTEE, it's successors and assigns forever. IT IS EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED, by and between the parties hereto, that after making repairs, performing maintenance, replacements or subsequent connections to the sanitary sewer and water mains, GRANTEE shall restore the area of the easement and adjacent property to that existent prior to undertaking such procedures. However, GRANTEE shall not be responsible for repairing, replacing or restoring anything placed within the area described in this easement that was placed there in violation of this easement. Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Easement EASMT S&W 11-15-13.doc THE GRANTORS hereby covenant and agree that they will not place or allow to be placed any permanent structures, trees, brush, or perennial shrubs or flowers within the area described for this easement, which would interfere with the use of said easement, for the purposes stated herein. THE GRANTORS hereby covenant and agree with the GRANTEE that should any part of the right-of-way and easement hereby granted become part of, or lie within the boundaries of any public street, then, to such extent, such right-of-way and easement hereby granted which lies within such boundary thereof or which is a part thereof, shall cease and become null and void and of no further effect and shall be completely relinquished. THE GRANTORS do hereby covenant with the GRANTEE that they are lawfully seized and possessed of the aforementioned and described tract of land, and that they have a good and lawful right to convey said easement, and that they will warrant and forever defend the title and quiet possession thereof against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said parties of the first part have hereunto subscribed their signatures the day and year first herein above written. GRANTOR: President 3072 Wildflower Drive Encinitas CA 92024 Address STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) : ss. County of San Diego ) On this /--'7 day of AGOG— , 20 l 6 , before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared Ti?ENTOV W and , known or identified to me to be the President of the corporation that executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that such corporation executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. /--/ � ---7 (SEAL) .,.� RON J. SEGAL Commission # 2098015 Notary Public - California Z San Diego County D My Comm. Expires Feb 21, 2019 NOTARY CALIFORNIA Residing at: Si}/V O4e-6- / Commission Expires: Z — Z / —/ 7 Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Easement EASMT S&W 11-15-13.doc -ter\ Wiry of �w Mayor SEAL f { r Attest by J,4'e" an,, City Clerk Approved By City Council On. 7 � ,'F y STATE OF IDAHO, ) : ss County of Ada 22 ) On this 3 day of S— '20 k( , before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared Tammy de Weerd and known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Muni, Md oo,, (�2n and who executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. NOTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO Residing at: fQq_, 1)� Commission Exp es: Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Easement EASMT S&W 11-15-13.doe Exhibit A-1 Sewer & Water Main Easement Description An easement for sewer and water main installation and maintenance over the proposed Third Street Square Subdivision located in the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 7, Township 3 North, Range 1 East of the Boise Meridian, Meridian City, Ada County, Idaho being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the found aluminum cap monument representing the position of the corner common to Sections 12 and 13, T3N, R1W and Sections 7 and 18, T3N, R1E as perpetuated by document 98117248, Records of Ada County; thence N 89° 19' 28" E along the line common to said Sections 7 and 18 for a distance of 1282.95 feet to a found 5/81h inch diameter iron pin at the intersection with East Third Street; thence N 000 24' 27" E along said East Third Street for a distance of 575.49 feet; thence S 90100' 00" E for a distance of 40.00 feet; thence N 000 24' 27" E for a distance of 110.00 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence N 00° 24' 27" E for a distance of 29.08 feet; Thence S 89134' 48" E for a distance of 248.80 feet; Thence N 000 25' 12" E for a distance of 25.66 feet; Thence S 890 27' 41" E for a distance of 10.00 feet; Thence S 000 25' 12" W for a distance of 25.63 feet; Thence S 890 34' 48" E for a distance of 5.80 feet; Thence N 000 25' 12" E for a distance of 21.04 feet; Thence S 890 27' 41" E for a distance of 15.87 feet; Thence N 000 32' 19" E for a distance of 60.05 feet; Thence S 890 36' 22" E for a distance of 20.00 feet; Thence S 00° 32' 19" W for a distance of 58.04 feet; (CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE) 1602 W. Hays St., Suite 306 - Boise, ID 83702 ® Phone: 208-48874227 www. accuratesurveyors.com Exhibit A-2 n=4" c3a"eV4nf 9 GRITy to - n Thence S 89127' 41" E for a distance of 42.08 feet; Thence S 00° 00' 00" E for a distance of 19.92 feet; Thence N 89127'41" W for a distance of 29.26 feet; Thence S 000 32' 19" W for a distance of 51.75 feet; Thence S 890'27' 41" E fora distance of 34.51 feet; Thence S 00132' 19" W for a distance of 10.00 feet; Thence N 89127' 41" W for a distance of 34.51 feet; Thence S 000 32' 19" W for a distance of 48.61 feet; Thence S 89° 27' 41" E for a distance of 29.50 feet; Thence S 000 32' 19" W for a distance of 18.72 feet; Thence N 890 27' 41" W for a distance of 29.50 feet; Thence S 000 32' 19" W for a distance of 49.65 feet; Thence S 890 27' 41" E for a distance of 30.88 feet; Thence S 000 32' 19" W for a distance of 10.00 feet; Thence N 890 27'41" W for a distance of 30.88 feet; Thence S 000 32' 19" W for a distance of 63.11 feet; Thence N 89° 38' 10" W for a distance of 20.00 feet; Thence N 00132' 19" E for a distance of 25.92 feet; Thence N 890 25' 58" W for a distance of 13.00 feet; Thence N 000 32' 19" E for a distance of 58.76 feet; (CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE) 2 1602 W. Hays St., Suite 306 ® Boise, ID 83702 w Phone: 208-863-4198 www.accuratesurveyors.com Exhibit A-3 Thence N 00° 32' 19" E for a distance of 20.00 feet; Thence S 890 27' 41" E for a distance of 12.28 feet; Thence N 000 32' 19" E for a distance of 113.07 feet; Thence N 89134' 48" W for a distance of 55.58 feet; Thence S 000 25' 12" W for a distance of 31.41 feet; Thence N 890 27' 41" W for a distance of 10.00 feet; Thence N 000 25' 12" E for a distance of 31.39 feet; Thence N 890 3448" W for a distance of 25.15 feet; Thence S 000 25' 12" W for a distance of 33.43 feet; Thence N 89133' 23" W for a distance of 10.00 feet; Thence N 00125' 12" E for a distance of 33.43 feet; Thence N 89134' 48" W for a distance of 4.12 feet; Thence N 000 24' 27" E for a distance of 2.03 feet; Thence N 890 36' 58" W for a distance of 175.50 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING. Easement contains 0.484 acres, or 21,409 square feet, more or less. 3 1602 W. Hays St., Suite 306 d Boise, ID 83702 - Phone: 208-863-4198 www.accuratesurveyors.com Exhibit A-4 °CQ i �N P. ° °° . 0 En o i A co cd CO w LL 6C) : 'j� 00 0 00 �- O N O (0 00 0 00 00 � - 0 0-) � r� O � N r� � 0 0 N z0000000r-Od7O(�NON�d-0n-"'O d' -O out w Q0)000r666rl�06N6N6 --:6 -UC VM6Ii4C' m = �d N')cONN—LO—N—LOn—nN►o—tom 0L cn -3:w33swwww3;:3: ui 3: www rn m- 0-) O0-) 00 o) m 00 N- N 00 N r7 N 00 � S ALO d- - d -r - N -d'N C�Nr�NI,NwN07N�N�d'ini,Lo q- n07d d' NMNnr)nNnNnNnNNNr) V)NroN o e o e e e O H O O� O� O� O� O�� O b) O b) O O) U 0) U Q O 00 O 00 O 00 O 00 O 00 O 00 00 O 00 O 00 O 00 O 00 O W m (n (n (n Z () Z Z Z Z Z Z (n Z (n Z Z Z (n Z Z Z Z wnd'07c01�0000Nrod'U-c0f�00mON�d- ZNNNNNNNt�7�����r�N�r�r7�d-d-d-d- J _1 J J J J J .J J J J .J J J J J J J ___r J J J -J W000C�0n I -_-U-) tto0N-co O10 ONO zOOCIJOCfl000o00000G�Nr- Lf-)0ti71ltC) J QOrnLoO�Lo,Lo0o00N0-)0), q -0d00 00 0)000i F - d'NN - N N - tONif)d-- NLOto-rid N -N U) wwww3�:wwwww3�:ww3: 3�:w3:w3�: 3: O f N N 00 N rn N 07 r 0 0') r- m 0) t- 0) 0Nrd' d--N-d Odd- ooO tLor,Lo 4 Lo r,N(DNr, NNNI`N� Z O N N N N M N o 0 0 ° O O O rn 0 M 0 0 O O) O 0-)O O d) 0 0) 0 0) 0 0� Q 07 O O 00 O 00 0 00 0 w O w 0 W 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 W m(nZZ((n(nZ(nZC�(n(bl(�Z(�(n(�Z(n(n(nZ z 0 Nnd LO(01�000)0(N EOR -Nnd U-)C0r-0007—NN J J J J J J J J J J J J ___I J J J —1 J J J J J J 9ybo �o�d W v v T.3N., R. 1 W., B. M. V T.3N., R. 1 E., B. M. z ou CD T� � 11 ry� ry1� 'I WV W m C � N :20 v Exhibit B z o D m r N 00°24'27" E 1164.74' _ v 575.49' 589.25' PI �r �A co ® E. THIRD ST. ® o N 00'24'27" E L2 110.00' Z � co o w wm Al ZE w w 00 o w m a v Pl Xx oCp o W q 't" r o 9tip�CA L40 w o m W L38 o m L36L.o 3 Ny o L33 r C45 4 o Z L31 U, � N00'32'19"E 113.07' 7 L9 0 L29 w \\ \� v I ; SEWER\ WA TER MAIN EASEMENT o 0o L11 r L27 � r- L23 r- r- L19 r L15 N O pp p) P m L25 L21 L17 L13rij O� rr 00 00 00izC 00 00 ny ny ny Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: August 23, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: 6A PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Mayor's Office Mayor's Office: Appointment of Rob McCarvel to Seat #2, Reappointment of Keith Bird to Seat #6, and Appointment of Rick Ritter to Seat #7 of the Board of the Meridian Development Corporation MEETING NOTES A P F R 0 Vti':t Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: Auqust 23, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Resolution Me Resolution No.: : Appointment of Rob McCarvel to Seat #2, Reappointment of Keith Bird to Seat #6, and Appointment of Rick Ritter to Seat #7 of the Board of the Meridian Development Corporation MEETING NOTES rMi" APPROVED Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: August 23, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: 6C PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Solid Waste Advisory Commission Solid Waste Advisory Commission: Republic Services Annual Rates Adjustment Amended Report for Solid Waste Collection Services MEETING NOTES Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS M E M O R A N D U M TO:Mayor Tammy de Weerd Members of the Meridian City Council: Mr. Keith Bird, President Mr. Joe Borton, Vice President Mr. Luke Cavener Ms. Genesis Milam Mr. TY Palmer Ms. Anne Little Roberts FROM:Rodney Remling, Controller, Republic Services of Idaho DATE:August 23, 2016 SUBJECT: Amended Report Annual Rate Adjustment for Solid Waste Collection Services as Presented to the Meridian Solid Waste Advisory Commission on July 27, 2016 Introduction Annually, solid waste collection rates are adjusted in accordance with Section 21 of our contract with the City of Meridian with an effective date of October 1. Republic Services presented the proposed rate adjustment to the Solid Waste Advisory Commission on July 27th, who approved the proposal and recommended it be forwarded to City Council for consideration. This memorandum addresses our adjustment for the fiscal year 2017. CPI Adjustment Methodology Our contract allows non disposal costs be adjusted annually based upon Ninety (90) percent of the net percentage change for June in the Consumer Price Index for the Pacific Northwest.. The Pacific Northwest CPI index is no longer published so CPI for the Western Region of the United States is used. This year’s change in CPI (at 90%) is 1.45%. The CPI adjustment is $0.17 per household per month. The commercial impact varies and is based on size and container frequency of collection. New Rates Republic Services is requesting new rates for services that either do not have a rate or are charged under the “Special Collection” rate in 10 minute increments. 11101 West Executive Drive, Boise ID 83713 Office (208) 345-1265 Description FY 16 FY 17 One Time Monthly One Time Monthly Commercial Cart Delivery The cost of delivering commercial carts is less than regular commercial containers. This rate allows for the separation of carts from containers which are proposed at $22.82 $-$ - $10.00 $ - Commercial Lid Lock Small Container 2 to 8 yard. Some commercial customers want to stop illegal dumping in their containers. Installation of a lock gives them this control. $-$ - $43.00 $ - Commercial Lid Lock Monthly Service 2-8 yard. Servicing containers with locks requires additional time service for each service. $-$ - $-$12.39 Commercial Combo Lock Replacement. When customer requests replacement of a lost or damaged combo lock. $-$-$27.53 $- Industrial Trash Monthly Lid 20 to 40 yard. Some industrial customers want to secure roll off boxes against illegal dumping. This monthly charge is rental charge to cover the cost of the asset. $-$ - $-$35.00 Miscellaneous Collection -Non-Freon. Republic Services currently provides a service to collect appliances. These are separately routed trucks. Non-Freon appliances are charged under the Special Collections rate at $20.90. This request aligns the charge code and amount with other contracts in the valley. $20.90 $-$15.00 $- Miscellaneous Collection -Bulky Item. Republic Services currently provides a service to collect bulky items. These are separately routed trucks. Bulky items are charged under the Special Collections rate at $20.90. This request aligns the charge code and amount with other contracts in the valley. $20.90 $-$15.00 $- Republic Services of Idaho Meridian City Proposed Rates Effective October 1, 2016 Ninety Percent of Change in CPI 1.45% Idaho Sales Tax 6.00% 2016 2017 Disposal HHW Service Rental Tax CURRENT Disposal CPI Serv HHW FUEL IMPACT INC TEMP FUEL IMP Service CPI Rent Rental Tax PROPOSED increase % of increase Row #RESIDENTIAL TRASH & RECYCLING 1 Residential 95 gallon service (includes 1 recycling cart)4.76 $0.24 $11.57 1.04 0.06 $17.67 $4.76 $0.17 $0.00 $0.00 ($0.01)$11.97 $0.02 $1.06 0.06 $17.85 $0.18 1.02% 2 Residential 65 gallon service (includes 1 recycling cart)2.88 0.24 11.45 1.04 0.06 $15.67 2.88 $0.17 --(0.01)$11.85 0.02 1.06 0.06 $15.85 $0.18 1.15% 3 Residential 35 gallon service (includes 1 recycling cart)1.00 0.24 11.33 1.04 0.06 $13.67 1.00 $0.17 --(0.01)$11.73 0.02 1.06 0.06 $13.85 $0.18 1.32% 4 Residential Extra Carts (per cart per month)-1.65 0.52 0.03 $2.20 -0.02 ---1.67 0.01 0.53 0.03 $2.23 $0.03 1.36% 5 Residential Cart Pickup/ Upsize Exchange fee (per event)-13.13 0.00 0.00 $13.13 -0.19 ---13.32 ---$13.32 $0.19 1.45% 6 Residential Cart Delivery (free)-0.00 0.00 0.00 $0.00 ---------$0.00 $0.00 - 7 Residential Carry Out Service -30.93 0.00 0.00 $30.93 -0.45 ---31.38 ---$31.38 $0.45 1.45% 8 COMMERCIAL PERMANENT TRASH 9 Commercial Carts Delivery Charge 0.00 0.00 10.00 $10.00 10 11 Commercial Carts 1, 95 gallon cart (1 x per week)4.76 -23.33 0.52 0.03 $28.64 4.76 0.34 --(0.02)23.65 0.01 0.53 0.03 $28.97 $0.33 1.15% 12 Commercial Carts 1, 95 gallon cart (2 x per week)9.52 -44.08 0.52 0.03 $54.15 9.52 0.64 --(0.04)44.68 0.01 0.53 0.03 $54.76 $0.61 1.13% 13 Commercial Carts 1, 95 gallon cart (3 x per week)14.28 -64.81 0.52 0.03 $79.64 14.28 0.94 --(0.06)65.69 0.01 0.53 0.03 $80.53 $0.89 1.12% 14 15 Commercial Carts 2, 95 gallon cart (1 x per week)9.52 -46.66 1.04 0.06 $57.28 9.52 0.68 --(0.04)47.30 0.02 1.06 0.06 $57.94 $0.66 1.15% 16 Commercial Carts 2, 95 gallon cart (2 x per week)19.04 -88.16 1.04 0.06 $108.30 19.04 1.28 --(0.08)89.36 0.02 1.06 0.06 $109.52 $1.22 1.13% 17 Commercial Carts 2, 95 gallon cart (3 x per week)28.56 -129.62 1.04 0.06 $159.28 28.56 1.88 --(0.12)131.38 0.02 1.06 0.06 $161.06 $1.78 1.12% 18 19 Commercial Carts 3, 95 gallon cart (1 x per week)14.28 -69.99 1.56 0.09 $85.92 14.28 1.01 --(0.06)70.94 0.02 1.58 0.09 $86.89 $0.97 1.13% 20 Commercial Carts 3, 95 gallon cart (2 x per week)28.56 -132.24 1.56 0.09 $162.45 28.56 1.92 --(0.12)134.04 0.02 1.58 0.09 $164.27 $1.82 1.12% 21 Commercial Carts 3, 95 gallon cart (3 x per week)42.84 -194.43 1.56 0.09 $238.92 42.84 2.82 --(0.18)197.07 0.02 1.58 0.09 $241.58 $2.66 1.11% 22 23 Commercial Container Container Delivery Svc (2,3,6,8 yd options)-22.49 0.00 0.00 $22.49 -0.33 ---22.82 ---$22.82 $0.33 1.47% 24 Commericial Container Lid Lock Installation (2,3,6,8 yd options)0.00 $0.00 43.00 $43.00 25 Commercial Container Monthly Lock Service (2,3,6,8 yd options)0.00 $0.00 12.39 $12.39 26 27 Commercial Container 2 yd (Extra Dump)1.91 -21.07 0.00 0.00 $22.98 1.91 0.31 --(0.02)21.36 ---$23.27 $0.29 1.26% 28 Commercial Container 3 yd (Extra Dump)3.81 -27.54 0.00 0.00 $31.35 3.81 0.40 --(0.02)27.92 ---$31.73 $0.38 1.21% 29 Commercial Container 6 yd (Extra Dump)7.62 -37.86 0.00 0.00 $45.48 7.62 0.55 --(0.05)38.36 ---$45.98 $0.50 1.10% 30 Commercial Container 8 yd (Extra Dump)10.16 -48.33 0.00 0.00 $58.49 10.16 0.70 --(0.06)48.97 ---$59.13 $0.64 1.09% 31 32 Commercial Containers 2 yd (1 x per week)8.25 -65.66 18.79 1.13 $93.83 8.25 0.95 --(0.07)66.54 0.27 19.06 1.14 $94.99 $1.16 1.24% 33 Commercial Containers 2 yd (2x per week)16.50 -97.08 18.79 1.13 $133.50 16.50 1.41 --(0.13)98.36 0.27 19.06 1.14 $135.06 $1.56 1.17% 34 Commercial Containers 2 yd (3x per week)24.75 -127.83 18.79 1.13 $172.50 24.75 1.85 --(0.20)129.48 0.27 19.06 1.14 $174.43 $1.93 1.12% 35 Commercial Containers 2 yd (4x per week)33.00 -178.51 18.79 1.13 $231.43 33.00 2.58 --(0.26)180.83 0.27 19.06 1.14 $234.03 $2.60 1.12% 36 Commercial Containers 2 yd (5 x per week)41.25 -229.06 18.79 1.13 $290.23 41.25 3.32 - -(0.33) 232.05 0.27 19.06 1.14 $293.50 $3.27 1.13% 37 Commercial Containers 2 yd (6 x per week)49.50 -279.61 18.79 1.13 $349.03 49.50 4.05 - -(0.39) 283.27 0.27 19.06 1.14 $352.97 $3.94 1.13% 38 39 Commercial Containers 3 yd (1 x per week)16.50 -57.54 22.33 1.34 $97.71 16.50 0.83 - -(0.10) 58.27 0.32 22.65 1.36 $98.78 $1.07 1.10% 40 Commercial Containers 3 yd (2 x per week)33.00 -101.20 22.33 1.34 $157.87 33.00 1.46 - -(0.20) 102.46 0.32 22.65 1.36 $159.47 $1.60 1.01% 41 Commercial Containers 3 yd (3 x per week)49.50 -144.96 22.33 1.34 $218.13 49.50 2.10 - -(0.29) 146.77 0.32 22.65 1.36 $220.28 $2.15 0.99% 42 Commercial Containers 3 yd (4 x per week)66.00 -197.69 22.33 1.34 $287.36 66.00 2.86 - -(0.39) 200.16 0.32 22.65 1.36 $290.17 $2.81 0.98% 43 Commercial Containers 3 yd (5 x per week)82.50 -271.86 22.33 1.34 $378.03 82.50 3.93 - -(0.49) 275.30 0.32 22.65 1.36 $381.81 $3.78 1.00% 44 Commercial Containers 3 yd (6 x per week)99.00 -335.33 22.33 1.34 $458.00 99.00 4.85 - -(0.59) 339.59 0.32 22.65 1.36 $462.60 $4.60 1.00% 45 46 Commercial Containers 6 yd (1 x per week)33.00 -92.68 24.82 1.49 $151.99 33.00 1.34 - -(0.20) 93.82 0.36 25.18 1.51 $153.51 $1.52 1.00% 47 Commercial Containers 6 yd (2 x per week)66.00 -152.44 24.82 1.49 $244.75 66.00 2.20 - -(0.39) 154.25 0.36 25.18 1.51 $246.94 $2.19 0.89% 48 Commercial Containers 6 yd (3 x per week)99.00 -212.10 24.82 1.49 $337.41 99.00 3.07 - -(0.59) 214.58 0.36 25.18 1.51 $340.27 $2.86 0.85% 49 Commercial Containers 6 yd (4 x per week)132.00 -291.58 24.82 1.49 $449.89 132.00 4.22 - -(0.78) 295.02 0.36 25.18 1.51 $453.71 $3.82 0.85% 50 Commercial Containers 6 yd (5 x per week)165.00 -371.13 24.82 1.49 $562.44 165.00 5.37 - -(0.98) 375.52 0.36 25.18 1.51 $567.21 $4.77 0.85% 51 Commercial Containers 6 yd (6 x per week)198.00 -450.62 24.82 1.49 $674.93 198.00 6.52 - -(1.17) 455.97 0.36 25.18 1.51 $680.66 $5.73 0.85% 52 53 Commercial Containers 8 yd (1 x per week)44.00 -108.70 25.89 1.55 $180.14 44.00 1.57 - -(0.26) 110.01 0.38 26.27 1.58 $181.86 $1.72 0.95% 54 Commercial Containers 8 yd (2 x per week)88.00 -163.60 25.89 1.55 $279.04 88.00 2.36 - -(0.52) 165.44 0.38 26.27 1.58 $281.29 $2.25 0.81% 55 Commercial Containers 8 yd (3 x per week)132.00 -217.40 25.89 1.55 $376.84 132.00 3.14 - -(0.78) 219.76 0.38 26.27 1.58 $379.61 $2.77 0.74% 56 Commercial Containers 8 yd (4 x per week)176.00 -283.89 25.89 1.55 $487.33 176.00 4.10 - -(1.04) 286.95 0.38 26.27 1.58 $490.80 $3.47 0.71% 2016 2017 Disposal HHW Service Rental Tax CURRENT Disposal CPI Serv HHW FUEL IMPACT INC TEMP FUEL IMP Service CPI Rent Rental Tax PROPOSED increase % of increase 57 Commercial Containers 8 yd (5 x per week)220.00 -357.66 25.89 1.55 $605.10 220.00 5.17 - -(1.30) 361.53 0.38 26.27 1.58 $609.38 $4.28 0.71% 58 Commercial Containers 8 yd (6 x per week)264.00 -426.15 25.89 1.55 $717.59 264.00 6.16 - -(1.56) 430.75 0.38 26.27 1.58 $722.60 $5.01 0.70% 59 Commercial Containers 8 yd (7 x per week)308.00 -764.24 25.89 1.55 $1,099.68 308.00 11.06 - -(1.82) 773.48 0.38 26.27 1.58 $1,109.33 $9.65 0.88% 60 61 Commercial Compactors 2 yd (base price per pickup per week)5.08 -48.15 0.00 0.00 $53.23 5.08 0.70 - -(0.04) 48.81 - - -$53.89 $0.66 1.24% 62 Commercial Compactors 3 yd (base price per pickup per week)7.62 -65.74 0.00 0.00 $73.36 7.62 0.95 - -(0.06) 66.63 - - -$74.25 $0.89 1.21% 63 Commercial Compactors 4 yd (base price per pickup per week)10.15 -83.72 0.00 0.00 $93.87 10.15 1.21 - -(0.08) 84.85 - - -$95.00 $1.13 1.20% 64 Commercial Compactors 5 yd (base price per pickup per week)12.70 -101.73 0.00 0.00 $114.43 12.70 1.47 - -(0.10) 103.10 - - -$115.80 $1.37 1.20% 65 Commercial Compactors 6 yd (base price per pickup per week)15.24 -119.17 0.00 0.00 $134.41 15.24 1.73 - -(0.12) 120.78 - - -$136.02 $1.61 1.20% 66 Commercial Compactors 8 yd (base price per pickup per week)20.32 -160.21 0.00 0.00 $180.53 20.32 2.32 - -(0.14) 162.39 - - -$182.71 $2.18 1.21% 67 68 COMMERCIAL TEMPORARY TRASH 69 Commercial Temporary Service 3 yd Haul Svc (Municipal Solid Waste)3.81 -27.54 0.00 0.00 $31.35 3.81 0.40 - -(0.02) 27.92 - - -$31.73 $0.38 1.21% 70 Commercial Temporary Service 3 yd Haul Svc (Construction and Demolition)7.62 -94.01 0.00 0.00 $101.63 7.62 1.36 - -(0.06) 95.31 - - -$102.93 $1.30 1.28% 71 Commercial Temporary Service 3 yd (Monthly Rent)-0.00 22.33 1.34 $23.67 - - - - - - 0.32 22.65 1.36 $24.01 $0.34 1.44% 72 Commercial Temporary Service 3 yd (Daily Rent)-0.00 0.73 0.04 $0.77 - - - - - - 0.01 0.74 0.04 $0.78 $0.01 1.29% 73 74 Commercial Temporary Service 6 yd Haul Svc (Municipal Solid Waste)7.62 -37.86 0.00 0.00 $45.48 7.62 0.55 - -(0.05) 38.36 - - -$45.98 $0.50 1.10% 75 Commercial Temporary Service 6 yd Haul Svc (Construction and Demolition)15.24 -138.37 0.00 0.00 $153.61 15.24 2.00 - -(0.12) 140.25 - - -$155.49 $1.88 1.22% 76 Commercial Temporary Service 6 yd (Monthly Rent)-0.00 24.82 1.49 $26.31 - - - - - - 0.36 25.18 1.51 $26.69 $0.38 1.44% 77 Commercial Temporary Service 6 yd (Daily Rent)-0.00 0.82 0.05 $0.87 - - - - - - 0.01 0.83 0.05 $0.88 $0.01 1.15% 78 79 Commercial Temporary Service 8 yd Haul Svc (Municipal Solid Waste)10.16 -48.33 0.00 0.00 $58.49 10.16 0.70 - -(0.06) 48.97 - - -$59.13 $0.64 1.09% 80 Commercial Temporary Service 8 yd (Monthly Rent)-0.00 25.89 1.55 $27.44 - - - - - - 0.38 26.27 1.58 $27.85 $0.41 1.49% 81 Commercial Temporary Service 8 yd (Daily Rent)-0.00 0.85 0.05 $0.90 - - - - - - 0.01 0.86 0.05 $0.91 $0.01 1.11% 82 83 COMMERCIAL PERMANENT RECYCLING 84 Commercial Commingled Recyclable Collection Container Delivery Charge (3,5,6,8 yd options)-22.49 0.00 0.00 $22.49 - 0.33 - - - 22.82 - - -$22.82 $0.33 1.47% 85 86 Commercial Commingled Recyclable Collection 3 yd (Extra Dump)-13.34 0.00 0.00 $13.34 - 0.19 - -(0.02) 13.51 - - -$13.51 $0.17 1.27% 87 Commercial Commingled Recyclable Collection 3 yd (2 x month)-17.68 22.33 1.34 $41.35 - 0.26 - -(0.05) 17.89 0.32 22.65 1.36 $41.90 $0.55 1.33% 88 Commercial Commingled Recyclable Collection 3 yd (1 x week)-23.42 22.33 1.34 $47.09 - 0.34 - -(0.10) 23.66 0.32 22.65 1.36 $47.67 $0.58 1.23% 89 Commercial Commingled Recyclable Collection 3 yd (2 x week)-56.47 22.33 1.34 $80.14 - 0.82 - -(0.20) 57.09 0.32 22.65 1.36 $81.10 $0.96 1.20% 90 Commercial Commingled Recyclable Collection 3 yd (3 x week)-89.54 22.33 1.34 $113.21 - 1.29 - -(0.29) 90.54 0.32 22.65 1.36 $114.55 $1.34 1.18% 91 Commercial Commingled Recyclable Collection 3 yd (4 x week)-122.61 22.33 1.34 $146.28 - 1.77 - -(0.39) 123.99 0.32 22.65 1.36 $148.00 $1.72 1.18% 92 Commercial Commingled Recyclable Collection 3 yd (5 x week)-155.66 22.33 1.34 $179.33 - 2.25 - -(0.49) 157.42 0.32 22.65 1.36 $181.43 $2.10 1.17% 93 94 Commercial Commingled Recyclable Collection 5 yd (Extra Dump)-17.27 0.00 0.00 $17.27 - 0.25 - -(0.04) 17.48 - - -$17.48 $0.21 1.22% 95 Commercial Commingled Recyclable Collection 5 yd (2 x month)-31.04 22.64 1.36 $55.04 - 0.45 - -(0.08) 31.41 0.33 22.97 1.38 $55.76 $0.72 1.31% 96 Commercial Commingled Recyclable Collection 5 yd (1 x week)-45.97 22.64 1.36 $69.97 - 0.66 - -(0.16) 46.47 0.33 22.97 1.38 $70.82 $0.85 1.21% 97 Commercial Commingled Recyclable Collection 5 yd (2 x week)-86.90 22.64 1.36 $110.90 - 1.26 - -(0.33) 87.83 0.33 22.97 1.38 $112.18 $1.28 1.15% 98 Commercial Commingled Recyclable Collection 5 yd (3 x week)-127.40 22.64 1.36 $151.40 - 1.84 - -(0.49) 128.75 0.33 22.97 1.38 $153.10 $1.70 1.12% 99 Commercial Commingled Recyclable Collection 5 yd (4 x week)-168.11 22.64 1.36 $192.11 - 2.43 - -(0.65) 169.89 0.33 22.97 1.38 $194.24 $2.13 1.11% 100 Commercial Commingled Recyclable Collection 5 yd (5 x week)-208.81 22.64 1.36 $232.81 - 3.02 - -(0.81) 211.02 0.33 22.97 1.38 $235.37 $2.56 1.10% 101 102 Commercial Commingled Recyclable Collection 6 yd (Extra Dump)-21.08 0.00 0.00 $21.08 - 0.30 - -(0.05) 21.33 - - -$21.33 $0.25 1.19% 103 Commercial Commingled Recyclable Collection 6 yd (2 x month)-38.80 24.82 1.49 $65.11 - 0.56 - -(0.10) 39.26 0.36 25.18 1.51 $65.95 $0.84 1.29% 104 Commercial Commingled Recyclable Collection 6 yd (1 x week)-45.16 24.82 1.49 $71.47 - 0.65 - -(0.20) 45.61 0.36 25.18 1.51 $72.30 $0.83 1.16% 105 Commercial Commingled Recyclable Collection 6 yd (2 x week)-96.12 24.82 1.49 $122.43 - 1.39 - -(0.39) 97.12 0.36 25.18 1.51 $123.81 $1.38 1.13% 106 Commercial Commingled Recyclable Collection 6 yd (3 x week)-147.09 24.82 1.49 $173.40 - 2.12 - -(0.59) 148.62 0.36 25.18 1.51 $175.31 $1.91 1.10% 107 Commercial Commingled Recyclable Collection 6 yd (4 x week)-198.05 24.82 1.49 $224.36 - 2.86 - -(0.78) 200.13 0.36 25.18 1.51 $226.82 $2.46 1.10% 108 Commercial Commingled Recyclable Collection 6 yd (5 x week)-249.02 24.82 1.49 $275.33 - 3.60 - -(0.98) 251.64 0.36 25.18 1.51 $278.33 $3.00 1.09% 109 110 Commercial Commingled Recyclable Collection 8 yd (Extra Dump)-28.99 0.00 0.00 $28.99 - 0.42 - -(0.06) 29.35 - - -$29.35 $0.36 1.24% 111 Commercial Commingled Recyclable Collection 8 yd (2 x month)-48.01 25.89 1.55 $75.45 - 0.69 - -(0.13) 48.57 0.38 26.27 1.58 $76.42 $0.97 1.29% 112 Commercial Commingled Recyclable Collection 8 yd (1 x week)-54.52 25.89 1.55 $81.96 - 0.79 - -(0.26) 55.05 0.38 26.27 1.58 $82.90 $0.94 1.15% 113 Commercial Commingled Recyclable Collection 8 yd (2 x week)-115.70 25.89 1.55 $143.14 - 1.67 - -(0.52) 116.85 0.38 26.27 1.58 $144.70 $1.56 1.09% 114 Commercial Commingled Recyclable Collection 8 yd (3 x week)-176.89 25.89 1.55 $204.33 - 2.55 - -(0.78) 178.66 0.38 26.27 1.58 $206.51 $2.18 1.07% 115 Commercial Commingled Recyclable Collection 8 yd (4 x week)-238.09 25.89 1.55 $265.53 - 3.44 - -(1.04) 240.49 0.38 26.27 1.58 $268.34 $2.81 1.06% 116 Commercial Commingled Recyclable Collection 8 yd (5 x week)-300.99 25.89 1.55 $328.43 - 4.35 - -(1.30) 304.04 0.38 26.27 1.58 $331.89 $3.46 1.05% 117 118 Commercial Commingled Recyclable Collection 95 gallon carts (1 cart/week)-9.84 0.52 0.03 $10.39 - 0.14 - -(0.02) 9.96 0.01 0.53 0.03 $10.52 $0.13 1.25% 119 Commercial Commingled Recyclable Collection 95 gallon carts (2 cart/week)-14.52 1.04 0.06 $15.62 - 0.21 - -(0.03) 14.70 0.02 1.06 0.06 $15.82 $0.20 1.28% 120 Commercial Commingled Recyclable Collection 95 gallon carts (3 cart/week)-19.21 1.56 0.09 $20.86 - 0.28 - -(0.05) 19.44 0.03 1.59 0.10 $21.13 $0.27 1.29% 2016 2017 Disposal HHW Service Rental Tax CURRENT Disposal CPI Serv HHW FUEL IMPACT INC TEMP FUEL IMP Service CPI Rent Rental Tax PROPOSED increase % of increase 121 Commercial Commingled Recyclable Collection 95 gallon carts (4 cart/week)-23.91 2.08 0.12 $26.11 - 0.35 - -(0.07) 24.19 0.04 2.12 0.13 $26.44 $0.33 1.26% 122 Commercial Commingled Recyclable Collection 95 gallon carts (5 cart/week)-28.58 2.60 0.16 $31.34 - 0.41 - -(0.08) 28.91 0.05 2.65 0.16 $31.72 $0.38 1.21% 123 124 INDUSTRIAL TRASH 125 Industrial Trash Container Delivery Svc 6 - 10 yd -22.82 0.00 0.00 $22.82 - 0.33 - -(0.07) 23.08 - - -$23.08 $0.26 1.14% 126 Industrial Trash 6 - 10 yd containers (Haul Svc)-56.28 0.00 0.00 $56.28 - 0.82 - -(0.07) 57.03 - - -$57.03 $0.75 1.33% 127 128 Industrial Trash 6 yd Disposal Fee (Municipal Solid Waste)34.98 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $34.98 34.98 - - - - - - - -$34.98 $0.00 - 129 Industrial Trash 6 yd Disposal Fee (C&D/Compacted)69.96 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $69.96 69.96 - - - - - - - -$69.96 $0.00 - 130 Industrial Trash 6 yd Disposal Fee (Wood)17.52 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $17.52 17.52 - - - - - - - -$17.52 $0.00 - 131 Industrial Trash 6 yd Disposal Fee (Sheetrock)38.16 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $38.16 38.16 - - - - - - - -$38.16 $0.00 - 132 Industrial Trash 6 yd Disposal Fee (Clean Rock, Gravel, etc.)21.20 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $21.20 21.20 - - - - - - - -$21.20 $0.00 - 133 Industrial Trash 6 yd (Monthly Rent)-0.00 47.43 2.85 $50.28 - - - - - - 0.69 48.12 2.89 $51.01 $0.73 1.45% 134 Industrial Trash 6 yd (Daily Rent)-0.00 1.56 0.09 $1.65 - - - - - - 0.02 1.58 0.09 $1.67 $0.02 1.21% 135 136 Industrial Trash 8 yd Disposal Fee (Municipal Solid Waste)46.64 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $46.64 46.64 - - - - - - - -$46.64 $0.00 - 137 Industrial Trash 8 yd Disposal Fee (C&D/Compacted)93.28 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $93.28 93.28 - - - - - - - -$93.28 $0.00 - 138 Industrial Trash 8 yd Disposal Fee (Wood)23.36 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $23.36 23.36 - - - - - - - -$23.36 $0.00 - 139 Industrial Trash 8 yd Disposal Fee (Sheetrock)50.88 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $50.88 50.88 - - - - - - - -$50.88 $0.00 - 140 Industrial Trash 8 yd Disposal Fee (Clean Rock, Gravel, etc.)21.20 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $21.20 21.20 - - - - - - - -$21.20 $0.00 - 141 Industrial Trash 8 yd (Monthly Rent)-0.00 61.48 3.69 $65.17 - - - - - - 0.89 62.37 3.74 $66.11 $0.94 1.44% 142 Industrial Trash 8 yd (Daily Rent)-0.00 2.02 0.12 $2.14 - - - - - - 0.03 2.05 0.12 $2.17 $0.03 1.40% 143 144 Industrial Trash 10 yd Disposal Fee (Municipal Solid Waste)58.30 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $58.30 58.30 - - - - - - - -$58.30 $0.00 - 145 Industrial Trash 10 yd Disposal Fee (C&D/Compacted)116.60 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $116.60 116.60 - - - - - - - -$116.60 $0.00 - 146 Industrial Trash 10 yd Disposal Fee (Wood)29.20 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $29.20 29.20 - - - - - - - -$29.20 $0.00 - 147 Industrial Trash 10 yd Disposal Fee (Sheetrock)63.60 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $63.60 63.60 - - - - - - - -$63.60 $0.00 - 148 Industrial Trash 10 yd Disposal Fee (Clean Rock, Gravel, etc.)21.20 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $21.20 21.20 - - - - - - - -$21.20 $0.00 - 149 Industrial Trash 10 yd (Monthly Rent)-0.00 68.52 4.11 $72.63 - - - - - - 0.99 69.51 4.17 $73.68 $1.05 1.45% 150 Industrial Trash 10 yd (Daily Rent)-0.00 2.25 0.14 $2.39 - - - - - - 0.03 2.28 0.14 $2.42 $0.03 1.25% 151 152 Industrial Trash Container Delivery Svc 20 - 40 yd -22.82 0.00 0.00 $22.82 - 0.33 - -(0.07) 23.08 - - -$23.08 $0.26 1.14% 153 Industrial Trash/Recycling 20 - 40 yd screen lid/lift 0.00 $0.00 35.00 $35.00 154 155 Industrial Trash 20 - 40 yd containers (Haul Svc)-125.53 0.00 0.00 $125.53 - 1.82 - -(0.07) 127.28 - - -$127.28 $1.75 1.39% 156 Industrial Trash 20 - 40 yd containers (Haul Svc for Asbestos - Ada County)-155.17 0.00 0.00 $155.17 - 2.25 - -(0.07) 157.35 - - -$157.35 $2.18 1.40% 157 Industrial Trash 20 - 40 yd containers (Haul Svc for Asbestos - Idaho Waste Systems)-246.69 0.00 0.00 $246.69 - 3.58 - -(0.07) 250.20 - - -$250.20 $3.51 1.42% 158 159 Industrial Trash 20 yd Disposal Fee (Municipal Solid Waste)116.60 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $116.60 116.60 - - - - - - - -$116.60 $0.00 - 160 Industrial Trash 20 yd Disposal Fee (C&D/Compacted)233.20 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $233.20 233.20 - - - - - - - -$233.20 $0.00 - 161 Industrial Trash 20 yd Disposal Fee (Wood)58.40 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $58.40 58.40 - - - - - - - -$58.40 $0.00 - 162 Industrial Trash 20 yd Disposal Fee (Sheetrock)127.20 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $127.20 127.20 - - - - - - - -$127.20 $0.00 - 163 Industrial Trash 20 yd Disposal Fee (Clean Rock, Gravel, etc.)21.20 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $21.20 21.20 - - - - - - - -$21.20 $0.00 - 164 Industrial Trash 20 yd Disposal Fee (Asbestos - Ada County Landfill)800.00 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $800.00 800.00 - - - - - - - -$800.00 $0.00 - 165 Industrial Trash 20 yd Disposal Fee (Asbestos - Idaho Waste Systems)800.00 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $800.00 800.00 - - - - - - - -$800.00 $0.00 - 166 Industrial Trash 20 yd (Monthly Rent)-0.00 78.78 4.73 $83.51 - - - - - - 1.14 79.92 4.80 $84.72 $1.21 1.45% 167 Industrial Trash 20yd (Daily Rent)-0.00 2.59 0.16 $2.75 - - - - - - 0.04 2.63 0.16 $2.79 $0.04 1.45% 168 169 Industrial Trash 30 yd Disposal Fee (Municipal Solid Waste)174.90 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $174.90 174.90 - - - - - - - -$174.90 $0.00 - 170 Industrial Trash 30 yd Disposal Fee (C&D/Compacted)349.80 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $349.80 349.80 - - - - - - - -$349.80 $0.00 - 171 Industrial Trash 30 yd Disposal Fee (Wood)87.60 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $87.60 87.60 - - - - - - - -$87.60 $0.00 - 172 Industrial Trash 30 yd Disposal Fee (Sheetrock)190.80 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $190.80 190.80 - - - - - - - -$190.80 $0.00 - 173 Industrial Trash 30 yd Disposal Fee (Clean Rock, Gravel, etc.)21.20 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $21.20 21.20 - - - - - - - -$21.20 $0.00 - 174 Industrial Trash 30 yd Disposal Fee (Asbestos - Ada County Landfill)1200.00 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $1,200.00 1,200.00 - - - - - - - -$1,200.00 $0.00 - 175 Industrial Trash 30 yd Disposal Fee (Asbestos - Idaho Waste Systems)1200.00 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $1,200.00 1,200.00 - - - - - - - -$1,200.00 $0.00 - 176 Industrial Trash 30 yd (Monthly Rent)-0.00 96.27 5.78 $102.05 - - - - - - 1.40 97.67 5.86 $103.53 $1.48 1.45% 177 Industrial Trash 30 yd (Daily Rent)-0.00 3.16 0.19 $3.35 - - - - - - 0.05 3.21 0.19 $3.40 $0.05 1.49% 178 179 Industrial Trash 40 yd Disposal Fee (Municipal Solid Waste)233.20 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $233.20 233.20 - - - - - - - -$233.20 $0.00 - 180 Industrial Trash 40 yd Disposal Fee (C&D/Compacted)466.40 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $466.40 466.40 - - - - - - - -$466.40 $0.00 - 181 Industrial Trash 40 yd Disposal Fee (Wood)116.80 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $116.80 116.80 - - - - - - - -$116.80 $0.00 - 182 Industrial Trash 40 yd Disposal Fee (Sheetrock)254.40 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $254.40 254.40 - - - - - - - -$254.40 $0.00 - 183 Industrial Trash 40 yd Disposal Fee (Clean Rock, Gravel, etc.)21.20 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $21.20 21.20 - - - - - - - -$21.20 $0.00 - 2016 2017 Disposal HHW Service Rental Tax CURRENT Disposal CPI Serv HHW FUEL IMPACT INC TEMP FUEL IMP Service CPI Rent Rental Tax PROPOSED increase % of increase 184 Industrial Trash 40 yd Disposal Fee (Asbestos - Ada County Landfill)1600.00 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $1,600.00 1,600.00 - - - - - - - -$1,600.00 $0.00 - 185 Industrial Trash 40 yd disposal Fee (Asbestos - Idaho Waste Systems)1600.00 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $1,600.00 1,600.00 - - - - - - - -$1,600.00 $0.00 - 186 Industrial Trash 40 yd (Monthly Rent)-0.00 110.03 6.60 $116.63 - - - - - - 1.60 111.63 6.70 $118.33 $1.70 1.46% 187 Industrial Trash 40 yd (Daily Rent)-0.00 3.62 0.22 $3.84 - - - - - - 0.05 3.67 0.22 $3.89 $0.05 1.30% 188 189 Industrial Trash 10yd compactor Disposal Fee 116.60 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $116.60 116.60 - - - - - - - -$116.60 $0.00 - 190 Industrial Trash 15yd compactor Disposal Fee 174.90 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $174.90 174.90 - - - - - - - -$174.90 $0.00 - 191 Industrial Trash 18yd compactor Disposal Fee 209.88 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $209.88 209.88 - - - - - - - -$209.88 $0.00 - 192 Industrial Trash 20yd compactor Disposal Fee 233.20 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $233.20 233.20 - - - - - - - -$233.20 $0.00 - 193 Industrial Trash 25yd compactor Disposal Fee 291.50 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $291.50 291.50 - - - - - - - -$291.50 $0.00 - 194 Industrial Trash 30yd compactor Disposal Fee 349.80 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $349.80 349.80 - - - - - - - -$349.80 $0.00 - 195 Industrial Trash 36yd compactor Disposal Fee 419.76 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $419.76 419.76 - - - - - - - -$419.76 $0.00 - 196 Industrial Trash 40yd compactor Disposal Fee 466.40 -0.00 0.00 0.00 $466.40 466.40 - - - - - - - -$466.40 $0.00 - 197 198 INDUSTRIAL RECYCLING 199 Industrial Recycling Container Delivery Svc 6 - 10 yd -22.82 0.00 0.00 $22.82 - 0.33 - -(0.07) 23.08 - - -$23.08 $0.26 1.14% 200 Industrial Recycling 6 - 10 yd containers (Haul Svc)-56.28 0.00 0.00 $56.28 - 0.82 - -(0.07) 57.03 - - -$57.03 $0.75 1.33% 201 202 Industrial Recycling 6 yd (Monthly Rent)-0.00 47.43 2.85 $50.28 - - - - - - 0.69 48.12 2.89 $51.01 $0.73 1.45% 203 Industrial Recycling 6 yd (Daily Rent)-0.00 1.56 0.09 $1.65 - - - - - - 0.02 1.58 0.09 $1.67 $0.02 1.21% 204 205 Industrial Recycling 8 yd (Monthly Rent)-0.00 61.48 3.69 $65.17 - - - - - - 0.89 62.37 3.74 $66.11 $0.94 1.44% 206 Industrial Recycling 8yd (Daily Rent)-0.00 2.02 0.12 $2.14 - - - - - - 0.03 2.05 0.12 $2.17 $0.03 1.40% 207 208 Industrial Recycling 10 yd (Monthly Rent)-0.00 68.52 4.11 $72.63 - - - - - - 0.99 69.51 4.17 $73.68 $1.05 1.45% 209 Industrial Recycling 10 yd (Daily Rent)-0.00 2.25 0.14 $2.39 - - - - - - 0.03 2.28 0.14 $2.42 $0.03 1.25% 210 211 Industrial Recycling Contain Deliver Svc 20 -40 yd -22.82 0.00 0.00 $22.82 - 0.33 - -(0.07) 23.08 - - -$23.08 $0.26 1.14% 212 Industrial Recycling 20- 40 yd containers (Haul Svc)-125.53 0.00 0.00 $125.53 - 1.82 - -(0.07) 127.28 - - -$127.28 $1.75 1.39% 213 214 Industrial Recycling 20 yd (Monthly Rent)-0.00 78.78 4.73 $83.51 - - - - - - 1.14 79.92 4.80 $84.72 $1.21 1.45% 215 Industrial Recycling 20 yd (Daily Rent)-0.00 2.59 0.16 $2.75 - - - - - - 0.04 2.63 0.16 $2.79 $0.04 1.45% 216 217 Industrial Recycling 30 yd (Monthly Rent)-0.00 96.27 5.78 $102.05 - - - - - - 1.40 97.67 5.86 $103.53 $1.48 1.45% 218 Industrial Recycling 30 yd (Daily Rent)-0.00 3.16 0.19 $3.35 - - - - - - 0.05 3.21 0.19 $3.40 $0.05 1.49% 219 220 Industrial Recycling 40 yd (Monthly Rent)-0.00 110.03 6.60 $116.63 - - - - - - 1.60 111.63 6.70 $118.33 $1.70 1.46% 221 Industrial Recycling 40 yd (Daily Rent)-0.00 3.62 0.22 $3.84 - - - - - - 0.05 3.67 0.22 $3.89 $0.05 1.30% 222 0.00 223 Industrial Recycling 15 - 40 yd Compactors (Haul Svc)-125.53 0.00 0.00 $125.53 - 1.82 - -(0.07) 127.28 - - -$127.28 $1.75 1.39% 224 225 INDUSTRIAL BIOSOLIDS 226 Biosolids Biosolids Hauling - Ada County Landfill (per haul)466.40 -192.11 0.00 0.00 $658.51 466.40 2.78 - -(0.07) 194.82 - - -$661.22 $2.71 0.41% 227 Biosolids Biosolids Hauling - Idaho Waste Systems Landfill (per haul)407.00 -255.95 0.00 0.00 $662.95 407.00 3.71 - -(0.07) 259.59 - - -$666.59 $3.64 0.55% 228 229 MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES 230 Miscellaneous Collection Tires 9 (ea.) up to 16 inch -5.47 0.00 0.00 $5.47 - 0.08 - - - 5.55 - - -$5.55 $0.08 1.46% 231 Miscellaneous Collection Freon-containing units/appliances -52.14 0.00 0.00 $52.14 - 0.76 - - - 52.90 - - -$52.90 $0.76 1.46% 232 Miscellaneous Collection Non-Freon units/appliances 0.00 $0.00 15.00 $15.00 233 Miscellaneous Collection Special Collection (for each increment of 10 minutes)-20.90 0.00 0.00 $20.90 - 0.30 - - - 21.20 - - -$21.20 $0.30 1.44% 234 Miscellaneous Collection Bulky Item Pickup (per item)0.00 $0.00 15.00 $15.00 235 Miscellaneous Collection Extra Cart Pickup/Go Back (per occurrence)1.10 -10.12 0.00 0.00 $11.22 1.10 0.15 - -(0.07) 10.20 - - -$11.30 $0.08 0.71% 236 Miscellaneous Collection Relocation (all sizes) - Commercial/Industrial -22.82 0.00 0.00 $22.82 - 0.33 - -(0.07) 23.08 - - -$23.08 $0.26 1.14% 237 Industrial Services Turnaround compactor fee -Commercial/Industrial -15.96 0.00 0.00 $15.96 - 0.23 - - - 16.19 - - -$16.19 $0.23 1.44% 238 Miscellaneous Collection Weekend Charge - Industrial -64.57 0.00 0.00 $64.57 - 0.94 - - - 65.51 - - -$65.51 $0.94 1.46% 239 Miscellaneous Collection Pressure Wash - Industrial -190.45 0.00 0.00 $190.45 - 2.76 - -(0.07) 193.14 - - -$193.14 $2.69 1.41% 240 Industrial Services Dry Run - Large industrial containers and compactors -96.99 0.00 0.00 $96.99 - 1.41 - -(0.07) 98.33 - - -$98.33 $1.34 1.38% 241 Industrial Services Dry Run (6 - 10 yd)-56.28 0.00 0.00 $56.28 - 0.82 - -(0.07) 57.03 - - -$57.03 $0.75 1.33% 242 Miscellaneous Collection Commerical Combo Lock Replacement 0.00 0.00 27.53 $27.53 32-gal 64-gal 95-gal Service Cost $11.32 $11.44 $11.56 Ada County Disposal $1.00 $2.88 $4.76 Carts $1.04 $1.04 $1.04 Household Hazardous Waste $0.24 $0.24 $0.24 2015 Temp (3 months /12 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 Sales tax $0.06 $0.06 $0.06 Customer Rate $13.67 $15.67 $17.67 Meridian Franchise Fees (6%)$0.82 $0.94 $1.06 Net to Republic Services $12.79 $14.67 $16.55 Net to State of Idaho $0.06 $0.06 $0.06 Rate increase on Service Costs 1.01% Rate increase on Disposal Costs 0.00% 32-gal 64-gal 95-gal Service Cost $11.50 $11.62 $11.74 Ada County Disposal $1.00 $2.88 $4.76Carts$1.06 $1.06 $1.06 Household Hazardous Waste $0.24 $0.24 $0.24 2016 Fuel tax change in law $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 2015 Temp (3 months /12 ($0.01)($0.01)($0.01) Sales tax $0.06 $0.06 $0.06 Customer Rate $13.85 $15.85 $17.85 Meridian Franchise Fees (6%)$0.83 $0.95 $1.07 Net to Republic Services $12.96 $14.84 $16.72 Net to State of Idaho $0.06 $0.06 $0.06 Proposed Residential Collection Rate Structure - FY 2017 Residential rates 1.02% - 1.45% Commercial cart rates (95 gallon)1.11% - 1.15% Commercial container rates (1/2, 3, 6, 8 yds.)0.70% - 1.47% Commercial compactor rates 1.20% - 1.24% Temporary commercial container rates (3, 6, 8 yds.)1.09% - 1.49% Roll off hauling services (rent and hauling)1.14% - 1.49% Miscellaneous collection services 0.71% - 1.46% Table 1 Percentage of Rate Change by System Bureau of Labor Statistics Series Id: Area: Item: Base Period: Years: Year Jun 2004 193.300 2005 198.000 2006 206.400 2007 212.680 2008 223.040 2009 219.865 2010 221.147 2011 228.075 2012 232.701 2013 236.227 2014 241.616 2015 244.332 2016 248.267 Change in CPI from 2015 to 2016 3.935 Total Percentage Change 1.611% Ninety Percent of Change in CPI 1.45% All items 1982-84=100 2004 to 2016 Attachment C: Change In Consumer Price Index June to June Consumer Price Index - All Urban Consumers Original Data Value CUUR0400SA0 Not Seasonally Adjusted West urban Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics Generated on: July 18, 2013 (06:14:57 PM) Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: August 23, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: $A PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing TEFRA Hearing for Cole Valley Christian Schools MEETING NOTES Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING N I IN CONNECTI6N WITH THE ISSUANCE BY THE PUBLIC FINANCE AUTHORITY OF ITS EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2016 (COLE VALLEY CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS PROJECT) IN AN AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL NOT TO EXCEED $5,500,000 PUBLIC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing, as required by Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, will be held by the City Council of the City of Meridian, Idaho (the "City") at the City Council Chambers, 33 E. BroadwayAv- enue, Meridian, Idaho 83642 on Tuesday, August 23, 2016, at or about 6:00 p.m. on the pro- posed issuance by the Public Finance Authority, a commission organized under and pursuant to the provisions of Sections 66.0301, 66.03Q3 and 66.0304 of the Wisconsin Statutes (the "Issuer"), of its Educational Facilities Revenue Bonds, Series 2016 (Cole Valley Christian Schools Project), in the aggregate principal amount not to exceed $5,500,000 (the `Bonds"): The Bonds are expected to be issued pursuant to 66.0304 of the Wisconsin Statutes, as amended, by the Issuer, and the proceeds from the sale of the Bonds will be loaned to Cole Community Church, Inc., an Idaho nonprofit corporation, or an affiliate thereof (the "Bor rower'), to (a) refinance all of the outstanding Colorado Educational and Cultural Facilities AuthorityAdjustable Rate Demand Revenue Bonds, Series 2007 (Cole Valley Christian Schools Project), originally issued in the aggregate principal amount of $5,380,000 (the "Prior Bonds"), the proceeds of which were loaned to CV Schools, LLC, an affiliate of the Borrower, and used to (i) refinance certain indebtedness of the Borrower, the proceeds of which were used to finance or refinance the acquisition, construction, renovation, installation, and equipping of a 46,000 square foot secondary facility containing classrooms, an auditorium, offices., and a 24,646 square foot gymnasium with common areas connected to the main building located at 200 East Carlton Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83642 (the "Campus'), (ii) finance a portion of the costs of the construction and equipping of a 24,646 square foot gymnasium with common areas connected to the main building located at the Campus, and (iii) pay certain costs of issuance of the Prior Bonds; (b) refinance certain indebtedness of the Borrower used to fi- nance or refinance the ac4iiisition, construction, renovation; installation, and equipping of certain real property and improvements thereto, including repairing and renovating HVAC, remodeling an internal passageway, and upgrading security systems located at the Campus and acquiring, renovating, and landscaping around existing buildings located at 1108 and 1153 NE 21d Yi Street, Meridian, Idaho 83642 (the facilities described in clauses (a) and (b), the "Project' ), (c) fund a debt service reserve, if any, and (d) pay certain eosts,of issuance of the Bonds and of refunding the Prior Bonds. The Project will be owned and operated by the Borrower. The Bonds will be limited obligations of the Issuer payable solely from the loan repayments to be made by the Borrower to the Issuer, and certain funds and accounts established by the bond indenture for the Bonds. The City of Meridian, Idaho will not bear any responsibility for the tax-exempt status of the Bonds, the debt service on the Bonds or any other matter related to the Bonds. Interested persons wishing to express their views on the issuance of the Bonds by the Issuer or on the nature or location of the Project proposed to be financed or refinanced may attend the public hearing or, prior to the time of the hearing, submit written comments to the office of the City Clerk of the City of Meridian, Idaho at Meridian City Hall, 33,E. Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83642. CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO By: IS/ Jaycee Holman Jaycee Holman, Interim City. Clerk NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING a IN CONNECTION WITH THE ISSUANCE BY THE PUBLIC FINANCE AUTHORITY OF ITS EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2016 (COLE VALLEY CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS PROJECT) IN AN AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL NOT TO EXCEED $5,500,000 PUBLIC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing, as required by Section 147(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, will be held by the City Council of the City of Meridian, Idaho (the "City") at the City Council Chambers, 33 E. Broadway Av- enue, Meridian, Idaho 83642 on Tuesday,August 23, 2016, at or about 6:00 pm. on the pro- posed issuance by the Public Finance Authority, a commission organized under and pursuant to the provisions of Sections 66.0301, 66.0303 and 66.0304 of the Wisconsin Statutes (the "Issuer"), of its Educational Facilities Revenue Bands, Series 2016 (Cole Valley Christian Schools Project), in the aggregate principal amount not to exceed $5,500;000 (the "Bonds"). The Bonds are expected to be issued pursuant to 66.0304 of the Wisconsin Statutes, as amended, by the Issuer, and the proceeds from the sale of the Bonds will `be loaned to Cole Community Church, Inc., an Idaho nonprofit corporation, or an affiliate thereof (the "Bar- rower"), to (a) refinance all of the outstanding Colorado Educational and Cultural Facilities AuthontyAdjustable Rate Demand Revenue Bonds, Series 2007 (Cole Valley Christian Schools Project), originally issued in the aggregate principal amount of $5,380,000 (the "Prior Bonds"), the proceeds of which were loaned to CV Schools, LLC,an affiliate of the Borrower, and used to (i) refinance certain indebtedness of the Borrower, the proceeds of which were used to finance or refinance the acquisition, construction, renovation, installation, and equipping of a 46,000 square foot secondary facility containing classrooms, an auditorium, offices, and a 24,646 square foot gymnasium with common areas connected to the main building located at 200 East Carlton Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83642 (the "Campus'D, (ii) finance a portion of the costs of the construction and equipping of a 24,646 square foot gymnasium with common areas connected to the main building located at the Campus, and (iii) pay certain costs of issuance of the Prior Bonds; (b) refinance certain indebtedness of the Borrower used to fi- nance or refinance the acquisition, construction, renovation, installation, and equipping of certain real property and improvements thereto, including repairing and renovating HVAC, remodeling an internal passageway, and upgrading security systems located at the Campus and acquiring, renovating, and landscaping around existing buildings located at 1108 and 1153 NE 2°d 1h Street, Meridian, Idaho 83642 (the facilities described in clauses (a) and (b), the "Project"), (c) fund a debt service reserve, if any, and (d) pay certain costs of issuance of the Bonds and of refunding the Prior Bonds. The Project will be owned and operated by the Borrower. The Bonds will be limited obligations of the Issuer payable solely from the loan repayments to be made by the Borrower to the Issuer, and certain funds and accounts established by the bond indenture for the Bonds. The City of Meridian,.Idaho will not bear any responsibility for the tax-exempt status of the Bonds, the debt service on the Bonds or any other matter related to the Bonds. Interested persons wishing to express their views on the issuance of the Bonds by the Issuer or on the nature or location of the Project proposed to be financed or refinanced may attend the public hearing or, prior to the time of the hearing, submit written comments to the office of the City Clerk of the City of Meridian, Idaho at Meridian City Hall, 33 E. Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83642. CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO By: is/ Jaycee Holman Jaycee Holman, Interim City Clerk Publish August 15, 2016 Publish August 8, 2016 Valley Times P.O. Box 1790 - Eagle, Idaho 83616 LEGAL ADVERTISING PROOF OF PUBLICATION Account: LLP Identification: CO Z ' _�-C'kh'ws Address: Z 5�D 1Jl,�a °{' StY ,Run Dates: ► T U R 32-3,j Number Lines f L Attention: B., ilL44-D Other 0117 Amount .�-V `1 2 Frank Thomason, being duly sworn, deposes and says: That he is the Principal Clerk of Valley Times, a weekly newspaper published at Eagle, Ada County, State of Idaho; that the said newspaper is in general circulation in the said County of Ada, and in the vicinity of Meridian, Star, and Eagle, and has been uninterruptedly published in said County during a period of seventy-eight consecutive weeks prior to the first publication of this notice, a copy of which is attached hereto, and that the notice was published in Valley Times, in conformity with Section 60-108, Idaho Code, as amended, for 2 time(s) in the regular and entire issue of said paper, and was printed in the newspaper proper, and not in a supplement; and that said notice was published on the following dates.- Beginning ates:Beginning A -L , Ending 4Y— ®' Q"T E R So � ,��� C �•ep.0®fns$ JJ�J ¢. STATE OF IDAHO) �' �• CF''RY )SS COUNTY OF ADA) On this ` �Aiday of in the year of 2016 •f pV�before me, a Notary Puc, personally appeared . q �% "•., 1 Frank Thomason, known or identified to me to be the person �'�•,, STA TE 0.,.� whose name is subscri ed to the within instrument, !!!!1"" d being by me first duly sworn, declared that the stateme she ein are true, laid acknowledged tome that / e executed the same. It Notary Public for Idaho V Residing at Boise, ID My Commission expires: :�Z- , j7 1 1 �7 I Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: Auqust 23, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: 8B PROJECT NUMBER: H-2016-0008 ITEM TITLE: Browning Plaza Public Hearing Continued from June 28, 2016 for Browning Plaza (H-2016-0008) by SLN / Boise -Waltman, LLC Located 505, 521, 615 and 675 Waltman Lane 1. Request: Two (2) Year Time Extension on the Preliminary Plat to Obtain the City Engineer's Signature on a Final Plat MEETING NOTES Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS MO MOTSu_ `1 M M.Ak - CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING SIGN -IN SHEET Date: August 23, 2016 Item # Project Number: Project Name: H-2016-0008 Browning Plaza Time Extension Please print your name For Against Neutral Do you wish to testify (Y/N) XX C; I TY 0FcL,f CXTY 0 LER Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: Auqust 23, 2016 ITEM TITLE: Waltman Property ITEM NUMBER: $C PROJECT NUMBER: Public Hearing Continued from June 28, 2016 for Waltman Property (aka Browning Plaza) (H-2016-0038) by SLN Planning/Boise-Waltman, LLC Located 505, 521, 615, and 675 Waltman Lane Request: Modification to the Development Agreement to Remove the Requirement (#5.1.8) for Corporate Drive to be Extended North of the Site fro MEETING NOTES Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING SIGN -IN SHEET Date: August 23, 2016 Item # Project Number: Project Name: H-2016-0038 :.1 Waltman Property MDA Please print your name For Against Neutral Do you wish to testify (YIN) �n.VE,r Tv C L RK S F FTCF Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: August 23, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: 8D PROJECT NUMBER: H-2016-0094 ITEM TITLE: Bainbridge Subdivision No. 4 Hnal HaTT7 aln ri ge ubdivision No. - - y Brighton Investments, Located East of N. Black Cat Road, Midway Between W. Chinden Boulevard and W. McMillan Road Request: Final Plat Approval Consisting of Thirty -Six (36) Building Lots and Four (4) Common Lots on 13.03 Acres of Land in an R-8 Zoning District MEETING NOTES Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: August 23, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: $E PROJECT NUMBER: H-2016-0099 ITEM TITLE: TM Crossing Subdivision No. 1 Final Plat for TM Crossing Subdivision No. 1 (H-2016-0099) by Brighton Investments, LLC Located at the Northeast Corner of S. Ten Mile Road and 1-84 Request: Final Plat Approval Consisting of 20 building lots and 1 common lot on 36.54 acres of land in the C -G Zoning District MEETING NOTES y APPROVED Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS Changes to Agenda: ® Item #813: Browning Plaza — TEC (H-2016.0008) — Applicant requests continuance to Oct. 25th ® Item #8C: Waltman Property - MDA (H-2016-0038) - Applicant requests continuance to Oct. 25th ® Item #8D: Bainbridge Subdivision No. 4 — FP (H-2016-0094) — Applicant requests continuance to Sept. 6th ® Item #81: Vicenza Subdivision No. 3 — FP (H-2016.0096) — Applicant requests continuance to Sept 6th ® Item #8J: Vicenza Subdivision No. 4 — FP (H-2016-0097) — Applicant requests continuance to Sept 6th Item #8E: TM Crossing Subdivision No. 1 (H-2016.0099) Application(s): Final Plat Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 36.54 acres of land, zoned C -G, located at the northeast corner of 1-84 and S. Ten Mile Road. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Commercial Summary of Request: Request for final plat consisting of 20 commercial building lots and 1 common area lot on 36.54 acres of land in the C -G zoning district for the 1st phase of TM Crossing Subdivision. Staff has reviewed the proposed final plat for substantial compliance with the approved preliminary plat (PP -12-003). Because the number of proposed buildable lots is fewer than shown on the approved preliminary plat and the amount of common area is the same, staff deems the final plat to be in substantial compliance with the preliminary plat as required. Written Testimony: Mike Wardle, Brighton Corporation (applicant response to the staff report) — See Letter dated August 18th; memo from staff dated August 23rd Staff Recommendation: Approval w/the modifications requested by the applicant to site specific (VI.) conditions 4 and 5 and general condition (VII.) 3, 8, 19, and 23. Further, after meeting with the applicant regarding site specific (VI.) conditions 10 and11, staff requests those conditions are stricken from the report; the applicant has committed to making some voluntary modifications to the design of their pressurized irrigation system that will help facilitate the connection of the recycled water system at some point in the future. Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2016-0099, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of August 23, 2016: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2016-0099, as presented during the hearing on August 23, 2016, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2016-0099 to the hearing date of August 23, 2016 for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) C�(�E IDIANI- Community Development Department Community Development Dept. Meridian City Hall, Suite 102 33 E. Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho 83642 MEMORANDUM August 23, 2016 To: Mayor and City Council From: Bruce Freckleton, Development Services Manager Re: TM Crossing Staff Report Conditions On Monday, August 22, 2016, representatives of Brighton Corporation met with Public Works Department Staff to discuss certain issues centered on Site Specific Conditions of approval #10 and #11. As a result of that discussion, we feel that it is in the best interest of the City and Brighton to strike these two conditions from the staff report. The applicant has committed to making some voluntary modifications to the design of their pressurized irrigation system that will help facilitate the connection of the recycled water system at some future point in time. Thank you Bruce VI. SITE SPECIFIC I mill ... ■iiiiiiiiiiiiirm Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: August 23, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: 8F PROJECT NUMBER: H-2016-0087 ITEM TITLE: Creason Creek No. 1 Public Hearing Continued from August 16, 2016 for Creason Creek No. 1 (H-2016-0087) by ULC Management, LLC Located Near the Southeast Corner of N. Linder Road and W. Ustick Road Request: Modification to the Development Agreement to Allow the Developer to Receive Four (4) Building Permits Prior to Recording a Final Plat MEETING NOTES Pe.vitd f6tA eK- I'ID Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING SIGN -IN SHEET Date: August 23, 2016 Item # Project Number: Project Name: H-2016-0087 Creason Creek No. 1 MDA Please print your name For Against Neutral Do you wish to testify (Y/N) Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: August 23, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: 8G PROJECT NUMBER: H-2016-0087 ITEM TITLE: Creason Creek No. 1 Final Plat Approval Continued from August 16, 2016 for Creason Creek No. 1 (H-2016- 0087) by ULC Management, LLC Located Near the Southeast Corner of N. Linder Road and W. Ustick Road Request: Modification to the Final Plat to Alter the Number of Buildable and Common Lots and to Move the Multi -Use Pedestrian Pathway Out of the Nampa Meridian Irrigation District's Easement and Into a Common Lot and to Update the Landscape Plan, Plat and Open Space Calculations MEETING NOTES Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS August 22, 2016 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Josh Beach, Associate Planner CC: Bill Nary, City Clerk RE: Creason Creek Subdivision – H-2016-0087 (MDA) On August 18th, staff met with the applicant to discuss the Creason Creek MDA application. A new development agreement provision and exhibit has been prepared for City Council’s approval. Staff recommends the following modification to Development Agreement provision C: 5.1 Owner/Developer shall develop the Property in accordance with the following special conditions: a. Development of this site shall substantially comply with the preliminary plat, landscape plan and the conceptual residential building elevations shown in Exhibit C of this agreement. b. The Owner/Developer shall provide a minimum of 4.56 acres of common open space and the following amenities on as shown on the landscape plan: 5-foot walking paths, a dog park, covered picnic area, playground equipment, a 10-foot multi-use pathway and several pedestrian bridges as proposed. The owner/developer shall provide commercial grade play structure, benches, and picnic tables as part of the development. c. The Owner/Developer is allowed to commence construction of two (2) homes on the site, one on each of the two existing parcels (S1201223065, and S1201223045) located on future lots (Lot 15, Block 2 and Lot 5 Block 3) of Creason Creek Subdivision 1 as shown in the attached exhibit. Access to these building sites shall comply with the Fire Department’s standards and any other applicable life safety requirements. Including, but not limited to having available live fire hydrants to provide fire protection. These structures shall be located so that the building setbacks and dimensional standards shall be in compliance with the R-8 district standards and all applicable zoning regulations of the City of Meridian. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy for these structures, the final plat shall be recorded and all site improvements shall be completed and accepted by the City. d. The Owner/Developer shall use a licensed surveyor to stake out the location of the future lots for the two building sites. e. The Owner/Developer shall assume any and all of the risk for any mistakes caused by proceeding to construct homes ahead of the final plat and shall agree to move or remove any structure that is out of compliance with all applicable standards. f. The Owner/Developer shall hold harmless and indemnify City for any and all claims, damages, or liens that result from proceeding to build home in advance of the final plat. g. All homes constructed in advance of the final plat shall be a part of the Creason Creek HOA and shall conform to all building and occupancy standards to be set forth in the restrictive covenants(CC&Rs) for the future subdivision. h. The bottom elevation of all structural footings shall be set a minimum of 12 inches above the highest established normal ground water elevation. i. Owner/Developer shall recognize the 10 foot PUDI easements along all future lot lines common to a future public right of way and along all future rear lot lines. j. All construction shall comply with all other applicable requirements of the Order of Conditional Approval of the Final Plat for the Creason Creek Subdivision, H-2016- 0022. As revised above, staff believes the modified development agreement provision along with the attached exhibit should ensure that the minimum standards will be met to issue two (2) building permits as desired by the applicant. Please note that the issuance of building permits prior to the Final Plat being recorded, and the development improvements being substantially completed is outside of normal protocol and will require additional staff involvement and staff time. Item #8F and G: Creason Creek Subdivision (H-2016.0087) Application(s): ➢ Development Agreement Modification ➢ Final Plat Modification Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of approximately 15.75 acres of land, zoned R-8, located near the southeast corner of N. Linder Rd. and W. Ustick Rd. Summary of Request: The applicant is requesting to amend the recorded development agreement (DA) approved with the annexation of the property, recorded as Instrument #2016-019362. Additionally, the applicant requests approval to modify the Creason Creek No.1 final plat to convert Lot 4, Block 1 to a common lot/drainage facility and to relocate the proposed pathway outside of the Nampa - Meridian Irrigation easement. This site consists of four legal parcels. The applicant would like to start construction on four houses, one on each parcel. Therefore, the applicant requests a new DA provision be included that would allow the applicant of obtain approval of four (4) building permits prior to the property being subdivided. Provided that access to the building sites meets the Fire Department's standards and any other applicable life safety requirements, staff does not object to the applicant commencing construction on these four structures. These structures should be located so that they comply with the setbacks of the R-8 zoning district for the future platted lots. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy for these structures, the final plat should be recorded and all improvements completed. DA Modification: Staff is supportive of the requested DA provision as the UDC allows for the approval. c. The Owner/Developer is allowed to commence construction of two (2) homes on the site, one on each of the two existing parcels (51201223065, and 51201223045) located on future lots (Lot 15, Block 2 and Lot 5 Block 3) of Creason Creek Subdivision 1 as shown in the attached exhibit. Access to these building sites shall comply with the Fire Department's standards and any other applicable life safety requirements. Including, but not limited to having available live fire hydrants to provide fire protection. These structures shall be located so that the building setbacks and dimensional standards shall be in compliance with the R-8 district standards and all applicable zoning regulations of the City of Meridian. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy for these structures, the final plat shall be recorded and all site improvements shall be completed and accepted by the City. d. The Owner/Developer shall use a licensed surveyor to stake out the location of the future lots for the two building sites. e. The Owner/Developer shall assume any and all of the risk for any mistakes caused by proceeding to construct homes ahead of the final plat and shall agree to move or remove any structure that is out of compliance with all applicable standards. f. The Owner/Developer shall hold harmless and indemnify City for any and all claims, damages, or liens that result from proceeding to build home in advance of the final plat. g. All homes constructed in advance of the final plat shall be a part of the Creason Creek HOA and shall conform to all building and occupancy standards to be set forth in the restrictive covenants(CC&Rs) for the future subdivision. h. The bottom elevation of all structural footings shall be set a minimum of 12 inches above the highest established normal ground water elevation. i. Owner/Developer shall recognize the 10 foot PUDI easements along all future lot lines common to a future public right of way and along all future rear lot lines. j. All construction shall comply with all other applicable requirements of the Order of Conditional Approval of the Final Plat for the Creason Creek Subdivision, H-2016-0022. The council approved the final plat with a total of 34 single-family residential lots and 6 common lots. Due to requirements of the Nampa -Meridian Irrigation District (NMID), the applicant has requested to modify the plan and to reduce the number of buildable lots to address NMID's concerns. The applicant proposes to reduce the number of buildable lots from thirty four (34) to thirty three (33), with the number of common lots remaining the same at six (6). The open space for the subdivision has changed from 0.82 acres of qualified open space that was approved with the previously approved final plat, to 0.90 acres of qualified open space for the proposed final plat. The amenity package for the development will not change. The applicant is proposing a 10 -foot multi -use pathway and a dog park as part of this phase of development for the Creason Creek Subdivision. The remaining amenities that were approved as part of the Overall Creason Creek Subdivision will be constructed with a subsequent phase of development. Final Plat Modification: Staff is supportive of the requested changes to the final plat. In order to proceed with the modification as proposed by the applicant, the plat notes must be modified as follows: Proposed Changes to Final Plat: 1) Plat Note #7 - Currently, this plat note does not indicate that Lot 4, Block 1 is a common lot for the subdivision. The plat note needs to be revised to indicate this as a common lot that shall be owned and maintained by the HOA. 2) Modify condition 5(b) to read as follows: Extend Lot 3, B!oGk 1 to the west boundaryof Lot F Blonlr 1 The entire lot Lot 4, Block 1 shall be designed to include the 10 -foot wide multi -use pathway and landscape standards set forth in UDC 11-3A-8 and UDC 11-313-12C. The developer shall provide a minimum fourteen (14) foot wide recreational pathway easement covering the pathway route for City Council approval and recordation. Depict 4 -foot tall bollard lighting, or other appropriate lighting source, along all pathways through common areas that are not visible from a public street as set forth in UDC 11 -3A -8H. Staff recommends approval of the development agreement modification and final plat modification with recommended provisions. History: • In 2015, the property received approval of Annexation, Preliminary Plat and Alternative Compliance (AZ -15-009, PP -15-014, ALT -15-020,) to develop a residential subdivision consisting of 51 single family residential lots and 8 common lots on approximately 15.75 acres of land. • In 2016, the property received approval of the first phase of the subdivision that consists of 34 single-family residential building lots and 6 common lots on 8.72 acres of land (H-2016-0022). Written Testimony: None Staff Recommendation: Approval Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2016-0087, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of August 23, 2016: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2016-0087, as presented during the hearing on August 23, 2016, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2016-0087 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING SIGN -IN SHEET Date: August 23, 2016 Item # Project Number: Project Name: H-2016-0087 Final Plat Modification - Creason Creek #1 Please print your name For Against Neutral Do you wish to testify (Y/N) ,- FC',1f'N_,,�,_, Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: Auaust 23, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: $H PROJECT NUMBER: H-2016-0095 ITEM TITLE: Volterra Heights Subdivision No. 2 Final Plat for Volterra Heights Subdivision No. 2 (H-2016-0095) by Cottonwood Development, LLC Located South of W. McMillan Road and West of N. Ten Mile Road Request: Final Plat Approval Consisting of Twenty -Eight (28) Single Family Residential Building Lots and Four (4) Common Lots on Approximately 21.5 Acres in the R-8 Zoning District MEETING NOTES ,77:�t�,xJ: �✓ pPpflUVED Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS Item #8H: Volterra Heights Subdivision No. 2 (H-2016-0095) Application(s): ➢ Final Plat Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 9.44 acres of land, zoned R-8, located near the southwest corner of W. McMillan Road and N. Ten Mile Road, Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: MDR Summary of Request: Request for final plat consisting of 28 residential building lots and 7 common area lot on 9.44 acres of land in the R-8 zoning district for the 2nd phase of Volterra Heights Subdivision. Staff has reviewed the proposed final plat for substantial compliance with the approved preliminary plat (PP -10-005). Because the number of buildable lots is the same and the amount of common open space is the same, staff finds the proposed plat to be in substantial compliance with the approved preliminary plat as required by UDC11-6B-3C.2. Written Testimony: None Staff Recommendation: Approval w/ conditions Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2016-0095, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of August 23, 2016: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2016-0095, as presented during the hearing on August 23, 2016, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2016-0095 to the hearing date of August 23, 2016 for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: Auqust 23, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: 81 PROJECT NUMBER: H-2016-0096 ITEM TITLE: Vicenza Subdivision No. 3 Final Plat for Vicenza Subdivision No. 3 (H-2016-0096) by Cottonwood Development, LLC Located North of W. McMillan Road; Between N. Black Cat Road and N. Ten Mile Road Request: Final Plat Approval Consisting of Twenty -Eight (28) Buildable Lots and Four (4) Common Lots on Approximately 10.62 Acres in the R-4 Zoning District MEETING NOTES w1111t. i� `l���ll�i Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: August 23, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: 8J PROJECT NUMBER: H-2016-0097 ITEM TITLE: Vicenza Subdivision No.4 Final Plat for Vicenza Subdivision No. 4 (H-2016-0097) by Cottonwood Development, LLC Located North of W. McMillan Road, Between N. Black Cat Road and N. Ten Mile Road Request: Final Plat Approval Consisting of Seventeen (17) buildable Lots and Three (3) Common Lots on Approximately 5.01 Acres in the R-4 Zoning District MEETING NOTES Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: August 23, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: 9A PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Presentation of West Regional Emergency Services Master Plan MEETING NOTES (l Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS West Regional Fire Service Master Plan Meridian Report Overview August 22, 2016 Overview of Process •Site Visit – November 16-19, 2015 •Citizen Task Force •November 18 •February 24 •April 13 (evening) •Environment Scan •Elected Officials •Internal FD Staff •Citizens •Evaluation of Current Conditions •Future System Demand Projections •Future Delivery System Models •Develop, Review, & Deliver Master Plan Report Services Provided- Organizational Statement •The Fire Department provides the following services to the community: •Fire Suppression in all structures, vegetation fires, and all other fires •Emergency Medical Services at the ALS non-transport level •Vehicle Rescue and Extrication at the Operations level •Emergency Incident Command and Management •Fire Cause and origin determination •Fire Code development, inspection, and enforcement •Fire and Life Safety Public Education •Hazardous Materials response at the Awareness level •Still and Swift-water Rescue at the Awareness level Services not currently provided by MFD •The Fire Department does not provide the following services to the community: •Technical Rescue •Rope, Confined Space, Trench, Heavy Vehicle/Machinery, Building Collapse •AARF- Airport firefighting •Tac-Med- Tactical paramedics attached to law enforcement •Community Paramedicine- Currently Ada County Paramedics •Ambulance Transport- Currently Ada County Paramedics •Incident Management Team- Potential for Regional Team •Emergency Management- Done through Ada County •Arson Investigation- Law Enforcement primary Citizen Survey - Services Citizen Survey - Planning Citizen Survey - Staffing, Response & Cost Projections Label Regional Population Projection Label Regional Response Projection Label MFD Budget Projection Responses Emergencies by Agency – 2013-14 Benchmarks/Outcomes for Response •Fire Responses: •Keep fire contained to the room or area of origin •0- Fire Related deaths •Maintain 100% civilian rescue rate •90% of fires result in higher $’s save than $’s loss (Residential and Commercial) •EMS/Rescue Responses •Maintain 75% cardiac arrest save rate •Extrication completed within 25 minutes of call, and 15 minutes from scene arrival •STEMI EKG sent to cardiologist within 10 minutes of scene arrival •Critical Trauma patients treated and en-route to hospital within 15 minutes of scene arrival Modern Fire Dept. Challenge- Contents and Construction NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology); Underwriters Laboratory- Independent Safety Science company Label Effective Response Force Critical Task Analysis Firefighter Personnel Needed Based On Level of Risk Max. Risk Significant Risk Moderate Risk Low Risk Attack line 4 4 2 2 Back-up line 4 2 2 (2) Support for hose lines 4 3 2 Search and rescue 4 4 2 Ventilation 4 2 2 Rapid intervention team 4 4 2 Pump Operator 2 1 1 1 2nd apparatus/ladder operator 1 (1) 1 Command 2 1 1 1# Safety 2 1# 1 Salvage 4 Rehabilitation 2 Division/group supervisors (2) Total 37-39 23 14-16 3-6 () indicates tasks may not be required at all such incidents # indicates task may, at times, be completed concurrently with other position Label Meridian Staffing Comparison- FF’s/1000 Compares against populations 50,000-99,999 Response time recommendation Two components to achieving travel time standard •Geography- Stations are situated such that crews can achieve the adopted travel time standard within their District boundaries (NFPA recommendation is 4 minute travel time) •Reliability- Station call volume is maintained to allow the District unit the availability to respond to a call within their District boundary. Requires “overlap” coverage. Department should strive for 85% reliability factor. •Current reliability Station 1= 72%; Station 2-5 = 82-86% •Total response time is combination of: •Call Processing time; Turnout Time; Travel Time Recommended Call Processing and Turnout Times •Call Processing Time- 60 Seconds or less 90% of the time. Follows NFPA 1221- “Standard for Installation, Maintenance, and Use of Emergency Services Communication Systems”. Defined as the time it takes from the initial phone call to notifying units of a call. •Current data = unable to analyze due to poor data information from Dispatch center. Local analysis from BFD shows they are significantly over that. •Can be significantly reduced with Station Alerting system •Turnout Time- 60 Seconds or less 90% of the time for EMS calls; 90 Seconds or less 90% of the time for Fire calls •Current data = 99 seconds at the 90th percentile Recommended Travel Time Objectives Population Density Population/ Square Mile Travel Time Objective Percent Compliant Urban Density > 2,001 5 Minutes 90 Percent Suburban Density 1,001 – 2,000 7 Minutes 90 Percent Rural Density 51 – 1,000 9 Minutes 90 Percent Frontier Density 0 -- 50 15 Minutes 90 Percent Label Label Label Label Actual Travel Time Coverage by Pop/Percent Population Classification 5 Minute Travel 7 Minute Travel 9 Minute Travel 15 Minute Travel Metro/Urban 85% 95% 98% 100% Suburban 64% 90% 95% 100% Rural 24% 49% 71% 100% Frontier 10% 22% 32% 74% Label MFD Concurrent Emergencies Single 2 3 4 5 2013 81.8% 16.3% 1.8% 0.2% 0.0% 2014 80.6% 17.1% 2.1% 0.1% 0.0% 2015 78.6% 18.7% 2.5% 0.2% 0.0% Recommendations Label MFD Management Recommendations •Provide performance evaluations for all employees •Establish regular review process for Department policies •Conduct Critical Task Analysis for common response types •Develop and adopt a new Strategic Plan to guide the workforce •Develop a Policy of services offered by the Department •Provide a six-minute review (Q&A) of a featured policy at the beginning of every training session • Enhance the MFD website, adding a description of services provided •Examine the Cross-staffing workload, response times, and unit reliability at Station 1. •Adopt Response Time Performance Objectives •Implement a Community Risk Reduction program Label MFD Staffing Recommendations •Implement regular labor/management meetings to improve two-way communication •Develop and implement a quality assurance program for all EMS responses •Implement a Safety Committee to review accidents •Consider creating a logistics position to focus on fleet, equipment, stations, and communications needs •Consider additional staffing in Training Division to meet current needs •Consider additional staff at Station 1 to ensure adequate reliability of Truck 31 for district response •Implement Alternate Response Units Label MFD Training Recommendations •Develop and adopt comprehensive emergency driving training •Continue efforts to provide a 14 week recruit training academy •Repair burn room on Training Grounds (at Station 1) •Continue examination and budgeting efforts for a two- story burn house and confined space prop Label Mid-Long Term Regional Strategies •Pursue a Regional Fire & EMS Dispatch Center •Implement a Regional Records Management System •Implement Peak Activity Units •Explore Regional Cooperation Opportunities •Jointly staffed Peak Activity Units •Jointly staffed truck company •Joint purchasing agreement •Functional consolidation: •Logistics Center •Apparatus Maintenance and Mobile Repairs •Training Division •Fire Investigation Team (FIT) •Special Operations/Technical Rescue services •Administrative consolidation •Full merger (via formation of fire districts) Regional Cooperation Label Example of Regional Efficiency Star Fire District – •Station 52 serves as a maintenance facility •Staffed with Emergency Vehicle Technician Supervisor •Performs emergency vehicle maintenance and repair with qualified staff for many agencies in Treasure Valley •Adds value and efficiency to all regional partners Thank You! Discussion – Questions? Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: August 23, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: 9B PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Legal Department Report: Alcohol Beverage Catering Permit Ordinance MEETING NOTES Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: August 23, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: 9C PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Community Development: Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) PY15 Substantial Amendment: Public Service MEETING NOTES ti - Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS Community Development Block Grant Substantial Amendment Reallocation of Funds (CATCH to Meridian Food Bank) Substantial Amendment to PY2015 Action Plan Substantial Amendment occurs when: Funding change of 25% Change in allocation priorities New activity to the Action Plan Triggers Citizen Participation Plan Comment Period Public Hearing Situation: CATCH is unable to expend their allocation of $13,200 for Case Management HUD restrictions are a barrier (definition of homelessness) Meridian Food Bank can absorb and expend Within the Public Service cap of 15% Leverage with bulk-purchase/coupon agreements Substantial Amendment to PY2015 Action Plan Staff Recommendation: Reallocate $10,000 from CATCH activity to the MFB Activity CATCH to expend $3,200 September 27th, 2016: Public Hearing on Substantial Amendment. Substantial Amendment to PY2015 Action Plan Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: August 23, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: 9D PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Community Development: Transportation Programs and Projects Update - Discuss Ada County Highway District's Draft FY2017-2021 Integrated Five -Year Work Plan (IFYWP), the Idaho Transportation Investment Program (ITIP), and COMPASS' Change in Motion Report MEETING NOTES Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS Memo TO: Mayor Tammy de Weerd City Council Members FROM: Caleb Hood, Planning Division Manager DATE: August 18, 2016 RE: Transportation Programs and Projects Update August 23rd, 2016 City Council Agenda Item ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Staff gave the “All Things Transportation” update to Council in June. Since then, some additional developments in the transportation realm have occurred. Staff will run through these programs and projects with the Council during the August 23rd meeting. ACHD 2017-2021 Integrated Five Year Work Plan (IFYWP): In March, the City sent ACHD our list of highest priority roadway, intersection and Community Program projects. On May 18th, ACHD sent a letter back to the City recognizing the list of transportation priorities sent for potential inclusion in the Integrated Five-Year Work Plan (IFYWP) for FY2017-2021. On Wednesday, August 10th, the ACHD Commission approved release of the 2017-2021 IFYWP for public comment. Public comments are being accepted through September 9th; the adoption hearing is planned for October 26th. Below are the “major” changes to Roadways, Intersections and Community Program Projects from the currently-adopted IFYWP to the draft IFYWP within the Meridian area (construction year listed): NEW Projects: Linder Road, Cayuse Creek Drive to Chinden Blvd., 2021; Linder Road, Ustick Road to McMillan Road, PD; Lake Hazel/Eagle, UF; Linder Road/UPRR Crossing Upgrade, 2020; Black Cat Road/UPRR Crossing Upgrade, 2018; and, Locust Grove Road, Puffin Street to Overland Road Pedestrian Improvements, PD. ADVANCED Projects: Eagle Road, Amity Road to Victory Road, PD to 2021; Eagle Road and Amity Road Dual Lane RAB, PD to 2021; and, SH 69(Meridian Road)/Lake Hazel Intersection, UF to 2021. DELAYED Projects: Linder Road, Franklin Road to Pine Avenue, 2019 to 2020; Ten Mile Road/Amity Road, 2019 to 2021; and, Eagle Road Adaptive Traffic Signal Improvements, 2017 to 2018. REMOVED Projects (Does not include completed projects): Ten Mile, Victory Road to Overland Road. During the August 23rd meeting, Staff will hand out a prioritization spreadsheet that lists all of the roadway and intersection projects considered in the IFYWP process. Staff will discuss with Council if a letter to ACHD is warranted and if so, talking points to be included. For a link to more information on the IFYWP, including a complete listing of all the proposed projects in Ada County, go here: http://www.achdidaho.org/Departments/PP/5Year.aspx 2 ITD 2017-2021 ITIP: The 2017-2021 Idaho Transportation Investment Program (ITIP) is open for public review and comment. There are a handful of projects in Meridian and our Area of City Impact listed in the draft ITIP including: railroad crossing upgrades on Linder and Black Cat, relocating the ITD maintenance yard from Meridian/I-84 to Canyon County, adaptive signal timing along Eagle Road, adding a signal to the Lake Hazel/Meridian Road intersection, realigning Pollard Lane at Chinden Boulevard, and widening Chinden between Eagle Road and Locust Grove Road as a Strategic Initiatives project. This project intends to add an additional westbound and eastboun d lane on US-20/26 (Chinden) between Locust Grove and Eagle Road. The right-of-way and widening will occur on the south side of the corridor. Below are more details. US 20/26, CHINDEN; LOCUST GROVE TO EAGLE Key No: ORN19790 Program Year: 2021 Beginning Milepost: 39.22 Ending Milepost: 40.22 City: Boise/Meridian County: ADA ITD Admin District: 3 Funding Category: MAJRWIDN Total Cost: $7,475,000 Costs By Year 2017: $200,000 2018: $250,000 2019: $2,175,000 2020: $0 2021: $4,850,000 Preliminary: $0 Change in Motion Report: COMPASS develops a regional long-range transportation plan for Ada and Canyon Counties called Communities in Motion (CIM). The plan is guided by goals developed by the COMPASS Board and helps ensure roads, bridges, and transportation services (buses, etc.) are ready for the future. Long-range planning helps prioritize future transportation projects based on public input and how the region is likely to grow. COMPASS collects and evaluates data to assess the region’s progress toward achieving CIM goals and summarizes that information in Change in Motion reports. Below is the recently approved “scorecard” for Meridian and an overall regional summary of how we are doing at meeting the performance measures established in CIM. Additional information and the full Change in Motion report can be found here: http://www.compassidaho.org/prodserv/gtsm -perfmonitoring.htm COMBINED PROJECT PRIORITIZATION - FY 2017-2021 Attachment 3 DRAFT Monday, August 01, 2016 3:02 PM General Information Cost -Benefit Analysis Program Criteria Ranking --------- PROJECT GIS Type Adopted FYWP Signal Warrant Functional Class Estimated Annual Project Safety Annual Congestion Benefit- CostRatio: CICAC PIS Support 1Importance Pts: Area Plan Access Previous city Investmnt Limits Roadways to Adjusted Benefit/ Cost Ratio ---- ----- Const Cost Benefit (�)_ _Benefit --Mgmt Pts -- Bi . keways 1 Cloverdale Rd, Fairview Ave Ustick Rd RC0087 RD 2018 MA $3,772,539 $187,850 $33,370,000 198.11 0 -5---- 5-.----8 10 7 221.88, -2 Ustick Rd, Meridian Rd / Locust Grove Rd RD202-37 RD 2018 PA $2,922,791 $188,845 $12,215,000 84.75 0 10! 10 0 10 8 0 95.48 3 Ustick Rd, Linder Rd /Meridian Rd Franklin Rd, Black Cat Rd /Ten Mile Rd RD202-35 RC0152 RD RD 2918 2017 PA PA $2,833,133 $77,214 $1,450,157 $35,513 $10,635,000 $8,310,000 82.56 79.98 0 0 10 15 0 5 8 7 - 6: 4 6 0 91.09 88.24 4 5 Ustick Rd and Meridian Rd IN202-06 Rebuild 2018 PA -MA $4,569,952 $68,784 $581,000 $114,330 $9,760,000 $744,000 39.03 0 7! 5 0 6: 9 5 43.19 6 US 20/26 (Chinden Blvd) and Curtis Rd IN215-03 Rebuild 2020 PA -MA 29.55 0 0" 5 0 3� 10 0 31.32 7 Orchard St, Gowen Rd 1-84 On -Ramp RD207-01 RD PD PA $5,228,000 $43,595 $7,145,000 27.50 0 51 15 5 01 10 6 31.26 8 1State St, Glenwood St Pierce Park Ln RD208-04 RD OF PA $1,326,000 $77,115 $1,480,000 I $3,925,000 23.49 22.84--- 0 0 U 15 o 0 0 0 0' 10 9 0 0 25.45 23.53 9: 10 Locust Grove Rd, Fairview Ave / Ustick Rd Five Mile Rd, Overland Rd / Franklin Rd RD210-02 RD203-04_ RD RD FTR FTR MA PA $3,559,000 $7,123,000 $140,265 $315,100 $6,738,000 19.80 0 0 0 0 0 10 7 20.92 11�1 SH 69 (Meridian Rd) and Lake Hazel Rd IN205-70 New 2021 1B 2 3B PA -PA $139,000 $117,138 $195,000 18.04 0 01 5 0 01 0 5 18.64 0 0� 5 5 6! 10 7 16.28 12 Cloverdale Rd, Ustick Rd / McMillan Rd 0092 RD 2019 MA $4,237,000 $3,147,400 $5,050,591 $187,800 $32,425 $380,970 $2,920,000 $1,975,000 $1,560,000 14.67 12.76 11.61 12.01 13= 14 Linder Rd, Ustick Rd / McMillan Rd IRD202-18 Fairview Ave and Cole Rd JIN213-01 RD Rebuild PD 2018 MA PA -PA 0 0 0 0 10 61 10 1! 0 0 10 0 0: 7 8� 10 0! 6 5 0 5 13.70 13.31 12.49 15 Victory Rd, Locust Grove Rd/ Eagle Rd RD215-02 RD FTR MA $3,600000 $37,188 $2,124,000 0 0-----0, 0 0 0 5 5 1 0 5 0: 0 5 4 16 17 Victory Rd, Maple Grove Rd / Cole Rd IRD207-28 Cloverdale Rd, Amity Rd / Victory Rd RD207-10 RD RD FTR FTR MA MA $6,024,000 $3,801,000 $3,772,000 $217,438 $111,425 $104,450 $3,320,000 $2,065,000 $1,410,000 11.74 11.45 8.09 12.33 11.79 8.36 18 Five Mile Rd, Lake Hazel Rd /Amity Rd - ------- ------ Victory Rd, Eagle Rd / Cloverdale Rd Lake Hazel Rd and Five Mile RdIN205-59 RD215-07 RD FTR FTR PD MA MA PA -MA 0 0 01 0 10 5 0 0 U! 0 01 i 2 6 0 5 ----5- 5 ,19 20 PP1208-69 RD Rebuild $10,409,000 $2,737,000 $48,250 $2,088,000 $1,056,000 -8.08-- 7.72 0--..-. 0 8.27 8.11 21 - ---------- Cole Rd and Franklin Rd Maple Grove Rd, Amity Rd Victory Rd IN203-14 RD207-21 Rebuild RD 2019 PID PA -PA MA $8,977,301 $6,917,000 00 $3,243,000 $270,071 $76,275 $7,513 $154,888 $1,920,000 $2,260,000 $880,000 $960,000 $2,105,000 .$1,555,000 6.76 6.34---- 6.88 6.52 - ------ --- 5.92 0 0 0 0 0 5 7 5 15 0 0 a 5 10! 15 0 5 0 0 5 0 4 10 0! 0 61; 10 0; 0 i 0 10 -8 10 0 5 0 5 0 0 7.84 7.26 7.14 6.99 6.95 22 23 24 State St and Pierce Park Ln Maple Grove Rd, Lake Hazel Rd / Amity Rd JIN210-03 IRD207-20 Rebuild RD 1 2021 FTR MA 25 Maple Grove Rd, Victory Rd / Overland Rd State St and Veterans Memorial Pkwy RD207-22 IN205-112 RD Rebuild 2020 2018 MA PA MA $6,622,000 $9,298,017 $102,825 $232,645 6.77 26 27:. Fairview Ave and Locust Grove Rd IN211-05 Rebuild PD PA -MA $6,457,000 $205,411 $1,080,000 5.97 0 51 5 5 21 8 0 6.47 283 29 Locust Grove Rd, Victory Rd Overland Rd Ten Mile Rd, Victory Rd / Overland Rd RD202-44 RCO299 RD RD FTR OF MA PA $3,444,000 $4,546,000 $131,400 $22,325 $65,875 $122,283 $850,000 $1,285,000 $1,850,000 $500,000 5.70 5.66 5.20 0 0 0 0 6! 0 8: 5 0i 0 8 15 0 0 5 0 0 9 0� 2 O� 10 6 10 5 0 4 5 6.08 6.04 6.02 5.96 30 31 Cloverdale Rd, Victory Rd / Overland Rd - -------- State Stand Glenwood St RD207-11 IN207-03 RD Rebuild FTR OF MA PA -PA $6,767,000 $3,587,000 $148,825 $61,062 32 - --------- - - 33 Locust Grove Rd, Ustick Rd McMillan Rd Broadway Ave/Avenue B and Idaho St/Warm Springs Ave RD202-20 IN205-95 RD Rebuild FTR PD MA $2,880,000 $4,576,593 $645,000 $1,055,000 5.51 4.96 0 0 0 0 0 0 0: 8 10 ------- 6 5 5.79 5.29 MA -MA 34 Cloverdale Rd, Lake Hazel - Rd / Amity Rd IRD207-09 RD FTR MA ------------ $2,252,000 $47,313 $59,945 $510,000 $1,365,000 4.95 4.75 0 0 0. 0 0 0 5 5 Or 0 0 10 4 5 5.10 5.07 35 Cloverdale Rd, Overland Rd / Franklin Rd RD207-12 RD FTR MA $6,000,000 36 37, 38 - State St, Collister Dr 36th St Linder Rd, Pine Ave / Cherry Ln. Lake Hazel Rd and Maple Grove Rd RD208-06 RD207 25 - IN205-69 RD RD Rebuild OF FTR PD PA MA PA -MA $10,522,000 $2,789,000 $2,565,000 $147,680 $112,150 $9,129 $2,140,000 $475,000 $552,000 4.35 4.21 4.38 0 0 0 O� 15 91 5 0: 10 0 0 0 0; 10 & 10 01 0 0 5 5 4.71 --- 4.62 4.60 39 SH 69 (Meridian Rd) and Hubbard Rd IN205-66 New 2021 1B 1C 2 3B PA -MA $138,000 $69,225 $0 4.04 0 9; 5 0 0; 2 0 4.26 4.11 �40 Eagle Rd and Amity Rd Roundabout (Dual Lane) JIN215-05 Rebuild 2021 PA -MA $1,181,000 $160,167 $72,000 0 0 5 0 2� 0 0 4.21 41 Victory Rd, Cloverdale Rd /Five Mile Rd I RD207-26 RD FTR MA $4,159,000 $65,675 $765,000 3.99 0 - 0 0 --- 5 ---- 01 5 5 4.19 3.44 42 Cloverdale Rd, McMillan Rd / Chinclen Blvd (US 20/26) RD207-13 RD 2021 MA $4,992,000 $49,799 $810,000 01 0' 5 5 5 10 0 3.73 43 44 Orchard St Extension, Lake Hazel Rd Gowen Rd Linder Rd and Deer Flat Rd RD216-03 IN211-01 RD Rebuild OF 2020 PA MA -MA $1,927,700 $917,748 $183,500 $324,000 $360,000 3.36 3.28 0 0 51 15 100 0 0: 7 2i 10 0 5 3.66 3.63 -�45� Eagle Rd, Amity Rd -/ Victory Rd RD207-33 RD 2021 PA $5,004,000 $12,050 $805,000 3.27 0 1 10 5 2 6 i 0 3.53 46 State St, Pierce Park Ln / Collister Dr RD208-05 RD OF PA $6,930,000 $164,965 $915,000 3.12 0 01 15 0 01 10 0 3.38 47 Cole Rd and Victory Rd IN205-97 Rebuild 2020 PA -MA $6,702,000 $167,390 $490,000 2.94 0 3! 5 5 3.12 48 49 Lake Hazel Rd, Eagle Rd / Cloverdale Rd Eagle Rd, Lake Hazel Rd /Amity Rd RD209-18 RD216-04 RD RD RD FTR FTR PA PA $3,396,000 $3,808,000 $13,750 $28,650 $485,625 --- $528,000 2.94 2,92 0 0 0 1 0 10 0 0 : 0 0 0 4 0 0 3.09 3.06 50; Meridian Rd, Cherry Ln / Ustick Rd RD207-23 2020 MA $5,427,000 $55,855 $715,000 2.84 0 1 0 0 3; 91 5 3.01 51 State St, 36th St / 27th St RD208-07 RD OF PA $5,180,000 $119,960 $585,000 2.72 0 0 15 0 61 10 0 3.00 52 Lake Hazel Rd, Cole Rd Orchard St Extension RD216-02 RD UF PA $2,683,000 $324,000 242 ----�146 01 6 15 0 01 71 0 2.65 Ten Mile Rd, Ustick Rd / McMillan Rd IRD202-32 RD PID MA $3,986,000 $34,413 $455,000 10 0 21 8 2.621 Attachment 3 General Information ----- ---- ----------- -------------._.._..__._....------ -------------.... Cost -Benefit Analysis ------------------ Program Criteria Ranking PROJECT Is Type Adopted FYWP Const Yr Signal Warrant --- Functional Class Estimated Annual Project Safety Cost ($)- Benefit ($) _ $95,817 Annual Congestion elfos _ Benit ($)__ _ $520;000 ---------- Benefit- CostRatio: _ _ _ _ 2.18 .1 -------- CICAC Pts - 0 --- Support Importance Pts: Pts: _ --___ _ 9 -- Area Plan Access Mgmt 0 -- - Previous City Investmnt Limits Pts 8 10 ---� Roadways to Bikeways...- 5 Adjusted Benefit/ t atio 2.52 54 State Stand Collister Dr IN203-21 IRD207-24 Rebuild 2018 55 ^ - _ - -----..- ------ Ustick Rd, Ten Mile Rd ( Linder Rd _ RD OF - - -PA-C_ PA $1,755,361 -- - --- -- - 2,890,000 $22 058 -- $310 000 - 2.30 -- -- - 0 -15 ...- - -- - 0. 10 0 - 0 � 10 5 - 2.49 56 SH 16 and Beacon Light Rd IN205 11 New 201_7 113 23A38 EX -MA $43,500 $119,863 $5,000 2.06 0 10_' 5 0 6 3 5 2.26 57 _ Lake Hazel Rd, Cloverdale Rd Five Mile Rd _ RD207-29 RD OF PA 3 471000 $46,100 $277 500 1 86 0 0. 15 5 0, 0 5 2.01 58,11Linder Rd, Chinden Blvd (US 20/26) / SH 44 (State St) RD207-19 RD FTR_ MA $23,813,000 $102,388 $1,920,000 0 4, 15 0 OI, 2 5 1.85 59 ----... e Mile - -p._ ---Rd .. Lake Hazel Rd, Five Mile Rd / Maple Grove Rd RD207-30 RD _ 1- OF _ _ PA $94,125 75 $161875 _ _1.70 1.43 -------- 0 -- --- -- 0, 15 - - 5 ------- 0, 0 -- ---- 5 1.55 ---- 60 -- 1 Linder Rd, Cayuse Creek Dr/ Chinden Blvd (US 20/26) --- RD202-17 --- RD 2021 ._..------ - MA -- --$3,568,000 --- -- - $1,458,400 $51,775 --- $50,000 ------ 1.40 0 -- ----------. 0; 10 _.-....-- --- - 0 ----.._._..-_ 0 9 5 1.51 61 Lake Hazel Rd and Cloverdale Rd IN205-34 Rebuild PD PA -MA --- 6,602,000 $65,799 - $ 282,000 1.28 1.28 0 0, 0 5 1.3462. -- - --- Ten Y. Rd - - - aSta -- -- N2 -- - - -2 -- .......- -- 2 - --600 - $ --- - - 80 -- - - - $200,000 ---- -- - - 1.29 - .__-... 0 --- ---- - 0 _ 0 - ----- - 0 6a_ - - 0 -_-_ 1.32 63 Eagle Rld and e St _-_ - - - - - -- IN2011-04 Rebind FTR -38 MA -MA $4 448000 $2,880,800 - ---- $2,5064 $81,125 - - ------ $250,000 --- $70,000 - 1.14 1.07 - _- 0 0 - - 8�_--0 _ 5 _ 6 10 5 _ 1.27 --- 1.199 _ 64 ;__ Linder Rd, Franklin Rd /Pine Ave - - ---- -- -- -..__._ .. - _ Linder Rd, Cher Ln Ustick Rd RD213-16 ._. ----- RD209-15 RD - RD 2020 - -.. FTR - - - MA --- MA 0 -- 0 -- 9: � 5 0 5 0 0 0 6' 9 0! 9 5 5 65 6,647 000 138 600 -- - - $170,000_ .. - - 0.93 0.99 66 _ Ten Mile Rd McMillan Rd / Chinden Blvd (US 20/26) Lake Hazel Rd, Maple Grove Rd /Cole Rd (CIP Buildout) RD202-31 RD216-05 I RD RD ---- PD FTR --- -- MA PA - $3,427 000 - $18 750 $65,000 --- - 0.49 - -- 0 0 ---- - _ 10 0 15 0 0 _ 21 8 0i 0 0 0 0.53 67 $2,590,000 $45,563 $12,000 0.44 0.46 68 Linder Rd, SH 44 (State St) / Floating Feather Rd - _ RD209-28- RD FTR - MA $5,113,700 -- $10,950 $48,000 0.25 _- 0 _ _ 5' 15 _ 0 0I _ 9 - 5 0.28 69 Cole Rd and Lake Hazel Rd IN215-02 New 2019 PA -PA $5,542,000$12 000 1- 0.04 0 6 10 5 2, 1 0 0.04 70 Lake Hazel Rd and Eagle Rd IIN216-01 New OF - PA -PA $5,016,000 } $6,000 -- 0.02 -- 0 _ 0 10 _ 0 D; 1� _ 0 0.02 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: August 23, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: 9E PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: City Council: Discussion on Performance Auditor Position MEETING NOTES Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: August 23, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: 10 PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Future Meeting Topics MEETING NOTES -Fr' Pu& z:, c )P% 30 Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: August 23, 2016 ITEM TITLE: ITEM NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: 11 Executive Session per Idaho State Code 74-206 (1)(c): To acquire an interest in real property which is not owned by a public agency; and 74-206A (1) (a) a governing body or its designated representatives may hold an executive session for the specific purpose of: (a) Considering a labor contract offer or to formulate a counteroffer / v) - MEETING NOTES Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS