Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-11-15Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda Tuesday, November 15, 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. 1. City Council Chambers 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho Tuesday, November 15, 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 O Luke Cavener O Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Community Invocation by Troy Drake with Calvary Chapel Meridian 4. Adoption of the Agenda Adopted 5. Amended onto agenda: Proclamation for School Psychology Awareness Week 6. Consent Agenda Approved A. Approve Minutes of November 1, 2016 City Council Regular Meeting B. Memorandum of Agreement for Contribution to 2017 Concerts on Broadway C. Award of Bid and Approval of Purchase Order 17-0084 for 1000’ of 48” Class 3 Reinforced Concrete Pipe to Oldcastle Precast per Formal IFB #PKS-1658-10518 for the “RETA HUSKEY PARK” project for a Not-To- Exceed amount of $75,260.00 D. Approval of Purchase Order #17-0066 for New and Replacement Sensus Water Meters to Ferguson Enterprises in the Not-To-Exceed amount of $466,500.00. This PO is a sole source purchase per the previously approved Sole Source for Sensus Water Meters. E. Approval of Task Order 10624.a to Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. for the “WATER MAIN EXTENSION, AMITY RD AND LINDER RD, MERIDIAN TO VICTORY PROJECT 10624.a" for a Not-to-Exceed Amount of $168,609.00 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda Tuesday, November 15, 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. F. Approval of Award of Bid and Agreement to Star Construction, LLC for the “WRRF OUTFALL PIPE RIPRAP EXTENSION” project for a Not -To-Exceed amount of $58,509.00 G. Approval of Cooperative Agreement between the City and Valley Regional Transit for “Annual Dues and Service Contribution” for a Not-To-Exceed amount of $180,194.00 H. Approval of Contract Amendment No. 1 to extend the contract for “Poly- Aluminum Chloride” to Kemira Water Solutions in the Not-To-Exceed amount of $60,000.00 I. Agreement to Accept Payment in Lieu of Installing Street Lights at Silverwater Subdivision No. 3 J. Resolution No. 16-1178: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, SETTING FORTH CERTAIN FINDINGS AND PURPOSES TO DECLARE SURPLUS PROPERTY AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN TO DONATE CERTAIN FIRE DEPARTMENT PROPERTY OF NOMINAL VALUE TO LOYAL TO ONE, A LOCAL NON-PROFIT MINISTRY 7. Items Moved From the Consent Agenda None 8. Community Items/Presentations A. Children’s Museum Presentation Continued to November 22, 2016 B. Historic Preservation Commission: TourBuddy Digital Walking Tour 9. Department Reports A. Mayor’s Office: Mayor’s Youth Advisory Council Update B. Public Works: Approval of a Budget Amendment for $65,000.00 for the Emergency Repair of the Collections Building Approved C. Parks & Recreation: New Neighborhood Park Update D. Community Development: Amendments to Professional Services Agreements with the Idaho Division of Building Safety for Mechanical and Electrical Plan Review and Inspection Services Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda Tuesday, November 15, 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. E. First Amendment to September 1, 2015 Professional Services Agreement Between Idaho Division of Building Safety and City of Meridian for Electrical Plan Review and Inspection Services Approved F. First Amendment to September 1, 2015 Professional Services Agreement Between Idaho Division of Building Safety and City of Meridian for Mechanical Plan Review and Inspection Services Approved G. Legal Department: Beer and Wine License Contingent Approval for Frankie’s Java LLC Approved 10. 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. A. Public Hearing for Proposed Winter 2016 – 2017 Fee Schedule of the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department B. Resolution No. 16-1179: A Resolution Adopting the Winter 2016-2017 Fee Schedule of the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department; Authorizing the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department to Collect Such Fees; and Providing an Effective Date Approved C. Public Hearing for CDBG Substantial Amendment Approved D. Public Hearing for Interstate Center (AKA Wahooz/Roaring Springs) H- 2016-0119 by Bowden Properties, LLC and Black Mor, LLC Generally Located Near the NW Corner of W. Overland Road and S. Meridian Road Approved 1. Request: For a Modification to the Development Agreement to Amend the Recorded Development Agreement (DA#97044085) for the Purpose of Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda Tuesday, November 15, 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. Modifying the Approved Concept Plan, Including a Sign Plan and a Landscape Plan and Modifying other Specific Provisions E. Public Hearing for Citadel 4 Storage Ten Mile (H-2016-0114) by Citadel Storage, LLC Located 4015 N. Ten Mile Road Approved 1. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 9.97 Acres of Land with an I-L Zoning District F. Public Hearing for Paramount Director (H-2016-0104) by Brighton Investments / Land Holdings Located Southwest Corner of W. Chinden Boulevard and N. Meridian Road Approved 1. Request: Rezone of 37.31 Acres of Land from the C-C and TN-C Zoning Districts to the R-15 Zoning Districts 2. Request: Preliminary Plat Approval Consisting of 196 Building Lots, 12 Common Area Lots and 2 Future Right-of-Way Lots on 35.63 Acres of Land in the R-15 Zoning District 3. Request: Modification to the Development Agreement to Amend Certain Provisions and Inclusion of a Conceptual Development Plan G. Public Hearing for Linder Road Apartments (H-2016-0111) by S 3 Investments LP, Located at 1770 S. Linder Road Approved 1. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 4.55 Acres of Land with an R -15 Zoning District 2. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a Multi-Family Development in the R- 15 Zoning District Consisting of Sixty-Four (64) Dwelling Units H. Public Hearing for 2016 UDC Text Amendment (H-2016-0118) By Meridian Planning Division Approved 1. Request: Text Amendment to the Unified Development Code (UDC) as follows: UDC Sections, Definitions; Density Requirements in the Residential Districts; Traditional Neighborhood Standards (TN-R and O-T Districts); Ditches, Laterals, Canals or Drainage Courses; Fencing; Pathways; Structure and Site Design Standards; Landscaping Requirements (Stormwater Facilities); Common Open Space and Site Amenities Requirements; Specific Provisions (Certificate of Zoning Compliance, Annexation and Rezones and Alternative Compliance); Subdivision Process; and Subdivision Design and Improvement Standards (Block Length and Common Driveways) 11. Ordinances Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda Tuesday, November 15, 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. A. Ordinance No. 16-1713: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AMENDING MERIDIAN CITY CODE SECTION 6-2-3, RELATING TO CITY OF MERIDIAN DOG LICENSE; AMENDING MERIDIAN CITY CODE SECTION 6 -2- 8(K), RELATING TO RABIES VACCINATION REQUIREMENTS FOR DOGS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Approved 12. Future Meeting Topics Adjourned at 9:25 p.m. Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 A meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:05 p.m., Tuesday, November 15, 2016, by Keith Bird. Members Present: Joe Borton, Keith Bird, Genesis Milam, , Ty Palmer and Anne Little Roberts. Members Absent: Mayor Tammy de Weerd and Luke Cavener. Others Present: Bill Nary, Jaycee Holman, Bruce Chatterton, Bill Parsons, Josh Beach, Sonya Allen, Kyle Radek, Berle Stokes, Mark Niemeyer, Mike Barton, Bruce Freckelton, Jake Garro, Dale Bolthouse 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 _____ Lucas Cavener ___ Mayor Tammy de Weerd Bird: Welcome, everybody to the regular City Council meeting. It's Tuesday, November 15th. It's 6:00 o'clock. It's nice to see so many smiley faces out here and welcome. We appreciate it. We will start -- Madam Clerk, would you, please, call roll. Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance Bird: Okay. Thank you. If you will all join us in standing and saying the pledge of allegiance. (Pledge of Allegiance recited.) Item 3: Community Invocation by Troy Drake with Calvary Chapel Meridian Bird: Pastor Drake, I think you are here. If you would like to come up and lead us in the community invocation we would appreciate it. Drake: Lord God in Heaven, thank you so much for this free country that we live in. God, thank you. We just pray that you keep it free, that we can choose our elected officials and, Lord, we are also praying for our city tonight. We appreciate Meridian so much and that we get to live and work and pursue our own way here and, God, we appreciate that so much and so we just pray for our city tonight, for the safety of it. Pray for all the first responders, the police officers Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 2 of 70 and the paramedics and the fire -- firefighters, Lord, that you would keep them safe and there be peace tonight in Meridian and the whole valley and so, God, we just appreciate these people here tonight also that our -- our leaders, the ones we put in charge to make these decisions for us and so, God, I pray that you give them great wisdom and even on the small things, Lord, I think that you care about all things and so we just want to do our best with those . We pray for these people and, God, that you would give great wisdom and also that you bless them for the service that they give to our community. So, God, bless this time and we just praise your holy name, amen. Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda Bird: Thank you, Troy. Next item is adoption of the agenda. Mr. Borton. Borton: Mr. President. We need to add Item 5 to the agenda. Proclamation for School Psychology Awareness Week. Item 6-J is proposed resolution number 16-1178. Item 10-B is proposed resolution 16-1179. And Ordinance 11-A is proposed ordinance number 16-1713. And with those amendments I move that we adopt the amended agenda. Bird: Mr. Borton, I forgot to tell you. Item 8-A, the Children's Museum presentation, they want to continue that until next week -- Borton: Okay. Bird: -- so that the Mayor can be here. So, would you -- have we got a second? Milam: Second. Bird: Okay. Got a motion and a second to approve the agenda -- amended agenda. All in favor say aye. Any opposed? Okay. The agenda has been approved. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 5: Amended onto agenda: Proclamation for School Psychology Awareness Week Bird: I'm going to move down with your permission and if I can get the people representing the psychology awareness to come up here to me I would appreciate it. Okay. We are honoring the School Psychology Awareness Week and I have got a proclamation here from the Office of the Mayor. Whereas children and youth learn best when they are healthy, supported and receive an education that enables them to strive academically, socially and emotionally and, whereas, there are currently 24 psychologists employed by the West Ada School District, each serving one to three schools, to include 33 elementary schools, Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 3 of 70 eight comprehensive middle schools, in five comprehensive high schools and whereas school psychologists are specially trained to foster and deliver in the school and community continuing mental health services and academic support that lower the barriers between teaching and learning and whereas sound psychology principles are integral in instruction and learning, social and emotional development, prevention -- early intervention and school safety and supporting culturally diverse student population and, therefore, I, Tammy -- Mayor Tammy de Weerd, do hereby proclaim November 14th through November 18th, 2016, as School Psychology Awareness Week. Thank you. Do you want to say anything? Somebody's got to talk. Grinnell: Hi. I'm Sarah Grinnell, I'm one of the West Ada school psychologists and also the president-elect for ISPA, which is the Idaho School Psych Association, and we thank you very much for the proclamation and for honoring the hard work that we do for the students of West Ada and all around the state of Idaho. Thank you. Item 6: Consent Agenda A. Approve Minutes of November 1, 2016 City Council Regular Meeting B. Memorandum of Agreement for Contribution to 2017 Concerts on Broadway C. Award of Bid and Approval of Purchase Order 17-0084 for 1000’ of 48” Class 3 Reinforced Concrete Pipe to Oldcastle Precast per Formal IFB #PKS-1658-10518 for the “RETA HUSKEY PARK” project for a Not-ToExceed amount of $75,260.00 D. Approval of Purchase Order #17-0066 for New and Replacement Sensus Water Meters to Ferguson Enterprises in the Not-To-Exceed amount of $466,500.00. This PO is a sole source purchase per the previously approved Sole Source for Sensus Water Meters. E. Approval of Task Order 10624.a to Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. for the “WATER MAIN EXTENSION, AMITY RD AND LINDER RD, MERIDIAN TO VICTORY PROJECT 10624.a" for a Not-to-Exceed Amount of $168,609.00 F. Approval of Award of Bid and Agreement to Star Construction, LLC for the “WRRF OUTFALL PIPE Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 4 of 70 RIPRAP EXTENSION” project for a Not-To-Exceed amount of $58,509.00 G. Approval of Cooperative Agreement between the City and Valley Regional Transit for “Annual Dues and Service Contribution” for a Not-To-Exceed amount of $180,194.00 H. Approval of Contract Amendment No. 1 to extend the contract for “PolyAluminum Chloride” to Kemira Water Solutions in the Not-To-Exceed amount of $60,000.00 I. Agreement to Accept Payment in Lieu of Installing Street Lights at Silverwater Subdivision No. 3 J. Resolution No. 16-1178: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, SETTING FORTH CERTAIN FINDINGS AND PURPOSES TO DECLARE SURPLUS PROPERTY AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN TO DONATE CERTAIN FIRE DEPARTMENT PROPERTY OF NOMINAL VALUE TO LOYAL TO ONE, A LOCAL NON-PROFIT MINISTRY Bird: Council, Item No. 6, Consent Agenda. Borton: Mr. President? Bird: Mr. Borton. Borton: Item No. 6-J is resolution number 16-1178. And with that I move that we approve the Consent Agenda. For the President to sign and the Clerk to attest. Milam: Second. Bird: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to approve the Consent Agenda. Madam Clerk, will you call roll. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, absent; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 7: Items Moved From the Consent Agenda Bird: Okay. We had nothing moved from the Consent Agenda. Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 5 of 70 Item 8: Community Items/Presentations A. Children’s Museum Presentation Bird: So, we will go into Community Items and Presentations. 8-A, I would like a motion to continue that to next week if possible. Borton: Mr. President? Bird: Mr. Borton. Borton: Move to continue Item 8-A to November 22nd. Little Roberts: Second. Bird: Okay. We have got a motion and a second to continue the Children's Museum presentation to next week. All in favor say aye. Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. B. Historic Preservation Commission: TourBuddy Digital Walking Tour Bird: 8-B is the Historic Preservation Commission. TourBuddy digital walking tour. Josh, are you doing that? Evarts: Yeah. I'm good to go, sir. Bird: Okay. Evarts: All right. Let me go ahead -- Bird: State your name, please. Evarts: Oh. I'm Josh Evarts. Interim vice-president of the Historic Preservation Commission of downtown Meridian. And I have -- Herman: Nick Herman. CCS class president. Bird: Thank you. Evarts: Thank you. Pretty big deal. Council Members, I really appreciate your time this evening. The Historic Preservation Commission has actually been working on this for a number of months and we thought it was time to probably bring this to you guys for you guys to ask questions and offer input on a project Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 6 of 70 we have been working on as a commission . So, I provided some slides for the evening. We are going to do an introduction to the team that's been working on this, an overview of the app that we are proposing for this virtual walking tour for -- for the history of downtown Meridian . The schedule that we are on. A little bit of the cost associated that HPC is looking to pick up on behalf of the city and, then, some considerations, as well as being open to answering questions that you guys might have about this project. So, operation Lewis-Clark is what we are calling this as a commission and what we are intending to do is deliver an interactive walking experience for exploring downtown Meridian , Idaho. Currently our commission produces these great printed guides that have been super valuable I can attest as a property owner in Idaho Avenue, who sits down there daily, that there is hardly a day that goes by that I don't see somebody walking around downtown, whether it's a third grade class or individuals, that have got their books out and they are walking around and they are reading about our properties. One of the things that we found as a challenge as a commission is that these are very static and we are limited to a single page and kind of a paragraph of content that we can provide in a -- in a cost responsible way for our citizens. So, we started exploring what were ways that we can augment this current printed piece with some technology to offer a more rich experience to our community. The team that's been working on this -- I'm kind of on this project as a commissioner, kind of spearheading it. Nick Herman. He's Cole Valley Christian School's vice-president -- or president and -- and his senior project is actually being my stuckey working on this and so -- so, it's been exciting to have him as kind of a resident of one of our high schools down here getting involved, learning about history, and taking this project on. The Meridian Historic Society -- Lila has been great in providing us all the content and, then, we have been using Unbound as kind of a technical liaison. Nick and I have been meeting regularly, talking about what technologies were out there, what could we use, as well as how can we leverage them up to support this in the long run . So, that's kind of the overview of the operation. So, I'm going to let Nick talk a little bit how we selected TourBuddy. Herman: So, we looked at several platforms that have virtual tours of major cities and we decided on TourBuddy because they have almost ten years of experience and this is what they were founded to do . All across the world they have virtual tours for cities and they are compatible with IOS and Androids and we think they would be great for our walking tour. Evarts: So, the screen shots that you are to see in here are some -- we did a pilot demo in the summer where we just loaded a little bit of content on this platform and, then, I actually went out and did a walking tour with the Mayor and showed her some of the things that were in there. It's actually what's called a geo fired technology, which means that as I'm walking around these stops -- and I'm using air quotes here -- are fired by your GPS location. So, while I'm walking around with my mobile device, it's going to tell me that I am in a certain proximity or a geo fence to a particular location, historic property, a business, whatever we Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 7 of 70 want to map geospatially and, then, it's going to fire content to me and that content is managed by our commission and it's not limited to just a paragraph of a copy, we have all these videos that Lila produced and all these properties that are sitting on YouTube, we can reference all those. So, that's that middle screen that you are seeing up there. The screen on the right is actually a Facebook page for The Vault. So, that's content that we can go ahead and fire , too, and this other page gives other businesses that are around there, so we are actually leveraging up Google Maps inside of there and letting people know what else might exist around them. So, we are pushing specific geo data, images, videos, external web links, any kind of content that we -- that we so desire. Our schedule on this -- it really began last spring, kind of in its early formative stages, but we actually got to where we had our formal plan in October that we approved as a commission, as well as approving on the budget amount that we thought would be appropriate for this. October 20th we begin working with TourBuddy to provide all the legal documentation and user license agreements that we might need to deliver the city to get that license executed . We are coming to you tonight to kind of give you a project update, allow you guys to answer -- or ask some questions for us to answer about the project. Upon approval we are going to have the pilot app published and present to the HPC in December, with doing a big tour event, kind of a launch walk party in January and we are not going to worry about weather, because we are Idahoans. And, then, do that January 21st. The other part of -- the really cool part about Nick's senior project is our third grade classes all get tours of downtown Meridian. That's something that our commission is really active in developing. So, Nick, is going to be developing a training program for this app, because the biggest gap that I see right now -- and I see it because I sit in my building every day and I watch these classes come by -- is that these third grade teachers and some of their volunteer parents don't always have a lot of data about the sites and so they are walking around with this book, but -- but, you know, being able to give them some actual curriculum and give them a tool on their phone where they don't have to look around and figure out, you know, what building am I looking at, it's actually going to show them, boom, this is what it looks like today. Here are historical photos. Here is a little cool video that I might be able to show on my tablet to students -- I think really gives a great training platform and a richer experience for our third graders that are going through that. So, Nick is going to be developing that program and have that ready to give to teachers in the spring and in May, which is our Historic Preservation Month, we are going to do another big Vault party where we are going to invite the city to come in, everybody bring your mobile phones, download the app, give a quick training that Nick developed and, then, go for a walk and experience downtown Meridian. So, that's a little bit of our schedule. Form a cost basis this was actually one of the most affordable solutions that we found. When we went and looked at what the cost would be for us to develop it, that was one of the things I talked to actually Nick and Unbound about was going and finding out if we could, you know, build this ourselves, what could we leverage up as open source. When we stumbled upon this company we found out that we could get a license to do everything that we wanted to do for 2,500 Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 8 of 70 dollars and, then, for a thousand dollars a year in maintenance. One of the things that we are going to be doing upon launch of this is beginning our partnership with the Downtown Business Association to have them pick up the out years for that thousand dollars that we think there is a real natural way that we cannot only tell the history of downtown , but start including some of our destination locations and businesses. One of the things that the app platform provides is the ability to push out coupons, the ability to push out information. So, we think this is a great platform to start building partnerships between city and downtown business owners and we would ask them to pick up the ticket in out years for that thousand dollars. So, our intent is as a commission we would pay for that first year and, then, we would be getting those monies from downtown business owners in the out years, because that would be a value proposition that we could offer to them. So, that's the amount that we approved by HPC was 3,500. So, some considerations. Nick's going to be working on that plan to integrate with our Downtown Business Association. I'm going to put it on him to make the presentation to them . He's also going to be working on that training program. We are pretty excited about it. It's kind of a neat way to jump into that digital age with that -- with a platform that's very easy to use and friendly. So, with that I would open it up for questions. Bird: Council, any questions? Palmer: Mr. President? Bird: Mr. Palmer. Palmer: Josh and Nick, I was prepared to shoot a bunch of holes in this, mostly because Josh asked me to to mess with you, but the presentation was fantastic. It answered all the questions I was going to throw at you. So, I'm really impressed and excited for it now. Not that I wasn't excited before. But I do have one question. So, will -- will it be like a TourBuddy app that you download that, then, you download the Meridian to or into or will it be a separate app? Evarts: No. It's our app. Palmer: It will be our app. Evarts: So, it will be Meridian historic -- and haven't decided the exact name, because we wanted to be inclusive, but I think it will probably be a destination Meridian app with the idea talking about our history, talking about our businesses, but it will be an app that will be in the IOS and Android store and free to download. Palmer: Mr. President, follow up? Can I follow up? Bird: Yes. Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 9 of 70 Palmer: That sounds great. I really especially like the point that you made where you are going to try to get the Downtown Business Association to, then, pick up the cost in the future. I mean while a thousand dollars a year in the scheme of the hundred million that we spend slash blow, we -- it's very -- it's tiny, but finding opportunities like that to benefit the businesses of downtown Meridian that we are trying to help promote through all the various ways that we are with URD and whatnot, finding this opportunity to support them while having them, then, support the advertising opportunity for themselves is a fantastic way to move forward with it. So, thank you for having that end goal in mind. Evarts: And, Councilman, it was really important for us and like HPC is looking to add value to downtown, our Downtown Business Association is doing the exact same thing and when we talked about this as a board, we were super excited about ourselves. Like we are going to find a way for our Downtown Business Association to pay for this, because we think this is a great platform to push content to them, because we really do believe this walking tour -- I believe this gets used and I think when we digitize it I think it will get used more based on what I see. So, if we can also help promote the downtown businesses I think they are going to be eager to participate financially and it's not a big ticket item I think to your point. So, I think it's great to allow those businesses to pick up the tab in the out years. Milam: Mr. President? Bird: Any other questions? Mrs. Milam. Milam: Great presentation, Josh. An exciting idea. I have a third grader this year, so I'm excited to come -- to be one of those parent volunteers on their field trip. So, hopefully, I will understand this a little bit by then. And I don't know -- this thought just came to me. You were talking about tablets and I'm not sure if every single teacher has tablets available and so it -- and third graders don't -- most of them don't carry a cell phone, so you might want to check with IT and see if there are any old tablets around that could maybe be used as a check out or something for those classes that have a larger visual to look at and stuff. Evarts: Sure. I know that I hijack -- oh, yeah. Sorry. Thank you. Unbound rents those out. So, what we will do is we will coordinate with them. Thank you, Hillary. Because she's much smarter than me. Yeah. So, we will -- Milam: Okay. Evarts: -- coordinate a check-out program as part of our training, that would be an asset that's available, because what I will tell you, having -- and, like I said, I hijack every third grade class that comes by The Vault and I bring them in, to the great chagrin of all the parents and volunteers, but that's fine. They are looking Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 10 of 70 to tell a great story. A lot of times what I see is teachers herding cattle and, then, flipping through something trying to tell a great story. So, I think we are going to really augment that program and give them a pretty rich asset and the fact that I think they are going to be doing it on a tablet or personal device, something like that, will be -- will be exciting and fun. Really great. Other questions? Bird: Any other questions? Borton: Mr. President? Josh, Nick, great -- great opportunity. Love the idea. One of the things with the walking tour, which is really beneficial, is it's focused on the historical buildings. Will there be some filter or similar feature that allows you to just look at the historic buildings through downtown , as opposed to if we have got a lot of businesses that participate and are -- will they also be featured and located -- Evarts: Yeah. Without getting too technical. So, inside of the app there are different threads that you can pull. So, meaning you can go on an actual walking tour that's literally going to start at City Hall and , then, take you on a walk and walk you and show you stuff. It's going to be very historic tour kind of driven. And, then, there is effectively another layer, we can actually categorize things, that this has been a business, so that you can go see those businesses, scroll through them. There is tie-ins to things like Yelp, so if the business wants to publish their Yelp reviews, because they are great, we can provide those links and push that content as well. Borton: Perfect. Evarts: I don't know anything about technology, though, so this whole thing might get really sketchy really, really quick. I have no background in that. Anything else? Bird: Any other questions? Thank you, Josh. Evarts: I appreciate it. Thank you. Item 9: Department Reports A. Mayor’s Office: Mayor’s Youth Advisory Council Update Bird: I appreciate it. Okay. Department Reports. Our Youth Advisory Commission. Is Ms. Bradford here? Bradford: Members of the Council, my name is Susannah Bradford. I'm the vice- chair of MYAC for this year and I will be giving an update on October in the Mayor's Youth Advisory Council. And this is our second update of the year. We had three general council meetings since I saw you last and we had something to Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 11 of 70 break out for each. We were also pleased to hear from three different guest speakers. Autumn Kersey, Jeff Yarnell, and Erin Bennett. On October 27th we had our trunk or treat here at City Hall. We had record attendance at this event. It was awesome. It went super well. And we had food trucks, dancing, and lots of fun. Yesterday at 4:00 we had our ribbon-cutting at Tully Park for a participatory budgeting project, which was an outdoor gym for teens and adults. So, we had maybe 20 MYACers there from this year and last year's council to cut the ribbon on that and get that thing started and that was really fun to see. And also yesterday right after the ribbon-cutting we had Rake Up Meridian, so we had about 20 members that volunteered there and we were able to fill every single bag that we had. So, it was really good and it was super beneficial. And do you have any questions? Bird: Is that it? Bradford: Yes, that's it. Bird: Any questions for -- Milam: Mr. President? Bird: Yes, Mrs. Milam. Milam: Can't leave you with nothing. Not really a question. More of a comment. The ribbon cutting with the -- the outdoor fitness facility -- Bradford: Uh-huh. Milam: -- that idea that you guys did is -- was fantastic and I'm -- I was speaking with some senior ladies yesterday and she's -- the one woman said I -- I go to Idaho Athletic Club. Now I go here. Bradford: Yeah. Milam: But, you know, she still plans on using her gym membership for the winter, but she was so excited and she was telling me how to use each type of equipment and what one she uses and she comes here every day. So, already it's making a big impact. Bradford: Yeah. I definitely -- Milam: Great job. Bradford: -- think it's going to be beneficial. Thank you. Bird: That was very nice. Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 12 of 70 Bradford: Thank you. Bird: You picked a very, very nice project and thanks to our private partners, Mr. Conger and them, we got it done. And thank you very much. Bradford: Thank you. B. Public Works: Approval of a Budget Amendment for $65,000.00 for the Emergency Repair of the Collections Building Bird: Public Works. Oh, Dale. We get the big guy. Bolthouse: Good evening, Council President Bird, Members of the Council. I wish I had something as interesting as those two fantastic presentations that you just had, but I'm here to talk about sewer. I'm here to request your approval for a budget amendment for a not to exceed 65,000 dollars for a collapsed sewer drain that occurred in our collections building, which is one of our main office facilities at the wastewater treatment plant and I trust that you have gotten the report in front of you and see some pictures, but we, unfortunately, on a building built in 1977 had a catastrophic failure where the four inch cast iron pipe actually has corroded and collapsed on itself in several locations to the point where it now must be replaced and this building is an important one to us. We have ten of our collection staff members in that facility. They use it for their offices, their locker rooms and showers, which are important. Laundry facilities. As well as our SCADA and command control systems for the lift stations that are throughout the city and things, are all housed in this facility and we have absolutely no plans to make any changes. We now have, however, the facilities associated with the restrooms and anything that uses that sewer is now shut off and quarantined until we can get this repaired. So, I think that probably covers the landscape and I would stand for any questions that you may have. Bird: Any questions for Mr. Bolthouse? Milam: Mr. President? Bird: Mrs. Milam. Milam: If I can read this sideways. I move that we approve the budget amendment for the Public Works Department for not to exceed 65,000 dollars for the emergency repair of the collection building. Little Roberts: Second. Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 13 of 70 Bird: Okay. We have got a motion and a second. Any questions? Any discussion? If not, Madam Clerk. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, absent; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Bird: Thank you, Dale. Bolthouse: Thank you. C. Parks & Recreation: New Neighborhood Park Update Bird: Item C is Parks and Recreation. Mr. Barton. Barton: Good evening, Mr. President, Members of the Council. Thanks for the opportunity to give you an update tonight on three neighborhood park s that have been in design over the last year. I wanted to give you some -- a little bit of history on where we have been and where we are going and what our timing is for bid and contract award. So, the first one that I want to talk about is Bainbridge Park. It's located in the Bainbridge Subdivision on North Ten Mile between McMillan and Chinden. This property was donated to the city approximately eight or nine years ago. It's seven and a half acres. So, we put together a design and a lot of those programming elements we -- we drew from our Parks and Rec master plan that has input from citizens, our task force and citizen surveys on what amenities were desired. And also, of course, we -- we worked with the landowner on this -- on this one and all the other ones to come up with the layout you see right here. The layout is -- you know, one of the things in that -- in those surveys is that there is a real call for intergenerational design where you can have -- you can have a playground, you can have an outdoor gym, you can have a sport court, some tables, something for the whole family to do. A picnic shelter. So -- so, it's not just purely designed for kids, it's designed for active seniors, teens, tweens, kids. So, I think we have -- we have kind of hit that -- hit everything that's desired by our citizens with -- with this one. So, what we have done regarding public outreach is we have had discussions with our park and rec commission, they have approved the design. We have had, obviously, discussions with the landowner, the Brighton Corporation, and we have -- we have -- we gave the Council an update in July and kind of got your feedback on some of these. We think we are right on target with this one, so what's -- what's next on this. We have a couple of agreements that we are working on. There is a well sharing agreement that will be coming to you and also an agreement to use the pressurized irrigation system for the subdivision . That's going to be coming to you. Those will be consent items here in the next -- in the coming weeks. The other one that we will be bringing is a cost-share. Brighton Corporation has agreed to not only donate this land to the city, but they Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 14 of 70 have also agreed to participate in the cost of the landscaping, the irrigation, the sprinkler system, the turf, the trees. They have committed to half of the grating and the site work and they have also agreed to half of the soft costs. So, a little bit later on I will go into some more details on where we sta nd as far as costs go and -- but this one in particular I mean all of them we have worked out some partnerships that have really greatly reduced the cost of these parks, but this one -- this one is, you know, kind of -- it's a homerun. So, we have got that agreement coming to you. Palmer: Mr. President? Bird: Mr. Palmer. Palmer: Quick question on that one. I assume that's a temporary name or is that one going to stay that way? Barton: This one is temporary. Palmer: Okay. Barton: Yes, sir. Per our naming policy we don't -- we don't name neighborhood parks after the subdivision they are in, because there is some misunderstandings where maybe it's a private amenity for the HOA, where this is a public park. So, the name -- the name is -- will be changed. The next one I want to talk about it's called Rita Huskey Park and that's located off Ten Mile Road. That's in the Bellano Creek Subdivision. The land, eight and a half acres, was donated by Coleman Homes for this neighborhood park. Kind of the same process we went through with the amenity choices. We have got a playground, we have got three pickleball courts for active seniors. We have some -- a couple of exercise -- cardiovascular equipment stations on the concrete. Walking trails. There is a -- in the entryway there is some -- there is a space for public art as you walk in or some climbable structures. We have been throwing around ideas of climable ladybugs and, you know, some playful things like that. One of the -- one of the things that came out in our surveys are the need for unique amenities and unique structures where not every park was -- looks the same where you can identify with -- with what that park is, so this one will have a combination picnic shelter and restroom building connected to each other. That will be the first one of its kind that we have and the gable end presents an opportunity for either art or park signage. So, same kind of process that we have -- you know, the public outreach. One of the things we did with -- with this park in particular, because it borders Bridgetower Subdivision, is we met with their -- their board, we distributed park plans to the management company for distribution to the homeowners out there, because they will be -- it's right in their backyard. So, the partnerships -- obviously, Coleman Homes donated the land. They are paying for and installing approximately 2,000 feet of multi-use path. The entire north- south pathway is installed by the developer and the entire east-west pathway is Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 15 of 70 installed by the developer at no cost to the city. The other thing that's really cool is that we are working with Nampa-Meridian Irrigation and we got -- got board approval for -- they are willing to use their crews to tile a thousand feet of the Creason lateral. So, we are paying for the pipe, but Nampa-Meridian Irrigation is going to use their crews to install that -- that pipe, which is at least 100,000 dollars in savings. We didn't bid it, so we can't -- we don't have a number, but there is a big chunk and we wrote them a thank you letter and really appreciate their cooperation on that project. So, one of the things on this one is we do have a bid alternate to try to -- depending on where the bills come in, there could be an offset of a reclaimed water connection to the park. So, we will have water sources. One the -- the regional pump station from Nampa-Meridian, possibly a reclaim water connection. We think it's going to be a little bit pricey, because we got to go out to the Ten Mile Road and connect to the reclaimed water and bring it into the park. So, we pulled that out and we are going to -- we are going to see where the bids come in and see if -- see if we want to move forward with that. The agreements that we need -- still need to put in place is a land transfer agreement. We don't own the property yet, we have done our due diligence with an environmental assessment and, then, we are getting close on -- on the language of an agreement and, hopefully, by the -- by the first of the year we will own the property. Obviously, we are not going to put any development money into it until we own it, so we are getting there. The next one, Hillsdale Park. This is -- this is the one connected to the elementary school. Hillsdale Elementary School. The future or new YMCA that's going in in south Meridian that they broke ground on here a couple of weeks ago. It's a ten acre site that was donated from the Hill family. Marty Hill has donated the property to the YMCA and, then, it's coming back to the city via -- via a property transfer. There is some -- some platting and some things that -- that need to take place first for that to happen, but, you know, the same -- same kind of process with this. We took our impact from our -- our master plan and incorporated that in. Marty Hill had some specific wants and desires for this park and so we have kind of an agricultural theme to it. There is hay bale benches and a tractor playground and -- you have probably seen the plans at some of the Town Hall meetings and from the last presentation. So, we think we have got a real cool, real unique design that's -- you know, when you walk into this park you will know -- you will remember it. It will be, hey, there is that, you know, the tractor playground or whatever it is. It will be very distinct. So, obviously, the partnerships -- we have donated land. We are working on a partnership with West Ada School District to use the lower parking lot there and a cross -access easement. We are working with the YMCA for the -- the agreement to transfer real property. So, basically, what that -- that will say is that the property is coming to the city and it will allow us to make the improvements ahead of that transfer , because the transfer is probably not going to come -- the YMCA wants to get it off the tax rolls and get it to the city, but there was some -- there is a hold up on Howry Lane and how much right of way and now there needs to be -- it can't go through a short plat process, so it's a little bit more of a lengthy process. But the property is coming to the city. We are -- we are anxious to get this going, because we feel that Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 16 of 70 bidding in December and letting these -- all of these plans out to bid for a month and opening bids up in January is the very best time to solicit pricing from contractors. If we wait until they are booked for the year and we have put things out to bid in the summer, our pricing or our construction costs will be significantly higher. So, kind of -- there is a sense of urgency in getting this agreement done and -- with all of them trying to close in the loop with construction plans and agreements and just getting these things out to bid and breaking ground March 1st. So, that's kind of it in a nutshell and I have covered most of the last slide. So, really, final agreements. Construction documents. You can see the bid schedule. Council award. One of the things that we -- we think we -- we set our budgets based on 142,000 dollars an acre for development cost and those -- those numbers are basically seven years old. This is what we have -- we took off our last impact fee study that was based on the last round of park development. So, as you know, construction costs have gone up. I have heard some -- some estimates of three to four percent per month, if not 18 percent per year. So, what we have done by leveraging partnerships, donated land, developer contribution, partnerships with shared parking lots, we have been able to hold that cost to we think about 165,000 dollars an acre, which is less than a 20 percent increase over seven years. So, I think we are -- I think we are good. But it's just to let you know that when we -- when we open bids in mid January and we come to the City Council for contract award, that there is likely to be a budget amendment that goes along with that and the funding source will be from park impact fees. It's money that we have already collected for park development. It's money that we have in the bank right now and we are requesting spend -- we would be requesting spending authority at that point. So, hopefully, everything -- you know, we are getting down -- we are getting to the finish line, wanted to give you an update and present where we -- where we have been, where we are going and answer any questions you might have. Bird: Any questions, Council? Palmer: Mr. President? Bird: Mr. Palmer. Palmer: I just wanted to thank you for pointing out the -- and explaining ahead of time the -- the future reasoning for the budget amendment , since we have a million different reasons that a budget amendment may come before us and so the earlier we know the reason and, then, it just makes it so much easier to comprehend and move forward with when it does eventually get here, so thank you. Barton: You bet. You are welcome. D. Community Development: Amendments to Professional Services Agreements with the Idaho Division of Building Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 17 of 70 Safety for Mechanical and Electrical Plan Review and Inspection Services E. First Amendment to September 1, 2015 Professional Services Agreement Between Idaho Division of Building Safety and City of Meridian for Electrical Plan Review and Inspection Services F. First Amendment to September 1, 2015 Professional Services Agreement Between Idaho Division of Building Safety and City of Meridian for Mechanical Plan Review and Inspection Service Bird: Any other questions for Mike? Thank you, Mike, for the nice presentation. Community Development. Mr. Freckleton. Are you going to cover D, E and F right here while you are standing there? Freckleton: Absolutely. Bird: Okay. Freckleton: Absolutely. Good evening, Mr. President, Members of the Council. I originally had prepared this to be on consent and -- and Councilman Bird suggested we take it off of consent and I give a little bit of background on the -- on the request and, then, where we are with our contracts. As you guys are aware, we enter into contracts with different agencies to perform our building plan review and inspection services in Community Development . So, we have contracts for building, mechanical, electrical, plumbing and fire for new -- for new construction. The latest PSAs that we have -- or Professional Services Agreements, were entered into in September of last year. At the time we entered into those agreements we had -- we were negotiating electrical and mechanical with the Idaho Division of Building Safety. At that point in time Ron Whitney, the deputy administrator of DBS -- and he's here tonight to answer any questions that -- that you might have to -- he did express some concern then that on the electrical, with the percentages that we negotiated, that it was going to be pretty thin for him and he wanted to -- to, basically, be able to come back and talk to us if their program wasn't fully supported and so in mid September I received a letter from Ron basically stating -- restating that and saying that they -- they are under the scrutiny of the State Department of Financial Management and also review of the different trade boards that they answer to and the scrutiny that they have had on the electrical proved Ron's suspicion that they are coming up short from being able to support the program on the percentages that we negotiated in 2015 . So -- and also Ron had mentioned in a letter that the mechanical program was starting to build a little bit of reserve and so his letter of September 16th requested some adjustments to the percentages -- the compensation percentages that they receive in those contracts, requesting a five percent Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 18 of 70 increase in the electrical compensation and a five percent reduction in the mechanical compensation. Now, looking at these two together, the compensation and mechanical -- or the fees in mechanical are higher and so I had Todd Lavoie in Finance do a financial analysis and he went back and looked at the past eight years and considered that if we would have made these changes eight years ago, where would we be today? What he found was that we have -- we have only realized a 7.21 percent fluctuation in the revenue and expenditures across those two contracts and that because the mechanical savings is greater than the expense that we would incur for electrical, we actually would have a modest savings -- we would have had a modest savings over that eight years of about 59,000 dollars. So, it's his recommendation that we -- we go forward with this request and that's also reflected in the packet that I had presented and, hopefully, you have before you. Again, like I say, Ron is here tonight if you have any questions and with that I will stand for any questions you might have of me. Bird: Thank you, Bruce. Any questions for Bruce? Milam: Mr. President? Bird: Yes, Mrs. Milam. Milam: Well, I don't have any question, I just thought that it was pretty awesome that any person or company or anybody would come forward and recommend a change that -- that results in less income in their pocket. So, that's -- that's integrity and I appreciate that. Freckleton: It really is. And, you know, it's -- you know, they are governed by a lot of the same statutes that we are with regard to the financial management and not being able to turn profits. So, that's -- that's a relief. Palmer: Mr. President? Bird: Mr. Palmer. Palmer: Mr. President, Bruce, is there any chance that we could have any issues with other bidders that -- at the time that we are putting this out for bid by amending -- Freckleton: No. When we entered into these contracts in 2015 they were three year contracts. So, I mean we are in the -- in the contract term right now. We are only a year into the three-year term. Palmer: Okay. Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 19 of 70 Bird: Other questions? If not, I would entertain a motion to cover the first amendment for Item 9-E. Freckleton: Mr. President, if I may, I -- Bird: Yes. Freckleton: I did notice a typo in my -- in my memorandum that I wrote to you. In that closing paragraph, the second to the last line, I included and electrical in there and it should only be mechanical. Bird: And mechanical. Yeah. Freckleton: Yeah. So, it is a reduction of five percent mechanical and an increase of five percent in the electrical. Bird: Mr. Attorney, we can make that in one motion, can't we? Nary: Yes. It was a consent item initially, so you can certainly make a motion to approve them both. Borton: Mr. President? Bird: Mr. Borton. Borton: If there is no further questions or discussion, I would move that we approve the first amendment to the September 1, 2015, professional services agreement between the Idaho Division of Building Safety and the City of Meridian for electrical plan review and mechanical plan review and inspection services. Milam: Second. Bird: I have got a second. Motion and a second. Any discussion? Hearing none, Madam Clerk. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, absent; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Bird: Thank you, Bruce. Freckleton: Thank you. G. Legal Department: Beer and Wine License Contingent Approval for Frankie’s Java LLC Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 20 of 70 Bird: Legal Department. Mr. Nary. Nary: Thank you, Mr. President, Members of the Council. This one is a little bit different than you have seen previously and I will just give you a 30 second history. Whenever a person requests a beer and wine license in the city, they have to go through the state, the county, and, then, the city and so the state does all the background checks, they do all of the investigation of the person's fitness to be able to have a beer or wine license in the state of Idaho. There is one wrinkle in the state code that requires the governing board of the city to allow the issuance of a beer or wine or liquor license if the establishment is within 300 feet of a public school or a church. In the past the state has normally issued the license, as county licenses come to us and previously this Council used to issue all of the licenses. A few years ago we stopped that practice. It's issued by the clerk's office, unless it's within the 300 foot and, then, you would see that one on your agenda after it had been issued by the state and the county . The state has decided recently that that doesn't make as much sense to them , because if you had a situation in the city where the council did not want to approve an establishment within 300 feet of a public school or a church, then, they will have gone through all that process for no reason and they will have issued a license that wouldn't be effective. So, what they asked us to do is that the Council review the request. If you approve the request -- you're not approving the license, you're just improving the ability for the establishment to go through the licensing process. You will still end up with the license if it gets approved at the state and the county, you will have the license back in your agenda at a future time for approval of the actual license because of the location. So, this particular one is Frankie's Java, which is located in Generations Plaza. It's within 300 feet of the Harvest Church. So, that's the reason it's in front of you. And, again, the process is just slightly different. It actually makes more sense -- we suggested this to them a couple years ago and so they eventually took us up on it , because it does kind of make sense to do this first. So, all you need to do tonight is make a motion that you would be approving the -- the ability for Frankie's Java to apply for a beer and wine license through the state and, then, ultimately, the county and the city. Palmer: Mr. President. Bill, did anybody talk to the Harvest to see if they had any -- Nary: We don't. We would -- well, eventually they get notice. They have other -- other establishments within 300 feet. The Hop House is within 300 feet. They had no objection to that. The Flatbread is within like 30 feet and they had no objection to those. So, the state does go out and provide notice before they issue them and if they have an objection, have an ability to raise it, but it doesn't usually -- they do that before it comes back to us. Bird: Any other questions? If not, I would entertainment a motion. Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 21 of 70 Milam: Mr. President? Bird: Mrs. Milam. Milam: I move that we approve the exception for Frankie's Java, so that she can apply for a state license for a beer and wine. Little Roberts: Second. Bird: Second. We have got a motion and a second. Any discussion? Hearing none, Madam Clerk. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, absent; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 9: Action Items A. Public Hearing for Proposed Winter 2016 – 2017 Fee Schedule of the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department Bird: Okay. We will go to Action Items. First up public hearing -- excuse me -- for the summer -- or the winter fee schedule for Meridian Parks and Recreation. That's Jake. Garro: Thank you, Mr. President and Members of the Council. As you had mentioned, I'm here tonight seeking our Park fee schedule for the winter -spring 2017 activity guide. A little bit about the activity guide. It's currently in print. It will go to print December 2nd and be released to our community members on December 9th with our winter-spring class registration beginning that Monday, December 12th, and the majority of the classes beginning the first week of January, concluding by the end of May. Then our summer guide will be released the end of April. So, with that I stand for any questions and the one thing I do want to point out is, you know, reiterate our great relationship that we have with -- with West Ada School District. They are allowing us to use some gym space this winter and spring for fitness classes that will be a part of our winter-spring guide. So, I just wanted to get that on the record, that we really do appreciate that -- that relationship with -- that we have with them and with that I will stand for any questions about the fee schedule. Bird: Thank you. Any questions for Jake? This is a public hearing. Anybody in the audience would like to testify? If not, I would entertain a motion to close the public hearing. Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 22 of 70 Little Roberts: Mr. President, I move we close the public hearing. Milam: Second. Bird: I have a motion to close and a second. All in favor say aye. Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. B. Resolution No. 16-1179: A Resolution Adopting the Winter 2016-2017 Fee Schedule of the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department; Authorizing the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department to Collect Such Fees; and Providing an Effective Date Bird: Item B is a resolution. Little Roberts: Mr. President? Bird: Mrs. Little-Roberts. Little Roberts: I move we accept the proposed resolution number 16-1179, adopting in the winter 2016-2017 fee schedule. Milam: Second. Bird: I have a motion and a second to accept the resolution number 16 -1179. Madam Clerk. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, absent; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. C. Public Hearing for CDBG Substantial Amendment Bird: Next item is C and that is a public hearing for CDBG substantial amendment and I will open the public hearing and Sean. Kelly: Thank you, Mr. President, Members of the Council. I'm going to go over this pretty quickly, but I will leave all the time in the world to discuss any parts of this, since this is a public hearing. Some of these folks might not have seen it until tonight. So, just really quick on why we are here. We have got a couple of projects that didn't move forward. That tends to happen. We also have a construction cycle, as Mike Barton had mentioned earlier, that we like to try to get ahead of and sometimes we can't get ahead of it. There is also certain times Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 23 of 70 where a project can't get all of the things that it needs to move forward with anyway. We do have some residual funds left over from prior years and we have a plan and this is -- this is that actual plan, to amend the action plan to let us do some of these projects earlier and to support a couple of the other projects that we did last year with a few more funds. So, the recommendation from staff is to reallocate 150,000 dollars of these funds to street lights. We had planned for street lights in 2016 anywa y with the last action plan that Council approved. What this does is it leaves street lights as an opportunity to be done in 2016. It starts that process early with funds from prior years and, again, as Mike Barton had mentioned, too, getting ahead of that construction schedule, this gets us in design in December and gets us closer to a build somewhere in the spring -- or closer to the summer as well. Also to reallocate 30,000 dollars to Neighborworks Boise. Neighborworks Boise has been a great subrecipient for the city. They have carried out all of their projects that we have given them. They have the capacity and ability to spend those funds in a home buyer assistance program that they run and, then, I'd like to take the Five Mile pathway projec t that didn't move forward, pull that into -- to the -- keep it in the '15 action plan, but make that an alternate project so that we can move forward with that at some other time when -- when parks does get all of those easements that they need to do that project and also at the request of the Mayor and Council I went ahead and put in -- into the -- the notice that we applied for Public Works for LMI sewer projects of 100,000 dollars and that, again, in future years we can go back to 2015 and if something happens like has happened over on 2 1/2 Street or whether it's an emergency project or just something that Council wants to do with that, then, we will be able to trigger that should those funds become available . Mr. President, I will stand for any questions. I'd like to just note that this is a public hearing. This is the -- the request that I have from you is to open the public hearing. I will record the testimony if we have any. Close the public comment and, then, I'm recommending approval. If Council has any questions or has anything that they would like to say now I can definitely respond to those. Milam: Mr. President? Bird: Mrs. Milam. Milam: Sean, I have got a question. You have probably told us in the past, but Neighborworks Boise, so you are requesting 30,000 dollars and they -- they help people with housing assistance, but not just in Boise? Great. So, I don't like their name so much. Makes it difficult to, you know, spend money that way or is this going for Meridian housing or Boise housing? Kelly: Mr. President, Counsel Member Milam, it is going to Meridian. It's supporting homeowners in Meridian and that's what that is is a home buyers -- in the home buyer assistance program that they are looking for homes in Meridian, trying to find the right price point. They are a low to moderate income family and we are putting them into those homes. Neighborworks Boise is their dba. I think Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 24 of 70 it's Neighborhood Housing Solutions is another -- I think that might be their -- it might be their national name that they use, but locally they -- just because they are down there in Boise, that's where they are headquartered. Milam: Thank you. Bird: Any other questions? Is there any public testimony on this? This is a public hearing. Sean, how long do we keep it open? Kelly: Mr. President, this is a public hearing and we are closing it as soon as -- if no one has anything. Bird: Okay. Seeing we have no testimony, I would entertainment a motion to close the public hearing. Milam: Mr. President? Bird: Mrs. Milam. Milam: I move that we close the public hearing for the CDBG substantial amendment. Little Roberts: Second. Bird: I have a motion to close and a second. All in favor say aye. Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Milam: Mr. President? Bird: Mrs. Milam. Milam: I move that we approve the CDBG substantial amendment as presented. Little Roberts: Second. Bird: I have a motion to approve the amendment and a second. Any discussion? Hearing none, Madam Clerk. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, absent; Palmer, nay; Little Roberts, yea. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE NAY. ONE ABSENT. Kelly: Thank you. Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 25 of 70 D. Public Hearing for Interstate Center (AKA Wahooz/Roaring Springs) H2016-0119 by Bowden Properties, LLC and Black Mor, LLC Generally Located Near the NW Corner of W. Overland Road and S. Meridian Road 1. Request: For a Modification to the Development Agreement to Amend the Recorded Development Agreement (DA#97044085) for the Purpose of Modifying the Approved Concept Plan, Including a Sign Plan and a Landscape Plan and Modifying other Specific Provisions Bird: Thank you, Sean. Next is a public hearing for Interstate Center, also known as Wahooz/Roaring Springs and I will open the public hearing and listen -- have the staff and I believe it's Josh? Beach: Yes, sir. Bird: Thank you. Beach: Mr. President, Members of the Council, as you said, this is an application for a development agreement modification . The sight consists of developed and undeveloped commercial land, which is zoned C-G, located near the northwest corner of West Overland Road and South Meridian Road. There has been quite a number of applications through the years for this project . Currently the applicant is proposing to modify the existing development agreement. The current agreement is cumbersome to work with . It requires a conditional use permit for every additional use on the property and so the applicant is requesting , A, that that requirement to get a CUP for every use be removed. That they be -- or adding a -- proposing to add a sign package to the development agreement and -- it's a little difficult to read here. They have an existing 60-foot sign here. Several of these signs will be removed. This sign, this sign, and this sign and they are posing to add one, two, three, four and another sign along the freeway. Staff has indicated to the applicant that this current proposed sign does not meet our code. Our current code requires that signs along the freeway be up to 50 feet in height. The applicant is proposing 60 feet. They are also proposing 385 feet -- or square feet of sign area, where the code allows up to 300. So, part of their request is that that be allowed . As I said, that does not meet code, but as part of the development agreement that's something that staff has the -- or Council has the ability to modify. So, as part of their application they submitted a number of items here and the staff has modified to include some landscape buffer that they added. A number of sections include a landscape buffer, which isn't something that is normally included in a landscape plan. They submitted a landscape plan to be included in their development agreement. That's not something that we typically do with a development agreement, that's something Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 26 of 70 that's reviewed at the time of the certificate of zoning compliance for any use that's being applied for. So, staff has made some slight modifications to that . I will add that in addition to the modifications that are shown here from staff, the applicant did submit some additional revisions on top of what staff has requested that I think will -- will meet what the code entails. They have included some language that includes a five foot -- feet of landscaping and a 20 foot gravel road I believe along the east side, since there is a -- there is a canal and the irrigation district needs an access road there. With that staff is recommending approval and I will stand for any questions you have on the application . Bird: Counsel, any questions for staff? Borton: Mr. President? Bird: Mr. Borton. Borton: Josh, that recommendation is in relation to this -- Beach: Correct. Borton: -- what's on the screen? Beach: I would note that as part of the application to include it -- to be included in the development agreement is a request that they be allowed a 24-hour operation, which would include -- they have indicated that they do, you know, senior nights and some venues that potentially go into the late hours, 1:00, 2:00 a.m. in the past. There has been some concern from staff that would impact some of the surrounding neighbors and so I wanted to make you were aware of that as well, that that's one of their requests as well, so -- Parsons: Mr. President, Members of the Council -- Bird: Mr. Parsons. Parsons: -- just to elaborate on that request a little bit more, as we all know, the property currently is developed with an outdoor arts-entertainment venue. That's what we call it. Outdoor -- indoor-outdoor arts-entertainment. Basically a fun center. Under our specific use standards in our ordinance we don't allow outdoor venues to be within 50 feet of any property line and that's what they are -- their request isn't for 24 hour use. They can do the 24 hour use, because they are not abutting a residential district. So, it's really not the hours of operation. Their request is to allow their outdoor venues to be within 50 feet of their property line , which is against what our current specific use standards are. So, that's really the request that they are after this evening. It has nothing to do with hours of operation, it's just how close can that be to the adjacent property owners. In looking at the area -- we know we have Walmart to the south, which is, again, a Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 27 of 70 commercial development, but Bear Creek West butts up against them . Recently we have approved multi-family to the west of the waterpark, so now we do have residential starting to develop closer to the waterpark than what we had when this was first developed. So, it's just something to take and consider this evening. Again, staff can't approve that request, because it's something that isn't specifically allowed in our ordinance, along with the sign package. If I can go back to the sign as well. The original approval for this project -- the original DA had requirements for signage. Said would comply with whatever the sign code was at that time. Well, the code changed and so they will be keeping one of their non-conforming signs, but, again, this request this evening also -- they are asking for you to approve a sign that isn't allowed under what our current code is. But since we had signage tied to the original DA, we felt rather than coming back for a variance before you to get the sign -- taller sign, we felt this was the more appropriate mechanism to have the Council take action on their request for the signage. Now, anything that's approved in the DA tonight, they still have to come back to the city and get a sign permit. I mean all you're doing is conceptually looking at their sign package. We have done that analysis. All the signs comport to the sign code except for that one sign. The non-conforming sign can stay there, too. So, we know -- we are pretty confident, other than that sign that they are requesting to deviate from, everything else complies with our sign ordinance. So, that's really what's on the table tonight. Really, the outdoor venue within 50 feet of the property and, then, that additional signage that they are requesting. Bird: Any other questions? If not, applicant representative? Welcome, JoAnn. State your name and address. Butler: Thanks, Council. JoAnn Butler. 251 East Front Street representing the applicant and who I have with me tonight are Pat Morandi and Tom Nicholson, co-owners. Craig Callahan, civil engineer, and Neil Caldwell, who can answer questions about the signs -- more technical questions than I can. But let's see if I can possibly answer all the questions. I am pleased to be here tonight to represent Pat and Tom. It's been a delight, since my kids are all grown, every time we had a meeting we went over to the park and had a great time in the summer. These two, obviously, have a great time providing entertainment facilities for kids and families in Meridian and, in fact, it's grown to the point that it is now the largest waterpark in the northwest. So, you have -- you're serving not only Meridian, but a lot of people traveling to Meridian. So, part of the reason -- and I'll come back to the sign, but part of the reason for our request for the sign amendment to take it ten feet higher than is allowed by code and to expand the sign face is to make it easier for the travelling public to understand where they are coming to get off of the freeway. Some of the photos that we provided to the staff show that the existing signs today -- oh, thanks whoever did that. Shows -- it's a little hard to tell. These are -- and there is another drawing that shows that the existing sign is actually invisible, because of the trees that are around and also because of the revised signs that ITD has put up with the interchange change. So, that's part of the reason that we are asking for that. Again, the Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 28 of 70 original DA -- it is about 20 years old. It was for an office park. It has never been developed as an office park and staff's right, every time we came in for the most minor of change we would have to go through a full-blown conditional use hearing. So, the idea was to make this less cumbersome for the staff , less cumbersome for the owners. Also we did bring in an overall landscape plan, but staff has asked, no, let's not do that, let's do the landscape as we come. Let's set the timing for the landscape, which we have said in this development agreement modification, but let's have staff as you come in approve the landscape plan. So, there will be a concept plan attached to this development agreement. The landscape plan and the overall sign package. And, again, that be -- the one issue that we have here with the sign change, again, just to repeat, the idea is to make this easy for the travelling public to find their way to the park and so that's why we are asking for that change. And with that we are in agreement with all the rest of the staff findings and if I can answer any questions or if anybody here can answer. Bird: Any questions? Thank you, JoAnn. Butler: Thank you. Bird: We had nobody sign up. This is a public hearing, so if anybody would like to testify, if they would come forward we would entertain that now. Council, any questions before we close the public hearing that need to be answered? If not I'd entertain a motion to close the public hearing. Nary: Mr. Bird? Bird: Yes. Nary: One question I guess of Council might consider, before you close the public hearing in case the applicant has some comment, but the venue where they are talking about this being an event -- venue to go into the different hours of the night, we do have an ordinance in regards to noises creating public disturbances that doesn't grant an exception for development agreements. So, they still would have to comply with the city code in relation to noises and -- and there were some concerns expressed I see to the Mayor's office last year about an event that was held. There was a concert I think that went fairly late and as Bill Parsons has said, there is a lot more residences in this area than there used to be, but I did want to make it clear, I did look up the ordinance again to be sure and it doesn't grant any exception for a development agreement or a zoning exception or anything like that. The only activities that are exempted are either activities that occur in a park or activities that require a permit and those are very narrowly focused to parades and fireworks displays and things like that. So, I don't think a development agreement was ever contemplated by ordinance as an exception. So, I just wanted to raise that issue in case you had a concern since that was raised by Planning or the applicant had a comment about that. I don't Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 29 of 70 know if they plan on having events that cause a lot of noise and disturbance past 2:00 in the morning -- or, excuse me, past 11:00 at night, but that is a concern that comes up periodically in the city, so -- Palmer: Mr. President? Bird: Mr. Palmer. Palmer: Mr. President, Mr. Nary, thanks for bringing it up. I kept going to the mic, because I was going to ask that question, because I remember we got that e-mail from the citizen saying, hey, it's loud over there. Well, it was like 10:30 and, then, our ordinance went to 11:00 and when we e-mailed them about them they said, oh, we are very conscious of the law and we are going to make sure that we continued to adhere to it. So, they -- they knew what they needed to do and they were going to adhere to it, so I didn't have any concern. Nary: Yeah. And I just wanted to raise it in case there was an issue by either the Council or the applicant. I just wanted to make sure it matched up with our ordinance, so -- Butler: And JoAnn Butler again. And, yes, we did review that with staff when we met with them in pre-application meeting and whatnot and just talking to Pat, no, they don't intend to be -- they are well aware of that noise -- the noise ordinance and so they intend to comply with that. Bird: Great. Thank you, JoAnn. Parsons: Mr. President, Members of the Council, looking at the ordinance and reading a little bit further, it does specifically prohibit the outdoor activities to 6:00 a.m. and 11:00 p.m. as well. So, it does align with our noise ordinance as well. Bird: Any other questions? Milam: Mr. President? Bird: Mrs. Milam. Milam: Seeing nobody is jumping up and down to ask questions. I move that we closed the public hearing on H-2016-0119. Palmer: Second. Bird: I have got a motion and a second to close the public hearing on 2016- 0119. All in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Okay. Passed. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 30 of 70 Milam: Mr. President? Bird: Mrs. Milam. Milam: I move that we approve H-2016-0119. Little Roberts: Second. Bird: I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Any questions? Hearing none, Madam Clerk. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, absent; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. E. Public Hearing for Citadel 4 Storage Ten Mile (H-2016- 0114) by Citadel Storage, LLC Located 4015 N. Ten Mile Road 1. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 9.97 Acres of Land with an I-L Zoning District Bird: Next item is E, public hearing on H-2016-0114, Citadel Storage, LLC. Josh, is that you again? Beach: It is. As you said, this is an application for annexation. This site consists of 9.97 approximate acres of land, which is currently zoned RUT in Ada county. It's located at 40015 North Ten Mile Road. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation is mixed-use non-residential. The applicant requests annexation and zoning within the I-L zoning district, which is consistent with the mixed-use nonresidential land use designation. The purpose of this designation is to set aside areas where new residential dwellings will not be permitted , as residential uses are not compatible with the plan and were existing uses in these areas. If you're not familiar, the water treatment plant is this property here. So, that's part of the reason why this property is -- the Comprehensive Plan designation that it has. The applicant proposes to develop a 193,823 square foot self-service storage facility, consisting of a 1,156 square foot office building and a combination of enclosed and open outdoor storage. The site is proposed to develop in two phases. As you see here in the box that would be the first phase with approximately 63,187 square feet of storage in the first phase and 130,636 square feet in the second phase . Access to the site is proposed via Ten Mile Road, which is designated as an arterial roadway. Staff recommends a minimum 20 foot wide driveway and cross-access be provided from the proposed site to the property to the north and south in accord with UDC 11-3A-3. The applicant is Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 31 of 70 requesting the DA provision requiring the cross-access be modified if the subject property does not develop with a self storage facility as proposed. A 35 foot wide street landscape buffer his proposal along North Ten Mile Road. A 25 foot landscape buffer is required to be landscaped in accordance with -- in accordance with UDC 11-3B-7C and the ordinance requires that any building setbacks be setback 35 feet from the road for any property in the -- in the I-L zoning district. The property does abut a residential use along the portion of the southern boundary, which is approximately 500 feet. Go back to the aerial here. This property here has a single family residence on it and as you can see we don't have a color like this property over here, so it's a -- it's a county -- county property. UDC 11-2C-3 requires the applicant to construct a 25 foot wide landscape buffer with vegetation that touches at maturity along any residential use. So, the applicant -- staff is requiring that the applicant provide that along that portion of that southern boundary. There is an existing home on the subject property and associated outbuildings that will be removed with development of the site. Building materials for the site include a structural wall would be around the perimeter of the development, which consists of split-face CMU, with accent mortar, ribbed metal walls -- ribbed metal wall accents and trim and metal roofing. The office will consist of two different colors of stucco. The applicant is required to obtain approval of certificate of zoning compliance and design review application for the proposed structures and site design for the self-storage facility in accord with the UDC and the architectural standards manual. The Planning and Zoning Commission did recommend approval. Summary of the Commission -- Jim Conger, the applicant, was in favor. There was none in opposition. Did receive comments from Jim Conger, as well as written testimony. Bill Parsons presented that application. There were no other staff members commenting on that. Key issues of discussion by the Commission whether to recommend approval of reducing or waiving the landscape requirements along the southern boundary of the property. Key Commission changes to staff's recommendation are they modified Condition 1.1.1C as follows: The applicant is also required to construct a ten foot wide landscape buffer for the eastern 150 feet of the southern boundary adjacent to the existing rental house. So, Commission reduced that 25 to ten and only on the first 150 feet starting from Ten Mile Road and going west. They modified Condition 1.1.1D as follows: The applicant shall provide cross-access from the north to the south if the site does not develop as a self-storage facility. Outstanding issues for City Council. The applicant is requesting that they only be required to install a ten foot landscape buffer along the southern boundary of the property and only for the first 150 feet of the property starting from North Ten Mile Road. So, the Commission did recommend that. That takes Council action. With that staff is recommending approval and I will stand for any questions you have. Bird: Council, any questions for staff at this time? If not, is the applicant here? Please state your name and address. Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 32 of 70 Conger: Good evening, Mr. President, Members of the Council. Jim Conger. 4824 West Fairview Avenue. The only clarification I will make to Josh is that he said it was adjacent to the treatment facility -- or water treatment facility. It's actually right next to your wastewater treatment facility, which is why there is no residential allowed in the future. So, we are proud to bring another Citadel Storage in this industrial area. We are in agreement with the staff report as approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission as Josh indicated and forwarded to you tonight. So, with that I will stand for any questions and appreciate the approval. Bird: Any questions for Mr. Conger? None. Thank you, Jim. This is a public hearing. Is there anybody that would like to testify? Hearing none, Council, I would entertain a motion to close the public hearing. Borton: Mr. President? Bird: Mr. Borton. Bird: Move that we close the public hearing on item H-2016-0114. Palmer: Second. Bird: I have got a motion to close the public hearing and a second. All in favor say aye. Opposed same? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Borton: Mr. President? Bird: Mr. Borton. Borton: Move that we approve Item 10-E, H-2016-0114. Palmer: Second. Bird: Have a motion to approve H-2016-0114 and a second. Madam Clerk. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, absent; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. F. Public Hearing for Paramount Director (H-2016-0104) by Brighton Investments / Land Holdings Located Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 33 of 70 Southwest Corner of W. Chinden Boulevard and N. Meridian Road 1. Request: Rezone of 37.31 Acres of Land from the C- C and TN-C Zoning Districts to the R-15 Zoning Districts 2. Request: Preliminary Plat Approval Consisting of 196 Building Lots, 12 Common Area Lots and 2 Future Right-of-Way Lots on 35.63 Acres of Land in the R-15 Zoning District 3. Request: Modification to the Development Agreement to Amend Certain Provisions and Inclusion of a Conceptual Development Plan Bird: Item F, H-2016-0104, Brighton Investment Land Holdings, southwest corner of West Chinden Boulevard and Meridian Road. Bill, is that you? Parsons: Council Members, President, we are going to get the other planner to come present the project. So, Sonya should be here in a minute. Bird: Okay. Allen: Excuse me. You guys were quicker than I thought. All right. The next application up is a request for a rezone, preliminary plat, and development agreement modification for Paramount Director. The subject property consists of 35.63 acres of land. It's zoned C-C and TN-C and it's located at the southwest corner of West Chinden Boulevard and North Meridian Road. This property was annexed in 2013 and a modification to the development agreement for the larger Paramount development was approved to include the annexation area in the existing agreement. A preliminary plat was approved at that time. No. Excuse me. Earlier this year for Paramount North 40. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation is mixed-use community on the northern 26 acres and medium density residential on the southern 15 acres. A rezone of 37.31 acres of land from the C-C and TN-C zoning districts to the R-15 zoning district is proposed for the development of 196 single family residential attached units , consisting -- consistent with the associated MUC and MDR future land use designations for this site. An amendment to the existing development agreement is also proposed that will update the development plan for this site and amend certain provisions of the agreement. A preliminary plat is proposed as shown that consists of 196 building Lots, 12 common area lots and two future right-of- way lots on 35.63 acres of land in a proposed R-15 zoning district. Two different types of single family attached structures are proposed within this development. The Encore units are an age-qualified 55 and older single story attached product, configured in quads with shared driveways and side entry garages , located on Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 34 of 70 the western portion of the development, consisting of 98 units. The Cadence units are a two story attached product with side entry garage s, accessed from shared driveways located on the eastern portion of the development. Also consisting of 98 units. All development is required to comply with the dimensional standards of the R-15 district. The applicant has submitted an exhibit for each of the unit types that depicts building f ootprint as shown, setbacks, common driveways and off-street parking. The rear setbacks of the Encore units that back up to common area need to be extended from three feet to a minimum of 12 feet and the parking pad for the Cadence units does not meet the minimum dimensional standards for the two off -street parking spaces per unit that are required, which makes the development short 196 off -street parking spaces. The plat and/or unit types will need to be revised to comply with the minimum setback and parking standards or the applicant may submit an application for an alternative compliance to the parking standards . Access is proposed via North Fox Run Way, a collector street, which was previously approved with the development agreement and preliminary plat for Paramount North 40 and is shared with the assisted living facility to the west. Two accesses are proposed via West Director Street, a collector street. Direct lot access is not proposed or approved via West Chinden Boulevard or North Meridian Road. Common lots are proposed along Chinden and Meridian for future right of way for expansion of these streets. Common shared driveways are proposed throughout the development for access to the units. A total of 8.63 acres or 24.2 percent of qualified open space is proposed. Proposed site amenities consist of a swimming pool and clubhouse in the Encore portion of the development and a swimming pool with a risk -- excuse me -- with a restroom facility, tot lot, and associated parking area in the Cadence portion, which is, again, on the east portion of the development. A ten foot wide multi-use pathway is proposed along Chinden and Meridian in accord with the pathways master plan . Conceptual building elevations were submitted for each of the two types of attached units as shown. The Cadence and Encore. Building materials consist of two different types of materials with stone veneer accents . The applicant states there are two different Encore floor plans, one for the front units and one for the rear units, with elevation variations and one floor plan for the Cadence units with a few differences between the back-to-back units primarily on the first floor. All attached structures are required to comply with the residential design standards listed in the architectural standards manual. The Commission did recommend approval of the subject applications at their hearing. Mike Wardle, the applicant's representative, testified in favor. Elizabeth Davis and Brian Davis testified in opposition. Written testimony was received from Mike Wardle, the applicant's representative, in agreement with the staff report. Key issues of discussion -- the public was not -- the public that testified was not in favor of the attached housing type and higher density proposed within the Cadence portion of the development, as compared to the detached homes and lower density within the adjacent Paramount Subdivision and they were concerned that the homes will be purchased by investors and turned into rental properties. Key issues discussed by the Commission was concern regarding the lack of off-street parking that was Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 35 of 70 below UDC standards within the Cadence portion of the development and they were in favor of the proposed housing types , density, and transition between developments. There were no changes to the staff recommendation. The only outstanding issue for Council is the off-street parking I mentioned in the Cadence portion of the development is significantly below that required by the UDC. A condition is included in the staff report for the applicant to reconfigure the lots to meet the UDC parking standards or submit and obtain approval of an application for alternative compliance with the final plat application. No written testimony has been received since the Commission hearing. Staff will stand for any questions. Bird: Any questions for Sonya at this point? The applicant is ready. Wardle: Mr. President, Council Members, Mike Wardle, Brighton Corporation. 12601 West Explorer Drive in Boise. Just right at the get go and for the record we concur with the staff recommendation as forwarded to you with a recommendation for approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission, including a resolution to the parking issue for Cadence, which we will deal with in due course. I just want to spend a few minutes -- Sonya has done a really very good job and most of what I'm going to show you has already been shown , but there are a couple of specific items that we would like to address. As noted, we are requesting a change of zone from commercial zone to C-C and the TN-C to an R-15 and that's primarily because of the dimensional and setback standards of the R-15, even though we do not even approach the R-15 density. Also the detailed site plan, which is a modification requirement for the development agreement and the preliminary plat as noted. Thank you, Sonya. I'm not -- my finger hasn't figured the screen out yet. There are two Comprehensive Plan land use designations. The tan along Chinden is mixed-use commercial -- or, excuse me, mixed-use community. The yellow, which encompasses virtually all of the single-family portion of Paramount, is the medium density residential. You will see the -- the Comprehensive Plan density objectives from each of those designations and, in reality, what we are proposing with Paramount Director is much less than the mixed-use community and right at the midpoint of the mix -- or, excuse me, the medium density residential. This project is not high density. It is not multi-family. It is not out of character with Paramount. It just happens to be a different form of single-family choice afforded to future residents. The next slide, just for context to show Paramount Director really is the last residential component of the project. It's been -- I guess we started this project in 2003, so over the last 13 years there has been a great deal of development in this area, with the exception of the Paramount Director and the southeast corner of multi- family, which have yet to be developed , I have shown, for instance, the type of density that has been created throughout the project and it depends clearly on the size of the lots. You will see a range from about 3.4 on the low end up to 4.3 single family, but, then, the highest density that we have up to this point down in the southeast corner of the are the alley load and some greenway lots, just over six units per acre. When you look at the overall project, including the elementary school site, the parks and all of the open space, the overall density of the project Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 36 of 70 is 3.25 units per acre. If you account for the future of Paramount Square Apartments and the Director density of five and a half units per acre, the overall project completed will be 4.02 units per acre. Paramount, I believe, is the most complete community in Meridian, with the schools, the parks, with diverse housing, the commercial, some of which has been completed and a great deal more to be done. Churches and services afforded to the residents within that square mile. There are a couple of parcels that we don't control, but will certainly be developed at some point in the future, but in context Paramount is a very complete community, with a fairly diverse character. The next slide simply kind of reiterates what Sonya has already pointed out. The Encore product to the west, which is adjacent to the assisted living structure that's under construction currently that's noted or called Veranda and that's located just on the east side of Fox Run Way, Encore will be single story age-qualified and we will market them as townhomes, even though under your code they don't actually qualify as townhomes. Townhomes under the UDC is three units or more attached. These will be simply by your code single family attached two units each. The Cadence portion will be two story units and so a bit broader market in the sense that it will be open for all family sizes and characters, certainly ranging probably from empty nesters to young families getting a start. So, it's not much different in character than what is afforded to folks that already live within the community. I would just point out that these units are by, again, code definition not duplexes. A duplex consists of two units on a single lot. These will all be owner -- each unit will have its own parcel ownership. The next slide, just, again, shows the distinction. This particular product, because it is age-qualified, will have its own private pool and clubhouse. The unit -- the ownership line shown in the lower corner shows how those units would be broken up in terms of ownership . The next slide actually shows a similar project in the nearby community of Boise. This is located at Cloverdale and Ustick, but it shows how paired units are configured in a quad configuration with shared driveways in lower courts that are off streets . So, the yellow lines simply show how we have got two units each connected and, then, they are separated by a little bit of a -- it's a utility corridor between the structures, so it -- all of the utilities can be off the street and out of the lower court, but that just shows how the character of those attached units in that quad configuration are delineated. Cadence -- again, a family community, two story units will feature the fourth Paramount community pool and playground open to all residents of the community. Long planned and long promised. And so that particular product line will have, again, some shared facilities in terms of the off -street parking and will be acknowledged that Condition 1.2.3D is the one that requires us to either reconfigure the units to provide that off-street parking or to seek and gain approval of an alternative compliance proposal and that we will do . The next -- and almost final slide simply, again, shows the ownership line in red with the Encore products, the age-qualified single story to the left, Cadence two-story to the right and it shows the separation between those units with green space , so that there is -- and I think Sonya had indicated the amount of open space, but it's 20 plus percent overall. Again, with two significant features. One a private pool for the 55-plus group, another for the overall community that would provide the Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 37 of 70 fourth such facility for Paramount. The slide is simply we will open it up for questions after we acknowledged our request for Council approval of the rezone from commercial to R-15, the DA modification with a specific site plan for these products and the preliminary plat for up to 196 units. Again, noting that we agree with the conditions that have been forwarded to you from the Planning and Zoning Commission as prepared by staff at the initial hearing. Mr. President, I would stand for questions. Bird: Thank you. Any questions, Council? Thanks, Mike. Wardle: Thank you. Bird: We did have quite a few sign up. A lot wanted to testify. When I read your name if you would like to come testify come on up. Steven Chrysler. If you will give your name and address, please. Chrysler: My name is Steven Chrysler and I live at 417 West Broderick Drive in Meridian. After reviewing the proposed request to change the zoning, I object to it on the grounds that the schools are overcrowded. I have a son at Rocky Mountain High School. It's my understanding the place was built for 1,500 students. It currently has approximately 2,000 students. I have another son who goes to -- to the middle school nearby. Before the current school year they asked some of the students to share lockers, because they did not have enough lockers. That school is overcrowded. And the roads in the neighborhood -- there is too much traffic. The current configuration of commercial zoning would be appropriate, because there is not enough commercial facilities around there at this time and the -- Paramount does not need new -- more people. That's basically it. And if you have any questions of me that's -- Bird: Any questions, Council? Thank you. Chrysler: Thank you. Bird: Debbie Chrysler. She's against, but did not want to testify. Karen Coonradt. Coonradt: Mr. President, Council, I live at 5942 North Mitchum Avenue. Bird: State your name, please. Coonradt: My name is Karen Coonradt. Bird: Okay. Coonradt: Okay? And I live at 5942 North Mitchum Avenue. I'm losing my voice, so -- but I object to this and the reason I object to it is because when all Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 38 of 70 homeowners bought their homes the zoning was just as it is stated and this density -- the density that's being computed with parks and schools -- I don't understand that, how you can count the density of this Cadence that way with these two stories. It's just going to impact that area tremendously. I know that they were going to have the -- the senior living there. They told us that when we bought our homes. But we all were aware that the zoning at that time was C-C and TN-C and this R-15 with meeting the high density, especially with the Cadence, is just not acceptable. It's just too many people and I don't know what they are going to do with the cars. You know, how they are going to figure out what they do with the -- the cars, you know. So, anyway, I object and thank you very much. Bird: Just a minute. Any questions? Robert Chlebda. I'm sorry if I'm butchering your name. Chlebda: Good evening. Bob Chlebda is my name. Nice to see you all tonight. My wife and I are at 362 West Bacall and we purchased last year and delighted to be up here. However, we purchased based on the commitment that the zoning was firm at the time, obviously. So, anyway, we are, obviously, against it based on what some of the other comments have been tonight . So, totally wanted to make -- make that abundantly clear and we are highly hopeful of your -- of your correct decision in this matter. Thank you. Bird: Is there any questions for -- thank you very much. Wanda Shelba. She didn't want it testify. Claudia Bail. Against, but didn't want to testify. Lindsay Merrill is neutral, but did not want to testify. Elizabeth Davis is against and, yes, would like to testify. Davis: Mr. President, Members of the Council, I am opposed also -- Bird: Ma'am, would you -- Davis: Oh, yes. Bird: -- state your name and address, please. Davis: Yes. Elizabeth Davis. 115 West Bacall Drive. Bird: Thank you. Davis: I am also opposed to the proposal to rezone this 36 acres of the northeast corner of my neighborhood for three principal reasons . The first of these reasons is the desirability of the current zoning as it stands. I'm sure that you all as Council Members are aware, but in case some in the audience are not aware, the land at the northeast corner of Paramount is currently zoned for C-C or Community Business and TN-C, which is the Traditional Neighborhood Center Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 39 of 70 District and quoting from the City of Meridian's website: The purpose the TN-C district is to serve as the focal point of a neighborhood center, containing retail, commercial, and community services to meet the daily needs of community residents within a one to two mile radius. A TN-C is pedestrian-oriented. It's designed to encourage pedestrian connection with a traditional neighborhood residential district and it uses small-scale retail, restaurants, recreational, personal services, public or quasi-public uses, churches and attached and multi- family dwellings. So, this type of pedestrian friendly area with a mix of retail, commercial, and community businesses is really what Paramount needs . That would just be fantastic for our part of the neighborhood . Instead of driving down Eagle Road for a dinner out, it would be wonderful if there were a restaurant right on the corner of the street. Instead of driving several miles to take a pet to the veterinarian what if there were one right on the corner for the residents of the Veranda assisted living facility that's currently under construction ? An area like this, like a TN-C, could really enhance their quality of life. I imagine that most of them will not be able to drive, but if there was something that they could walk to with assistance that could really enhance their quality of life , as well as all the residents that already live in Paramount, such as my family. The second reason I'm opposed to this rezoning is what I would call the bait-and-switch problem. As has already been stated for any residents that already purchased in Paramount , who inquired about the zoning of this area, they would have been told that this area was zoned for community business and the traditional neighborhood center district. So, to change the zoning now, especially, apparently, without much of a compelling reason, is unjust and a classic bait-and-switch for the homeowners that are already there. The third reason that I'm opposed to this change is just the residential versus commercial balance in the neighborhood. Paramount is a great neighborhood. We have lived there since April. I think it could be a model for other neighborhoods as it is currently zoned. We love living there. It has a fantastic elementary school right in the heart of the neighborhood. It has a lot of houses. It has what I feel like is a nice variety of residential options already there. Apartments under construction. There is an assisted living facility. There are small alley -- alley loading homes. There are larger single family homes. A variety of lot sizes. And what we feel like -- or what my family feels like Paramount needs is not more houses, but something -- something else that we could walk to. Bird: Thank you. Any questions for -- Davis: Could I make just one more comment? Bird: One more comment. Yes. Davis: We feel like if the current zoning was a good idea at the time , what has changed that makes it not a good idea now? That's not -- that's not clear to us. Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 40 of 70 Bird: Thank you. Any questions? Thank you. Brian Davis is against and would like to testify. Davis: Brian Davis. Same address. 115 West Bacall Drive. Mr. President, Members of the Council, thanks for giving us this forum to voice our opinions. I think a lot of what I was going to say, which has already been stated, the -- you know, we love the neighborhood, what they have -- what they have done with it and I don't think that the zoning change is -- is justified. As my wife stated, I'm unaware of any compelling reason that goes above and beyond to -- I'm just not sure what added value there is to making this zoning change and adding the residential houses, the parking, schools, all that stuff. I'm just not sure how that increases the value of Paramount in any way and we have a plethora of children in our family, so we have a long time to -- to live there and it's a nice little community as it is. When we get older we can transition right on into the assisted living, so thank you very much. Bird: Any questions? Thank you very much. Kristin Arnell is against, but didn't say whether they wanted to testify or not. Is there a Jessie? Or Maguire? Jessie Maquire? Okay. They were neutral. Jonathan Sage is against and would like to testify. Sage: Good evening, Mr. President, Members of the Council. My name is Jonathan Sage. I live at 137 West Bacall in the Paramount Subdivision. I am against the motion to change the zoning of it , as I believe it is a bit of a bait-and- switch. We live directly south of where the proposed development is going to be . We were really looking forward to the C-C portion of the zoning for that, as we believe a community center that has commercial properties would be a value to us as we like to walk the neighborhood on a regular basis and it would be nice to have an anchoring point with which we could have our walks within the neighborhood. Both my wife and I, we really see value in that. In addition to that, I seeing the zoning increase the density of our neighborhood is something that concerns us, since we just had our first born child and we are worried about increasing the density within our schools that according to other members of the committee already seem to be overcrowded and that is all. Questions? Bird: Any questions, Council? Thank you very much. Sage: Thank you. Bird: Karen Pestka. Bob Lockery. Kerts: I think I'm the person you're after. I'm the last one on the -- on the front of the page, if you have a piece of paper. Bird: Kerts? Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 41 of 70 Kerts: Kerts. Bird: Okay. We are going down the list. Is there Karen Pestka? Does she want to testify? If you want -- you got to come up here. Pestka: Mr. President and community. I'm pretty much the same as everyone else. I'm against it. But the biggest reason is the off -street parking. Anyone that lives in Paramount and has that high school in there with school-age drivers, they drive extremely fast and I think going down that street around with cars and you have this pedestrian walkways, it's going to create a hazard and even more so. They already have everything planned how it was. We have lived there since March. Been in the neighborhood in that area for 11 years and just the overcrowding of schools is just becoming a nuisance. Even though our daughter graduated last year, it's just -- we can't afford to keep putting the schools in jeopardy. Bird: Ma'am, would you state your name and address to get me out of trouble. Pestka: Karen Pestka. 5997 North Mitchum. Bird: Thank you. Any questions? Thank you very much. Sherwin. Did not want to testify. Is against. Jake Griggs is against and he didn't -- he put a question there. I guess he wants to testify. Griggs: Good evening Mr. President, City Council Members. My name is Jake Griggs. I live at 116 West Heston. My house actually backs up to where this will -- the Cadence Community will be developed. I kind of feel the same as everybody else. I do think there shouldn't be any exceptions whatsoever to parking. As the folks on the south part of the subdivision with the school of seeing lots of issues come up with that, I think the same thing with multi-family dwellings. Another concern that I have is with regards to rental units. Eventually the homeowners association will be passed off from Brighton into the hands of the homeowners and at some point most HOA associations only allot so many rental units per housing subdivision. I think that will become our problem later when right now it probably should be considered by Brighton . A couple other things. The schools, they are entirely overcrowded. With the opening of the new elementary school last year that did free up Paramount Elementary. I foresee that being a fairly large problem with all of the multi-family dwellings and, then, just the traffic -- the access points in and out, you know, they say off of Fox Run will be an access point. I struggle with that with the assisted living community. Therefore, the other two are right on Director right to where all of our houses are, coming in and out. So, that's all have. Any questions? Bird: Any questions? Thank you very much. Griggs: Thank you. Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 42 of 70 Bird: Eric Delreal. Name and address, please. Delreal: 6010 North Peppard Avenue. Eric Delreal. Yeah. Pretty much like everybody said, I don't agree with that. One of the main reasons is going to be the schools. I got my daughter and my other daughter in the high school and elementary and they are pretty crowded. The only thing is like I mean we wanted to state that we did our due diligence looking for the best schools that we could possibly find in Meridian and Boise and all the cities around and we came out with Paramount. We found the schools and that's what we wanted. We rented for about a year to see how we like the neighborhood and my wife she loved it, so that's why we are there. Besides all the concerns that everybody said, I wanted to address what is going to do that to our property values. We just bought a house right there and I -- you know, we pretty much spent everything we had and if they do that then how is that going to affect our property values. Bird: Any questions? Thank you very much. Dawn Delreal. Jeremy Schroeder is neutral and did not want to testify. Ramona Neal against and did want to testify. Thank you. Neal: Good evening, President, Commissioners, staff, clerks and my neighbors that I haven't even met yet. My name is Ramona Neal and I live at 181 West Bacall. I moved into this home in February of this year. Since then I have seen the development of the retirement center that is on Fox Run . There is a lot of commotion there. There was one sign posted there at that corner. There was a sign posted on Director and there was a sign posted, I believe, on Meridian Road. The signs that are on Director would not be seen by most of the people in the subdivision. Most of the people in the subdivision come right on Fox Run. So, they might have seen the one sign that was there where the retirement community was being built, but mind you when you're coming down Fox Run you're trying to get out if you're going to work. There is a lot of commotion right there. There are cars, there are vehicles, service vehicles, et cetera, being parked there and so the sign being there was not completely apparent and I -- I thank you for your attention and patience with t his important decision for us. We just bought these homes. They are over 300,000 dollars. They are beautiful. But we have made significant investments. So, I appreciate your patience. It is late. I had the opportunity to run over to my parish, which is Holy Apostles, and Holy Apostles is on the corner there and it's right across Meridian. They didn't know anything about the change -- the zoning change. They said they didn't see any of the signs and they are building St. Ignatius Catholic School, which is right across the street. All of the traffic that will come out of this new development wil l come straight out onto Meridian Road or it will go through Fox Run . What I learned from pulling the ACHD report is that we can expect 1,140 trips of vehicles to come out of that development every day. The Ada county report looked at Fox Run, it looked at Meridian and it looked at Chinden. It failed for Chinden. They said that's an Idaho Transportation Department issue. We don't Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 43 of 70 care. Well, it's not that they don't care, but it's not their issues to decide. Fox Run they said was better than a D and they said that the other street was also better than the D. They did not look at Director. They asked that -- and Director, by the way -- the two streets that will come out on Director or Garbo and they are -- I'm afraid I'm forgetting the other one. Garbo and, then, there is one more. So, there is two streets that come straight out on Director and, then, they are going right out onto Meridian. The ACHD report said that they asked that Channing Way be closed and I think Channing Way is the street tha t comes out by the retirement center and I'm not sure, maybe someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but that would mean that the outlet to Fox Run is closed and everything is going to come out on Director. That's 1,140 cars out on Director Street every day and that means my street, too, that comes out, which is either Bacall or the one that I can't remember, will be the two that are venting out onto Director and you're going to have 1,200 cars coming out there. The point made about the density, I understand that R-15 in the proposed development is less than some of the other neighborhoods within our subdivision, but it is greater -- it is greater than the density that would have been proposed by TN-C. So, they are trying to compare apples to apples and it's not apples-to-apples, it's apples to oranges. R-15 is a much greater density than TN-C. So, we are talking 1,140 cars out on that street every day. For me it's mindboggling. That's a lot of cars. Bird: Ma'am, would you wrap it up, please. Neal: I definitely will. I will tell you that there are 805 students currently in Paramount Subdivision. With this new development you will add 200 students. That's another 25 percent to that school. I don't think it can handle it. If the school can't handle it, that means buses or it means parents taking their children to school. I'm worried about the infrastructure. If they actually were doing the zoning at the time and building for the units that they had , they knew at the time we bought our houses that they were going to put this development in. Otherwise, the infrastructure that's there is infrastructure for the TN-C, because it's -- it's paved over. They have got irrigation, they have got all that stuff already there and so the question is they were -- they knew about this before they told us -- before we bought our homes. I'm worried about whether or not there is sufficient water. If you had TN-C, you know, infrastructure there and you have now -- you have irrigation for 196 units or water for 196 units, where is that water going to come from? Things like that. Thank you so much and with that I will close my remarks. I am available for questions. Milam: Mr. President? Bird: Mrs. Milam. Milam: Not really a question, but more of a comment. At least I have heard it a couple of times already and I hear -- I really hear all your pains and I get it all, because I live here, too. But in the TN-C zoning multi-family is an acceptable Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 44 of 70 use. This is much less density than a multi-family unit and so without changing this to an R-15, which they are really going -- it's really -- they are putting in at about five and a half per acre, they could be putting in apartments right there in the TN-C. So, I just wanted to clarify that to you guys. Neal: I guess that's true if what was promised or what was going to happen there were apartment buildings, but that is not the representations that we heard when we looked at TN-C and it does also include the parameters for small retail pedestrian, which is what we were kind of hoping. So, I understand what you're saying and we could get worse than we have I think is what you're trying to point out to me. I get that. But I'm trying to make sure that this commission is aware of some of the things that could impact the homeowners , the traffic, and some safety concerns there. There are schools there. Paramount was promised to be this type of a community and I just want you to know that this may impact it and it may not be that type of community any longer. Thank you. Any further questions? Comments? Bird: Any questions? Thank you very much. Jeri Collins. She is against, but she didn't want to say whether they wanted to testify or not. Sheldon Anderson was against. Anderson: My name is Sheldon Anderson. I live at 5964 North Mitchum, which we live directly south of the proposed Cadence . Our objection is the high density or label of townhomes. We know what happens to townhomes. Off-site parking. You know, 98 units with one or two -- maybe three cars per unit, parking on the streets, we all know what that looks like or attracts. My wife is a professional property manager. We know what happens to townhomes. Eventually get sold for rentals. We know what type of the demographics rentals bring people in and out, in and out, it becomes a transient type of neighborhood, bringing people in and out, and we object to this. So, the Cadence part of the high density. And the traffic -- we all know people will avoid going Fox Run to Chinden. That forces all that traffic out Director onto Meridian directly across from the school and everything. So, it's going to be pretty hectic going through there. Thank you. Bird: Any questions? Thank you very much. Terrance Kurtz. Now, it's your turn. Kurtz: Mr. President and Council, my apologies first. My hair is gray and my hearing is not great and you were speaking down here, so I didn't hear clearly. I thought you were struggling with my name. Bird: I have got the same problem. Kurtz: Terrence R. Kurtz. I live at 652 West -- I’m tired already. 652 West Barrymore. My wife and family moved here in May of 2011 back when we could see the Catholic Church from where we were and certain representati ons were Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 45 of 70 made about the development. We knew ultimately in the course of time it was going to be filled up. The first couple years I ended up being on the traffic committee in the Paramount Subdivision, but we had traffic problems at that point and that was really before a lot of the new construction has taken place. A year ago there was a ballot provision to ask for a hundred million dollars to improve and enlarge on schools in the school district and it was turned down in the fall. A scare campaign was run telling us that the quality of our children's education would be in peril and all these bad things would happen and they put it on the ballot in the spring I think of this year and it passed . It added 300 dollars to my taxes. When I moved here in 2011 my property taxes were 2,300 dollars. Today they are 3,500 dollars. That's a 50 percent increase in five years. Our federal government asked for a 75 percent increase going to the third year for health insurance. That kind of thing is unsustainable. Now, we have yet to see the apartments that have been approved for the southeast corner of Paramount Subdivision. On the chart it showed it at a density of 18. It's going -- two years ago I spoke to Principal Brigham at my children's elementary school and asked where are these people going to go to school. You know, they are proposing -- they have already approved -- I mean it's a done deal. I realize that. They have got all these families. The demographic in Paramount tends to be young families with lots of children. The principal couldn't tell me where the children were going to go to. All the schools -- Paramount is unique in that it's got -- within the square mile it's got the high school, it's got the elementary school, and, then, Heritage Middle School is just across Meridian Road. There is a rush hour in Paramount just at the time children move to their schools. Buses, parents driving their kids to the elementary school, a lot of it's internal. There has been people coming across Chinden, down Fox Run, going to the high school. There is a lunch hour rush hour at the high school and we yet have the traffic coming from all those apartments to deal with, much less what's now proposed for the northeast corner. I don't understand why the Council isn't -- I understand the developers want to maximize their profits, but who is looking out for the people in our subdivision and the quality of our life and protecting us . This current election they had three ballot issues for money. One for the Western Idaho College and one for pools and one for the -- anyway, three ballot issues asking us for money and they all three got turned down. I don't understand -- Bird: Sir, time to wrap up. Would you, please, wrap up. Kurtz: Okay. My point is this: I -- whatever will minimize the impact on the subdivision where I live is what I want -- I want this Council to look out for us, not the business interests. The homeowners within Paramount and our children and our -- the education -- if we come -- they come back and ask us for more money for more schools, that's inappropriate. That money should be collected before permits are issued and at -- you know, put an assessment tax -- or an impact tax on building permits to pay for these kinds of things. And one last thing. Coming up Meridian Road, when the junior high school is letting out, it's a mishmash of traffic. You have got entrances from this new part of the Paramount that's just Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 46 of 70 been built and is being developed now where the apartments are, trying to cross the -- Heritage School. School is trying to come out and turn left and right -- you can't get -- it's just a robot and it's only going to get worse when that southeast corner is fully developed. What's going to happen when the northeast corner is fully developed? And I will leave that with you, because you are the one who are approving these things to the Planning Commission ultimately and I leave that with you. Bird: Any questions? This is a public hearing. Is there anybody else that would like to testify? Seeing none -- come on up. No. Not twice. Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Come on up anyway. We will take you and, then, I will call -- Sullivan: Thank you so much. I'm Jennifer Sullivan. I live on 393 West Dreyfuss. And my family -- my husband, my eight year old and I have lived there since 2012. I really appreciate you listening to us, your voting constituents. We are trusting in your wise decisions. I'm opposed to these new zoning changes for reasons that parked -- extra parked cars and driving congestion are posing more and more threat to our young children who walk and play in our communities . I have seen several near misses. The houses are packed pretty tightly already and I think what you are feeling from us is that we feel already that we are pretty congested and these -- the changes of the apartments and now -- and now this proposed change is just feeling a bit much. The pools are pretty crowded. I have taken my now eight year old for years to the pools and we have walked away, because there were too many people there . We bought into this original dream and we have taken walks and we have been looking forward to the shops where we can go as a family and have a healthy lifestyle , which encourages more movement and walking and spending our hard -earned money locally and we just bought into this quality of living, we bought into the dream, and it feels like this is change -- changing on us. Thank you. Bird: Any questions? Thank you very much. I'm sorry. Tom Robert is against, but did not want to testify. Naquel Ross against and does want to testify. Ross: Hello, Council Members. My name is Naquel Ross and I'm at 6043 North Peppard Avenue and I am opposed to the change in zoning because of -- our family had made a decision to buy and build based on the current zonin g information and we want that zoning to stay the same. To change the zoning and development plan now for this parcel of land is unjust, particularly since there is not a compelling reason to make the change. My husband was not able to attend tonight. In his -- in his words he said that it should be kept how it was originally said. We bought our homes because of this information and now they change it. It's like it's not honest or fair and we are also worried about the concerns of some of these townhomes and things being rented out as the gentleman over here kind of explained what that can be like when they become rentals and also how will that affect their property value . W e put a lot of money into this home and we are worried about that. Also I'm concerned about traffic, Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 47 of 70 as many have spoken about the loss of the school capacity. I have three children in the schools and so our family -- we respectfully request that the city will not -- the City Council, that you will not -- sorry. Our family respects -- respectfully requests that the City Council will not approve this proposed zoning change. Thank you. Bird: Any questions? Thank you very much. John Sullivan. Sullivan: Thank you. John Sullivan. 393 West Dreyfuss. I echo my wife's commentary. I just wanted to voice my objection. I wanted to add that we have also -- already had an incident where a pedestrian has been hit by a car, so the congestion is very much a concern. I also buy in that what was sold to as originally or communicated to us while we were purchasing the home was the original zoning and I would like that to stay in place. That's all I'd like to say. Bird: Any questions, Council? Sullivan: Thank you. Bird: Thank you. I can't pronounce -- I think -- is there anybody that wants to testify? This is a public hearing. Please come forward. Delreal: Good evening. My name is Gisela Delreal. I live on 6010 North Peppard Avenue. You heard my husband a little bit earlier. We have been here since April of this year in the home that we purchased and , to be honest, the streets are crowded with children always playing. They are always outside. But that is where you will always find them. They are never inside, besides when they are doing homework. And if we add additional congestion to that I can just imagine, you know, the problems that we would see with the little ones running out and I'm talking four, five, six -- all -- all ages are out in the middle of the street and, granted, where we are it's -- it's a little bit quieter, but the kids do venture out to busier streets and I'm afraid that, you know, at some point there is going to be so much traffic that nobody is paying attention. And besides the schools being congested, we have -- like myself, expect the parents that are going to have children, you know, five, six years down the line where the schools are even more congested and what are we supposed to do? We have invested everything we have into the purchase of our home and we can't just pick up and go somewhere that's less congested, because of the schools that we want to provide our children with. Bird: Any questions? Thank you very much. Anybody else? Mike, would you like to reply? Wardle: Mr. President, Council Members, Mike Wardle again for Brighton. I was sitting pondering what the feelings might have been if we were proposing to go the other direction from a residential use to commercial. I suspect that the Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 48 of 70 arguments would have been largely the same. We are proud of the community that's been created and I think that the folks here th is evening have affirmed the quality of the community and this is not proposed in any way to detract from the quality or character of the community. There was certainly no bait and switch intended. When this was annexed and zoned in 2013 we did not have a specific plan, but there have been two applications that this concept has been presented to since 2013 to the neighborhood and also to the Council. When we brought the Veranda assisted living project forward I showed to the Council at that point the concept of virtually what we are proposing this evening. Slight tweaks in the -- the layout. So, it's really a matter of -- as the market evolves over time in any project, there are some uses that are longer term and candidly when you look at the southeast corner of the Paramount section where we have the commercial and the multi-family, that area has not yet developed in commercial. It takes time for that to occur. Now, this could be -- I guess we could sit and hold this, but our intent is to build this community out. It's fascinating to me to listen to the distinction that the -- the neighborhood has about the character of the people that will live in these homes. These will be single family homes that will back up to a collector roadway that will have their single family homes backing up to the same collector roadway and the same character of their family makeups will be identical. These residents will be them, but in a slightly different form of housing. Schools. Always a challenge. Always have been. They follow the need just as the need that these people created for schools when they chose to build a home in this neighborhood. There was a comment made by one of the ladies concerning the ACHD staff report that I just want to clarify. ACHD did not recommend closure of the access to -- I believe it was called to Fox Run. They recommended that it be made public, so that it -- because that will be not only an access for the assisted living, but it will be the westerly access for this project as well. We have to have the two access points. The two on Director, again, go into a collector roadway that forms a clear distinction in terms of neighborhoods between the area to the north and the area to the south and as has been stated by one of the neighbors, their community that backs up to Director is, essentially, kind of an enclosed little community. Certainly children can move out of their neighborhoods if they choose to do so. But it doesn't change the character of what their experience is. This will not have any direct impact on them internally and, quite frankly, not from a property value perspective . These are just the same type of people. In one case a bit more on the senior side. In the other case small families, potentially, living in a choice of lifestyle, but ownership is the same. There is no distinction between the two. I will conclude with that, unless you have questions, but I think Mr. Turnbull would like to also make some comments. Bird: Thank you, Mike. Any questions for Mike? Wardle: Thank you. Bird: David. Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 49 of 70 Turnbull: Mr. President, Members of the Council, David Turnbull. 12601 West Explorer Drive in Boise. I want to be brief, but I will probably respond a little bit to some of the points that were made point by point. I will go back ten years. We actually commissioned a plan over this northern property that actually included about everything these new sections west of -- or, excuse me, south of Director that are now the residents where some of these people live. The plan and the idea back then, even ten years ago, was to create a different kind of living environment. One of those components that we unveiled back then was the idea of a continuing care retirement facility and I want to just point to the nature of Paramount as a whole. We have tried and tried over the course of the last 13 years to provide multiple living environments that would incorporate anybody's lifestyle choices. So, we got the Veranda project under construction now. Obviously, this is for people that are nearing the end of life. The Encore project is an adjunct to that. This is an age-qualified community. Some of you may have been around when we built another age-qualified community called James Place out by the Cherry Lane Golf Course and, you know, the average age in those communities is into the 70s and 80s. And so when we are talking about schools and crowding, a full half of this project is not anticipated to generate any student s whatsoever. The other half of the project, Cadence, actually targets the buyer profile that would be slightly diverse. It could be young couples, newly married, just getting started. Maybe they have a baby or two. But it's not for the -- primarily targeted toward the families that have students that are going to school . Or it could be empty nesters that are just wanting to downsize. So, the issue of school crowding -- this is going to help. On the issue of traffic, everybody wants to think about restaurants and retail and if you even look at this location, the idea of restaurants and retail there is a little bit problematic, because, number one, you have to attract traffic from outside of the community to support those uses . So, we would actually be inviting more traffic into the Paramount neighborhood. We would probably have to get a waiver from ITD to create an access off Chinden and to make anything like that viable. So, the uses we are proposing as Council Member Milam said, you know, under the current zoning we could have gone for apartments, we could have gone for densities nearly two or three times what we are proposing here. So, the traffic issues, although I understand their concerns, we are mitigating those. The density issues are less. As for the rentals, I want to go back about another ten years and just let these residents know what we have done to look out for this Paramount neighborhood. A phenomenon occurred that we had never seen before -- and I don't know how -- if I'm running out of time here, if I have got a time limit, but a phenomenon we had never seen before. One day I came to work and we had had eight sales reported in our community for that weekend and I thought, oh, my gosh that's like -- where did that come from. So, I checked into it and I think -- I can't remember for sure. I think about six of those were investor sales, people who wanted to buy for an investment and I could see this bubble forming and I could see this as a warning sign. We quickly revised our documents with all of our builders to require that their homes be owner-occupied. We were the only ones that did Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 50 of 70 that. All of our surrounding neighbors were selling to investors as fast as they could. Consequently, when the downturn hit and the foreclosure crisis came, if you looked at the websites that tracked foreclosures, Paramount's foreclosure rate was probably a third of what the surrounding neighborhoods were . So, we have always taken that long view in mind here. Now, I will tell you that in the Encore project there may well be some rental properties, because I have a mom that's 89 years old. She doesn't live in Idaho. We actually looked at one of these -- and Mike used this comparison of the Orchard project on Cloverdale and Ustick, which is age qualified and built for older couples. There was a similar project built where she lives and she looked at actually living -- moving there for the environment. But she was 85 years old and they didn't rent. All you could do was buy. Well, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense for my 85 year old mother to be buying a property at that stage of her life. So, there could be those kind of situations. The nice thing about it is these are all under one common area maintenance agreement. All of these units are maintenance free. Both sides. Cadence and Encore. So, they will be managed by an association -- a sub association that will maintain these properties. So, I think that we have taken care of that concern. Somebody mentioned that, you know, they wished there were more pools. Well, guess what, we have provided two. And for the Encore residents we have provided their own private clubhouse. So, I think we have addressed the amenities. We have addressed a lot of the concerns that have been raised here. Obviously, you know, some of these people are probably coming here with a lot of questions on their mind and, you know, we have done our best to have the appropriate neighborhood meetings . As Mike mentioned, we have had a couple of these in the last three years and laid out our plans and I think with a better understanding they will come to recognize that this is actually a really nice use. It diversifies the population base, but it also allows people for -- you know, this is a multi-generational neighborhood and that's what we have always aimed to create and I think that's what we have done a pretty good job at. So, I'd appreciate your approval of this application and I will stand for questions. Bird: Questions for Mr. Turnbull? Thank you, David. Turnbull: Thank you. Bird: Council, what is your pleasure? Palmer: Mr. President? Bird: Mr. Palmer. Palmer: Mr. Present, Mr. Nary, I know I have asked you this a lot here in my first year, but just to keep it fresh and also to the benefit of the public , as we have heard a lot of comments about -- concerning property values and schools and whatnot, what are the parameters in which we can legally decide. Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 51 of 70 Nary: Council Member Palmer, Members of the Council. So, the Council's decision has to be based on your zoning and -- your zoning maps, your Comprehensive Plan, and your city code. The school district is responsible to -- to school -- to educate whatever children that come. They guesstimate those numbers based on formulas, but they really, again, have that responsibility. Schools are not your -- within your purview to use as a basis for denial alone. Property values has not ever been found in the state of Idaho by any court to be a consideration for whether you would amend a zoning map or you shouldn't amend a zoning map. Again, everything is based on your code, your comp plan, everything that's within your purview to review. Traffic is decided by the highway district on what's the appropriate roadway system, access points, levels of service, those are all decided by the highway district. They do have a representative here tonight. I don't know if you wanted to hear from him, but -- I'm sure he appreciated me reminding you that he was here. But, again, the issues of density are within your purview. The issue of zoning does require you to find that the zoning that's requested is reasonable based on your -- your land use map and your Comprehensive Plan and that it's in the interest of the city to amend the zoning. The folks that testified about the zoning are correct, they had an expectation, but they also have the -- they have an expectation, but there is also a right that comes with that on the property and to request a change, which is what's before you. They have the right to come and testify and give you their concerns and issues and that's what they have done. So, property values, that's not an issue. Schools really are not an issue. Traffic, that's not really an issue for the city. It really is based on your code and your Comprehensive Plan. Does that answer your question? Bird: Any other questions? Any other discussion? Palmer: Mr. President? Bird: Mr. Palmer. Palmer: I notice that Justin was squirming a little bit sometimes -- Bird: You want to talk to him? Palmer: You had mentioned -- so, yeah, Justin, if you have got anything you want to chime in, I'd like your opinion. Specifically I guess with the -- we hear often about going both ways. That is some people prefer commercial because of traffic. Some people prefer residential because of traffic. What's the science? Lucas: Mr. President, Members of the Council, for the record my name is Justin Lucas. My business address is 3775 Adams Street, Garden City, Idaho, and I am here representing the Ada County Highway District. As always, I will guide you to the official staff report that was submitted on behalf of the highway district . I do that, because that is our commission action on the -- on the application and Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 52 of 70 the official response from the highway district. Now, as -- as I usually do, I'm glad to provide commentary at the request of the Council. Traffic is -- as you say, there is science behind that and the generation of trips depends on all kinds of things. But typical use is one of the primary drivers. Residential uses typically generate fewer trips than higher intensity commercial style uses . So, that -- in general that that is true. Are there some commercial uses that are low trip generators? Absolutely. Are there some residential types of housing that are a little higher trip generators than others? Absolutely. So, it's -- it's very specific and for this specific subdivision, a comprehensive traffic impact study was completed many years ago when all of this was originally reviewed and anticipated and I do not see anything with these changes that would change the highway district's opinion on the traffic generation. It is unique that you have collector streets on both sides, both the west and the south and, then, an arterial street on the east and a state highway on the north and the trips generated from this subdivision are likely to go to those collector streets, out onto the state highway directly through Fox Run or onto Meridian Road through Director. So, I can answer any other specific questions you may have. Bird: Council, any other questions? Palmer: Mr. President? Bird: Mr. Palmer. Palmer: So, that -- you mentioned that it was unique with the two collector streets adjacent to the -- the property in question. Would that be to the benefit of the proposal, as opposed to just having I guess one -- Lucas: Well, I'm hesitant to provide, you know, benefit type -- that type of language, but what I can say is that collector streets are intended to carry trips to other higher capacity facilities and in this specific situation it appears that the trips that are generated from this proposed neighborhood would not have to cut through other local streets to access those higher-capacity facilities, which is a typical problem that we deal with with new subdivision applications is cut-through traffic on local streets. In this specific situation I don't see that occurring as -- as much, because of the -- the configuration of the collector system that was developed through the Paramount Subdivision. Palmer: Thank you. Bird: Any other questions for Justin? Thank you again, Justin, very much. Council, if we don't need anymore public testimony or questions, I would certainly entertain a motion to close the public hearing. Borton: Mr. President? Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 53 of 70 Bird: Mr. Borton. Borton: Move that we closed the public hearing on item H-2016-0104. Palmer: Second. Bird: Got a motion to close the public hearing on H-2016-0104. All in favor say aye. Any opposed? Pass. The public hearing is closed. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Bird: What's your pleasure, Council? Borton: Mr. President? Bird: Mr. Borton. Borton: There has been I think some great input from the public and the applicant to describe the very nature of the balance of considerations that we have and I think a lot of the public -- the Davis family in particular -- raised a lot of concerns and at least some questions that I think for me at least the applicant has -- has answered. I'm trying to weigh the considerations of this application in looking at -- as counsel has described -- our future land use map, our Comprehensive Plan, and the specific ways in which this particular application and this parcel that already had entitled land use rights to it . I for one am pleased to see how the applicant has mitigated with this request the impact on traffic and schools, for example, among other considerations. So, those for me weigh heavily in favor of supporting the application as presented. I do think it's consistent with a reasonable use and reasonable application of our code and our Comprehensive Plan. It's an application that I'm supportive of and from our experience on Council this particular project, which has been going on for 13 years, and this particular developer has been anything but a participant of bait and switch or anything of the sort. Uses and needs may change and as I understood this application that's what's happened here and I think that the description has described just that, but clearly not an element of a bait and switch or any overt or implied desire to try and pass something off that it isn't. So, that was exactly what I -- when I saw it I don't agree. Bird: Any other comments? Milam: Mr. President? Bird: Mrs. Milam. Milam: As I already stated, you know, the concerns that we all have, you know, having families in Meridian are the schools and the traffic and, you know, that -- Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 54 of 70 that makes our job really hard, because we listen to you and we hear you and with our hearts want to just say no more building, no more houses, you know, but in reality this is a project -- there is 24 percent open space, which is more than double what is required. But the fact that they have the -- the age-required older living is going to make -- have a lot less children. You can move literally from one of your homes, your kids move out, you move into one of the Cadence places and, then, you get a little bit older and you move into the Encore and, then, you can move right into the assisted living. So, the diversity that it provides, it -- I see that it does add a lot of value to Paramount and this particular developer they donated the land for the school, they are the ones that created this wonderful place that you guys love living and I know it's hard, but based on the facts that we have to make a decision on I am in support of this application. Bird: Any other? If not, I would certainly entertaining a motion to -- Borton: Mr. President? Bird: Mr. Borton. Borton: If there is no any further discussion, I would move that we approve Item H-2016-0104. Palmer: Second. Bird: I have a motion to approve and a second. Any discussion? Borton: Yeah. Mr. President, that includes the staff and applicant's agreement with regards to how to reconcile the parking concern. Bird: Everybody understand that? Madam Clerk, would you -- Roll Call: Bird, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, absent; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. G. Public Hearing for Linder Road Apartments (H-2016- 0111) by S 3 Investments LP, Located at 1770 S. Linder Road 1. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 4.55 Acres of Land with an R-15 Zoning District 2. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a Multi-Family Development in the R15 Zoning District Consisting of Sixty-Four (64) Dwelling Units Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 55 of 70 Bird: Next item. Item G is H-2016-0111, S 3 Investments, LP. The Linder Road Apartments. Is that you, too, Sonya? Allen: That is. Bird: We have got you here, we don't have to go run you down. Allen: I didn't run out on you. All right. Next item up before you is a request for annexation and zoning and conditional use permit. This site consists of 4.35 acres of land, zoned RUT in Ada county, located at 1770 North Linder Road. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation is medium density residential. The applicant is proposing to annex and zone 4.55 acres of land with an R-15 zoning district and requests a step up in density from medium density residential to medium high density residential as allowed by the Comprehensive Plan without an amendment to the future land use map. The proposed density of 14.71 units per acre is consistent with that allowed in the R -15 district and with the requested step up in density to medium high density residential. A conditional use permit is also requested for a multi-family development, consisting of 63 dwelling units in an R-15 district. The site plan depicts 16 four- plex structures that contain 63 two-bedroom units and a management office. Access is proposed via South Linder Road. ACHD is restricting the access to a right-in, right-out. An emergency turnaround for the fire department is proposed at the southeast corner of the site. The proposed off-street parking is in compliance with UDC standards. A ten foot wide multi-use pathway is required along Linder Road in accord with the pathways master plan . Staff recommends pathway connections are stubbed to the north, generally in this location here where my pointer is at and to the east property boundary for future pedestrian interconnectivity. A total of 1.99 acres or 44.6 percent of qualified open space, along with site amenities consisting of large open grassy areas, a covered barbecue area, a tot lot, a sports court, bicycle maintenance station and a segment of the city's multi-use pathway are proposed in accord with UDC standards. Two types of multi-family structures are proposed within the development as shown. Building materials consist of a mix of horizontal and vertical siding with stone veneer accents. The two building types appear to be identical, except that they differ -- have different roof forms. Variety in the architecture character of the structures and design should be provided as set forth in our architectural standards manual. Windows are required on all elevations that face pathways and areas used for children's recreation to allow views of these areas. All structures on the site are subject to design review. The Commission did recommend approval of the requested annexation, zoning and conditional use applications. Kent Brown, the applicant's representative, testified in favor. No one testified in opposition or commented. Written testimony was received from Ken Brown, the applicant's representative, in agreement with the staff report. There were no major issues of discussion with the Commission and they did not make any changes to the staff recommendation. Council should Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 56 of 70 determine if a step up in density from medium density residential to medium high density residential is appropriate and should be approved for this development as allowed by the comp plan without an amendment to the future land use map. Written testimony has been received since the Commission hearing from Kent Brown in agreement with the Commission recommendation. He also submitted a revised site plan as discussed at the Commission hearing that complies with the right-of-way requirements and parking standards. Staff will stand for any questions. Bird: Council, any questions for staff? Mr. Brown. Brown: For the record, Kent Brown, 3161 East Springwood, Meridian, Idaho. Could you go to the colored -- yes. As you look at this design, I'm really pleased with it. We -- we had one neighbor call us after the neighborhood meeting , said he was out of town, it was on our east side. They have the Party Barn, if you know what the Party Barn is, adjacent to us and they were concerned about the private area back in the very southern -- southeasterly corner of our site. We had a building located there. We moved it across the parking aisle and so now we don't have any of our buildings back against any other building. We don't have any neighbors that we are abutting, even though we have increased our setbacks -- you allow 15 in the R-15 zone and most of your zones from the rear of these buildings. We have 20 in all of them. We are adjacent to this parking lot on the -- the east there as you can see in this -- this rendering. We have a ditch that's -- a couple of ditches and a right of way for irrigation that runs along our southerly boundary that's between us and Fall Creek Subdivision that will be coming in in the future up in this corner where it kind of comes to a point to have a cul-de-sac that ends up in there. So, I really like the design. We have widened some of the spaces so that it's a little wider, for example, between the -- on the south side as you are coming off of Linder, the second building in, that area was widened with a pedestrian path that takes you back to all of those amenities that are central in -- in the site, in a close proximity for everybody to come. As I have been working on this site it reminded me years ago of a project I did in front of Mountain View High School, those apartments that are there. This intersection is much like that intersection. At the same time when we put the apartments in there was no road. The ones in front of Mountain View High School , there was no connection on Linder Road across the freeway. This is the same thing that is taking place here. This is one of the places that ITD and I think the Meridian plan that's looking for that connection to take place, that is dramatically going to change the character of the area and if you look at the two areas and what has taken place, as you look over there by Mountain View High School you have the gas station that's on the corner and more commercial type uses, but the apartments are very appropriate with the busy traffic that's -- that's along Overland Road and I see this fitting in and most likely the zoning that's to the north of us is going to change also. As I did talk to the neighbors they were seeking kind of similar type uses as what we were and that's why they are not here. The Meridian Fire Department owns the piece directly to the north of us also and -- for a fire station site and I Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 57 of 70 think we have done a good job and hopefully you will think so, too. I would stand for any questions. Bird: Any questions for Kent? Thanks, Kent. Brown: Thank you. Bird: This is a public hearing. Is there anybody that wants to testify? Ralph? You got any replies, Kent? Council, what's your pleasure? Milam: Mr. President? Bird: Mrs. Milam. Milam: I move that we close the public hearing for H-2016-0111. Little Roberts: Second. Bird: I have got a motion to close the public hearing on H-2016-0118 -- or, no, 0111. I'm sorry. Trying to get us out of here earlier. All in favor say aye? Any opposed same. Okay. It's passed. Public hearing is closed. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Bird: Now what's your pleasure? Milam: Mr. President? Bird: Madam -- Milam: I'm glad you have a playground in there, so -- I move that we approve H-2016-0111. Borton: Second. Bird: Got a motion to approve H-2016-0111. Madam Clerk. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, absent; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. H. Public Hearing for 2016 UDC Text Amendment (H-2016- 0118) By Meridian Planning Division Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 58 of 70 1. Request: Text Amendment to the Unified Development Code (UDC) as follows: UDC Sections, Definitions; Density Requirements in the Residential Districts; Traditional Neighborhood Standards (TN-R and O-T Districts); Ditches, Laterals, Canals or Drainage Courses; Fencing; Pathways; Structure and Site Design Standards; Landscaping Requirements (Stormwater Facilities); Common Open Space and Site Amenities Requirements; Specific Provisions (Certificate of Zoning Compliance, Annexation and Rezones and Alternative Compliance); Subdivision Process; and Subdivision Design and Improvement Standards (Block Length and Common Driveways) Bird: Okay. Going on to H-2016-0118. Is that you, Mr. Parsons? Parsons: That's me tonight. I will get my changes up here for you and we will get into it. How does that sound? Bird: We are ready. Parsons: So, Mr. President, Members of the Council, I am here tonight to speak with you about the next round of UDC changes. If you recall, we were here about a year ago and did the same presentation for you . I would let you know that we did vet these changes with the UDC focus group and we spent quite a bit of time with them on the proposed changes and I also went to the BCA, as I did last year, and vetted these changes with them as well and so very little comments received on this application for you this evening . So, a lot of the changes tonight I won't touch on, I will just touch on the bigger items. I know we are getting late into the evening here. But I do want to highlight some of these and I did want to let you know that we did take into consideration of our development community, our stakeholders, as we went through this next round of UDC changes. There are approximately ten pages and, again, I won't go into all those tonight, but I did want to touch on a couple of them, though. I will run through that quickly. I don't want this to be too much of a formal presentation. If you want me to pause and answer any questions feel free to chime in and I will do my best to answer the questions you may have and that way we will just keep this at an open dialogue for you as a Council and also are two members in the audience here this evening. So, as far as the first page before you -- and I can -- I think I can zoom in on some of this for you. Hopefully you can read it up there. Bird: Did you have -- did you have Finance print this out for you? Parsons: I did not. The problem is we have so many changes we -- we got to have more and more pages of smaller, smaller font to fit it on here and I tried to do the best I could to present that and I was hoping to get this blown up a little bit Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 59 of 70 for you. Let me see if I can increase the size here a little bit. Well, that didn't help me, but, hopefully, you can see it up there. So, basically, on this particular sheet there is two -- two items I really want to touch bases on and if you can see my cursor here -- one is really double fencing. I think we came before you last year -- I should probably leave it on that other mode and you can zoom in on it. But as you know, we have always had an issue with fencing within our city and there has been instances where residents have double fenced their property when it -- especially when they abut a common lot and so this year we took it upon ourselves to define what double fencing is and how we would apply that. So, if you were next to your neighbor and you were fighting with them and you wanted to build your own fence on your property, you could still do that. But if you were up against a common open space, an HOA lot, code would prohibit that from happening. So, that's the distinction here. We want to make it clear that double fencing isn't allowed adjacent to common lots and that's happened throughout the city. So, that's one of the big items that we are bringing forward. The other one is really are density chart here and that's -- can you lower it here? Bird: Mr. Borton. Borton: Yeah. Real quick on that point. Is it also prohibited adjacent to school lots? The double fencing? Parsons: Not -- no. At this time. Borton: Is there a reason -- I knew -- it might have been a while, but that has come up before -- and I forget the school -- where -- Parsons: The school district double fences their property. They -- they don't -- there was one up at Silverleaf Subdivision where the -- the school district likes chain link fencing -- Borton: Yeah. Parsons: -- and the subdivisions put in wood or vinyl and they want to just -- they always put that perimeter fencing along -- yeah, they always double it up, because they don't want to be responsible for damage on the adjacent property owners' fencing, so this doesn't negate that. That's not considered open space in our code. Borton: Okay. Parsons: It's really an HOA common lot. Bird: But, Bill, they do -- they just require it to be open fencing, isn't it, if you -- if -- at a school if you double fence? Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 60 of 70 Parsons: Not necessarily. Bird: It isn't? Parsons: No. They prefer to do that. Typically what we do is -- they do it for maintenance purposes and they want eyes on that, because the public and the police are kind of monitoring that. You do want your eyes on your open space. Even parks are the same way. So, the practice is, yes, you want open vision fencing along those areas. You don't want to wall people off and the school district has done a pretty good job on that as well. The other one -- the other item -- particular item on this slide is the density requirements. Currently in our code we have a maximum density. So, in an R-2 zone maximum density of two units to the acre. R-4 four units to the acre. Eight units to the acre in an R-8 district. When we presented to you last year we brought up that issue on how do we increase our density to match what our zoning districts are and at the time we had thought, you know, let's reduce our lot size and our dimensional standards and Council was not -- was adamant against changing the R-4 and the R-2 standards. There are no -- we are good with the R-8, R-15, R-40, but we do not want to mess with the R-4 and the R-8 -- or the R-2 standards and so what we tried to do here is remove the density requirements and let the Comprehensive Plan guide what that is. As you recall, every time we come before you we speak to the Comprehensive Plan and we speak to you what the densities -- the anticipated densities are under our Comprehensive Plan. So, again, for example, in this evening we had one medium density residential, we talk about three to eight dwelling units to the acre. Well, technically, you could have an R-4 development and still fall within three to eight. You could have an R-8 development that falls into three or eight. You can have an R-15 that falls into three to eight. You just saw that this evening with the Paramount Director project. So, what we are doing is taking density out of our code and letting the comp plan guide that. Now, there have been instances where I have been with the city where you have an in-fill project where density does become -- the maximum density does become a problem, because you don't have open space and you don't have a lot of roads to put in . So, when you look at, basically, gross density on something -- if you have a lot of open space and a lot of roads, then, your density is higher, because you're not setting aside that space for that. So, this is our first blush at attempting to do that and, again, the group felt -- they didn't have really an opinion on it one way or another, as long as they can continue to do the projects they want to bring in Meridian and we said that wouldn't have any bearing on that . We would still let the comp plan guide that. Any questions or concerns with removing density requirement out of the code? Next slide really kind of reinforces that same discussion that I just shared with you. This particular slide, again, as we did last year, we are looking at some of our zoning districts. This is our Traditional Neighborhood Residential District. We don't have a lot of this within the City of Meridian. There are specific standards that the developer has to comply with in order to use this zoning district and because of the stringent requirements many developers don't use Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 61 of 70 this. W hen you heard the lady just having a discussion about being walkable in traditional neighborhoods and a mix of commercial, that's really what this zone is for. You want the mix of residential product types and you want it to be small -- short block length, walkability, buildings towards the street, alley loaded product, and that's what this zone tries to achieve and so we have looked at the standards, we understand that some of them may not be achievable, so this -- this specific graphic is really diving into that and saying how can we make this zone achievable. How can we get more of this in the City of Meridian and incorporate that into our adjacent subdivisions and so we are trying to lower the density requirements to give a little bit greater flexibility in the setbacks and reduce some of the parking pad requirements in front of the units. It's similar to what we did last year when we came forward with our changes to our R-8 and R- 15 and R-40 standards. On this particular slide here -- and you guys see this on a regular basis. You know, Meridian has a lot of what's traditionally a farming, agricultural community and we have a lot of waterways that traverse our city and we get in a situation sometimes where waterways are either piped or relocated to fit a certain development. Our Comprehensive Plan encourages waterways to be incorporated into our overall development and so there is good examples of that in Meridian where the developers did a great job at incorporating a creek or a waterway as part of a linear open space and there is also bad examples where they, basically, fence them off, they become a maintenance road and a weed patch and so with this change here we are not requiring the developer to tile the canal, what we are saying is follow the guidelines of our Comprehensive Plan. We encourage -- we want to encourage them to -- don't look at that as an impediment to the development of the property, look at it as a positive -- an amenity for that development and find ways to creatively encourage that to be incorporated into your -- the design of your subdivision and maybe create a linear open space or a walkway corridor through there, pedestrian corridor through your development. I think Settlement Bridge off of McMillan and Locust Grove did a very nice job with their waterway that's going through that and that's really what we are trying to do here. Again, we are not forcing it on the developers to do that, they still have the right to tile the canal and -- and make some of those changes, but it would be our first stance and we are even going to communicate this at our pre-application meetings that it's our intent through our Comprehensive Plan to keep these waterways open and protected and encouraged to be incorporated into the development as a whole. Now, that will take some work with the irrigation districts as well. There is -- there is some requirements that -- they have some say on how these facilities develop, too, and that's some of the concerns that I heard from the BCA is, you know, the irrigation districts are a little skittish on letting us improve that and put landscaping in that when it comes to maintenance of their facilities. So, again, there is good examples of it and there is really bad examples of this. Next item is our -- again, we are proposing some changes to our design standards. If you recall last year we revamped our design manual and we took out all of the site development requirements and came forward with our new architectural standards manual. In that manual we clearly wanted to focus on the architecture more than the site Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 62 of 70 development. We told you this was phased -- at that time that was phase one. This tonight, this evening, I'm discussing phase two and what we have done is we have comprehensively looked at those list of site changes that we removed from the old design manual and we said where does this apply? Does it work in the UDC, does it work in the Comprehensive Plan, or is it just redundant and we don't need it? So, we vetted all of those previous standards out. We have incorporated some new standards into the UDC and some of those did get rolled over into the Comprehensive Plan or were already addressed in the Comprehensive Plan. So, again, it's just that next phase of how we want to encourage development to have buildings towards the street, minimize large sea of asphalt in front of their shopping centers, almost like a village where you -- and to have that pedestrian connectivity throughout the parking lot, so people aren't having to walk down drive aisles, almost get run over as they walk through the parking lot. So, that's really what this next step of our design changes are proposing -- our design standards. We are expecting a little bit more pedestrian connectivity and more buildings towards the street to kind of frame or screen the parking areas. And, again, the majority of that would happen on our major corridors throughout the city. Any questions or keep pressing on? Bird: Any questions at this point? Evidently not, Bill. Parsons: Nothing really on that slide to discuss. The one that I want to touch on here -- are a couple items. Or at least the last one. If you recall last year we spent a lot of time on how to make open space and site amenities proportionate to a development. Currently we treat everyone the same -- or the code does. We say if you're five acres or greater you provide ten percent open space and you provide an amenity for every 20 acres and it doesn't matter if you're five acres or 200 acres, you have to -- to comply with that standard. I came forward with a matrix, some proposals, some recommendations to you. Council wanted us to look at code and say how can we write something so that we can get it proportioned -- be more proportionate for the larger developments . The Mayor at that time said there has got to be some kind of alternative compliance or something in place to do that and so I took your direction from last year and I spent some time with the planning director and I said, Caleb, you know, maybe the simpler way -- and I brought this up with the UDC focus group is maybe the simpler way is to allow common open space and site amenities to be part of the other alternative compliance process. We -- here on this table you can see we have a list of standards and our alternative compliance process is allowed -- gives a developer flexibility. It's something to allow them to do something innovative other than what our code allows. It has to be equal to or better than. And so when I vetted this with the UDC focus group, they liked the idea of opening that up to the alternative compliance process. Now, that is a director- level approval. It doesn't require Council action or P&Z, but we will share that with you as the projects come forward before you to let you know they are -- they have submitted alternative compliance of these standards and so this would give the developer an opportunity to -- say if they wanted to build a 6,000 square foot Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 63 of 70 clubhouse and only want to do five percent open space, we could say, yes, that clubhouse offsets the five percent additional open space and so we felt this was the easiest way to come up -- rather than reinvent the code and come with some new standards, this was our way of kind of taking what we heard from you last year and incorporating it into what we already have in code and that was pretty well receptive from the development community. They didn't -- they didn't like the idea of doing that. I think it does give them some greater -- greater flexibility and, hopefully, it does help us as we start having more and more in-fill projects, giving them -- a developer or property owner latitude to come in with something with some density, but also have a great amenity package to go along with that to support that density. That's something that we discussed quite a bit last year. Milam: Mr. President? Bird: Mrs. Milam. Milam: Bill, was the issue of density versus amenities discussed at all, as opposed to just acreage? Parsons: It wasn't, but I think like any city when you get progressive, open space is always a great amenity for a subdivision, but as I discussed last year, it can be costly to an HOA, to a homeowner, because things will always go up and maintenance of those facilities -- those costs increase. So, someone could diversify their open space and off-set it with an amenities package, that -- that's one way to do that. Milam: Mr. President? I guess what I -- what I'm referring to, Bill, is more like the amount of -- the number of homes -- so, if they are even R-4 and -- you know, you have got a hundred homes -- and I'm just making up numbers. Don't do the math on it. But 20 acres, you have got a hundred homes and -- or versus putting 200 homes in that same piece of property. It seems the 200 homes should have to have more amenities to their -- because they have more people that they are trying to appease. So -- does that make sense? Rather than just say acreage itself. Parsons: It does make sense. Again, the comp plan -- Milam: I mentioned this a long time ago, but I guess it -- Parsons: Well, the density is something, again, that -- as I presented, we are taking out density out of the UDC and letting the comp plan drive that. So, if someone came in -- in that particular case if something was a medium density residential and they came in with an R-4 development and they still had 8,000 square foot lots and they came in on the high side, eight dwelling units to the acre, technically they could request less open space and greater amenities, because they have that available to them. But that's not a guarantee that they Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 64 of 70 get that approved. Again, it has to be equal to or better than. Our intent behind getting rid of density is to get more -- like as you saw this evening with the Paramount community, is you have a master planned community, you want to be all-inclusive. You want to have a townhome component. You want to have alley load. You want to have the person that can afford the really nice single family home, but they all share the same amenities. That's really the intent behind this. It's not meant just to drive up density, so that we can get density for density sake. I mean that's not the intent behind that . If we feel that's what they are doing, we won't support their alternative compliance and we can deny their annexation or their plat based on their requirement. Again, there is always going to be someone that tries to push it. You can't try to setup code to address every situation. Milam: But I guess my -- my question really doesn't -- it isn't addressed here and it's -- because it's not about any of the changes that you are making, it's about changing our code to begin with. Parsons: If they don't want -- yeah. If they don't want to do the alternative compliance they can do the ten percent and stick with -- Milam: But I'm saying we need to have -- we should have higher -- we should have higher standards or higher requirements for more homes. The higher number of homes should have to have more amenities than less density or zoning, that we are not getting rid of, but whatever it is, you have more homes you need -- should have more amenities. More than what we already require, I guess is what I want to say, not in this change or alternate compliance. Something on its own -- take more time and come back with -- Parsons: Density should coincide with the open space and amenities. Milam: Uh? Parsons: You want density to coincide with open space and amenities. Milam: Yeah. Parsons: And that's -- again, you have to look at if -- if -- a prime example is that multi-family up against Settlers Park. Do they really need open space and their own amenities? They are right next to a city park, so -- Milam: But there you're going to have to have some exceptions. Parsons: Yeah. Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 65 of 70 Milam: And we talked about that before, having -- if they are a certain distance from a park, having an exception and we talked about that a couple weeks ago, that if there is a park within a certain distance -- Parsons: And I think we can have that discussion as part of the alternative compliance process. If we don't feel it's appropriate again we don't send them down that road. Milam: And my point is really to not have so many low end, high density -- you know, I look at this and I'm like what are we -- we are taking away all of our standards and just let them just cram it all down -- you know, cram in as much as you can and -- Parsons: Yeah. I don't want you to think that alternative compliance is a way to get out of code. It's not. It's -- it's a means to get something better -- equal to or better. There is findings that we have to make -- that they have to comply with. Again, if they are coming in -- I'm with you. You want 300 homes, but you want to do five percent open space and one clubhouse, is that really equal to or better than or is it better to have open space and no clubhouse or a tot lot and open space? Sometimes market demand kind of does that. You go where you can afford to go. But, again, if you're getting nicer architecture -- I mean there is -- what if you have a nicer development? What if you do have a cluster development where your -- all your -- as we discussed, you can have a really great development with five percent open space and it could have a great amenity package and it could be better than someone that has a ten acre park and two trees and a picnic shelter. If you're getting everyone out there participating, going to the clubhouse, doing community events, maybe three acres is appropriate for a denser development. There is no easy solution to it I guess is where I'm going. We can look at that further. Right now what we are trying to do here is get something a little bit more innovative for the community without sacrificing the open -- without -- making sure that it's equal to or better than, not sacrificing. We don't want to degrade a community. We want to keep that standard. But we want to give somebody flexibility to do that, whether that's through lesser open space and greater amenities or -- Milam: And I agree with that. I mean it might be eight and a half percent, but they have got some amazing packages, so -- Parsons: Yeah. Exactly. Milam: So, I agree with having some flexibility, you know, in there, but I just think it should be also based on the number of homes and the acreage -- Parsons: Well, the density -- right. The density is going to be driven by the zoning district that they request. So, if they are falling within the three to eight or whatever code may require, four -- under that and they are still complying with all Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 66 of 70 the requirements, then, density is going to be what it is. They can't just request a step up in density, they got to -- they got to still meet the dimensional standards and fall within the parameters of the Comprehensive Plan. But that's the risk you run when you take density out of the code . I mean now it -- it does get a little subjective, because one -- one could argue that, hey, I'm giving you this great open space, why don't you let me go a little denser, Council. Let me go to nine units to the acre. Let me go to ten units to the acre. Because we are giving you this great open space and now -- as Sonya mentioned to you, the code does allow them to request a step up without -- in intensity without a comp plan change. So, that's something to take under consideration. With that I don't have anything else. I did want to let you know I did take this to the Planning and Zoning Commission on the October 20th hearing. They supported -- they were in favor of the changes with no modifications. No one was there to testify in opposition and, again, staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission, we are recommending approval this evening and, again, stand for any other questions you might have. Bird: Any questions for Bill? This is a public hearing. Mr. Brown, if you would state your name and address, please. Brown: Kent Brown. 3161 East Springwood, Meridian, Idaho. I do get to spend quite a bit of time down here at City Hall and just the other day I was in the planning department and this lady was ready to go postal and shoot somebody , because they would not let her build a double fence. So, I can definitely say that there is an advantage -- she and her neighbor were having issues over that property line and she wanted her fence. She -- she said their neighbor wasn't playing right and so she's happy to have her own fence and listening to the poor planners trying to tell her why she can't have one was -- I mean it was kind of interesting. Over the 20 something years that I have been doing this -- 20 -- close to 27 now. The first nine years I was over land development for the city of Boise and, then, I have been on the private side. I have done a lot of different developments and a lot of them in your community and I look at like a development that I did -- Tuscany and when we did Tuscany the plan that we came in with didn't have any of the pools in it . That was something that we added later and my client didn't want to show the pools , because he didn't want to have to bond for those improvements and that's -- the reason he didn't -- he didn't show those up front -- he ended up putting I think five pools in there and gave a city park, an elementary school site -- I mean some of those things -- that's kind of the purpose why they do that. I would be really curious going back and seeing if I could meet the ten percent open space and yet -- in Tuscany today. If there is that ten percent that you guys view as qualified in that Tuscany development, because we had so much water and that water area doesn't always get counted with the way that you do things. We had groundwater that was pretty high and so we had to dig trenches and create the Tuscany lakes that -- that is quite an amenity for those -- those neighborhoods. As I work with the different jurisdictions, one of the ones that I like -- the zoning code that I really Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 67 of 70 like is Star's. In Star if you have an R-2 zone, that's two units per acre, and it doesn't matter the lot size. There is no lot size in the R-2 zone or in any of their zones. It is strictly just the density and it makes it really nice when you have something and you're laying out a subdivision and you are putting these lots in and someone in the planning world has said that 50 feet is the magic number when you are building a lot of houses that, you know, you could do a 45 or a 49 and you can't put that in, even though you're not going to increase the density and you are not going to do those things, but you still have to do it, because there is a dimensional standard that is tied to that zone and that doesn't make a lot of sense. You know, who came up that 50 feet or 60 feet is that magic number? I have tried to do -- Bird: Kent, if you could wrap up, please. Brown: I will real quick. I tried to do a development with shops, do estate type housing and not have any open space and down in fl ames and yet I know that there is a market for that and that is something that your code doesn't allow for. Site amenities. You do an in-fill project -- I was in Boise city last night before the Planning and Zoning Commission. I'm next to a 14 acre city park and I did a 52 unit apartment complex and they counted the apartment -- or the park space next door as a part of the -- my amenity package. Realistically, everything else that was around that park -- it's up by the airport -- is commercial. So, we would -- we kind of like are the only ones that get to use the park that's in that area. I think that they have got good suggestions. It's nice to be able to use the ditches where we can. Not all the ditch companies are friendly about that and I will stand for any questions. I do have other items. Bird: Any questions for Mr. Brown? Thank you, Kent. Brown: Thank you. Bird: Thanks for staying. This is a public hearing. Is there any -- Ralph? Robert? If not I would entertain a motion to close the public hearing. Little Roberts: Mr. President, I move we close the public hearing. Bird: I got a second? Milam: Second. Bird: All in favor? Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Bird: What's your pleasure, Council? I have kept quiet and I think that -- I think it's a good deal overall. While I don't agree with it a hundred percent, I don't think Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 68 of 70 anybody agrees with it a hundred percent, but I think our staff has worked hard on getting some of these changes and I think they are to the benefit of the citizens myself. That's my personal opinion. Milam: Mr. President? Bird: Mrs. Milam. Milam: So, if it turns out this was a bad idea, we just change it back? Parsons: Mr. President, Members of the Council, if you don't like some of these changes you can certainly strike them out. That's -- that's within your purview tonight. We can look at it at a later date. Right. We can -- we can try it and if we don't like it we can certainly do another text amendment and change it. That's always in our purview. Borton: Mr. President? Bird: Mr. Borton. Borton: We could look at that in a year and see if we want to make changes at that time. Bird: We are just going to have Mr. Nary do that. Borton: I appreciate the -- the changes as written and in particular the efforts that go to collaboratively come up with these and to incorporate the focus group and the BCA and -- and, Kent, thank you for sticking around. All of that input is really valuable and -- and whether or not what we have written works as intended we will find out. This is a living document and can continue to evolve. We will certainly track and Planning will track what is working and what's not. I do like the alternative compliance. The key word being compliance. It's just another means to allow them to comply. That flexibility I think is great. And we might be surprised at what we see, so -- Milam: I'd like to see some -- Bird: Is that in the form of a motion? Borton: Unless there is further discussion, I move that we approve the UDC text amendment H-2016-0118. Bird: Do I have a second? Little Roberts: Second. Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 69 of 70 Bird: Okay. We have got a motion and a second to approve H-2016-0118. Madam Clerk. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, absent; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 11: Ordinances A. Ordinance No. 16-1713: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AMENDING MERIDIAN CITY CODE SECTION 6-2-3, RELATING TO CITY OF MERIDIAN DOG LICENSE; AMENDING MERIDIAN CITY CODE SECTION 6-28(K), RELATING TO RABIES VACCINATION REQUIREMENTS FOR DOGS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Bird: Moving on to No. 11 is our ordinance. If you would, please, read the ordinance by title only, Madam Clerk, I would appreciate it. Holman: Thank you. City of Meridian Ordinance No. 16-1713, an ordinance of the City of Meridian amending Meridian City Code Section 6-2-3 relating to City of Meridian dog license. Amending Meridian City Code Section 6-2-8K relating to rabies vaccination requirements for dogs and providing an effective date. Bird: You have heard the ordinance by title only. Is there anybody in the room that would like it in its entirety? Seeing none, I would entertain a motion. Milam: Mr. President? Bird: Mrs. Milam. Milam: I move that we approve Ordinance No. 16-1713 with suspension of rules. Little Roberts: Second. Bird: I have a motion to approve it with a second. Madam Clerk. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, absent; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 12: Future Meeting Topics Meridian City Council November 15, 2016 Page 70 of 70 Bird: Council, any ideas for future topics at this point? Borton: Mr. President? Bird: Yes, Mr. Borton. Borton: Two things. One, will you e-mail around the assignments? Bird: Yes. She's already -- we got that. Borton: And the 29th, the fifth Tuesday, are we planning on -- on meeting that day? Bird: I don't think we will have a meeting on the 5th if we -- Nary: Mr. President, Members of the Council, there is nothing scheduled at all on that, because it is a fifth Tuesday. Borton: Okay. Bird: Hearing none, I would certainly entertain a motion to adjourn. Milam: So moved. Little Roberts: Second. Bird: All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:25 P.M. ( O RECORDI ILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) PRESIDE KEITH BIRD DATE APPROVED �I ATTEST. oD AUC� `'Sr City of C. AY COLES; CITY CLERK , t S , s /hI TO Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: November 15, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: 5 PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Proclamation for School Psychology Awareness Week 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 IDIANII,— 7"he Office of the Mayor r WHEREAS, all children and youth learn best when they are healthy, supported, and receive an education that enables them to thrive academically, socially, and emotionally; and WHEREAS, there are currently 21 school psychologists employed by the West Ada School district, each serving one to three schools, to include 33 elementary schools, 8 comprehensive middle schools and 5 comprehensive high schools; and, WHEREAS, school psychologists are specially trained to foster and deliver, in the school and community, a continuum of mental health services and academic- supports that lower the barriers between teaching and learning; and, WHEREAS, sound psychological principles are integral to instruction and learning, social and emotional development, prevention, early intervention and school safety, and supporting culturally diverse student populations; and WHEREAS, children's mental health is directly linked to their learning and development, and the learning environment provides an optimal context to promote good mental health through connectedness within the school and community; THEREFORE, I, Mayor Tammy de Weerd, do hereby proclaim November 14th through November 18th, 2016 as Sch s choCogy Awareness'Week in the City of Meridian and encourage all residents to recognize the vital role that school psychologists play in the personal and academic developmentpof our—citildre� Dated this 14t" day of November 2016 Tammy de Keith Bird, City Council President Joe Borton, City Council Vice -President Anne Little Roberts, City Council Genesis Milam, City Council Luke Cavener, City Council Ty Palmer, City Council C Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: November 15, 2016 ITEM TITLE: ITEM NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: Approve Minutes of November 1, 2016 City Council Regular 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 November 1, 2016 Page 18 of 18 Bird: I move we go into Executive Session as per Idaho State Code 74-206 (1)(fl• Borton: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to adjourn into Executive Session. Mr. Clerk, will you call roll. All ayes. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. EXECUTIVE SESSION: (6:54 p.m. to 8:20 p.m.) Bird: I would entertain a motion to come out of Executive Session. Milam: So moved. Cavener: Second. Bird: All in favor say aye. Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Bird: I would entertain a motion to adjourn? Milam: So moved. Cavener: Second. Bird: I have got a motion and a second. All in favor say aye. Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES, Bird: Good night. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:20 P.M. ;�ADIO REC Dlly ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) DATE APPROVED ATT-. o�o��ep C. MY C LES, CITY CLERK w cry 0t E IDIAN*-- IDAHO crib ,SEAL yw a Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: November 15, 2016 ITEM TITLE: ITEM NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: Memorandum of Agreement for Contribution to 2017 Concerts on Broadway MEETING NOTES Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION 6 DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT FOR CONTRIBUTION TO CONCERTS ON BROADWAY This MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT FOR CONTRIBUTION TO CONCERTS ON BROADWAY ("Agreement") is made this 26th day of October, 2016 ("Effective Date"), by and between the City of Meridian, a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of Idaho ("City"), and Meridian Development Corporation, an urban renewal agency organized under the laws of the State of Idaho ("MDC"). WHEREAS, City and MDC desire that the plaza at Meridian City Hall serve as a place where members of the community can gather to enjoy downtown Meridian and to take part in the arts; WHEREAS, in the summer of 2017, the Meridian Arts Commission will present Concerts on Broadway, a series of live, outdoor performances to be held in the Meridian City Hall plaza; and WHEREAS, MDC is willing to contribute to City ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00) toward expenses related to the presentation of the Concerts on Broadway series; 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, the Parties agree as follows: I. CITY'S RESPONSIBILITIES. A. Concert production. Between May 31, 2017 and September 30, 2017, City agrees to present four (4) free outdoor concerts at Meridian City Hall plaza as part of the 2017 Concerts on Broadway series. Such concerts will include live musical performance, and may include an opening act, food vendor(s), amplified sound, and limited chair seating. The selection of staff and/or vendors for Concerts on Broadway shall be made by City. B. Publicity. City shall publicize the 2017 Concerts on Broadway series, which publicity may include distribution of information via written and broadcast media, social and online media, e-mail, posters, and a banner displayed at Meridian City Hall. Decisions regarding the time, place, and manner of such publicity shall be made by City. C. Acknowledgment of sponsorship. Though the amount contributed by MDC would typically allow MDC to be acknowledged as a title sponsor of the 2017 Concerts on Broadway series, MDC's desire is to be acknowledged as a Tier 1 sponsor (or like designation). As such, MDC shall be entitled to recognition as "sponsored by," be recognized and allowed an opportunity to address the audience during intermission at all concerts, set up a display table and banner at one (1) concert, and have the MDC logo printed on all event marketing materials where sponsors' logos are printed. D. Invoice MDC. City shall provide one (1) invoice to MDC by April 1, 2017, in the amount of ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00), and City shall use such amount for the payment of expenses related to the production of Concerts on Broadway, which expenses shall include payment for performance artist booking, sound system rental, chair rental, and publicity. MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT FOR MDC's CONCERTS ON BROADWAY CONTRIBUTION PAGE 1 OF 3 II. MDC's RESPONSIBILITIES. A. Reimbursement. Within thirty (30) days of receipt of City's invoice, MDC shall provide payment to City in the amount of ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00). B. Logo. MDC shall provide City with a copy of its logo, in digital format, for use on marketing materials as described herein. C. Appropriation. Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, MDC's obligations under this Agreement to provide payment to City as described herein shall be subject to and dependent upon appropriations being made by the MDC governing board for such purpose. The officer or administrator charged with the responsibility of preparing MDC's Fiscal Year 2017 budget shall include in the proposed budget the amount noted herein, which will be duly considered by the Board along with the other proposed expenditures for Fiscal Year 2017. III. GENERAL TERMS. A. Term. This Agreement begins immediately upon execution and shall remain in effect through September 30, 2017. B. Notice. Notice required to be provided by either of the parties under this Agreement shall be in writing and be deemed communicated when mailed by United States Mail, addressed as follows: City: City of Meridian MDC: Meridian Development Corporation City Attorney's Office Ashley Squyres, Administrator 33 E. Broadway Avenue 104 E. Fairview Ave., #239 Meridian ID 83642 Meridian ID 83642 Either party may change its address for the purpose of this paragraph by giving formal notice of such change to the other in the manner herein provided. C. Entire agreement; modification. This Agreement embodies the entire agreement and understanding between the parties pertaining to the subject matter of this Agreement, and supersedes all prior agreements, understandings, negotiations, representations, and discussions, whether verbal or written, of the parties pertaining to that subject matter. The Agreement may not be changed, amended, or superseded unless by means of writing executed by both Parties hereto. D. Termination. Either party may terminate this Agreement in whole, or in part, due to convenience, nonappropriation, or when either or both parties agree that the continuation of the project is not in the parties' best interest, by providing thirty (30) days written notice. If MDC is the terminating party, City shall be entitled to receive reimbursement for payments made for services properly performed by City to the date of termination. If City is the terminating party, MDC shall be entitled to reimbursement for a pro -rata share of MDC's contribution for any concerts that have not been presented at the time of the termination, i.e. $2,500 per concert. City's decision to cancel or reschedule a concert due to inclement MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT FOR MDC's CONCERTS ON BROADWAY CONTRIBUTION PAGE 2 OF 3 weather or other unforeseen event on the day of such scheduled concert shall not constitute termination or breach, and MDC shall not be entitled to pro -rata or other reimbursement in such circumstance. E. Indemnification. To the fullest extent permitted by law and by Article VIII, section 4 of the Idaho Constitution, City agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless MDC and its officers, agents, consultants, and employees from and against any and all liability, claims, losses, actions, or judgments, costs and fees, including any costs and attorney's fees incurred therein, for damages, losses, or injury to entities, persons or property for any act, error, or omission arising out of or in any way connected with the activities and programs described herein and/or the activities of City and its officers, employees, contractors, or agents related to or connected with this Agreement. F. Severability. If any part of this Agreement is held to be invalid or unenforceable, such holding will not affect the validity or enforceability of any other part of this Agreement so long as the remainder of the Agreement is reasonably capable of completion. The invalidity or unenforceability of any particular provision of this Agreement shall not affect the other provisions, and this Agreement shall be construed in all respects as if any invalid or unenforceable provision were omitted. G. Applicable Law. The Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Idaho and jurisdiction for any disputes arising hereunder shall be in the Fourth Judicial District, Ada County, State of Idaho. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on this 26th day of October, 2016. MERIDIAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: Jim Es bar, Chairman R Attest: Dave Winder, Secretary CITY OF MERIDIAN: a� 'N311111' KV ♦T VVl M, lit , Va ,v Attest: C. Jay MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT FOR MDC's CONCERTS ON BROADWAY CONTRIBUTION PAGE 3 OF 3 Meridian City Council Meeting 6C DATE: November 15, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Award of Bid and Approval of Purchase Order 17-0084 for 1000' of 48" Class 3 Reinforced Concrete Pipe to Oldcastle Precast per Formal IFB #PKS-1658-10518 for the "RETA HUSKEY PARK" project for a Not -To -Exceed amount of $75,260.00 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  Page 1 Memo To: C. Jay Coles, City Clerk, From: Keith Watts, Purchasing Manager CC: Mike Barton Date: 11/9/2016 Re: November 22nd City Council Meeting Agenda Item The Purchasing Department respectfully requests that the following item be placed on the November 22nd City Council Consent Agenda for Council’s consideration. Award of Bid and Approval of Purchase Order 17-0084 for 1000’ of 48” Class 3 Reinforced Concrete Pipe to Oldcastle Precast per Formal IFB #PKS-1658-10518 for the “RETA HUSKEY PARK” project for a Not-To-Exceed amount of $75,260.00. Recommended Council Action: Award of Bid and Approval of Purchase Order 17-0084 to Oldcastle Precast for the Not-To-Exceed amount of $75,260.00 and authorize the Purchasing Manager to sign. Thank you for your consideration. City of Meridian Purchasing Dept. BID RESULTS Si g n e d Bi d B o n d X X X Attest: VENDOR Oldcastle Precast Robertson Mfg. Opened by: $80,240.00 BID AMOUNT $75,260.00 Non-Responsive DUE DATE & TIME: October 17 , 2016 2:30 BID NUMBER: PKS-1658-10518 BID NAME: CREASON PIPE MATERIAL E IDIAN CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST BROADWAY AVE. MERIDIAN, ID 836,12 (208) 888-4433 Vendor Address: OLDCASTLE PRECAST, INC PO BOX 742387 LOS ANGELES, CA 90074.2387 Description 48 Class 3 Reinforced Concrele Pipe (incl. all sealing bands) PUrChaSe Order 11t22t2016 Attn: Finance 33 E Broadway Ave Meridian, lD 83642 Shipping Address: City of Meridian Parks Deparlment 1700 E. Lanark St. Meridian. lD 83642 17 -0084 Shipping Method: FOB: Unit truck Destination Pre-Paid Unit Price 75.26 Quantity 1000.00 Tota I 75,260.00 $75,260.00 Purchasing Manager: Special lnstructions 48: Class 3 Reinforced Concrete Pipe per Formal IFB #PKS-1658-10518. Not-To-Exceed $75,260.00 07-5200-96928 Case#55125 **- TO BE DELIVERED 1/4 MILE NORTH OF USTICK RD. ON TEN MILE RD.**- IDAHO Attention: Mike Barton Billing Address: Ft. Purchase Order Total: Meridian City Council Meeting 6 D DATE: November 15, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: z PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Approval of Purchase Order # 17-0066 for New and Replacement Sensus Water Meters to Ferguson Enterprises in the Not -To -Exceed amount of $466,500.00. This PO is a sole source purchase per the previously approved Sole Source for Sensus Water Meters. MEETING NOTES 9 AFIROIED Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS Page 1 Memo To: CJ Coles, City Clerk, From: Keith Watts, Purchasing Manager CC: Dennis Teller Date: 11-3-2016 Re: November 15th City Council Meeting Agenda Item The Purchasing Department respectfully requests that the following item be placed on the November 15, 2016 City Council Consent Agenda for Council’s consideration. Approval of Purchase Order #17-0066 for New and Replacement Sensus Water Meters to Ferguson Enterprises in the Not-To-Exceed amount of $466,500.00. This PO is a sole source purchase per the previously approved Sole Source for Sensus Water Meters. Recommended Council Action: Approval of Purchase Order #17-0066 to Ferguson Enterprises for the Not-To-Exceed amount of $466,500.00 and authorize the Purchasing Manager to sign. Thank you for your consideration. City of Meridian Purchasing Dept. Water Division 2235 NW 8th St, Meridian, ID 83646 Phone 208-888-5242 Fax 208-884-1153 water@meridiancity.org www.meridiancity.org TO: Councilman Keith Bird FROM: Chip Hudson, Assistant Water Superintendent CC: Tom Barry, Public Works Director Dale Bolthouse, Deputy Director of Utility Operations Dennis Teller, Water Superintendent DATE: October 1, 2016 SUBJECT: Water Meter Replacement / New - Purchase Requisition FY17 The City currently owns and maintains approximately 33,000 water meters within its service boundary. Meter replacements are required due to the lifespan of their power supplies which are responsible for their data capture and transmission of reads. The City replaces its meters over a fifteen (15) year schedule (approx. 2,200 per year) based on historical performance and best industry standards recommended by the American Water Works Association (AWWA). Additionally, the purchase of new meters is required above the needs of our replacement program as we continue to add new service connections to our water system, (Approx. 1,000 annually). The cost for the purchase of these meters is covered by developers through connection fees which have been incorporated into and are accessible through the Water Division’s base budget for water meters. Attached for your review and approval is a blanket purchase order requisition in the amount of $466,500.00 for the acquisition of new and replacement water meters and related equipment for the 2017 fiscal year. Purchases will be made under current sole source agreement between the City of Meridian and Sensus Industries. Adequate funding was budgeted for and exists in the FY17 enterprise fund for this request. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Thank you, Chip Hudson | Assistant Superintendent City of Meridian | Public Works Department 2235 NW 8th Street. Meridian, Idaho 83642 Phone: 208-888-5242 | Fax: 208-884-1159 ?r\,ft IDIAN Purchase Order Attention: Chip Hudson 11t1512016 1 7-0066 CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST BROADWAY AVE. MERIDIAN, ID 83642 (208) 888-4433 Vendor Address: FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC, FERGUSON WATERWORKS #1 701 PO BOX 802817 cHrcAco, rL 60680-2817 Description Sensus Water Meters - New Capital Prciecl lU72 Sensus Water Meters - New Replacement Projecl 10500 Billing Address: Shipping Address: Shipping Method: Attn: Finance 33 E Broadway Ave [4eridian, lD 83642 City of Meridian Water Department 2235 NW 8th Meridian, lD 83646 FOB: Unit Quantity Dollar Oollar 66500.00 400000.00 truck destination Unit Price 1 .00 Total 66,500.00 400,000.00'1 .00 Purchase Order Total $466.500.00 Purchasing Manager: Special lnstructions Yearly Sensus water meters & related eqmt. Sole Source (evergreen) approved at Council 12-16-2014. Not-To-Exceed $466,500.00 Proj 10472 - Capital = $66,500.00 Proj 10500 = Replacement = $400,000.00 60-3410-52450 Case Mgt. Ticket No. 55454 IDAHO Budget with Amendments CurrenE Year Actual BudgeE Remaining Percent of Budget Remaining 52450 OPERATING COSTS water Meters TOI' 1 OPERATING COSTS TOTAI EXPENDITI'RES s16. s00 . 04 516, 500 . 04 516,500.04 100.00t 0.00 515 500 .04 100.00t 516, 500 . 04 0.00 s15,s00.04 Date, rt/3/16 o3:0?:16 PM Clty Of x.lldlaD Detailed statemenc of Revenues and E4)enditures - Rev and Exp Report - Keith - Unposted Transactiona Included In Report 341,0 - fat.r - opor.tloaa 50 - Eatarpllac lund Froll.i- 1-O / l/ 201-6 Through 9/30/2017 100.00t 0 00 z 2 LL O U c 0 A Z 0 o� Q LU y Y O • O } .V • ~ 7 {% CL C E C w T co rLa m °' Q 0a m a B tl! O O N �� IL N(( V O LU W Q 7 m M I- LL w 2 O Z z W W 0 Cc a g ui N v m w O W EM (r} LO F -LW 000 GI [3]O W 3 w C r � O r C of O lC 3Z rnT r LL C N 0 w wg N� '!1 z - 0 ` - a : a • o CJ W - • 1 w � Ul o 0 - - Z z O w Z a ¢ • Q u u U U — .. 1110 ❑ U 0 LL W U_ a1 [i C a U I- � '� Z a � f0 7 1 w Z O a� z Lzil fl) g w w L --3 U O IL • z a o O r�; d O U 0 I- '- in z U W �■ VI ❑ 47 U . a IZ a UJ w M M z R a0 z x Ln Q < a . a • '!1 frFERGUSON' FEt 1S22 452 NORTH LOCUST GROVE RD. MER|D|AN, tD E3642.O000 Deliver To: From: Comments a1don. 6r.byakef .rguBon. coE Atdor EDbysk Waterusorks 23:47 :42 SEP 05 2016 Bid No.......: Bid Date....: Quoted By.: Customer: 8173121 09/05/16 ALE CITY OF MERIDIAN METER ACCOUNT 33 E BROADWAY AVE ACCOUNTS PAYABLE MERIDIAN, ID 83642 Cusf 208-888-2191 Terms........: NET lorH PRox Cust PO#... j ANNUAL CONTRACT 2017 Ship Io.' CITY OF MERIDIAN METER ACCOUNT 33 E BROADWAY AVE ACCOUNTS PAYABLE MERIDIAN, ID 83642 Job Name: ANNUAL ooNTRACT 2017 Description Quantity Net Price UM Total sc4l xxxxcl DAxx ST4l XXXXGl DAXX SC2l XXXXGl GAXX ST2l XXXXGl GAXX sc't lxxxxclGAXX sTl txxxxcl GAxx sr3sSGLXX SI2SSGLXX ssM80802239001 ssM66502239001 sr4sSGLXX s5396't53752063A1 s5396't53752001A1 ssM50535200009 s5396353752201Mt s5396353752203M1 LF 4 OMC2 M/T lOGPL ,IOOOG AMR LF 4 OMT2 M/T lOGPL lOOOG AMR LF 2 OMC2 M/T lGPL ,IOOOG AMR LF 2 OMT2 M/T lGPL lOOOG AMR LF 1.1/2 OMNI C2 TRPL 1M USG WSTRN LF 1,5 OMT2 M/T lGPL lOOOG AMR LF 3/4 IPERL ,1MG SM 6 3W LF 3/4S IPERL 1MG SM 6 3W LF STRNR 1 IPERL LF STRNR 3/4 IPERL LF 1 IPERL 1MG SM 6 3W Ms2OR-D1-TC-TC.AL 2P PIT W-A M520R-C1-TC-X-AL 1P PtT TC W-A CABLE TR IPERL 6TRPL 3WIRE SEN AY Ms2OM-F1-TC-X.E.MI 1P PIT W-IDiLD M520M-F1-TC-TC-E-Mr 2P PrT TC W-tD/ 3089.110 2414.760 1419.840 991.8't0 1231.680 841.360 1*.730 146.930 1.050 0.970 196.880 189.560 186.420 28.900 149.730 171.000 3089.11 2414.76 1419.U 991.81 1231.68 841.36 154.73 146.93 1.05 0.97 196.88 189 56 146.42 28.90 149.73 171.00 EA EA EA EA EA EA EA EA EA EA EA EA EA EA EA EA Net Total: Tax: Freight: Total: $11214.73 $0.00 $0.00 $11214.73 FERGUSON WATERWORKS #1701 Price Quotation Phone : 208-855-2040 Fax :20&855-2869 Page # 1 Item FERGUSON Watmlorks Page # 2 23:47:42 SEP 05 2016 Reference No: 8i73121 Quoted pdces are based upon receipt ofthe totalquantity for immediate shipment (48 hours). SHIPMENTS BEYOND48 HOURS SHALL 8E AT THE PRICE lN EFFECT AT TIME OF SHIPMENT UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. Sellor not responsibl€ for delays. lack of product or increase of pricing due to causes beyond our @ntrol, and/or based upon Local, State and Federal laws governing type of products that can be sold or pul into @mmerce. This quote is offered contingent upon the buye/s acceptance of SelleTs t€rms and conditions, which are incorporated by reference and found either following this document, or on the w€b at Govt Buyers: All items are open market unless noted olheMise. http:/Arolseleyna.com/terms_conditionsSal6.html FERGUSON WATERWORKS #1701 Price Ouotation Phone : 208-85$2040 Fax :208-855-2869 LEAD LAW WARNING ll rs rllegal to install products lhal are not 'lead free' in accordance with US Federal or other aDolicable law rn oolablewater syslems anliopated for human_consumption Products wilh 'NP in lhe dgscription are NOT lead fte€ and can onli be installed in non-poiable applications Buyer is solely responsible lor product selection Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: November 15, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Approval of Task Order 10624.a to Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. for the "WATER MAIN EXTENSION, AMITY RD AND LINDER RD, MERIDIAN TO VICTORY PROJECT 10624.a" for a Not -to -Exceed Amount of $168,609.00 MEETING NOTES d. -J 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 Page 1 Memo To: C. Jay Coles, City Clerk, From: Keith Watts, Purchasing Manager CC: Dean Stacey Date: 11/7/16 Re: November 15 th City Council Meeting Agenda Item The Purchasing Department respectfully requests that the following item be placed on the November 15th City Council Consent Agenda for Council’s consideration. Approval of Task Order 10624.a to Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. for the “WATER MAIN EXTENSION, AMITY RD AND LINDER RD, MERIDIAN TO VICTORY PROJECT 10624.a” for a Not-To-Exceed amount of $168,609.00. Recommended Council Action: Award of Task Order 10624.a to Murray, Smith & Associates for the Not-To-Exceed amount of $ 168,609.00 Thank you for your consideration. City of Meridian Purchasing Dept. CONTRACT CHECKLIST Date: REQUESTING DEPARTMENT Project Name: Project Manager: Contract Amount: Contractor/Consultant/Design Engineer: Is this a change order? Yes No Change Order No. Fund: Budget Available ( Purchasing attach report ): Department Yes No Construction GL Account FY Budget: Task Order Project Number: Enhancement: Yes No Professional Service Equipment Will the project cross fiscal years? Yes No Grant Grant #: Wage Determination Received Wage Verification 10 Days prior to bid due date Debarment Status (Federal Funded) Print and Attach the determination Print, attach and amend bid by addendum (if changed) www.sam.gov Print and attach Master Agreement Category (Bid Results Attached) Yes No (Ratings Attached) Yes No Date MSA Roster Approved: Typical Award Yes No If no please state circumstances and conclusion: Date Award Posted: 7 day protest period ends: PW License Expiration Date: Corporation Status Insurance Certificates Received (Date): Expiration Date: Rating: A+ Payment and Performance Bonds Received (Date): Rating: N/A Builders Risk Ins. Req'd: Yes No (Only applicabale for projects above $1,000,000) Reason Consultant Selected 1 Performance on past projects Check all that apply Quality of work On Budget On Time Accuracy of Construction Est 2 Qualified Personnel 3 Availability of personnel 4 Local of personnel Description of negotiation process and fee evaluation: Date Submitted to Clerk for Agenda: By: Purchase Order No.: Date Issued: WH5 submitted (Only for PW Construction Projects) NTP Date: Contract Request Checklist.5.24.2016.Final N/A N/A N/A N/A Goodstanding N/A N/A I. PROJECT INFORMATION 10/1/2016 11/1/2017 N/A 2017 9/27/2016 Public Works Water Main Extension - Amity Rd and Linder Rd from Meridian Rd to Victory Rd V. BASIS OF AWARD IV. GRANT INFORMATION - to be completed only on Grant funded projects VI. CONTRACTOR / CONSULTANT REQUIRED INFORMATION October 1, 2015 November 7, 2016 VIII. AWARD INFORMATION Approval Date Enter Supervisor Name Date Approved Kyle Radek 9/27/2016 VII. TASK ORDER SELECTION (Project Manager to Complete) Cost of actual Task Order was verified with supervisor and compared to previous type Task Orders, such as, Locust Grove from Blackrock to Reflection Ridge. The Blackrock design to estimated construction ratio was .13 and this design to estimated construction is .16. The cost comaprison is considered reasonable, so I suggest we proceed with design at this cost. N/A Award based on Low Bid Highest Ranked Vendor Selected $168,609 Dean Stacey If yes, has policy been purchased? MSA / Dennis Gallianato / 208-947-9033 III. Contract Type II. BUDGET INFORMATION (Project Manager to Complete) 60 3490 96140 10624 TASK ORDER 1B RFP / RFQ BID VE IDIAN t- Public IDAHO Works Department TO: KEITH WATTS FROM: DEAN STACEY, Engineering Project Manager DATE: September 26, 2016 Mayor Tammy de Weerd City Council Memberse Keith Bird Joe Borton Luke Cavener Genesis Milam Anne Little Roberts Ty Palmer SUBJECT: WATER MAIN EXTENSION DESIGN- AMITY RD AND LINDER RD TO VICTORY - TASK ORDER WITH MSA FOR AN AMOUNT OF $168,609 I. DEPARTMENT CONTACT PERSONS Dean Stacey, Engineering Project Manager 489-0386 Kyle Radek, Assistant City Engineer 489-0343 Warren Stewart, City Engineer 489-0350 Tom Barry, PW Director 489-0372 II. DESCRIPTION A. Background Due to additional growth in South Meridian, demand on our water system is increasing. In order to meet future demands in Pressure Zone 5, a new 12 inch water main needs to be designed and installed along Amity, Linder and Victory Roads from Meridian Road, westward. B. Proposed Project Design and construct a 12 inch water main on Amity Road from Meridian Road to Linder Road, heading north to Victory Road and east to connect to the existing system near Kentucky Ridge subdivision. Fire hydrants will be installed at intervals along the length of the project. C. Describe Item This project will connect the water mains from both Amity Road and Victory Road, creating a looped system, which will enable development in the area into the future. Page I of 2 III. IMPACT A. Fiscal Impacts Project Costs: Fiscal Year 2017 Design Task Order $168,609 Total Project Cost $168,609 Available Project Funding Fiscal Year 2017 Account Code / Codes 3490-96140 Total Funding $168,609 Departmental Approval: wis Page 2 of 2 TASK ORDER NO. 10624.a Pursuant to the MASTER AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BETWEEN crTY oF MER|DIAN (OWNER) AND MURRAY, SMITH AND ASSOCTATES (ENGTNEER) This Task Order is made this 1sth day of November, 2016 and entered into by and between the City of Meridian, a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of ldaho, hereinafter referred to as "City", and accepted by Murray, Smith and Associates. hereinafter referred to as "Engineer" pursuant to the mutual promises, covenant and conditions contained in the Master Agreement (Category 1B) between the above mentioned parties dated October 1,2015. The Project Name for this Task Order 10624.a is as follows: CITYOF MERIDIAN WATER MAIN EXTENSION, AMITY RD AND LINDER RD, MERIDIAN RD TO VICTORY RD - PROJECT.I0624.A BACKGROUND The CITY identified the need to extend a 12-inch water main from the intersection of Amity Rd./Meridian Rd. west along Amity to Linder Rd, then north along Linder Rd to Victory Rd, then approximately 2,000 feet east on Victory Rd to a point of terminus at the Kentucky Ridge Estates. The estimated length of the project is 12,560 feet. This Task Order is for development of construction documents and services during construction SCOPE OF WORK Task 1 -Proiect Manaqement Task 1.1 - Kickoff Meeting ln this task, ENGINEER will attend a kick-off meeting with the CITY to introduce project staff; review communications protocol, Task Order, schedule and budget; and make an initial data request. Task 1.2 - General Project Management and Meetings The purpose of this task is to manage the project team, schedule, and budget. This includes monthly invoicing (invoices will include progress in terms of project percent Task Order 10624.a water Main Ext; Amity Rd and Linder Rd - Meridian to Viclory Murray, Smith and Associates Page 1 of 11 complete), budget (percent spent and budget remaining) and schedule review, updates, and general administrative tasks. At a minimum, MSA's project manager (PM) will hold monthly teleconferences with the CITY's PM to provide project status updates. Additional status meetings are described in the subsequent project tasks. Monthly invoices will include updates on project schedule and budget. Task 1 Assumptions 'l . Assumes a notice to proceed date of October 21 , 2016 and an eight-month project duration (design only). 2. No MSA travel time will be charged. Task 1 Deliverables 1. Monthly project updates (submitted with invoice) that summarize each month's budget, schedule, and work accomplished. ENGINEER will perform the following tasks as part of a data collection effort prior to development of design plans and specifications. Task 2.1 - Data Collection ln this task, ENGINEER will review background information provided by the OWNER and may develop a formal data request for any additional information required for completion of the work. lt is anticipated that additional data requests will be made throughout the project, however the majority of the data required will be requested at the beginning of the project. ENGINEER will limit the number of data requests that are made to minimize the required OWNER staff time. Task 2.2 - Survey ENGINEER will work with Wellington Survey to perform a preliminary survey as described below. The survey will be done horizontally on the NAD 1983 (translated to the Ada county G.l.S. system) datum and vertical control based on NAVD 1988 datum. Contours will be developed at one-foot intervals. The survey will include: Road centerline, edge of pavement, shoulder, breaklines, etc. at a maximum interval of 50 feet Underground utilities as marked by Digline or from provided as-built plans Task Order 10624.a Water Main Ext; Amity Rd and Linder Rd - Meridian to Victory Murray, Smith and Associates Page 2 of 11 Task2-DataCollection . lnverts of all irrigation and storm drain facilities in the project area. . Parcel information from the OWNER's GIS database. r Existing site features (such as trees, fences, etc.) that could impact the waterline alig nment. . Set benchmarks for vertical project control. . County monuments Task 2.3 - Geotechnical lnvestigation ENGINEER will work with Material Testing lnc. (MTl) to perform ten borings along the proposed alignment. At a minimum, a boring will be performed at each of the 4 major inigation crossing, at the Williams-Northwest Pipeline gas line crossing, and the Meridian, Linder and Victory intersections. The borings will be used to verify subgrade conditions, understand ground water elevation, estimate bedrock depth and inspect soil conditions at the irrigation crossings for construction recommendations. All potholes will be backfilled with native material and filled with cold mix asphalt, matching the existing asphalt thickness. MTI will work with DigLine to identify existing underground utilities in the areas of the borings and will coordinate traffic control during those operations. Task 2.4 - Potholing ENGINEER will work with a subcontractor to perform potholing at various locations to confirm existing utility depths for crossings noted after DigLine performs the locate services. lt is assumed at this time there will be up to five (5) potholes performed' All potholes will be backfilled with native material and filled with cold mix asphalt, matching the existing asphalt thickness. It is understood that Ada County Highway District (ACHD) will perform their own potholing of the existing asphalt pavement along the proposed path to determine the proposed pavement section required during this project. Task Order 10624.a Water Main Ext; Amity Rd and Linder Rd - Meridian to Victory Murray, Smith and Associates Page 3 of 11 l4sk 2 Assumptions ENGINEER will perform a data analysis effort that includes the following tasks 1. ENGINEER and the OWNER will identify and collect required data in a timely manner so as to not impact the project schedule. 2. ENGINEER will contact ACHD to verify future buildout of Amity, Linder and Victory Roads, to be used in locating the proposed waterline. ACHD's requirement for roadway repair, associated with the utility trench, will be addressed at this time as well. 3. Task Order assumes that there are no permits required for any of the proposed investigation services other than those assumed by the sub consultants. Task 2 Deliverables 1. CAD file of survey. 2. Geotechnical report of findings and recommendations (electronic copy) 3. Summary of utility depths based on potholes (electronic copy of logs provided by the potholing subcontractor). ENGINEER will develop Concept, 30%o, 60oh, 95% and 100% designs for the work described in the background section of this Task Order. ENGINEER will then develop a construction package for the improvements. Task 3.1 - Concept Design ENGINEER will perform the following tasks: 1. ENGINEER will develop a proposed concept alignment for the new waterline. 2. Review existing topography and coordinate with the local fire department to site the proposed fire hydrant locations. 3. Coordinate with existing utility providers and review as-built maps for existing utilities (e.9. water, gas, power) in the proposed project area and the potential impacts. 4. Submit concept plans to and coordinate with the inigation and natural gas companies to understand the crossing requirements. Page 4 of 11 Task 3 - Desiqn Task Order 10624.a Water Main Ext: Amity Rd and Linder Rd - Meridian to Victory Murray, Smith and Associates Conceptual level construction cost estimates will be developed during this task and used to compare the alternatives. Iask 3.3 - 30% Design/Utility Permit Set ENGINEER will develop 307o design package based on comments from the concept design. 30% design will include the following: . Plan and Profile Sheets . Notes and Details specific to utility crossings . Opinion of probable cost for work o Reassessment of design schedule The 30% package will be submitted to the irrigation district and gas company (see Task 4) and the CITY for review. ENGINEER will meet with the CITY and review any comments on the 30% design. ENGINEER will revise the 30% design package per CITY comments, and ENGINEER will submit the revised 30% package to the inigation district and gas company for review (see Task 4). Task 3.4 - 60% Design ENGINEER will develop the 60% design package based on comments from the 30% design review. 60% design will include the following: . Plan and Profile Sheets . Notes and Details specific to the project (standard details are not required). . Surface Water Pollution Prevention (SWPP) plan as required by ldaho Department of Environmental Quality (IDEQ) and ACHD. (The plan will be reviewed by the CITY Environmental Division) . ACHD Variance Request (if required) o Traffic Control Plan . Technical Specifications o Bid Schedule Task Orde.I0624.a Water Main Ext; Amity Rd and Linder Rd - Meridian to Viclory Murray, Smith and Associates Page 5 of 11 5. Coordinate with ACHD on water line alignment based on future buildout of the roadway. ldentify potential impacts based on site topography and the proposed future edge of road. ENGINEER will present the results of the concept design at a meeting with the CITY. . Opinion of probable cost for work . Reassessment of design schedule The 60% design plans and specifications will be submitted to the CITY for review and comment by the Development Services and Environmental Divisions. ENGINEER will attend a meeting with the CITY to review the 60% design package and perform a site walk through. ENGINEER will fill out any final forms for the various permits required for the irrigation and gas crossings and shall submit the final permits, plans, details, figures to the various entities for approval. Task 3.5 - 95/o Design Package ENGINEER will develop a 95% design package based on the comments on the Concept Design and 60% Design. The 95% design package will include the following final documents: The 95% plans are assumed to be "bid ready" and are only missing minor CITY, IDEQ, and ACHD comments and approvals. The 95% design plans and specifications will be submitted to the CITY for review and comment by the Development Services and Environmental Divisions. ENGINEER may attend a meeting with the clTY to review comments from the 95% design package, if needed. ENGINEER will submit the 95% plans to IDEQ for review and comment. Task 3.6 - 100% Design Package ENGINEER will finalize the 100% design package based on the comments on the 95% plans from the clTY and IDEQ. The 100% design package will include the following FINAL documents with all the approval stamps and signatures: Task Order 10624.a Water Main Ext; Amity Rd and Linder Rd - Meridian to Victory Murray, Smith and Associates Page 6 of 1'l . Plan and Profile Sheets . Surface Water Pollution Prevention (SWPP) as required by the CITY, IDEQ and ACHD o Traffic Control Plan (see assumptions). . Notes and Details specific to the project, standard details are not required . TechnicalSpecifications o Bid Schedule with quantities . Opinion of Probable Cost . Plan and Profile Sheets . Surface Water Pollution Prevention (SWPP) as required by CITY, IDEQ and ACHD. o Traffic Control Plan as required by ACHD and with an ACHD signature . Notes and Details specific to the project, standard details are not required . Technical Specification Package r Bid Schedule o Opinion of Probable Cost The '100% design plans and specifications will be submitted to the CITY for approval signature and inclusion in the bid package. Task 3 Assumptions 1. The entire project will be designed with plan and profiles for traditional open trench construction with the exception of the canal crossings. Trenchless methods may be required for these crossings. 2. Variance requests for "out of corridor work" will be submitted to ACHD and any other utilities affected. Approval letters from those utilities will be submitted to the CITY prior to commencing the 100o/o design plans. 3. The budget assumes up to four hours of meetings with ACHD. 4. Trench patch will be acceptable surface restoration to ACHD, and all pavement restoration design will be included on the water plan and profile sheets. 5. Traffic control plan will be a guideline used for Contractor to have a basis of bid. The Contractor will be responsible for developing a detailed traffic control plan for ACHD review and approval. 6, Gas and irrigation crossing permits are covered under Task 4. 7. ENGINEER will prepare the Technical Specifications to The ldaho Standards for Public Works Construction (ISPWC) and CITY supplements and Addenda will be used as the basis of the Technical Specifications and they will be in the ISPWC formatting. ISPWC specifications will be referenced and not reproduced in the specification package. Supplemental technical specifications will be developed as required. (specifications will state specifically what points shall be staked with a reference that the contractor will pay for additional staking or re-staking) 8. The CITY will prepare the "front end" bid specification section. 9. The CITY will administer the contract. 10. Plans will be full size (22-inch x 34-inch). 1 1 . Any required permitting fees will be paid by the CITY. Task Order 10524.a Water Main Ext; Amity Rd and Linder Rd - Meridian to Victory Murray, Smith and Associates Page 7 of '11 12. Easement acquisition is not included in this SOW. Task 3 Deliverables 1. Concept design, presented in email format. 2. Meeting notes from the concept design review meeting. 3. Three hard copies of the 30% and one file in PDF format (to be placed on the CITY FTP site) design package (plans and technical specifications). 4. 5. Three hard copies of the 60% and one file in PDF format (to be placed on the CITY FTP site) design package (plans and technical specifications). 6. Four hard copies ofthe 95% design package (plans and technical specifications). 7. One reproducible copy of the FINAL 100% design package in PDF format to be placed on the CITY FTP site. This task is for permitting and coordination with the Boise Project Board of Control (BPBC) inigation district and William-Northwest Pipeline gas company. ENGINEER will develop plans, details, and figures and complete applications for the following permits (if required) for this project: . Bureau of Reclamation 299 Permit application for Transportation and Utility Systems and Facilities on Federal Lands for irrigation lateral crossings. . Joint Application Permit (404 Permit) for irrigation crossings. o W|ISOP EncroachmenUForeign Line Crossing Permit Form for gas main crossings. Task 4 Assumptions '1 . The CITY will pay all permit and other reimbursement agreement fees. 2. The budget assumes up to six hours of meetings with Williams-Northwest Pipeline Gas ComPanY, and BPBC/BR. 3. Concept plan (developed in Task 3) will be used to coordinate with the inigation and natural gas companies to understand the crossing requirements. The 30% plan will be submitted as the permit set to both the irrigation district and the gas company. Task Order '10624.a Water Main En; Amity Rd and Linder Rd - Meridian to Victory Murray, Smith and Associates Page I of 11 Task 4 - Permittinq Task 4 Deliverables 1. Meeting notes from coordination meetings. 2. Electronic copies of permit submittals. The budget includes 164 hours for services during construction. Services during construction will include the following tasks: o Provide five hard copies and 5 cd's of the FINAL 1007o design package (plans and technical specifications) o Attend pre-bid meeting . Answer questions during the bid period o Assist the CITY in creating any required addenda during the bid period . Attend the pre-construction meeting . Respond to requests for information (RFls) . ENGINEER will review the technical submittals; up to ten submittals are included . Perform site visits, attend construction meetings during construction and provide final punch list as requested 1. Bid and Construction period is anticipated to be Winter 2017lSpring 2018 with canal crossing construction between October 2017 and March 2018. 2, The CITY will produce the final Bid Package. 3. The CITY will produce any required addenda during the bid period. 4. The CITY will review bids and determine the apparent low bidder. 5. Pay requests will be reviewed by the CITY. 6. The CITY will provide a Project Representative that will be responsible for inspection of the project. Task 5 Deliverables Task 5 Assumptions Task 5 - Services Durinq Biddino and Construction 1. Five hard copies of the Bid Package. 2. Electronic copies (PDF) of submittal review comments, RFI responses, field notes and construction meeting notes. Task Order 10624.a Water Main Ext; Amity Rdand Linder Rd - Meridian to Viclory Page9of 11 Murray, Smith and Associates Task 6 Assumptions Task 6 - Record Survev Drawinqs The budget includes 33 hours for services after construction completion . Collect any as-built information from the contractor and the CITY inspector . Prepare and produce complete sets of Record Drawings per CITY Record Drawing Requirements 1. The CITY will perform a review of the proposed Record Drawings for completeness and accuracy Task 6 Deliverables TIME OF COMPLETION and COMPENSATION SCHEDULE The following schedule is based on a Notice to Proceed (NTP) from the City in November 2016 and resulting in Final Design being completed by September 2018. A NTP issued on a different date will change the schedule accordingly. Task Description Compensation 1 Project Management $6,640.00 2 Data Collection $38,167.00 3 Desiqn $88,980.00 4 Permitting $10,084.00 5 Service During Construction $20,866.00 6 Record Drawings $3,872.00 Total Task Order Cost $168,609.00 The Not-To-Exceed amount to complete all services listed above for this Task Order No. 10624.a is One Hundred Sixty Eight Thousand Six Hundred and nine dollars ($168,609.00). No compensation will be paid over the Not-to-Exceed amount without prior written approval by the City in the form of a Change Order. Any and all travel will only be reimbursed if pre-approved by the Project Manager, and only per the City of Meridian Travel Policy. Reimbursable expenses will be paid at cost and only if pre- approved by the Project Manager. Any travel and/or reimbursables paid will be paid as part of the NolTo-Exceed Task Order Total per the Compensation and Completion Schedule above. Task Order 10624.a Water Main Ext; Amity Rd and Linder Rd - Meridian to Victory Murray, Smith and Associates Page 10 of 11 1. Record drawings per CITY Submittal Requirements CITY OF -ME 31 Attest: LV vw' -KAI Clay C0I4SICITY CLERK CR V'-fEDA *0UCUSI IT9W City of E IDIAN� „; .IDAHO SEAL, tiw ��r�1trr TAEpg�aPte'4� Dated: 1// & / ?0/ Purchasing Approval BY: f !/ KEITH WATTS PURCHASING MANAGER Dated: _ /d/..�f116 � �q TASK ORDER 10624.a MURRAY, SMITH AND ASSOCIATES, INC MUR ITH AS OCIATES BY: DENNIS ALINATO, P.E. SENIOR ENGINEER, ASSOCIATE ated:'`" Depart 'rent APr I BY: - - WARREN STEWART, PE CITY ENGINEER Dated: 1('12 f, Page 11 of 11 City Of Meridian Statement of Revenues and Expenditures - Rev and Exp Report - Kathy - Unposted Transactions Included In Report 60 - Enterprise Fund 3490 - Water Construction Projects From 10/1/2016 Through 9/30/2017 Amendments Budget with Actual Current Year Remaining Budget Remaining Budget Percent of Capital Outlay 96140 WATERLINE EXTENSIONS 2,199,999.96 0.00 2,199,999.96 100.00% 10442.a ACHD Ustick Road Rebuild: btwn: Linder Rd and Locust Grove R 0.00 10,050.00 (10,050.00)0.00% 10640.a Water Main Ext., E Lake Hazel Rd and S Locust Grove Rd - Des 0.00 55,706.00 (55,706.00)0.00% Carryforward Carryforward 842,294.04 0.00 842,294.04 100.00% Total Capital Outlay 3,042,294.00 65,756.00 2,976,538.00 97.84% DEPT EXPENDITURES 3,042,294.00 65,756.00 2,976,538.00 97.84% TOTAL EXPENDITURES 3,042,294.00 65,756.00 2,976,538.00 97.84% Date: 10/24/16 11:47:55 AM Page: 1 IDSOS Viewing Business Entity Annual Reports: Page I of 2 IDAHO SECRETARY OF STATE Viewing Business Entity Lawerence Denney, Secretary of State I New Search ] [ Back to Summarv ] et a certifica I Monitor MURRAY. SMITH & ASSOCIATES. INC. business filinos ] MURRAY, SMrTH & ASSOCIATES, rNC. 121 SW SALMON ST STE 9OO PORTLAND, OR 97204 Type of Business: CORPORATION, GENERAL BUSINESS StAtUS: GOODSTANDING State of Origin: OREGON Date of !4 May 2OO7 Origination/Authorization: Initial Registered Agent: INCORPORATING SERVICES LTD 2219 N CURTIS BOISE, ID 83705 Organizational ID / Filing C173086 N umber: Number of Authorized Stock Shares: Date of Last Annual Report: 21 Mar 2015 Annual Report Due: MaY 2OL7 Original Filing: I Help Me Print/View TIFF ] View Imaoe ( PDF format) Report for year Report for year Report for year Report for year Report for year Report for year Report for year Report for year Report for year Report for year Fited 14 May 2OO7 CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORITY View Imaqe FF format) I Help 14e Print/View TIFF ] View Document Online View Docu View Document Online View Document Online View Document Online View Document nline ocu View Docu m ent Online View D View Imaqe PDF format)View Imaqe (TIFF fomat) 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2008 AN NUAL AN NUAL ANNUAL ANNUAL AN NUAL AN NUAL ANNUAL ANNUAL AN NUAL CH NG RA/RO REPORT REPORT REPORT REPORT REPORT REPORT REPORT REPORT REPORT https://www.accessidaho.org/public/sos/corpiC 1 73 086.html 10t2412016 Idaho Secretarv of State's Main Paqe state of Idaho Home Paqe urr(r /gqvlm 10 /ot /2016 TH|S CERTIFICATE ls BaUED AS A i,IATTER OF INFORI{AtlOll ONLY AND CONFERS ilo R OHIS UPOI{ THE CERnFTATE HoLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE OO€S NOT AFFIRIT/TTUELY OR NEOAT|VELY AMEND. EXTEND OR AL?ER THE GOI'ERAGE AFFORDED BY fl{E POI.ICIEg BELow. THls CERnFICAIE oF ll{SURANcE DoEs NoT coNgIruTE A colrlTRAcT BETWEEiI I}lE ISSUnO INSURER(S), AUIHoRIED REPRESETTITATNE OR PROOUCER, AND THE CERTFICATE HOI.DER. IIIPORTANT: It lh. c.rlltic.l. hold.. i. .n AOOInOIIAL ll{St REO, ttl. policy(i..) mu.a b. .ndor..d. l, SUBROGATbi/ lS WAIVED, .ubl.cl lo th. tcrm. .nd cordltlora ot th. pollcy, c.drh poalcl.r ,nay r.qulE.n GndorldrErt. A !{rt trEnt on thl. certlllcat do!5 not con&f dghtr to th. cndo..cm.nl(s).caiificatc hold.r ln llcu ot such Pt(,{E f# iot sss -621-31?3 stenErsh. com ,{srrEF(3) AFEOROTNO COVBAOE Pioauca Larsh Sponsored Prograns a division of Uarsh USA lnc. Po Box t 4404 Des Uolnes IA 50305 liluiEi a: Hartford Accident a Indemnlty co 22351 |[3URER B: Sentinel Insurance Cohpany Ltd 1100a DaarlliC:Hartford Underr!iters Irsurance Co 30104 INSIJF€R O LNSIJIEi E II.IUAEDlrurray, Smith & Assoc. Inc 888 Sr 5th Avenue, 11170Portland, oR 9?204 CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE CERTIFICATE NUMBER:REVISION NUMBER: CA O 1988-2010 ACORO CORPORATIOI{. All.llhtr n$wcd. Th. ACORD n.m. and logo ar. roglsbrcd mark3 ofACORD + COVERAGES CERTIFICA R TltAT THE POTICIES OF INSLNANCE USTEO BELOI'V IiAVE BEEN ISSUEO TO T}C INSURED NAMEO ABO/E FOR IHE POUCY PERIOD INOCITED. IIOTffTHSTANdNG ANY REOUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITON Of AMY CONTRACT OR OII{ER o@Ul',El.II WTH RESPECT TO WHIO{ THIS CERTIFICITE MAY BE ISSUEO OR MAY PERTAIN. THE II.ISURA}€E AFFORD€D BY THE POIJOES DESCRAED HEREIN IS SUBIECT TO ALI TT€ ]ERMS, EXCLUSIOi€ ANO CONOINONS OF StrcH POUCIEA. UMITS SHCA'VN ti{AY HAVE BEEN REDIJCED BY PAIOCLAIMS. THIS IS TO CERT]FY TYPE OF INSURAIICE LIIIITS EACIT OCCUFiRENCE 32,000,000 PREMISES lE. eumic.r t2,000,000 MED E(P (lny cl. p.ron)t10.01r0 PE.RSCNAL I ADV INJURY t2, 0o0, o0o GENERALAGGRSATE t{, 00 0, 00 0 @MMESCIAL GENER L LIAAILlTY s500k/5500k/s500k GEML AGGRECA]E LIMII APPLIES PEF x x x EL and Stop Gap WA occuR LOC Y 8 4SB$CGo 4 21Prof. Liab. Excl. \1 1/2016 rr/0t/2011 t4, 000,000 I a1.000-000 BOOILY INJURY (P.r Fror'l 5 AOOILY INJURY (P.r.*i<,.n!! ! c AUTOIbALE !AEILIIY aL or/\l!o AUTG HREO ruIOS SCH@ULEDluros NON{wN€O AT TOS x Y 84IIEGI,N?49]1 1l/111/2016 tt/orl2011 I x x E:ACIl OCCURRENC€t1.000,000uflSiEla LtAt EICESS LIAB occrJR AGGREGATE t3, 000, c00 D€O x REIE','IION I l "OO 84SBtlCGo4 21 !l rr /2 015 Il/01/2017 t orll E L EACU ACCTOE|\fi a50 , € L O]SEASE. E EMPIOYEE r50 , B woixEis @xPEltg TroN AIO IiPI-OYEiS LAEIITY ANY PiOPitEIOR/IPAFTN &/gECUTIVE OFFICER/UETA€R €tCLUO'O? O€SCR|Pi ON OF OPEFAIlor.s b.r6r tr 8 4 WacBUS 53 9 rtlor/2016 rltotl20rl E L D1SE SE. POTICY UMT t500,000 lrElcalPTrotl of oPEianoaaa, LG^tDxt tvEtElEa udi Acoio Io, Attdrlsa R .t. &trtu|.r Ino.rr€ E,qsrnlF.: 1l5A Plojec! : ci:y ot H.ridi.n Rorter!_iry o! llerrdian rs nah.d .s additlon.I In!o!.d on th..bov. r.f.r.ac.d polici.s eh.n !qui!.d by vlitr.n contr.ct. I T T TT $I(XJLD A'{Y OF TI{E ABOVE D€SCBBED PO LICIES AE CAIICELLE) BEFOREIHE EXPIRATIO}I OAIE THENEOF, iIOTICE WILL BE ELIVERED I'I ACCORDAXCE WTH THE POUCY PROVISIONS. City of Melidian 33 E Bloadway AveMeridiant ID 83642 AUIIIOBEED IEFREEE ITATI\G),Af* ACORO 25 (2010105) A\ OENEiAL LIA6IUTY PRODL]CTS. COMPEP AGG Meridian City Council Meeting � F DATE: November 15, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Approval of Award of Bid and Agreement to Star Construction, LLC for the "WRRF OUTFALL PIPE RIPRAP EXTENSION" project for a Not -To -Exceed amount of $58,509.00 MEETING NOTES 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 Page 1 Memo To: C. Jay Coles, City Clerk, From: Keith Watts, Purchasing Manager CC: Emily Skoro Date: 11/7/2016 Re: City Council Meeting Agenda Item The Purchasing Department respectfully requests that the following item be placed on the November 15 th City Council Consent Agenda for Council’s consideration. Approval of Award of Bid and Agreement to Star Construction, LLC for the “WRRF OUTFALL PIPE RIPRAP EXTENSION” project for a Not-To-Exceed amount of $58,509.00. Recommended Council Action: Award of Bid and Approval of Agreement to Star Construction, LLC for the Not-To-Exceed amount of $58,509.00. Thank you for your consideration. City of Meridian Purchasing Dept. CONTRACT CHECKLIST Date: REQUESTING DEPARTMENT Project Name: Project Manager: Contract Amount: Contractor/Consultant/Design Engineer: Is this a change order? Yes No Change Order No. Fund: Budget Available ( Purchasing attach report ): Department Yes No Construction GL Account FY Budget: Task Order Project Number: Enhancement: Yes No Professional Service Equipment Will the project cross fiscal years? Yes No Grant Grant #: Wage Determination Received Wage Verification 10 Days prior to bid due date Debarment Status (Federal Funded) Print and Attach the determination Print, attach and amend bid by addendum (if changed) www.sam.gov Print and attach Master Agreement Category (Bid Results Attached) Yes No (Ratings Attached) Yes No Date MSA Roster Approved: Typical Award Yes No If no please state circumstances and conclusion: Date Award Posted: 7 day protest period ends: PW License Expiration Date: Corporation Status Insurance Certificates Received (Date): Expiration Date: Rating: Payment and Performance Bonds Received (Date): Rating: Builders Risk Ins. Req'd: Yes No (Only applicabale for projects above $1,000,000) Reason Consultant Selected 1 Performance on past projects Check all that apply Quality of work On Budget On Time Accuracy of Construction Est 2 Qualified Personnel 3 Availability of personnel 4 Local of personnel Description of negotiation process and fee evaluation: Date Submitted to Clerk for Agenda: By: Purchase Order No.: Date Issued: WH5 submitted (Only for PW Construction Projects) NTP Date: Contract Request Checklist.5.24.2016.Final $58,509 Emily Skoro If yes, has policy been purchased? STAR CONTRUCTION, LLC / CH2M HILL III. Contract Type II. BUDGET INFORMATION (Project Manager to Complete) 60 3590 96174 10055.F TASK ORDER RFP / RFQ BID VII. TASK ORDER SELECTION (Project Manager to Complete) Award based on Low Bid Highest Ranked Vendor Selected VIII. AWARD INFORMATION Approval Date Enter Supervisor Name Date Approved I. PROJECT INFORMATION N/A N/A FY17 10/26/2016 PUBLIC WORKS WRRF OUTFALL PIPE RIPRAP EXTENSION V. BASIS OF AWARD 10/26/2016 November 2, 2016 IV. GRANT INFORMATION - to be completed only on Grant funded projects VI. CONTRACTOR / CONSULTANT REQUIRED INFORMATION Only received 2 bids N/A N/A N/A N/A Existing PWC-C-14428 9/30/2017 EN DIAN�- Public IDAHO Works Department TO: Keith Watts FROM: Emily Skoro Staff Engineer II DATE: 10/27/2016 Mayor Tammy de Weerd City Council Memberfs Keith Bird Joe Borton Lukze Cavener Genesis Milam Anne Little Roberts Ty Palmer SUBJECT: MERIDIAN WRRF OUTFALL PIPE RIPRAP EXTENSION PROJECT WITH STAR CONSTRUCTION FOR A NOT -TO -EXCEED AMOUNT OF $58,509.00. I. DEPARTMENT CONTACT PERSONS Emily Skoro, Staff Engineer II 489-0356 Clint Dolsby, Assistant City Engineer 489-0341 Warren Stewart, City Engineer 489-0350 Dale Bolthouse, Interim PW Director 985-1257 II. DESCRIPTION A. Background The W disinfection system expansion project at the Wastewater Resource Recovery Facility is nearly complete. During the construction process, it was determined that additional outfall channel scour protection was required. A Work Change Directive was given to the original project contractor for pricing. The price submitted was much higher than anticipated. Therefore, it was decided to wait and rebid this portion of the project at a later date. The project has been rebid and the new bid will save the City $100,000 over the previous construction quote. B. Proposed Project The proposed project includes: • Installing additional riprap at the effluent pipe outfall at Fivemile Creek. • Regrading the existing embankment on north side of Fivemile Creek. Page 1 of 2 111. IMPACT A. Fiscal Impacts Project Costs: --- ------------ --------- ------------------------------------------ ---------_-_-____ � FiocalYomc2Ul7 . . .--- ----------------- ---- ------ ---------- -------------------- ----------- ------ ------ ---------- Star Construction ----StorCountructioo $58,504.00� ----------------------------------- ---- ------------------------------ ---_--_-_--__.-, Tntnl $58,509.00 � -___—..------__'+----_------------_---__.--'-���-_-� ' ----------------------------------- -- � � Total (�o8t| $58���).U� � ---------------'----------'-----------------'----- Available Project Fundin _-------_--_------_----------___-__--------_--_---, � Fiscal Year � z�o�nnz�(�od�/(�odon �---------------+--------------f---------------- ---- --� � 01 � 3590~4h{74 | $816, 761. �'--'`--'^-----�------------------|-----------'`----� . . ^-----'---------'--------------'^----------'-----~ Tolo] � $81/�76735 � ---------'------------------------------- ------------ --------- B. Time Constraints This portion of the projectiucritical to complete ansoon oapossible because this vvnzkouu«»k/be completed outside the irrigation season. The l7VExpansion Construction projectcan't becompleted until the riprapcoua1ructimoproject is Departmental Approvak Page 2 of 2 CONTRACT FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION WRRF OUTFALL PIPE RIPRAP EXTENSION PROJECT# 1OO55.F THIS CONTRACT FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION is made this 8th day of November, 2016, and entered into by and between the City of Meridian, a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of ldaho, hereinafter referred to as "ClTY", 33 East Broadway Avenue, Meridian, ldaho 83642, and Star Construction LLC hereinafter referred to as "CONTRACTOR", whose business address is P.O. Box 157. Star lD 83669 and whose Public Works Contractor License # is PWC-C-14428. INTRODUCTION WHEREAS, the Contractor is specially trained, experienced and competent to perform and has agreed 1o provide such services; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration ol the mutual promises, covenants, terms and conditions hereinafter contained, the parties agree as follows: TERMS ANO CONDITIONS 1. Scope of Work: 1.2 All documents, drawings and written work product prepared or produced by the Contraclor under this Agreement, including without limitation electronic data files, are the property of the Contractor; provided, however, the City shall have the right to reproduce, publish and use all such work, or any part thereof, in any manner and for any purposes whatsoever and to authorize others lo do so. lf any such work is copyrightable, the Contractor may copyright the same, except that, as to any work which is copyrighted by the Contractor, the City reserves a royalty{ree, non-exclusive, and irrevocable license to reproduce, publish and use such work, or any part thereof, and to authorize others to do so. 'I .3 The Contractor shall provide services and work under this Agreement consistent with the requirements and standards established by applicable federal, state and city laws, ordinances, regulations and resolutions. The Contractor WRRF OUTFALL PIPE RIPRAP EXTENSION page '1 of 13 Project 10055.F Whereas, the City has a need for services involving ffi!!oUTFA!!l!!! BIPUHIEN!9N;and '1 .1 CONTRACTOR shall perform and furnish to the City upon execution of this Contract and receipt of the City's written notice to proceed, all services and work, and comply in all respects, as specified in the document titled "Scope of Work" a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by this reference, together with any amendments that may be agreed to in writing by the parties. represents and warrants that it will perform its work in accordance with generally accepted industry standards and practices for the profession or professions that are used in performance of this Agreemenl and that are in effect at the time of performance of this Agreement. Except for that representation and any representations made or contained in any proposal submitted by the Contractor and any reports or opinions prepared or issued as part of the work performed by the Contractor under this Agreement, Contractor makes no other warranties, either express or implied, as part of this Agreement. 1 .4 Services and work provided by the Contractor at the City's request underthis Agreement will be performed in a timely manner in accordance with a Schedule of Work, which the parties hereto shall agree to. The Schedule of Work may be revised from time to time upon mutual written consent of the parties. 2. Consideration 2.1 The Contractor shall be compensated on a NolTo-Exceed basis as provided in Exhibit B "Payment Schedule" attached hereto and by reference made a part hereof for the Not-To-Exceed amount of $59.5!XlJq. 2.2 The Contractor shall provide the City with a monthly statement and supporting invoices, as the work warrants, ol fees earned and costs incurred for services provided during the billing period, which the City will pay within 30 days of receipt of a correct invoice and approval by the City. The City will not withhold any Federal or State income taxes or Social Security Tax from any payment made by City to Contractor under the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Payment of all taxes and other assessments on such sums is the sole responsibility of Contractor. 2.3 Except as expressly provided in this Agreement, Contractor shall not be entitled to receive from the City any additional consideration, compensation, salary, wages, or other type of remuneration for services rendered under this Agreement including, but not limited to, meals, lodging, transportation, drawings, renderings or mockups. Specifically, Contractor shall not be entitled by virtue of this Agreement to consideration in the form of overtime, health insurance benefits, retirement benefits, paid holidays or other paid leaves of absence of any type or kind whatsoever. 3. Term: 3.1 This agreement shall become effective upon execution by both parties, and shall expire upon (a) completion of the agreed upon work, (b) or unless sooner terminated as provided in Sections 3.2, 3.3, and Section 4 below or unless some other method or time of termination is listed in Exhibit A. 3.2 Should Contractor default in the performance of this Agreement or materially breach any of its provisions, City, at City's option, may terminate this Agreement by giving written notification to Contractor. WRRF OUTFALL PIPE RIPRAP EXTENSION Projecl 10055.F page 2 ol 13 3.3 Should City failto pay Contractor all or any part of the compensation set forth in Exhibit B of this Agreement on the date due, Contractor, at the Contractols option, may terminate this Agreement if the failure is not remedied by the City within thirty (30) days f rom the date payment is due. 4. Liquidated Damages: Substantial Completion shall be accomplished within 56 (fifty-six) calendar days from Notice to Proceed. This project shall be considered Substantially Complete when the Owner has full and unrestricted use and benefit of the facilities, both from an operational and safety standpoint, and only minor incidental work, corrections or repairs remain for the physical completion of the total contract. Contractor shall be liable to the City for any delay beyond this time period in the amount of $500.00 (Five hundred dollars) per calendar day. Such payment shall be construed to be liquidated damages by the Contractor in lieu of any claim or damage because of such delay and not be construed as a penalty. Upon receipt of a Notice to Proceed, the Contractor shall have 70 (seventy) calendar days to complete the work as described herein. Contractor shall be liable to the City for any delay beyond this time period in the amount of $500.00 (Five hundred dollars) per calendar day. Such payment shall be construed to be liquidated damages by the Contractor in lieu of any claim or damage because of such delay and not be construed as a penalty. See Milestones listed in the Payment Schedule for Substantial Completion. This project MUST be completed by the start of the 2017 Spring lrrigation Season. 5. Termination: 5.1 lf , through any cause, CONTRACTOR, its officers, employees, or agents fails to f ullill in a timely and proper manner its obligations under this Agreement, violates any of the covenants, agreements, or stipulations of this Agreement, falsifies any record or document required to be prepared under this agreement, engages in fraud, dishonesty, or any other act of misconduct in the performance of this contract, or if the City Council determines that termination of this Agreement is in the best interest of CITY, the CITY shall thereupon have the right to terminate this Agreement by giving written notice to CONTRACTOR of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof at least fifteen (15) days before the effective date of such termination. CONTRACTOR may terminate this agreement at any time by giving at least sixty (60) days notice to CITY. ln the event ol any terminalion ol this Agreement, all finished or unfinished documents, data, and reports prepared by CONTRACTOR under this Agreemenl shall, at the option of the CITY, become its property, and CONTRACTOR shall be enlitled to receive .iust and equitable compensation for any work satisfactorily complete hereunder. WRBF OUTFALL PIPE RIPRAP EXTENSION Projecl 10055.F paqe 3 of 13 5.2 Notwithstanding the above, CONTRACTOR shall not be relieved of liability to the CITY for damages sustained by the CITY by virtue of any breach of this Agreement by CONTRACTOR, and the CITY may withhold any payments to CONTRACTOR forthe purposes of set-off until such time as the exact amount of damages due the CITY from CONTRACTOR is determined. This provision shall survive the termination of this agreement and shall not relieve CONTRACTOR of its liability to the CITY for damages. 6. lndependentContractor: 6. 1 ln all matters pertaining to this agreement, CONTRACTOR shall be acting as an independent contractor, and neither CONTRACTOR nor any officer, employee or agent of CONTRACTOR will be deemed an employee of CITY. Except as expressly provided in Exhibit A, Contractor has no authority or responsibility to exercise any rights or power vested in the City and therefore has no authority to bind or incur any obligation on behalf of the City. The selection and designation of the personnel of the CITY in the performance of this agreement shall be made by the CITY. 6.2 Contractor, its agents, officers, and employees are and at alltimes during the term of this Agreement shall represent and conduct themselves as independent contractors and not as employees of the City. 6.3 Contractor shall determine the method, details and means of performing the work and services to be provided by Contractor under this Agreement. Conlractor shall be responsible to City only for the requirements and results specified in this Agreement and, except as expressly provided in this Agreement, shall not be subjected to City's control with respect to the physical action or activities of Contraclor in fulfillment of this Agreement. lf in the performance of this Agreement any third persons are employed by Contractor, such persons shall be entirely and exclusively under the direction and supervision and control of the Contractor. 7. Sub-Contractors: Contractor shall require that all of its sub-contractors be licensed per State of ldaho starure # 54-1901 The Contractor shall only f urnish employees who are competent and skilled for work under this contract. lf, in the opinion of the City, an employee of the Contractor is incompetent or disorderly, refuses to perform in accordance with the terms and conditions of the contract, threatens or uses abusive language while on City property, or is otherwise unsatisfactory, that employee shall be removed from all work under this contract. 9. lndemnification and Insurance: WRRF OUTFALL PIPE FIIPHAP EXTENSION Project 10055.F page 4 of '13 8. Removal of Unsatislactory Employees: 9.3 Any deductibles, self-insured relention, or named insureds must be declared in writing and approved by the City. At the option of the City, either: the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles, seltinsured retentions or named insureds; or the Contractor shall provide a bond, cash or letter of credit guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. 9.4 To the extent of the indemnity in this contract, Contractor's lnsurance coverage shall be primary insurance regarding the City's elected officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained bythe City or the City's elected officers, off icials, employees and volunteers shall be excess of WRBF OUTFALL PIPE RIPRAP EXTENSION Project 10055.F page 5 of 13 9.1 CONTRACTOR shall indemnify and save and hold harmless CITY and it's elected officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers f rom and for any and all losses, claims, actions, judgments for damages, or injury to persons or property and losses and expenses and other costs including litigation costs and attorney's fees, arising out of, resulting from, or in connection with the performance of this Agreement by the CONTRACTOR, its servants, agents, officers, employees, guests, and business invitees, and not caused by or arising out of the tortious conduct of CITY or its employees. CONTRACTOR shall maintain. and soecificallv aqrees that it will maintain. throuqhout the term of this Aqreement. liabilitv insurance. in which the CITY shall be named an additional insured in the minimum amounts as follow: General Liability One Million Dollars ($1 ,000,000) per incident or occurrence, Automobile Liability lnsurance One Million Dollars ($1 ,000,000) per incident or occurrence and Workers' Compensation lnsurance, in the statutory limits as required by law.. The limits of insurance shall not be deemed a limitation of the covenants to indemnify and save and hold harmless CITY; and if CITY becomes liable for an amount in excess of the insurance limits, herein provided, CONTRACTOR covenants and agrees to indemnify and save and hold harmless CITY from and for all such losses, claims, actions, or judgments for damages or injury to persons or property and other costs, including litigation costs and attorneys' fees, arising out of, resulting from , or in connection with the performance of this Agreement by the Contractor or Contractor's officers, employs, agents, representatives or subcontractors and resulting in or attributable to personal injury, death, or damage or deslruction to tangible or intangible property, including use of. CONTRACTOR shall provide CITY with a Certificate of lnsurance, or other proof of insurance evidencing CONTRACTOR'S compliance with the requirements of this paragraph and file such proof of insurance with the CITY at least ten (10) days prior to the date Contractor begins performance of it's obligations under this Agreement. ln the event the insurance minimums are changed, CONTRACTOR shall immediately submit proof of compliance with the changed limits. Evidence of all insurance shall be submitted to the City Purchasing Agent with a copy to Meridian City Accounting, 33 East Broadway Avenue, Meridian, ldaho 83642. 9.2 lnsurance is to be placed with an ldaho admitted insurer with a Best's raling of no less than A-. the Contractor's insurance and shall not contribute with Contractor's insurance except as to the extent of City's negligence. 9.5 The Contractor's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respecl to the limits of the insurer's liability. 9.6 All insurance coverages for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the insurance and indemnity requirements stated herein. 9.7 The limits of insurance described herein shall not limit the liability of the Conlractor and Contractor's agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors. 10. Time is of the Essence: The parties hereto acknowledge and agree that time is strictly of the essence with respect to each and every term, condition and provision hereof , and that the failure to timely perform any of the obligations hereunder shall constitute a breach of , and a default under, this Agreement by the party so failing to perform. 11. Bonds: Payment and Performance Bonds are required on all Public Works lmprovement Projects per the ISPWC and the City of Meridian Supplemental Specifications & Drawings to the ISPWC, which by this reference are made a part hereof . Contractor is required to furnish faithful performance and payment bonds in the amount of 100% of the contract price issued by surety licensed to do business in the State of ldaho. ln the event that the contract is subsequently terminated for failure to perform, the conlractor andior surety will be liable and assessed for any and all costs for the re-procurement of the contract services. 12. Warranty: All construction and equipment provided under this agreement shall be warranted for 2 years f rom the date of the City of Meridian acceptance per the ISPWC and the Meridian Supplemental Specifications & Drawings to the ISPWC and any modif ications, which by this reference are made a part hereof . All items found to be defective during a warranty inspection and subsequently corrected will require an additional two (2) year warranty from the date of City's acceptance of the corrected work. 13. Changes: The CITY may, from time to time, request changes in the Scope of Work to be performed hereunder. Such changes, including any increase or decrease in the amount of CONTRACTOR'S compensation, which are mutually agreed upon by and between the CITY and CONTRACTOR, shall be incorporated in written WRRF OUIFALL PIPE RIPBAP EXTENSION page 6 of 13 Project 10055.F 14. amendments which shall be executed with the same formalities as this Agreement. Taxes: The City of Meridian is exempt from Federal and State taxes and will execute the required exemption certificates for items purchased and used by the City. ltems purchased by the City and used by a contractor are subject to Use Tax. All other taxes are the responsibility of the Contractor and are to be included in the Contractor's Bid pricing. '15. MeridianStormwaterSpecilications: All construction proiects require either a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) or an erosion sediment control plan (ESCP) as specified in the City of Meridian Construction Stormwater Management Program (CSWMP) manual. The CSWMP manual containing the procedures and guidelines can be found at this address: http://www.meridiancitv.oro/environmental.aspx?id=1 361 8. Contractor shall retain all stormwater and erosion control documentation generated on site during construction including the SWPPP manual, field inspections and amendments. Prior to final acceptance of the job by the City the contractor shall return the field SWPPP manual and field inspection documents to the City for review. A completed Conlractor Request to File Project N.O.T. with the EPA form shall be provided to the City with the documents. These documents shall be retained, reviewed and approved by the City prior to f inal acceptance of the project. 16. ACHD: Contractor shall be responsible for coordinating with the City to obtain appropriate ACHD permit(s) and will reimburse the City for fees, fines, or penalties City incurs due to Contractor's violation of any ACHD policy. City shall certify to ACHD that Contractor is authorized to obtain a Temporary Highway and Right-of-Way Use Permit from ACHD on City's behalf. The parties acknowledge and agree that the scope of the agency granted by such certification is limited to, and conterminous with, the term and scope of this Agreement. 17. Reports and lnformation: '17.1 At such times and in such forms as the CITY may require, there shall be furnished to the CITY such stalements, records, reports, data and information as the CITY may request pertaining to matters covered by this Agreement. 17.2 Contractor shall maintain all writings, documents and records prepared or compiled in connection with the performance of this Agreement for a minimum of four (4) years lrom the termination or completion of this or Agreement. This includes any handwriting, typewriting, printing, photo static, photographic and every other means of recording upon any tangible thing, any form of communication or WRBF OUTFALL PIPE RIPRAP EXTENSION Project 10055.F page 7 of '13 representation including letters, words, pictures, sounds or symbols or any combination thereof. 18. Audits and lnspections: At any time during normal business hours and as often as the CITY may deem necessary, there shall be made available to the CITY for examination all of CONTRACTOR'S records with respect to all matters covered by this Agreement. CONTRACTOR shall permit the CITY to audit, examine, and make excerpts or transcripts from such records, and to make audits of all contracts, invoices, materials, payrolls, records of personnel, conditions of employment and other data relating to all matters covered by this Agreement. 19. Publication, Reproduction and Use ol Material No material produced in whole or in part under this Agreement shall be subject to copyright in the United States or in any other counlry. The CITY shall have unreslricted authority to publish, disclose and otheMise use, in whole or in part, any reports, data or other materials prepared under this Agreement. 20. Equal Employment Opportunity: ln performing the work herein, Contractor agrees to comply with the provisions of Title Vl and Vll of the Civil Rights Act, Revenue Sharing Act Title 31, U.S. Code Section 2176. Specifically, the Contractor agrees not to discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, political affiliation, marital status, or handicap. Contractor will take affirmative action during employment or training to insure that employees are treated without regard to race, color, religion, sex, nalional origin, age, political affiliation, marital status, or handicap. ln performing the Work required herein, CONTRACTOR shall not unlawfully discriminate in violation of any federal, state or local law, rule or regulation against any person on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin or ancestry, age or disability. Contractor must comply with ldaho State Statute 44-1002 which states that the Contractor employ ninety-f ive percenl (95%) bona f ide ldaho residents. 22. Advice of Attorney: Each party warrants and represents that in executing this Agreement. lt has received independent legal advice f rom its attorney's or the opportunity to seek such advice. WRRF OUTFALL PIPE RIPRAP EXTENSION Project '10055.F page 8 of 13 21. Employment of Bona Fide ldaho Residents: 23. 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 attorneys'fees as determined by a Court of competent .iurisdiction. This provision shall be deemed to be a separate contract between the parties and shall survive any default, lermination or forfeiture of this Agreement. 24. ConstructionandSeverability: lf any part of this Agreement is held to be invalid or unenforceable, such holding will not affect the validity or enforceability of any other part of this Agreement so long as the remainder of the Agreement is reasonably capable of completion. Waiver of default by either party to this Agreement shall not be deemed to be waiver of any subsequent default. Waiver or breach of any provision of this Agreement shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any other or subsequent breach, and shall not be construed to be a modification of the terms of this Agreement unless this Agreement is modif ied as provided above. 26. Entire Agreement: 27. Assignment: It is expressly agreed and understood by the parties hereto, that CONTRACTOR shall not have the right to assign, transfer, hypothecate or sell any of its rights under this Agreement except upon the prior express written consent of CITY. 28. Payment Request: Payment requests shall be submitted to City of Meridian through the City's project management software. The Project Manager will compare the invoice against the Payment Schedule in the Agreement for compliance. Upon approval that the work has been done and is in compliance with the Agreement, the Project Manager will approve the pay request for processing. City of Meridian payment terms are Net 30 from the date City receives a correct invoice. Final payment will not be released until the City has received a tax release from the Tax Commission. 29. Cleanup: Contractor shall keep the worksite clean and free from debris. WHRF OUTFALL PIPE RIPRAP EXTENSION Project 10055.F At completion of page I of '13 25- Waiver of Default: This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the parties and supersedes any and all other agreements or understandings, oral of written, whether previous to the execution hereof or contemporaneous herewith. work and prior to requesting final inspection, the Contractor shall remove all traces of wasle materials and debris resulting trom the work. Final payment will not be made if cleanup has not been performed. The order or precedence shall be the contract agreement, the lnvitation for Bid document, then the winning bidders submitted bid document. 31. Compliance with Laws: ln performing the scope of work required hereunder, CONTRACTOR shall comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, and codes of Federal, State, and local governments. 32. Applicable Law: This Agreement shall be governed by and construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of ldaho, and the ordinances of the City of Meridian. 33. Notices: Any and all notices required to be given by either of the parties hereto, unless otherwise stated in this agreement, shall be in writing and be deemed communicated when mailed in the United States mail, certified, return receipt requested, addressed as follows: CITY City of Meridian Purchasing Manager 33 E Broadway Ave Meridian, lD 83642 208-489-0417 CONTRACTOR STAR CONSTRUCTION, LLC Altn: Ancil lrminger, Managing Member P.O. Box 157 Slar, lD 83669 Phone: 208-286-9198 Email : starconstructionllc@gmail.com ldaho Public Works License #PWC-C-14428 34. Approval Required: This Agreement shall not become effective or binding until approved by the City of Meridian. WRRF OUTFALL PIPE RIPRAP EXTENSION Project '10055.F page 10 of '13 30. Order of Precedence: Either party may change their address for the purpose of this paragraph by giving written notice of such change to the other in the manner herein provided. CITY OF MERIDIAN BY' , 71,t ✓�4i Dated: / ! yl X1 Approved by Council: /// D A UCL / J�� Sr Attest: / 4'4/ C.Jay C6Jes, CVY CLERK Purchasing A proval BY: KEITH W7MS, Purchasing Manager Dated:: 11 / // (10 Project Manager Emily Skoro WRRF OUTFALL PIPE RIPRAP EXTENSION Project 10055.F STAR CCIVS JC -T4 C� BY: _ Anci rminger, Managing Member Dated: % City of E IDIAN ��--..ppy�IDAHO SEAL y w tde TARAS����Py Depar t App o al BY: '�, WA REN STE A T, City Engineer Dated: page 11 of 13 EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF WORK HEFER TO INVITATION TO BID PW-1702.10055.F ALL ADDENDUMS, ATTACHMENTS, AND EXHIBITS included in the lnvitation to Bid Package # PW-l702-10055.F, are by this reference made a part hereof. SPECIFICATIONS / SCOPE OF WORK All construction work shall be done in accordance with the current version of the ldaho Standards for Public Works Construction (ISPWC), the 2013 City of Arleridian Supplemental Specifications to the ISPWC (and any Addendums). See separate attached documents: PLANS NAME BY CH2M Hill dated 08123120'16 1z pages; After work is done in creek, conlractor needs to remove (existing plug) (plywood and sand bags) out of 48" pipe and install city furnished 30"plug in 30" pipe just out of manhole. SPECIAL PROVISIONS/TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS o All work MUST be complete prior to the start of the 2017 Spnng lrrigation Season. a a WRRF OUTFALL PIPE RIPRAP EXTENSION Project 10055.F page 12 of 13 A Exhibit B MILESTONE / PAYMENT SCHEDULE MILESTONE DATES/SCHEDULE Milestone'1 Milestone 2 PRICING SCHEDULE NOT TO EXCEED CONTRACT TOTAL Contract is a not to exceed amount, Line item pricing below will be used for invoice verification and any additional increases or decreases in work requested by cily. The City will pay the contraclor based on actual quantities ol each item ol work in accordance with the contract documents. Contract Pricing Schedule Item No Description Quantity Unit Unit Price 1 General Requirements 1 LS $3,s29.00 2 tc s6.185.00 3 Permittinq 1 LS $150.00 4 Storm Water Pollution Prevention Control 1 $3,420.00 5 Surveyinq 1 LS $2,950 00 6 ln-Water Work Zone Provisions 1 LS $16,035.00 7 Earthwork 1 LS $8,271.00 8 Geotextile lnstallation LS 9 Riprap Placement LS $3,558.00 10 Groutino 1 LS $8,194.00 11 Site Restoration and Stabilization 1 LS $4.382.00 12 Plant Etfluent Flow Conversion to 48-inch Outlall Pipe ,1 LS $500.00 lncidentals 1 LS $0.00 Total and complete compensation for this Agreement shall not exceed $58,509.00. WRBF OUTFALL PIPE RIPRAP EXTENSION Project '10055.F Substantial Completion 56 Days from Notice to Proceed Final Completion 70 Days from Notice to Proceed Contract includes lurnishing all labor, materials, equipment, and incidentals as required lor the WRRF OUTFALL PIPE RIPRAP EXTENSION per IFB PW- 1702-10055.F $58-50900 Mobilization/Demobilization 1 1 $1 ,335 00 1 13 [ --t---- page 13 of 13 Clty Of uertdiaD Detailed StaEemenE of Revenues and Expenditures Rev and Exp Report - Keit.h - Unpostsed'Iransactions Included In Report 3590 - m{ Coaatructloa Projocts 50 - Etrterplla€ Eund Fro.n to/t/20t6'rhroug}] 9 /30 /2ot'7 CapitaL Outlay 96174 UltravioleE Di.slnfecEion LUU55 UV DaSrnteCElOn 10055. a tV Disinfection Expansion - CONSTRUCTION Carr... Carryf orward ?otal CapitaL Outlay Budget $ith Currents Year Actual BudgeE Remaining PercenE of Budgets Remaj.ning 0.00 0.00 49.99 9, 323 . 00 (49.99) (9, 323 . 00 ) 0 .00t 0 .00* 1.415.26t.t6 0.00 1,475,26t.16 100.00t L,4'75,261 .46 9,312.99 1 465 894.17 99-36t TOTAL EXPENDITURES 1 4',l5 25'7.16 9 312.99 1 465 494.17 99.358 Date:77/A/t6 11:22 i 0 0 AM Pertormance Bond CONTRACTOR: (Nome, legdl status ond oddress) Star Construction, LLC P.O Box 157 Star, lD 83669 OWNER: (Name, legal stdtus and odd.ress) City of Meridian 33 East Broadway Ave. Meridian, lD. 83642 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT Date: November 8, 2016 Amorrnt: $58,509.00 Description: (Name and, location) WRRF Outfall Pipe Riprap Extension BOND Date: November 8, 2016 (Not eorlier thon ColLstruction Controct Dote) nmount. $58,509.00 Modifications to this Bond: I None CONTRACTOR AS PRINCIPAL Company: Star Con CNASURETY (Corporote Seol) Bond No.58731992 SURETY: Western Surety Company: South Dakota Corporation (Name, legal status ond. principol place ol business) 333 S. Wabash Avenue 41st Floor Chicago, lL 60604 This document has important legal consequences. Consultation with an attorney is encouraged with respect to its completion or modification. Any singular reference to Contractor, Surety, Owner or other party shall be considered plural where applicable AIA Document A312-2010 combines two separate bonds, a Performance Bond and a Payment Bond, into one form. This is not a single combined Performance and Payment Bond. ! See Section 16 SURETY Company: Western Surety Company (Corporate Seal) ztiiiy n,C Name A NcIL IBMIN and Titlp: MAJVA6|UC MgMBgR- and Trle: Attorney-ln- (Any odditional signalures cippear on lhe losl page of lhis Performonce Bond.) act (FOR INFORMATION ONLY Nante, address and telephone) AGENT or BROKER: OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE: post lnsurance (Architect, Engineer or other party:) P.O Box 8447 N/A Boise, lD 83707 Printed in c@peration with the Aherican lnstilule of Atchitects (AlA). The language in this docuirent conloins exactly to lhe language used in AIA Documenl A312 - Peiomance Eond - 2010 Edition 1 A inlH:.L),-) 51 The Contractor and Surety, jointly and severally, bind themselves, their heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns to the Owner for the performance of the Construction Contract, which is incorporated herein by reference. S 2 lfthe Contractor performs the Constructiol Contract, the Surety and the ContractDr shall have no obLigation under this Bond, except when applicable to participate in a conference as provided in Section 3. $ 3 If there is no Owner Default under the Construction Contract, the Surety's obligation under this Bond shall arise after .l the Owner fust provides notice to the Contractor and the Surety that the Owner is considering declaring a Contractor Default. Such notice shall indicate whether the Owner is requesting a conference among the Owner, Contractor and Surety to discuss the Contractor's performance. If the Owner does not lequest a conference, the Surety may, within five (5) business days after receipt ofthe Owner's notice, request such a conference. If the Surety timely requests a conference, the Owner shall att€nd. Unless the Owner agtees otherwise, aay conference requested under this Section 3.1 ghall be held within ten (10) business days of the Surety's receipt of the Owrrer's uotice. If the Owner, the Contractor and the Surety agree, the Contractor shall be allowed a reasonable time to perforE the Construction Contract, but such an agreement shall not waive the Owler's right, ifany, subsequently to declare a Contractor Default; .2 the Owner declares a Contractor Default, terminates the Construction Contract and noti.fies the Surety; and .3 the Owner has agreed to pay the Balance ofthe Contract Price in accordance with the terms ofthe Construction Cofltract to the Surety or to a coltractor selected to perform the Construction Contract. $ 4 Failure on the part of the Owner to comply with the notice requirement in Section 3.1 shall not constitute a failure to comply with a condition precedent to the Surety's obligations, or release the Surety froD its obligations, except to the extent the Surety demonstrates actual prejudice. $ 5 When the Owner has satisfred the conditions of Section 3, the Surety shall promptly and at the Surety's expense take one of the lollowing actions: $ 5.1 Arange for the Contractor, with the consent of the Owner, to perform and complete the Congtruction Contract; $ 5.2 Undertake to perform and complete the Construction Cootract itself, through its agents or independent contractors; S 5.3 Obtain bids or negotiated ploposals from qualified contractors acceptable to the Owner for a contract for performance and completion of the Construction Contract, arrallge for a contract to be prepared for execution by the Owler and a contractor selected with the Owner's concurrence, to be secured with performance and payment bonds executed by a qualihed surety equivalent to the bonds issued on the Construction Contract, and pay to the Owner the amount of damages as described in Section 7 in excess of the Balance of the Contract Price incurred by the Owner as a result ofthe Contractor Default: or S 5'4 Waive its right to perform and complete, arrange for completion, or obtain a new contractor and with reasonable promptness unde! the ctcumstances: .'l After investigation, determine the amount for which it may be liable to the Owner and, as soon as practicable after the amount ie determined, make payment to the Owner;or.2 Deuy liability in whole or in part and notify the Owner, citing the reasons for denial. S 6 Ifthe Surety does not proceed as provided in Sectioo 5 with reasonable promptness, the Surety shall be deemed to be in default on this Bond seven days after receipt of an additional written notice from the Owner to the Surety demanding that the Sulety perform its obligations urder this Bond, and the Owner shall be entitled to enforce any remedy available to the Owner. If the Surety proceeds as provided in Section 5.4, and the Owner refuses the payment or the Surety has denied Liability, in whole or in part, without fudher notice the Owner shall be entitled to enforce any remedy available to the Owner. Pdnted in cooporation with the American lnsttute of Architects (AlA). The language in this docuoEnt contoms exac y to the language used in AIA Document A312 - Pe omance Bond - 2OlO Editbh 2 $ 7 If the Surety elects to act under Section 5.1, 5.2 or 5.3, then the responsibilities ofthe Surety to the Owner shall not be Sreater than those ofthe Contractor under the Construction Contract, and the rcsponsibilities of the Owner to the Surety shall not be greater than those of the Owner under the Construction Contract. Subject to the commitment by the Owner to pay the Balance ofthe Contract Price, the Surety is obligated, without duplication, for.l the responsibilities of the Contractor for correction of defective work and completion of the Construction Contract; .2 additional legal, design professional and delay costs resulting from the Contractor's Default, and resulting from the actions or failure to act of the Surety under Section b; and .3 liquidated damages, or if no liquidated damages are specified in the Construction Contract, actual damages caused by delayed performance or non-performance of the Contractor. $ 8 lfthe Surety elects to act under Section 5.1, 5.3 or 5.4, the Surety's liability is limited to the amount ofthis Bond. S 9 The Surety shall not be liable to the Owner or others for obligations of the Contractor that are uuelat€d to the Construction Contract, and the Balance of the Contract Price shall not be reduced or set offon account of any such unrelated obligations. No right of action shall accrue on this Bolrd to any person or entity other than the Owner or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns. $ 10 The Surety hereby waives notice of any change, including changes of tiEe, t the Coostruction Contract or to related subcontracts, purchase orders and other obligations. $ ll Any proceeding, legal or equitable, under this Bond may be instituted in any court ofcompetent jurisdiction in the location in which the work or part of the work is locat€d and shall be instituted within two years aft€r a declaration of Contractor Default or within two yeais aft€r the Cotrtractor ceased working or within two years after the Surety refuses or fails to perform its obligations under this Bond, whichever occurs fust. If the provisions of this Paragraph are void or prohibited by law, the minimum period oflimitation available to sureties as a defense in the jurisdiction of the suit shall be applicable. $ 12 Notice to the Surety, the Ov,/ne! or the Contractor shall be mailed or deLivered to the address shown o1r the page on which their signature appears. $ 13 \{hen this Bond has been furnished to cooply with a statutory or other legal requirement in the location where the construction was to be performed, any provision in this Bond conllicting with said ststutory or legal requirement shall be deemed deleted herefrom and provisions conlorming to such statutory or other legal requirement shall be deeoed incorporat€d herein. lvhen so furnished, the intent is that this Bond shall be construed as a statutory bond and not as a common law bond. S 14 Dofinitions S 14.1 Balance of the Contract Price. The total anount payabte by the Owner to the Contractor under the Constluction Contract after all proper adjustEents have been made, includiog allowance to the Contractor of any amounts received or to be received by the Owner in settlement of insurance or other claims for damages to which the Contractor ls entitled, reduced by all valid and proper payments made to or on behalfof the Contractor under the Construction Contract. S 14'2 Construction Contract. The agreement between the Owner and Contractor identified onthe cover page, including all contract Documents and change6 made to the agreement and the contract Documents. S 14.3 Contractor Default, Failure olthe Contractor, which has notbeen remedied or waived, to perform or otherwise to comply with a material term of the Construction Contract. S 14.4 OtYner Default. Failure ofthe Owner, which has not been remedied or waived, to pay the Contractor as required under the Construction Contract or to perform and complete or comply with the other Eaterial terms ofthe Construction Contract. S'14.5 Contract Documents. All the documents that comprise the agreement between the Ow[er and Contractor. $ 15 If this Bond is issued for an agreement between a Contractor and subcontractor, the term Contractor in this Bond shall be deemed to be Subcontractor and the term Owner shall be deemed to be Contractor. Pinted in cooperation with the Afierican lnstitute ol Atchitects (AlA). The language in this document confoms exactly to lhe language used in AIA Document A312 - Peiomance Bond - 2O1O Edition.3 S 16 Modifications to this bond are as follows: (Spoce is provided below lor additional signatures of odded parties, other th.an tltose appedrilg otu the couer paEe.) CONTRACTOR AS PRINCIPAL SUREWCompany: (Corporcte Seal) Company: (Corporcte Seal) Signature:Signature: Name and Title: Address CAUTION: You should sign an original AIA Contract Oocumgnl on which this toxt appears in REO. An original aggures that changgs will not be obscurod. Name and Title: Address Pinled in cooperction with the Anedcan lnstitute of Atchitects (AlA). Tho language in this documant confoms exactly to the language used in AIA Documenl A312 - Peionnance Bond - 2010 Edition 4 Payment Bond CONTRACTOR: (Name, legol status and. address) Star Construction, LLC P.O Box 157 Star, lD 83642 OWNER: (Name, legaL stqtus and address) City of Meridian 33 East Broadway Ave. Meridian, lD. 83642 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT Date: November 8, 2016 Amount: $58,509.00 Descliption: (Name and locdtion) WRRF Outfall Pipe Riprap Extension BOND Date: November 8, 2016 (Not eatlier than CorLsttuctiotu Controct Date) 4661111 $58,509.00 Modifications to this Bond: I None CONTRACTOR AS PRINCIPAL Company: Star Con Sign CNASURETY Bond No. 58731992 SURETY: Western Surety Company: South Dakota Corporation (Name, legal status aad principol place of business) 333 S. Wabash Avenue 41st Floor Chicago, lL 60604 This document has important legal consequences. Consultation with an aftorney is encouraged with respect to its completion or modification. Any singular reference to Contractor, Surety, Owner or other party shall be considered plural where applicable. AIA Document A312-2010 combines two separate bonds, a Performance Bond and a Payment Bond, into one form. This is not a single combined Performance and Payment Bond n See Section 18 SURETY rute Seal) Cor!pa\y: .. Western Surety Company,L a n l.tameA Ne,/L /RMING€R-Signature Name Mary Jaquier andTitle:14!4 GING MeMBe ? and Title: AttorneyJn-Fact (Any additionol signotures appear on the last page of tl1,is Paynlent bnd.) (FOR INFORMATION ONLY - Name, address ond telephone) AGENT or BROKER: OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE: post lnsurance (Architect, EtueilLeet ot other party:) P.O Box 8447 N/A Boise, lD 83707 Pinted in c:oope@tion with lhe Amarican lnstitute of Atchitects (AlA). The language in this document contoms exactly to the language used in AIA Docunent A312 - Payrient Bond - 2010 Edition.5 A (Corporate Seal) .... " EJ:,'l_) $ I The Contractor and Surety, jointly and severally, bind themselves, their heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns to the Owner to pay for labor, materials and equipment furnished for use in the performance of the Construction Contract, which is incorporated herein by reference, subject to the foUowing terms- S 2 Ifthe Contractor promptly makes payment ofall sums due to Claimants, and defends, indemnifies and holds haroless the Owner froE claims, demands, liens or suits by any person or entity seeking payment for labor, materials or equipEent furnished for use in the performance of the Construction Contract, then the Surety and the Contractor shall have no obligation under this Bond. $ 3 Ifthere is no Owner Default under the Constluction Contract, the Surety's obligation to the Owner under this Bond shall arise after the Owner has promptly notfied the Contracto! and the Surety (at the address described in Section 13) of claims, demands, liens or suits against the Owner or the Owner's property by any person or entity seeking payment for labor, oaterials or equipment furnished for use in the performance of the Construction Contract and tendered defense ofsuch claims, demands, liens or suits to the Contractor and the Surety. $ 4 When the Owner has satisfied the conditions in Section 3, the Surety shall promptly and at the Surety's expense defend, indemnify and hold harmless the Owner against a duly tendered claim, demand, lien or suit. $ 5 The Surety's obligations to a Claimant under this Bond shall arise after the following: $ 5.1 Claimants, who do not have a direct contract with the Contractor, .1 have furnished a written [otice of non-payment to the Contractor, stating with substantial accuracy the amount clailtred and the oame of the party to whom the oaterials were, or equipment was, furnished or supplied or for whom the Iabor was done or performed, within ninety (90) days after having last performed labor or last furnished materials or equipment included in the Claim; and,2 have sent a Claim to the Surety (at the ad&ess described in Section t3). $ 5.2 Claimants, who are employed by or have a direct contract with the Contractor, have sent a Claim to the Surety (at the addless described in Section 13). S6 If a notice of non-payment required by Section 5.1.1 is given by the Owner to the Contractor, that is sufficient to satisfy a Claimant's obligatioo to furnish a writt€n notice ofnon-payment under Section 5.1.1- $ 7 When a Claimant has satisfred the conditions of Sections 5.1 or 5.2, whichever is applicable, the Surcty shall promptly and at the Surety's expense take the followiug actions: $ 7.1 Send an answer to the ClaiEant, with a copy to the Owner, within sixty (60) days after receipt of the Claim, stating the amounts that are undisputed and the basis for challenging any amounts that are disputed; and S 7.2 Pay or arlange for payment of any undisputed amounts. $ 7.3 The Surety's failure to discharge its obLigations under Section 7.1 or Section ?.2 shall not be deemed to constitute a waiver of defenses the Surety or Contractor may have or acquire as to a Claim, except as to undisputed aoourlts fo! which the Surety and Claimant have reached agreeBent. Ii however, the Surety fails to discharge its obligations under Section 7.1or Section ?.2, the Surety shall indemnify the Claimant for the reasonable attorney's fees the Claimant incurs thereafter to recovei any sums found to be due and owing to the Claimant. S I The Surety's total obligation shall not exceed the amount of this Bond, plus the amount of reasonable attorney,s fees provided uoder Section 7.3, and the amount of this Bond shall be credited for any payments Eade in good faith by the Surety. $ 9 Amounts owed by the Owner to the Contractor under the Construction Contract shall be used for the pedormance ofthe construction contract and to satis& claims, ifany, under any construction perforEaoce bond. By the Contractor furnishing and the Owner accepting this Bond, they agree that all funds earned by the Contractor in the performance ofthe Construction Contract are dedicated to satis& obligations of the Contractor and Surety under this Bond, subject to the Owner's priority to use the funds for the completion of the work. A Ptinted in coope@lion with the American lnsltute of Architects (AlA). The language in this document confoms exactly to the language used in AIA Document 4312 - Payncnt Bond - 2O1O Edition. $ l0 The Surety shall not be liable to the Owner, Claimants or others for obligations of the Contractor that are unrelat€d t! the Co[struction Contract. The Owner shall not be liable for the payment of any costs or expenses of any Claimant under this Bond, and shall have under this Bond no obligation to make payrnents to, or give notice on behalf of, Claimaots or otherwise have any obligations to Claimants under this Bond- $ 1l The Surety hereby waives notice of any change, including changes of time, to the Construction Contract or to related subcontracts, purchase orders and other obligations. S 12 No suit or action shall be commenced by a Claioant under this Bond other than in a court ofcompetent jurisdiction in the state in which the project that is the subject of the Construction Contract is located or after the expiration ofone year Irom the dat€ (l) on which the Claimant seut a ClaiE to the Surety pursuant to Section 5.1.2 or 5.2, or (2) on which the last labor or service was performed by anyone or the last materials or equipment were furnished by anyone under the Constluction Contract, whichever of (1) or (2) first occurs. If the provisions ofthis Paragraph are void or prohibited by law, the minimum period oflimitation available to sureties as a defeuse in the jurisdiction of the suit shall be applicable. $ 13 Notice and Claims to the Surety, the Owner or the Contractor shall be mailed or delivered to the address shown on the page on which their signature appears. Actual receipt of notice or Claims, however accomplished, shall be sufficient compliance as of the dat€ received. $ 14 When this Bond has been furnished to comply with a statutory or other legal requirement in the location where the construction was to be performed, any provision in this Bond conllicting with said statutory or legal requirement shall be deemed deleted herefiom and provisions conforming to such statutory or other legal requiremetrt shall be deeoed incorporated herein. When so furnished, the intent is that this Bond shall be coostrued as a statutory bond and not as a common law bond. $ 15 Upon request by any person or entity appearing to be a potential beneficiary of this Bond, the Contractor and Owner shall promptly furnish a copy of this Bond or shall permit a copy to be made. S 15 Detinitions S 16.1 Claim. A written statement by the Claimant including at a minimum:.l the name ofthe Claimant; .2 the name of the person for wholo the laboi was done, or Eaterials or equipment furnished; .3 a copy ofthe agreement or purchase order pursuant to which labor, materials or equipment was furnished for use in the performance of the Construction Contract;.4 a brief description of the labor, materials or equipment furnished;.5 the date on which the Claimant last perforoed labor or Iast furnished materials or equipnent for use in the pedormance ofthe Construction Contract; .6 the total amou[t earned by the Claimant for labor, materials or equipment furnished as ofthe date of the Claim; .7 the total amount ofprevious payments received by the Claimant; and ,8 the total aEount due and unpaid to the Claimant for labor, materials or equipment furnished as ofthe date of the Claim. S 16.2 Claimant. An individual or entity having a direct contract with the Contractor or with a subcontractor of the Contractor to furnish labor, materials or equipment for use in the performance of the Construction Contract. The t€rm Claimant also includes any individual or entity that has rightfully asserted a claim under an applicable mechanic's lien or similar statute against the real property upon which the Project is located. The intent of this Bond shall be to include without limitation in the terms "labor, matprials or equipEent" that part ofwater, gas, power, light, heat, oil, gasoline, telephone service or rental equipment used io the Construction Contract, architectural and engineering sewices required for performance of the work of the Contracto! and the Contractor's subcontractors, and all other items for which a mechanic's lien may be asserted in the jurisdiction where the labor, materials or equipment were furnished- 516.3 Construction Contract. The agreement between the Owoer and Contractor identified on the cover page, including all Contract DocumeAts afld all changes made to the agreement and the Contract Documents. Pinted in cgoperation with the Ameican lnstitute ot Architects (AlA). The language in this document confoins exactly to the language used in AIA Document A312 - Paynent Bond - 2U0 edfion-7 S 16.4 Owner Default. Failure ofthe Owner, which has not been remedied or waived, to pay the Contractor as required under the Construction Contract or to perform and complete or comply with the other material terms of the Construction Contract. S 16.5 Contract Documents. All the docuEents that comprise the agreement between the Owner and Contractot S 17 Ifthis Bond is issued for an agreement between a Contractor and subcontractor, the t€rm Contractor in this Bond shall be deemed to be Subcontractor aod the terDl Owner shall be deeoed to be Contractor. $ 18 Modifrcations to this bond are as follows: (Spoce is prouided below for additional signatures of ad.ded pafties, other than those oppearing on the couer paEe.) CONTRACTOR AS PRINCIPAL SURETYCompany: (Corporote Seol) Company: (Corporate Seal) Name and Title: Address CAUTION: You should sign an original AIA Contracl Documsnt, on which this text appoars in REO. An o,iginal assurssthat changes will not be obscured. Signature: Name and Title: Address Pdnted in cnoperation with the Arnerban lnslilute of Atchitects (AlA). The language in this document conlofins exaclly to the language used in AIA Document A312 - Payment Bond - 2O1O Edition.8 Western Surety Company POWER OF ATTORNEY APPOINTING INDIVIDUAL ATTORNEY-IN-FACT Know All Men By These Presents, That WESTERN SURETY COMPANY, a South Dakota corporatiorl is a duly organized and existing corporatior having its principal office in the City of Sioux Falls, and State of Soulh Dakoh, and that it does by virtue of the sigrature and seal hercin affixed hereby make, constitute and appoint William F Pos! Mary Jaquier, Terry S Robb, Individually of Boise, ID, its tnre and lawful Attomey(slin-Fact with fuIl power and authority hereby coDferr€d to sign, seal and execute for and on its behalf bonds, undertakings and other obligatory instruments of similar nature This Power of Attomey is made and executed pursuant to and by authority of the By-Law printed on the reve6e hermf, duly adopted, as indicated, by the shareholdeN of the corporation. In Witness Wh€r€of, WESTERN SL'RETY COMPANY has caused these presents to be signed by its Vice Presideot and its corpomte seal to be hereto affixed on this 1 oth day of July, 20 15. WESTERN SURETY COMPANY T. Bruflat. Vice President State of South Dakota CouDty of Mirnehaha My commission o(pires February 12,2021 f rrri*$.\\!.ril'rtil$i\rr +! s. ErcH i. i@!3lffififfi@i}r'ir\i\lt\rii\i..*rirr. SS On this loth day ofJr y, 2015, before me peEonally came Paul T. Bruflal, to me known, who, being by me duly swom, did depose and sayi that he resides in the City ofsioux Falls, State ofsouth Dakota; that he is the Vice PresideDt ofWESTERN SIJRETY COMPANY described in and which executed the above instnrment; that he knows the seal of said co$oiation; that the seal afrix€d to the said instrument is such corporate seal; that it was so aflixed pursuant to authority givm by the Board ol Dircctors of said corporation and that he signed his name thereto pursuant to like authority, and acknowledges same to be the act and deed of said corporation. Cd^ S. Eich, Notary Public CERTIFICATE I, L. NelsorL Assistant Secretary of WESTERN SURETY COMPANY do hereby ceftiry that the Power of Attomey hereinabove set forth is still in force, and funher certify that the By-l-aw of the corporation printed on the reverse hereof is still in force. In testimony whereof I have hereunto subscribed of November 2016my name and alixed the seal of the said corpomtion this WESTERN SURETY COMPANY Form F4280-7'2012 8 day L. Nelson, Assistant Se€retary - In Unlimited Amounts - and to bind it thereby as fully and to the same extent as ifsuch instfiments were signed by a duly authorized ofhcer ofthe corporation ard all the acts of said Attomey, pu.suant to the authority hereby given, arc hereby iatified and confumed. ) Authorizing By-Law ADOPTED BY THE SHAREHOLDERS OF WESTERN SURETY COMPANY This Power ofAftomey is made and executed purcuant to arld by authority of the following By-Law duly adopted by the sharcholders ofthe Company. Section 7. All bonds, policies, undenakings, Powens of Attorney, or other obligations of the corporation shall be executed in the corporate name of the Company by the Prgsident, Secretary, and Assistant Secretary, Treasursr, or any Vice President, or by such other officers as the Board of DirectoN may authorize. The President, any Vice Presiden! Secretary, any Assistant Secretary, or the Treasur€r may appoint Attomeys in Fact or ageots who shall have authority to issue bonds, policies, or undertakings in the name of the Company. The corpoiate seal is not necessary for the validity of any bonds, policies, undertakings, PoweN of Attomey or other obligations of thc corpomtion. The signature ofany such officer and the corporate seal may be printed by facsimile. a,<:<>r.Lf CERTIF]CATE OF L]ABILITY INSURANCE 1O / 3t /20!6 THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTENO OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFOROEO BY THE POLICIESBELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZEO REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER, AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. MPOR T N T tf the ce rti fi c a te h de I rs n DDITI o NA L N SU RED t he pol cy (tes )m u st b€en d o rsed.tf U B R OG TI o N IS ED s ubj tothetermsandconditionsofthepocvcertanpocesmayrequIreanndorsement.s tate me nt o n th s c ertifi cate does not confe (f ig hts to the c erti fi cate h o de r i n eu of s uc h e ndorsem en s PRODUCEfi Post Insurance 2717 tl. Bannock P. O. Box 84 4? Boise INSUREO Servj-ces, Inc st. rD 83707 Star Construction, LLC PO Box 15? Star rD 83669 fi!ffpcr lryshia carnble lJ8),F.. ..r, (208) 336-5600 , ii6, *, !ffit"". agaeble0postj.ns. con INSURER(S) AFFOROING COVERAGE |NSURERA Auto Or,nerg Insurance TNSURER a:Idaho Stato Inguranco E\rnd INSIJRER C: INSURER O: INSURER E: INSURERf i {208} 344-0651 COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER:2016-2017 REVISION NUMBER: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTEO BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIODINDICATED NOTWTHSTANDING ANY REOUIREMENT TERiI OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WTH RESPECT TO WI{ICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES LIMITS SHO\AA IIAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMSllff ,rp: o!:,rlsuaarce AOOL SI]BR LIMITS A X , COIMERCIAI GENERAL LIABILITY CLAIMS.MAOE X OCCUR x 553?3,55091 EACH OCCURRENCE 3 DAMAGE TO REI{IED PREMISES (Ea o9q.4rs!!d S MEO EXP (Any or'e!ds) _ $ PERSONAL A ADV INJURY I GENERAT AGGREGqTE _! PROOUCTS. COMP/OP AGG S Hn€d & Nonownod Liability 3 1 , 000 ,000 300 ,000 10 ,000 1, 000 , o0o 2 ,000, 000 2 , ooo, ooo 1 ,0o0,000 x t 4 4 639-5?753350- 16 3/1/2016 GEN'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PERX poLrcv 5$"i Loc OTHER AUTOMOBILE LIAEIfITY M AINE $ 1,000,000{) A x nrry euro ALL O\M{EO , AUTOS HIREOAUTOS X Bs3o3 79516 BODIIY INJURY (Pr pelson) 3/r/201,6 3/1,/2017 BOOILY INJURY (Pd ecrd€nl) pRopEitiy oAtrtAGE (Psr a..a6!r) s SCHEOULEO AUTOS NONOv\/lTEO AUTOS 49-7s3,360-00 s s S X UiIERELI.A LIAB EXCESS LlAA OCCUR EACH OCCURRENCE AGGREGATE $5 , ooo, ooo 5, 000 ,000A49-753360-01 3/L/20t6 3/\/ZO!7 o x nerclrnor s I/VORl<ERS COIIPENSATION AND EM PLOYERS' LIAAILITY ANY PROPR ETOR/PARTNER/EXECUTIVE OFFICERA,IEMBER EXCLUDEO' ^ STATUTE ER E L EACH ACCIDENT $ IIIIZUL6 IILIZV).' ET OISEASE. EAEMPLOYEE 5 E t otsEAsE - Pot,tcY LtMtT s B 582913 DFSCRIPTION OF OPFRA N OESC RIPTION OF OPERATIONS / LOCAiIONS / VEHICLES {ACORO I 01 , Addition.l Rom.rtt S.h.dol., D.y tf, .tt.ch.d if morc !p.c. r. r!quh.d)RE: WRRP OutfaII Pipe Riprap Ext€nsi.on, project 1110055.F CERTIFICATE HOLOER CANCELLATION City of Meridian & A11 Others Requiled by Written Contract 33 E Broadway Avel'lelidian, ID A3642 SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE wlLL BE OELIVEREO IN ACCORDANCE wlTH THE POLICY PROVISIONS. AUTI]ORIZEO REPRESENTATIVE Alyshia Gamlcle/AG AAdahAu -r4alqh-.- O 1988-2014 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights roserved. Ths ACORD name and logo ar€ registered marks ofACORD A ACORD 25 (20't4l01) lNS025(201aoi)l! 18988 36129 3/A/20t1 500,000 500,000 @ CTRAKiT Page 1 of I Permits Licenses Search l.ad6 L c€nses E nr*exarn ue Follpr P...mrd Public Works Search , searcrr Asain Downroad Resurts Pnntabrevew Siar Conslrudion. LLC First Prev Details - License Number: PWC.C-Iil428 Page: 1 ol 1 Next Last lnspections Elevators Violations Shopping Cart Contact n nt.4r.Eion utlEton olh.sb3de indoi.r und66L.diic.nd .@fl.n4 ollh'! 3rri.@it 1-8@455-3oa/r, lOeO E vv.btusr sr, suia 15o M.id! tD a36/r2 HOME I CONTACT PWC C-14428 02230, 02310, 02318, 02500, 02810, 02855, 033@ Fees 63.510 0O Regblr'tion l: EIpln: Tvpo: Sub-rypo: St tu.: Call: P.g.r: Pt /c{,11428 &130/2016 9mt2017 PUBLIC \I/ORXS ACTIVE Slar Conslruclion. tLC (208) 28E9r9E (208) 867,7082 (208) 28&7947 https://web.dbs.idaho.gov/eTRAKiT3/Custom,/ldaho publicWorksSearchRslts.aspx tt8t20t6 IDSOS Viewing Business Entity Page 1 of2 IDAHO SECRETARY OF STATE Viewing Business Entity Lawerence Denney, Secretary of State I New Search ] [ Back to Summarv ] I Get a certificate of existence for STAR CONSTRUCTION. L.L.C. ] I Monitor STAR CONSTRUCTION. L.L.C. business filinos ] STAR CONSTRUCTTON, L.L.C. PO BOX 157 STAR, ID 83669 Type of Business: LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY Status: EXISTING State of Oragin: IDAHO Date of 25 Jul 1999 Origination/Authorization: Current Registered Agent: ANCIL A IRMINGER 2262 W SANTA CLARA MERIDIAN, ID 83642 File Number: W9387 Date of Last Annual Reporti 25 May 2016 Annual Report Due3 )ul 2017 Original Filing: I Help Me Print/View TIFF ] Filed 26 Jul 1999 ARTICLES OF O RGANIZATIO N F format View Imaqe TIFF format) Amendmentsl I HelD Me Pnnt/View TIFF ] Report for year 2016 ANNUAL REPORT Report for year 2015 ANNUAL REPORT Report for year 2014 ANNUAL REPORT Report for year 2013 ANNUAL REPORT Report for year 2012 ANNUAL REPORT Report for year 201t ANNUAL REPORT R€port for year 2010 ANNUAL REPORT Report for year 2OO9 ANNUAL REPORT View Document Online Report for year 2OO8 ANNUAL REPO RT Report for year 2OO7 (PDF for at)View Amendment F,led 22 Jul 2OO5 OTHER - DELETE 1 MANAGE R Annual Reports: P wD nl e View t Onlin View Document Onlin e n li D Onlin View Docum ent Online Document Online w Imaoe e (TIFF for mat) https ://www.accessidaho.org/publ iclsos/corpiW93 g 7.html Vie Imao n/8/2016 I Helo Me Print/View TIFF ] View Imaoe (PDF format) View Imaoe (TIFF format) IDSOS Viewing Business Entity Report for year 2006 Report for year 2OOs Report for year 2OO4 Report for year 2OO3 ANNUAL REPORT ANNUAL REPORT Report for year 2OO2 ANNUAL REPORT Report for year 2OO1 ANNUAL REPORT Report for year 2OOO ANNUAL REPORT Imaoe (TI FF format) ANNUAL REPORT View Document Online ANNUAL REPORT AN NUAL REPORT View Imaoe (PDF format)View Imaoe (TIFF format) Page 2 of 2 View Imaoe (PDF format) View Imaoe (TIFF format) View Imaoe (PDF format) View Imaqe (TIFF format) View Image (PDF format) View View Image (PDF format) View Imaoe fTIFF format) View Imaoe (PDF format) View Image (TIFF format) View Imaqe (PDF format) View Imaoe fTIFF format) Idaho Secretary of State's Main Paoe State of Idaho Home Paoe Comments, questions or suggestions can be emailed to: sosinfo@sos. idaho. gov https://www.accessidaho.org/public/sos/corp/W93 g 7.html t1t8/2016 BI D R E S U L T S S i g n e d B i d B o n d L i c # S u b s X X X X X X X X At t e s t : S a n d r a R a m i r e z DU E D A T E & T I M E : O c t o b e r 2 4 , 2 0 1 6 2 : 3 0 BI D N U M B E R : P W - 1 7 0 2 - 1 0 0 5 5 . f BI D N A M E : W R R F O u t f a l l P i p e R i p r a p E x t e n s i o n BI D A M O U N T $5 8 , 5 0 9 . 0 0 $6 5 , 2 5 4 . 0 0 Op e n e d b y : K e i t h W a t t s VE N D O R St a r C o n s t r u c t i o n L2 E x c a v a t i o n Meridian City Council Meeting G DATE: November 15, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Approval of Cooperative Agreement between the City and Valley Regional Transit for "Annual Dues and Service Contribution" for a Not -To -Exceed amount of $180,194.00 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 COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN VALLEY REGIONAL TRANSIT AND CITY OF MERIDIAN FOR ANNUAL ASSESSMENT AND SERVICE CONTRIBUTION THIS COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is entered into this 16 day of /yUb,6,`16elp,-� 20J( by and between VALLEY REGIONAL TRANSIT, a regional public transportation authority authorized under Chapter 21, Title 40, Idaho Code ("VRT"), and the City of Meridian, a municipal corporation organized, existing and authorized under Chapter 1, Title 50, Idaho Code ("Member") RECITALS a. VRT is the regional public transportation authority created to serve Ada and Canyon Counties, pursuant to Chapter 21, Title 40, Idaho Code, and as a result of November 3, 1998 public referendum. VRT provides publicly funded or publicly subsidized transportation services and programs in Ada and Canyon Counties. b. Member is a municipal corporation authorized under Chapter 1, Title 50, Idaho Code. C. Idaho Code § 40-2109(7) provides that VRT may enter into cooperative agreements with the state, other authorities, counties, cities and highway districts under the provisions of Idaho Code § 67-2328, which expressly authorizes public agencies to enter into agreements with one another for cooperative action for purposes within the power, privilege, or authority of said agencies. d. Idaho Code § 40-2110 provides that counties, cities, highway districts and other governmental entities in the region may enter into cooperative agreements with the regional public transportation authority in order to contribute funds from any source in recognition of costs of the authority. e. There are two primary programs which VRT budgets and funds each year. First, VRT budgets and establishes annual assessments for its regular and special members, with assessments for its regular members calculated pursuant to a population based formula, and assessments for its special members calculated pursuant to a negotiated amount. Second, VRT budgets and establishes service contribution requirements to support the operation of motor bus services within the Nampa Urbanized Area and the Boise Urbanized Area. f. VRT has budgeted $180,194 for Member to contribute for its annual assessment and service contribution; Member has budgeted the same amount for its VRT annual assessment and service contribution. g. Service contributions support the following modes: 1) Nampa Express Service (Routes 40): Operates between Nampa and Boise making a limited number of designated stops in, Nampa, Meridian, and Boise. The service operates Monday thru Page 1 of 4 AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of foregoing recitals, which are made a part of this Agreement and not mere recitals, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and suffrciency of which are hereby acknowledged, it is mutually agreed as follows: Section l. Term This Agreement shalt be in effect from the I't day of October, 2016, and will terminate on the 30th day of September, 2017, unless earlier terminated pursuant the mutual written agreement of the parties hereto. Section 2. Purpose The purpose of this Agreement is: (a) For Member to pay annual assessment and a service contribution to VRT for Fiscal Year 2017 in the amount of$120,194 in contribution to the costs ofVRT and in support of transportation services within the Boise Urbanized Area and the Nampa Urbanized Area. (b) For Member to pay for additional transportation services within the City of Meridian to support the Older Adults and Persons with Disabilities Program. The costs ofthese additional services are estimated at $60.000. VRT will bill City a fixed portion of $40,000 to support the Lifestyte service. VRT will bill the City up to $20,000 for additional senior trip sewices provided (aka - Community Link service). (c) For VRT to use said annual assessment for costs budgeted under its regional planning and program administration, and to use said service contribution for costs budgeted under its regional operating plan. Section 3. Compliance VRT, in using said assessment and service contributions, shall comply with all conditions required by applicable federal. state and local laws and regulations, and shall maintain, in accordance with generally accepted accounting practices and principles, records and books of account regarding said dues and operating costs. Page 2 of 4 Friday from 5:20 A.M. to 6:30 P.M. The service generally utilizes 40' buses with 38 passenger, 2 wheelchair capacity buses each equipped with a bicycle rack. 2) Nampa Limited Stop Service (Route 42): Operates between Nampa and Boise making several designated stops in Nampa, Meridian, and Boise. The service operates Monday thru Friday from 6:30 A.M. to 7:30 P.M. The service generally utilizes 28 p.rssenger, 2 wheelchair capacity buses each equipped with a bicycle rack. 3) Additional Meridian service is composed of Lifestyle and supportive transportation services lor Meridian seniors and citizens with disabilities. The Lifestyle service includes two multiple- passenger vans in two service areas within the City. VRT will bilt the City of Meridian $40,000 to support the Lifestyle service. Additionally, VRT will incrementally bill the City up to $20,000 as reimbursement for supportive transportation needs provided to older adults and citizens with disabilities. Section 4. Payment (a) Member shall pay its annual assessment and service contribution up to the aforesaid amount of$160,194 for dues, service contribution and the fixed portion additional supportive transportation within 30 days of invoice to VRT at the following address, unless Member is notified in writing by VRT of a new address: Valley Regional Transit 700 NE 2nd St Suite 100 Meridian, Idaho 83642 (b) Member's address, for the purpose ofnotice or correspondence, unless VRT is notified in writing by Member of a new address, is as follows: City of Meridian 33 E. Broadway Meridian, Idaho 83642 Section5. Miscellaneous (a) Each party hereto represents and warrants that each person executing this Agreement on behalf of such party is, at the time ofsuch execution, duly authorized to do so by such party's goveming body, and is fully vested with the authority to bind such party in all respects. (b) Ifany provision ofthis Agreement is held invalid, illegal, or unenforceable, the remainder shall be construed to conform to the intent ofthe parties, and shall survive the severed provisions. (c) Except as provided otherwise herein, this Agreement and any attachments hereto constitute the entire Agreement between VRT and Member conceming the subject matter hereof. The provisions of this Agreement shall be construed as a whole and not strictly for or against any parfy. (d) The captions and headings in this Agreement are for reference only and shall not be deemed to define or limit the scope or inlent ofany of the terms, covenants. conditions or agreements contained herein. (e) This Agreement is not intended to create, nor shall it in any way be interpreted or construed to create, any third party beneficiary rights in any person not a party hereto. (0 This Agreement shall be binding on the parties hereto. and their successors and assigns. Section6. Indemnification Page 3 of4 To the extent permissible by law, VRT shall indemnifo. defend, protect and hold harmless Member, and it's officers, agents and employees, from and against any and all liabilities, losses, suits, claims, judgments, fines or demands arising by reason of injury or death of any person or damage to any property. including all reasonable costs for investigation and defense thereof (including but not limited to attomey fees, court costs, and expert fees), ofany nature whatsoever (collectively, "Claims") arising out of or incident to this Agreement, and any renewal or extension thereof. and arising out of or caused by the negligent or intentional acts or omissions of VRT, it's officers, agents and employees, regardless of where the injury, death, or damage may occur, except to the extent any such Claims arise out of or are caused by the negligent or intentional act or omission of Member or it's officers, agents and employees. Member shall give to VRT reasonable notice of any such Claims. VRT shall notify Member of the counsel to be used in carrying out its obligations hereunder. Member must state any reasonable objection that it may have regarding the use of said counsel. The provisions of this section shall be deemed to be a separate contract between the parties and shall survive the expiration or any default, termination or forfeiture of this Agreement, and any renewal or extension thereof. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the foregoing, Member's right to indemnification pursuant to the foregoing shall be limited to indemnification for such Claims for which Member incurs actual liability or expense. The foregoing indemnification includes, without limitation, any Claim arising out of or caused by the noncompliance of any services, programs, or activities provided by VRT under this Agreement with all applicable federal, state, and local statutes, regulations, and requirements, including, but not limited to, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the foregoing, (i) no employee or officer of VRT shall be personally liable to Member under this Agreement, (ii) with respect to third party Claims, both VRT and Member expressly reserve any and all of the privileges and immunities available to them, if any, under Idaho law, and (iii) the agreement of VRT to hold harmless or indemnify Member shall be limited to, and be payable only from, VRT's available insurance or self-insurance coverage for liability assumed by contract available as a part of its general liability insurance program." EXECUTED and effective as of the date first above written. Valley Regional Transit: City of Meridi r Kelli Badesheim Td@ ` d j Executive Director -mayor Page 4 of 4 Meridian City Council Meeting 6 H DATE: November 15, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: ,5i< PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Approval of Contract Amendment No. 1 to extend the contract for "Poly -Aluminum Chloride" to Kemira Water Solutions in the Not -To -Exceed amount of $60,000.00 MEETING NOTES u✓ 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 Page 1 Memo To: C.J Coles, City Clerk, From: Keith Watts, Purchasing Manager CC: Laurelei Mcvey/PM Date: 11-9-2016 Re: November 15 th City Council Meeting Agenda Item The Purchasing Department respectfully requests that the following item be placed on the November 15 th City Council Consent Agenda for Council’s consideration. Approval of Contract Amendment No. 1 to extend the contract for “Poly-Aluminum Chloride” to Kemira Water Solutions in the Not-To-Exceed amount of $60,000.00. Recommended Council Action: Approval of Contract Amendment to Kemira Water Solutions for the Not-To-Exceed amount of $60,000.00 . Thank you for your consideration. City of Meridian Purchasing Dept. C>WERjD1AN,­ CITY OF MERIDIAN CONTRACT AMENDMENT No 1 KEMIRA WATER SOLUTIONS, INC. For POLY -ALUMINUM CHLORIDE SOLUTION CONTRACTOR NAME: DEPARTMENT NAME: Kemira Water Solutions, Inc. Wastewater ADDRESS: ADDRESS: 3211 Clinton Parkway Court 3401 N Ten Mile Rd Lawrence, KS 66047 Meridian, ID 83642 CURRENT CONTRACT INFORMATION: Contract Name: Poly -Aluminum Chloride Solution Protect No, 10317 Previous Amendment Date: NIA Previous Amen(Iments: 0 Current Contract Dates: START: September 22, 2015 COMPLETION: September 30, 2016 Current Contract Amount (Inclusive of Previous Amendments to Date): $77,235,00 AMENDMENT TO EXERCISE OPTION TO RENEW l0wok all that AAF/Y), Amendment to Contract Performance X Amendment to Contract Dates _ Amendment to Contract Amount _ Other: (Explain) DESCRIPTION OF REASON FOR AMENDMENT: (Attach all relevant documentation detailing amendment): NEW CONTRACT INFORMATION: Amendment Date: 11/03/2016 Now Contract Dates: START: October 1, 2016 COMPLETION: September 30, 2017 Amount of Amendment Change $_ -gyp Oga p0 &.04 000 Ko Current Contract Amount (inclusive of Previous Amendments to Date): $ 137.235.00 ALL OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE ORIGINAL CONTRACT AND PREVIOUS AMENDMENTS REMAIN UNCHANGED AND IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT. CITY OF ERJDtA A KEMIk�W �E�SOLUTIONS, INC, BY: }� f Christina M. lmbroyno — K*$° �90� Dated: q C'ty°t L, oAlAo Attest: SES ,CITY CLERK rFy�s� °� the TRF��J�ti les Dated:_ i lr Approved by City as o Content BY: KEIVIT7WATTS, PURCHASING MANAGER Meridian City Council Meeting � L DATE: November 15, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Agreement to Accept Payment in Lieu of Installing Street Lights at Silverwater Subdivision No. 3 MEETING NOTES Eq1j 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 Page 1 of 3 Mayor Tammy de Weerd City Council Members: Joe Borton Keith Bird Genesis Milam Luke Cavener Ty Palmer Anne Little Roberts Public Works Department TO: Mayor Tammy de Weerd Members of the City Council FROM: Austin Petersen – Transportation and Utility Coordinator DATE: November 7, 2016 SUBJECT: AGREEMENT TO ACCEPT PAYMENT IN LIEU OF INSTALLING STREET LIGHTS AT SILVERWATER SUBDIVISION NO. 3 I. RECOMMENDED ACTION A. Move to: 1. Approve the attached agreement with Challenger Development, Inc. (Challenger 2. Authorize the Mayor to sign the agreement II. DEPARTMENT CONTACT PERSONS Austin Petersen, Transportation and Utility Coordinator 489-0352 Warren Stewart, PW Engineering Manager 489-0350 Dale Bolthouse, Interim Director of Public Works 985-1257 III. DESCRIPTION A. Background The approved street light plan for Silverwater Subdivision No. 3 (Exhibit A in the attached agreement) includes the installation of three Type 1 street lights along the frontage of Victory Road. Two of these poles were not able to be installed due to conflicts with the overhead power lines. ACHD has plans to widen this section of Victory Road to three lanes between 2026 and 2030. During that widening project, it is likely that the power lines will be relocated to a position behind the sidewalk. This would make room for the street lights to be installed. Alternatively, and the poles could be installed on the north side of the roadway once the ultimate road section is known. It would not be prudent to install the lights on the north side of victory prior to the completion Page 2 of 3 of ACHD’s road widening project design, because we cannot ensure that the light will be placed in a location where it will not need to be relocated. Also, there is currently no power on the north side of the road. B. Proposed Project Because the poles were not able to be installed along the frontage of the development due to conflicts with the overhead power, it has been determined that the developer should remit sufficient funds for the City to install the lights. According to the attached agreement, Challenger Development will pay the City the estimated amount required to purchase and install the poles, $8980.00. The City will then use these funds install the poles after, or in conjunction with, ACHD’s upcoming road widening project. IV. IMPACT A. Strategic Impact: This agreement is in alignment with the Public Works Department’s Strategic Plan 2010-2015 Objective ENG-12, which is to increase street lighting throughout the City to enhance the safety of our citizens in a fiscally responsible manner. B. Service/Delivery Impact: This agreement will increase the street lighting along Victory Road while ensuring that the lights are installed in the appropriate location and will not need to be relocated in the near future. C. Fiscal Impact: Per this agreement the City will receive $8,980.00. This is the estimated amount required to install the two street lights along Victory Road, and these funds will be reserved for that specific purpose. V. ALTERNATIVES A. The Mayor and City Council could choose not to approve this agreement, and not require Challenger to remit the funds to install these lights. This would require the City to pay for the lights, or it would leave a gap in what would otherwise be ¾ of a mile of continuously lit roadway per City Standards. VI. TIME CONSTRAINTS Council approval of this agreement will allow Challenger to remit the required funds to the City and to start issuing certificates of occupancy on new homes once all other requirements have been met. AGREEMENT TO ACCEPT PAYMENT IN LIEU OF INSTALLING STREETLIGHT AT SILVERWATER SUBDIVISION NO. 3 THIS AGREEMENT for streetlight installation, made this day of NUiI 69h- , 2016 between the City of Meridian, a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of Idaho, whose address is 33 East Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho (hereinafter "City"), and Challenger Development, Inc., whose address is 1977 E. Overland Road, Meridian, ID 83642 (hereinafter "Challenger"). WHEREAS, Challenger has received from City, conditional approval of the for Silverwater Subdivision No. 3 in Meridian ID, case no FP -15-012; and, WHEREAS, one of the General Requirements of City's approval of FP -15-012 is to install street lights on all public roadways per the City of Meridian Improvement Standards for Street Lighting; and, WHEREAS, Challenger is currently unable to install two required streetlights on Victory Road in a location where they are not in conflict with overhead utility lines, and Ada County Highway District plans to widen this section of Victory Road within the next ten years. WHEREAS, when this section of Victory Road is widened, City is willing to install the required streetlights if Challenger has paid to City the estimated amount necessary to install the streetlights along Victory Road, NOW THEREFORE, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: Challenger shall pay to the City the amount of $8,980.00 as the amount necessary to supply, wire, and install the 2 streetlights on the frontage of Victory Road labeled numbers 41472C and 41473C in the approved street light plan, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by this reference. This amount is to be remitted to the City prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The quote from B&B electric indicating the cost of installation is attached hereto as Exhibit B. City agrees to accept the amount set forth in Article 1 in lieu of requiring Challenger to install the streetlights on Victory Road, 3. Upon payment of the amount in Article 1 by Challenger to City, Challenger's requirement to install the type 1 streetlights on Victory Road shall be considered satisfied. 4. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their heirs, successors and assigns, and shall survive any transfer by Challenger of Challenger Property. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties shall cause this Agreement to be executed by their duly authorized officers the day and year first above written. Challenger Developrne�—ht, In , CITY OF MERI AN Corey Barton, president 1aj/ttr►q-de-lflteErd�tta� �Q fit too!v ' •reid�wwsie °' .',r owv_v,�n saeis c� 16Z OHtl01 NNIOIH3N "� -ori sm�nisN=©nr —Ct .A .•..� C OIV 140ISIA109AS H31tlMH3AlIS t 3 E _ .€ j :5 �ttS nay . g En ERR. it ENE h sr 1. y g" t .,U 15P igi 8" s y� �E fou F G S y[ az4CsJ f,1 u 1 J Its Ln 8 C S P F.] LU F 3l 4 i� 4U. k�i i •�BC Y fit 7287 W Airway Court Boise, ID 83709 208-323-8408 STATE OF IDAHO LICENSE C2209 TRILOGY DEVELOPMENT 2364 S. TITANIUM PL. MERIIDIAN, ID 83642 SILVERWATER #3 MERIDIAN ID Qty Description Total 1 SUPPLY AND INSTALL 2 TYPE I (DAVIT) ON VICTORY RD 8,980.00 B&B ELECTRIC. ONLY ITEMS ON RESERVES THE RIGHT TO REMOVE ITEMIZED LIST INCLUDED IN MATERIAL THAT HAS NOT BEEN PRICE INCLUDES: SPECIFIED AMOUNT OF TRENCHING, WIRE & CONDUIT. PAID FOR. PERMIT IF REQUIRED. PRICE DOES NOT INCLUDE: EXTRA LABOR OR MATERIAL IF ROCK OR WATER IS ENCOUNTERED. FINAL BILLING MAY CHANGE DUE TO IN FIELD AIDUSTMENTS, ALL SLEEVES BY OTHERS. PRICE GOOD FOR 45 DAYS FROM ALL MATERIALS REMAIN PROPERTY DATE. NO WARRANTY ON LABOR OF B&B ELECTRIC UNTIL FINAL BILL OR MATERIAL NOT SUPPLIED BY IS PAID IN FULL. B&B ELECTRIC B&B ELECTRIC. ONLY ITEMS ON RESERVES THE RIGHT TO REMOVE ITEMIZED LIST INCLUDED IN MATERIAL THAT HAS NOT BEEN ESTIMATE. PAID FOR. Signature Total $8,980.00 Meridian City Council Meeting 6 DATE: November 15, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Resolution No. �r��:j � : A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, SETTING FORTH CERTAIN FINDINGS AND PURPOSES TO DECLARE SURPLUS PROPERTY AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN TO DONATE CERTAIN FIRE DEPARTMENT PROPERTY OF NOMINAL VALUE TO LOYAL TO ONE, A LOCAL NON-PROFIT MINISTRY MEETING NOTES �D 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 RESOLUTION NO.// /(o — /� p BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BIRD, BORTON, CAVENER, MILAM, PALMER, LITTLE ROBERTS A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, SETTING FORTH CERTAIN FINDINGS AND PURPOSES TO DECLARE SURPLUS PROPERTY AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN TO DONATE CERTAIN FIRE DEPARTMENT PROPERTY OF NOMINAL VALUE TO LOYAL TO ONE, A LOCAL NON-PROFIT MINISTRY. WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City of Meridian to declare that certain mattresses and box springs as attached in Exhibit "A" as surplus as this particular item is no longer needed or used by the City of Meridian; WHEREAS, the City of Meridian's purchasing policy allows surplus City property to be donated to non-profit, 501(c)(3) agencies when the value of the property in question is of nominal value, that is, valued at less than the cost of disposing of the property; WHEREAS, the cost of maintaining the mattresses and box springs would result in the unnecessary expenditure of City hinds; and WHEREAS, the City of Meridian desires to donate 9 mattresses and 9 box springs listed in Exhibit "A" to Loyal To One, a non-profit, 501(c)(3), whose vision and mission is to build on the teachings of the Apostles as written in the Book of Acts and provide fellowship services to reach out to the least, the lost and the forgotten. NOW, THE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the Mayor and City Council hereby authorize and declare that certain mattresses and box springs attached hereto as Exhibit "A" is surplus property. Section 2. That the Mayor and City Council hereby authorize the donation of the mattresses and box springs listed in Exhibit "A" to Loyal To One, a local non-profit 501(c)(3) Ministry. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this 15 day of November, 2016. APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this % day of November, 2016. APPROVED w rFNreF of t6e'��'�'�6�� Clerk RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING DONATION OF MATTRESSES AND BOX SPRINGS TO LOYAL TO ONE MINISTRIES T ❑ DEPARTMENT C-1WE1 y Y ^'� Fire DEPARTMENT CONTACT CITY OF MERIDIAN Judy Gerhart PROPERTY INFORMATION FORM CITY TAG # DESCRIPTION LOCATION None 9 Mattresses and 9 Box Springs Station 2 MODEL _ MANUFACTURER _ SERIAL / VIN # -d LVarious Varies _ _ None ACQUISITION DATE ORIGINAL COST VENDOR LIFESPAN 26 -Jan -11 $1,800 RC Willey 5 years Addition (No additional information required) PROPERTY DISPOSAL AUTHORIZATION DISPOSAL METHODS Give a brief description of how you plan on disposing the asset Auction/Sell Would like to donate to a local non-profit called Loyal 2 One. They are a X Donation/Transfer church ministry that help people in need. They are located at 232 N. Main. We can no longer donate to Idaho Youth Ranch as in the past, they no longer Trade In accept mattress donations. Any mattresses and box springs that are found to Discard/Recycle not be acceptable to the ministry will be disposed of. "Please remove all identifying logos prior to disposal REASON FOR DISPOSAL OF PROPERTY Mattresses have reached their lifespan. We have changed out all of our Stations mattresses to a 10 year Serta Mattress. This is the last station that has the old 5 year mattresses. Box Springs are being replaced with a more heavy duty box spring. CONDITION OF PROPERTY TO BE DISPOSED Mattresses and box springs have reached their life span. Both are being replaced with heavy duty and better quality items. epartm Direc or Approval Date I. R Fifiance Approval r - Mayor Approval FOR FINANCE USE ONLY Date Date FA# At r GL Code: Resolution No.: Approved by Council Date: Final Disposition of Property: F:\2 -Administration Division\INVENTORY\Donated or Disposed Items Lists\Mattresses - St. 2 cK �\lal►(-p 1of2 Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: November 15, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Children's Museum Presentation 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: November 15, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: _7-B, PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Historic Preservation Commission: TourBuddy Digital Walking Tour 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 TOURBUDDY DIGITAL WALKING TOUR FOR MERIDIAN: OPERATION LC Josh Evarts, HPC Nic Herman, CVCS Class President OPERATION LC OUTLINE •Introduction/Team •Platform •Schedule •Cost •Considerations/Questions OPERATION LC •Introduction/Team •Operation LC (Lewis Clark) seek to deliver an interactive walking experience for “exploring” downtown Meridian, Idaho •Team •Josh Evarts, HPC, Project Owner •Nic Herman, CVCS, Project Lead •Meridian Historic Society, Content Provider •unBound, Technical Support SCHEDULE •October 13 - Approval of Project Plan and Funding •October 20 – Project Launch/Coordinate billing with TourBuddy •November HPC Meeting – Project Update provided to HPC (Nic) •December HPC Meeting – Pilot App Published and presented to HPC •January 21 – App Launch and Walking Tour Event hosted at Vault COST •Initial Setup - $2,500 •1st Year Hosting - $1,000 •Total Amount to be approved by HPC - $3,500 CONSIDERATIONS/QUESTIONS •Nic will be working on plan to integrate MDBA business prior to launch •Nic will be working on communication/training for Meridian Schools that provide 3rd grade tours •Questions? Meridian City Council Meeting f1 DATE: November 15, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Mayor's Office: Mayor's Youth Advisory Council Update 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 November 15, 2016 Council Chambers MAYOR’S YOUTH ADVISORY COUNCIL UPDATE October 10 th October 24 th November 14 th Subcommittee Breakouts Guest Speakers Autumn Kersey Jeff Yarnall Erin Bennett GENERAL COUNCIL October 27 th at City Hall Record attendance Food trucks, dancing and fun TRUNK OR TREAT November 14 th Participatory Budgeting project finished Outdoor Gym for teens and adults RIBBON CUTTING AT TULLY PARK November 14 th About 20 MYACers volunteered Filled every bag RAKE UP MERIDIAN QUESTIONS? Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: November 15, 2016 X13 ITEM NUMBER: .8f� PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Public Works: Approval of a Budget Amendment for $65,000.00 for the Emergency Repair of the Collections Building MEETING NOTES Yf 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 C E I DIAN*,,--- Public IDAHO Works Department TO: Mayor Tammy de Weerd Members of the City Council FROM: Laurelei McVey Wastewater Superintendent DATE: 10/24/2016 Mayor Tammy de Weerd City Council Memberfe Ty Palmer Keith Bird Joe Borton Luke Cavener Genesis Milam Anne Little Roberts SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF A BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR $65,000 FOR THE - EMERGENCY REPAIR OF THE COLLECTIONS BUILDING I. RECOMMENDED ACTION Move to: 1. Approve the Collection Building Repair Amendment for an amount not to exceed $65,000; and 2. Authorize the Mayor to sign the amendment. H. DEPARTMENT CONTACT PERSONS Laurelei McVey 985-1259 Dale Bolthouse, Director 985-1257 III. DESCRIPTION A. Background The original administrative building at the Wastewater Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) was constructed in 1977. Since that time it has served as the " administration building, the operations and maintenance building, the laboratory, the SCADA control building, and ultimately the collections administrative building. This 40 year old facility has experienced a complete failure of the sewer and vent lines in the building. Currently, the sewer system, restrooms, and shower in this building are unusable. Because this building is constructed of concrete block on slab, repair and reconfiguration of the utility lines is complex. Page I of 2 IV. V. B. Proposed Project This request is for a budget amendment of $65,000.00 to replace the sewer and vent pipes in this building and restore the flooring and walls. This project will accomplish two objectives 1.) Restore the building to include working water, sewer, restroom and shower facilities 2.) Allow the City to continue to use this building to house the Collections staff for many years into the future. Because the sewer system failure in this building was not predictable, this item was not able to be included in the annual budget cycle. Having functioning water, sewer, and restrooms facilities for City staff is a basic requirement thus necessitating an emergency budget amendment to get this work completed as soon as possible. IMPACT A. Strategic Impacts Repair of the existing facility is the most cost effective solution that will allow continued use of existing infrastructure for years to come. B. Fiscal Impacts Project Costs Fiscal Year Account Code Building Improvements i b o $65,000.00 Total Cost $65,000.00 C. Time Constraints Approval of the budget amendment is necessary so the City can provide working water, sewer, restrooms and showers for its employees as quickly as possible. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS A. FY2017 Budget Amendment —Collection Building Repair B. 2 photos of existing sewer plumbing conditions Department Approval for Council Agenda: Page 2 of 2 Date EM Aul 0 it i dIM-0-C E i t Fff E O ^L W W E Q N M�Z3 0 1 LL C > (� 'Ei s w I C E o p ❑ L U OLL a) Q J U � 0 L a J E F a) c Q V} N 0 v Cc c 0 aa)) IL m r- 0 O N al Q M • � T 0. fl_ X1 S s O C) 0 0 U i � L uoN a) @ Q (a CLc O W E C N N R � O V). a) a (DE v° y, ea to N O C .0 + N 4i Ex Qj O Ui O N � O O O mc ei o Z o Z 0 Z 0 z q'p4-1 N� \ F- n. a) > O 4O_- ) � Q U u. w n. � Q. E w 0 o 0 0 )N aJ O O 0 O (0 C) ^ '•°^ V .ice+ m In O N O N U U N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 H d' c l d' 1-1 .-1 N N N N O O O O ti 0 0 0 N 3 CL CLE E v°iu o E � �+ °+ c c a °) a i a+'i v a o a') a Ln m )n m �3F �✓ 1n m )n m in m 1n m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w (D LD (D (D tD Q ° o `` ! = ai a) ii Q) y 01 s ,° a w a..' cu ru co z N E a) a) O p F. } C m v 3 c c a) v E E D 3 aLj as m w v i E F a) c Q V} N 0 v Cc c 0 aa)) IL m r- 0 O N al Q M • � T 0. fl_ X1 O C) 0 0 U i � L uoN a) @ Q (a CLc O W E C N N R � O V). a) a (DE v° y, to N O C .0 + N O Ui O N � O O E F a) c Q V} N 0 v Cc c 0 aa)) IL m r- 0 O N al Q M • � �� 0 X1 N N 0 U i � � ns C ru LD y Q (a O E p O _ O V). C (DE Q U v O E E N O N O a`, O mc ei o "0 (tea \ F- n. a) > O 4O_- ) � Q U u. w n. � Q. E w 0 o 0 0 0 o o 0 O (0 C) ZT c -I N m In O N O N c -i N O m N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 H d' c l d' 1-1 .-1 N N N N O O O O 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N Ln m )n m Ln m 1n m 1n m )n m in m 1n m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w (D LD (D (D tD E F a) c Q V} N 0 v Cc c 0 aa)) IL m r- 0 O N al Q J 7 'v c v CL w to C m 0 a) '~ CL a O v N Q 0 4fi 0 M • � �� 0 X1 0 i Ln ru LD y O V? : V). C 41 O O O mc o +° m U ,I C J 7 'v c v CL w to C m 0 a) '~ CL a O v N Q 0 4fi 0 M • � �� 0 X1 0 Ln ru LD y O J 7 'v c v CL w to C m 0 a) '~ CL a O v N Q 0 4fi 0 0 0 Ln ru LD y O V? : V). C 41 O O O mc o +° m U ,I C ar 0 0 ami t0 U � N O F— Q E -3o a) O C m N _ m W Q s bD V) �� j •D C a' `-n .Q II JJ AA Yl Ea N $ o II u �n E0 cr M1. W 1903 II' a � m L4 c t cu E i £ 0-() ++ m - t 1 •@0 cu 4m- XQ L a)L Q a o 0 o � t 0) .n v E a -0 Ln � a) 3 [ t m a u $ 5 N —O.. p€ O� @ _ ha a) € a) t N w E L Y `a) 0 to ` -a 6SE �p .0 i � � o U ) U OC e 0 C : a) ��� a) o u o m E L (L6 O C a) t a) Y L 41 m) ao E Q O o m o tw m C7 o ^ d c O C - Q LO L a) 1 (@ 4 o w a C }+' _0 o C w ai om �c m + ' C a) 0 m a) m Q O C7 > E c +' N Fo a)aa) -o s a) m cc m a) . E u> m 3 u n a)3 Q'mCL cu o a) 1 0 ' ,� in �n 3 .n 'a O Y a) a) E C a) ;u O N 4_- o +' ' c n• m cl m E E o aj N a) a a) •Ga 4m-• Q C t Vf -0 .0 a) o a o o n. o o v O OU -0 C, o O 3 - i N -0 m� O a) bA hA `� E M U 0 V Ln - C O .� O ..0..O � ..0 t O 4, U Y N N ++ m Y � Q L 4- Q m In a) aa)) E 3 aYi c a m c O i a _0 m o 4- E ego " ,. = Y 3 41 m U a) m a`i v+ n• a)O C j. O C O N E N CY ai •Q nn o n bn E c d n v a Q F a) m E m L 0 In Y m O Q �a) 3 ', CL v o CY _ n_ N U € C a) �) C O ..0 U I- ..0 1 at v1 a) t *' ! `� .0 Y iL-+ ( LL N -C 33 v d cr a) 7 a) ..O -0 U 41- O L v p a) D a) a p 4, 0[ p Q I— :3 {-- O ci N� CD N ~ TN.E Gti ,y v a a) U a ? ,w O y o. a O J -Fu QJ a v C > C l] a O p aY a m +y :- a v II) o = b `a ° av�a a01 Q m LL a) m II O +3 •�.' C 4: D N Y u Y C v o m v a C73: 'O v O 'O "6 Uo 0to a a o U w E i Y O c m 3 C O V Eu. 'Q C ­4en m v E o w m O CO O N a v a (� o = >a) v°a Ot o Z v bAv=QTY =c v > IN C Y E E E E v +°, d Y U a) O Aaj W 44 rA E° E 3 E a # .O a .O j, >MV `Q 9 �°icQ° av V) __—a a o E n •,C II a ° CC U L a) a) a) ac)Co -_ c tlzz E E E -O `u m t 'C C u (2 �. m m m C 0 L a y O_ O_ O_ m > a) 4) Z 0 0 i Q W LL ai i C N N _ m W Q s V) �� j •D C a' �-- o a) II JJ AA Yl Y 0 )n a) 1 o II u �n •� a cr W 1903 II' a � v Q ' ~ TN.E Gti ,y v a a) U a ? ,w O y o. a O J -Fu QJ a v C > C l] a O p aY a m +y :- a v II) o = b `a ° av�a a01 Q m LL a) m II O +3 •�.' C 4: D N Y u Y C v o m v a C73: 'O v O 'O "6 Uo 0to a a o U w E i Y O c m 3 C O V Eu. 'Q C ­4en m v E o w m O CO O N a v a (� o = >a) v°a Ot o Z v bAv=QTY =c v > IN C Y E E E E v +°, d Y U a) O Aaj W 44 rA E° E 3 E a # .O a .O j, >MV `Q 9 �°icQ° av V) __—a a o E n •,C II a ° CC U L a) a) a) ac)Co -_ c tlzz E E E -O `u m t 'C C u (2 �. m m m C 0 L a y O_ O_ O_ m > a) 4) Z 0 0 i Q W LL ai i Meridian City Council Meeting 1C: DATE: November 15, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Parks & Recreation: New Neighborhood Park Update 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 New Neighborhood Parks Update City Council Presentation November 15, 2016 Mike Barton MPR Parks Superintendent Bainbridge Park ~ 7.5 Acres •Located in North Meridian: In the Bainbridge Subdivision on the West Side of Ten Mile, Between McMillan & Chinden •Land Donated by Brighton Corporation •Approved by the Meridian Parks & Recreation Commission ~ July 2016 •Council Update ~ July 2016 Reta Huskey Park ~ 8.5 Acres •Located in North Meridian: In the Bellano Creek Subdivision Near Ustick/Ten Mile •Land to be Donated by Coleman Homes •Approved by the Meridian Parks & Recreation Commission ~ July 2016 •Council Update ~ July 2016 Hillsdale Park ~ 10 Acres •Located in South Meridian: South of Amity Road Near Cloverdale •Land to be Donated by Marty Hill Via Transfer from the YMCA •Approved by the Meridian Parks & Recreation Commission ~ July 2016 •Council Update ~ July 2016 Next Steps •Final Agreements •Nearing 100% Construction Documents •Bid Mid-December 2016 •Open Bids Mid-January 2017 •Council Award/Budget Amendments February 7, 2017 •March 1, 2017 Groundbreaking Questions? Thank you. Meridian City Council Meeting (� 0 DATE: November 15, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: ,$f� PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Community Development: Amendments to Professional Services Agreements with the Idaho Division of Building Safety for Mechanical and Electrical Plan Review and Inspection 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 Meridian City Council Meeting % I= DATE: November 15, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: First Amendment to September 1, 2015 Professional Services Agreement Between Idaho Division of Building Safety and City of Meridian for Electrical Plan Review and Inspection Services MEETING NOTES G✓ 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 Cil fE IDIAN*-- IDAHO Community Development Department Community Development Dept. Meridian City Hall, Suite 102 33 E. Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho 83642 MEMORANDUM November 8, 2016 To: Mayor and City Council From: Bruce Freckleton, Development Services Manager Re: Professional Services Agreements (PSA) with the Idaho Division of Building Safety (DBS) for Mechanical and Electrical Plan Review and Inspection Services Dear Mayor and Council, On September 16, 2016,1 received the attached letter from Ron Whitney, Deputy Administrator of the, (DBS). This letter is essentially requesting an adjustment to the percentages of permit fee revenue that DBS receives as compensation under the Mechanical and Electrical Plan Review and Inspection Services PSA's. The basic reasoning is given in the fourth paragraph of the letter: "The various programs in DBS, while not managed in silos, are financed in silos. Each program has a separate financial statement and those statements are audited by the State Department of Financial Management and reviewed by the corresponding trade boards. Currently, revenue from the electrical plan review and inspection contract with Meridian is not covering the full cost of running the program and is under scrutinyfrom those reviewing the financials." Ron has also stated verbally and in this letter that their revenue being collected under the mechanical plan review and inspection contract is building a reserve beyond the expenses of the program. To mitigate these two issues, he has suggested a 5% increase in the electrical percentage, and a 5% reduction in the mechanical percentage of permit revenue. As a result of these requests, I asked Todd Lavoie, CFO, for a financial analysis that would look back historically. The result of his analysis is attached in an email dated September 23, 2016. You will see that Todd looked at the past eight years Revenue and Expenditures for the Mechanical and Electrical Services. Under Revenue, you will see that over the eight year period, there has only been a fluctuation of 7.21%. Ron points out in the second to last paragraph of his letter, "...a 5% increase in fees to DBS on the electrical program will be less than the 5% reduction in fees to DBS on the mechanical program." This was proven out by Todd as well in the Expenditures section over the past eight years. The adjustment in percentages would have resulted in a modest $59,047 savings to the City. Based on the analysis by Todd Lavoie, I am recommending approval of the request for a 5% increase in the fees collected by DBS for the Electrical Plan Review and Inspection Services PSA, and a 5% reduction in fees collected by DBS for the Mechanical and Electrical Plan Review and Inspection Services PSA, and authorize the Mayor to execute the First Amendment to the respective PSA's for that purpose. Thank You, Bruce Freckleton Development Services Manager aTpSEac H o State of Idaho �� q4 DIV/S/ONOFBUILDING SAFETY ti rE o� Building a Safer Idaho C.L. `BUTCH" OTTER 1090 East Watertower Street Suite 150 Governor Meridian, Idaho 83642 C. Kelly Pearce Main 4 1-800-955-3044 Administrator Fax 4 1-877-810-2840 dbs.idaho.gov September 16, 2016 Bruce Freckleton City of Meridian Development Services Manager 33 E. Broadway, Suite 102 Meridian, ID 83642 RE: Electrical & Mechanical Inspection Services Dear Bruce, I would like to propose a modification to the percentage of revenue that the Division of Building Safety (DBS) receives from The City of Meridian (Meridian) for both the electrical and mechanical professional services agreements. In August of 2012, prior to discussing DBS performing mechanical plan review and inspections for Meridian, both parties had agreed to a 70% compensation allowance for the electrical plan review and inspection services. When Meridian made the request to have DBS perform mechanical plan review and inspection services also, DBS agreed to provide both programs at 65% of fees collected. My calculations at the time indicated the electrical program would be running precariously thin on revenue while the mechanical program would potentially be building up a substantial reserve. This forecast has proven to be quite accurate. The various programs in DBS, while not managed in silos, are financed in silos. Each program has a separate financial statement and those statements are audited by the State Department of Financial Management and reviewed by the corresponding trade boards. Currently, revenue from the electrical plan review and inspection contract with Meridian is not covering the full cost of running the program and is under scrutiny from those reviewing the financials. I believe we can mitigate this concern by making an adjustment to both the electrical contract and the mechanical contract that should result in a slight increase in revenue retention by Meridian. My proposal is to increase the electrical program to 70% of electrical permit fees and reduce the mechanical program to 60% of mechanical permit fees. There is rational to support the suggested fee adjustment when you look at historical revenue in these programs vs. number of inspections performed. My investigation for the period of October 1, 2015 through September 1, 2016 found total electrical permit revenue at $383,071 with 7693 inspections performed which is equivalent to $49.80 per inspection. Mechanical permit revenue was $566,235 with 8852 inspections resulting in $64 per inspection. Simply stated, the fee structure for the mechanical program is more robust then the electrical program. For Meridian, a 5% increase in fees to DBS on the electrical program will be less than the 5% reduction in fees to DBS on the mechanical program. For DBS, the electrical program will support itself on the 70% fee and the mechanical program will still have enough revenue to cover cost on the 60% fee. Please give this proposed fee adjustment some thought. If possible, I would like to make it effective October V Thank you for your consideration, Ron Whitney Deputy Administrator Bruce Freckleton To: Todd Lavoie Subject: RE: Mechanical and Electrical Revenue From: Todd Lavoie Sent: Friday, September 23, 2016 3:22 PM To: Bruce Chatterton; Bruce Freckleton; Brent Bjornson; Jenny Fields; Keith Watts Subject: Mechanical and Electrical Revenue Hello Bruce, Please see below the 8 year actual revenue amounts for Mechanical and Electrical Permit Revenue. The second set of numbers refers to the proportionate share of revenue each source contributes amongst the two revenue sources. As you can see, the proportionate share has been very steady over the past 8 years with only a 7.21% fluctuation in the Minimum and Maximum differences for revenues. In my opinion using past actuals, the future proportionate share should follow the same trend line thus supporting the claim by Ron Whitney. From an expense standpoint the City should see modest savings from the proposed rate changes promoted by Ron Whitney. Below data shows you what the savings would have been if we had implemented the % changes to the past 8 years. 5159,292 5165,447 Revenue 5212,535 5299,833 $316,164 $329,960 $ 358,353 52,004,221 Expenditures $138,626 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY20D FY2014 FY2015 FY2U16 FY2014 FY2015 32214 Mechanical Permit Revenues $265,487 5275,745 $27,060 5354,225 5199,722 %26,940 5549.934 S 597,255 0% Electrical Fees paid to DBS $128,84 32215 Electrical Permit Revenues $198037 S190437 $167488 $246639 5311902 5290258 $350,152 $ 404,522 $531,179 5585,056 5 651,155 Total REVENUES $463,525 $466,182 $438,549 $600,865 $811,624 5817,198 $900,086 $1,001,T Please let us know if we can be of any help on this project. :e7c5lia,+ Yew To�0.E Make it a good day. AVERAGE MIN MAX Fluctuation 32214 Mechanical Permit Revenues 57.28% 59.15% 61.81% 58.95% 61.57% 64.48% 61.10% 59.62% 60.49% 57.28% 64.48% 7.21% 32215 Electrical Permit Revenues 42.72% 40:85% 38.19% 41.05% 38.43% 35.52% 38.90% 40.38% 39.51% 35.52% 42.72% 7.21% From an expense standpoint the City should see modest savings from the proposed rate changes promoted by Ron Whitney. Below data shows you what the savings would have been if we had implemented the % changes to the past 8 years. 5159,292 5165,447 5162,636 5212,535 5299,833 $316,164 $329,960 $ 358,353 52,004,221 Expenditures $138,626 $133,306 $117,242 5172,647 $218,332 $203,180 FY2009 FY2010 FY20U FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 FY2016 $279,878 55% Mechanical Fees paid to DBS $172,557 5179,234 5176,189 $230,246 $324.819 5362,511 $357,457 5 388,216 $2,171,240 0% Electrical Fees paid to DBS $128,84 5123,784 $108,867 $160,315 $202,736 $188,667 $227,599 $ 262,939 $1,403,633 5 4,265 Total Fees paid to D85 $301291 5303,018 5285,057 5390,562 5527,556 $531,179 5585,056 5 651,155 $3,574,873 60% Mechanical Fees paid to DBS 5159,292 5165,447 5162,636 5212,535 5299,833 $316,164 $329,960 $ 358,353 52,004,221 70% Electrical Fees paid to DBS $138,626 $133,306 $117,242 5172,647 $218,332 $203,180 $245,106 $ 283,165 $1,511,605 Total Fees paid to OBS $297,919 $298.753 $279,878 $385,183 5518,165 5519,344 $575,067 5 60,519 $ 3,515,826 Savings to the City $ 3,372 5 4,265 $ 5,179 5 5,379 $ 9,391 5 11,834 $ 9,989 5 9,637 5 59,047 Please let us know if we can be of any help on this project. :e7c5lia,+ Yew To�0.E Make it a good day. `amu tv\5S Todd Lavoie I Chief Financial Officer City of Meridian I Finance 33 E. Broadway Ave., Meridian, Idaho 83642 Phone: 208.489.0420 C>WE IDIS IAN,- FIRST AMENDMENT to SEPTEMBER 1, 2015 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN IDAHO DIVISION OF BUILDING SAFETY AND CITY OF MERIDIAN FOR ELECTRICAL PLAN REVIEW AND INSPECTION SERVICES This First Amendment to September 1, 2015 Professional Services. Agreement Between Idaho Division Of Building Safety And City Of Meridian For Electrical Plan Review And Inspection Services ("First Amendment") is made this -15 day of November, 2016, by and between Idaho Division of Building Safety ("Contractor"), whose address is 1090 East Watertower Street, Suite 150, Meridian, Idaho and the City of Meridian ("City"), whose address is 33 East Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho. WHEREAS, on September 1, 2015, City and Contractor entered into a Professional Services Agreement Between Idaho Division Of Building Safety And City Of Meridian For Electrical Plan Review And Inspection Services ("September 1, 2015 Agreement"); WHEREAS, fee revenues paid by City to Contractor under the September 1, 2015 Agreement are not covering the full cost of electrical plan review and inspection services provided by Contractor; and WHEREAS, City finds that it is in the public interest to increase the percentage of the portion of fees collected for electrical plan review and inspection services paid to Contractor; 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, the Parties agree as follows: L Effective date. The effective date of this First Amendment shall be October 1, 2016. II. Section III(C) modified. Section III(C) of the September 1, 2015 Agreement shall be amended to read as follows: C. Revenue Allocation. Contractor shall be entitled to seventy percent (70%) of all commercial and residential electrical permit fees collected by the City collected by City directly relative to the specific fee schedule adopted by the City of Meridian on the effective date of this contract, attached hereto as Exhibit D, Fee Schedule. If changes or new permit fee schedules are adopted by the City of Meridian, the contractor payments will not be adjusted and will be payable per the fee schedules in effect on the date of the commencement of this contract. III. September 1, 2016 Agreement Fully in Effect. The intent and effect of this First Amendment is to increase the payment amount for services provided by Contractor as set forth in the September 1, 2015 Agreement. Except as expressly set forth herein, this First Amendment does not otherwise modify or alter any term or condition of the September 1, 2015 Agreement in any way. The September 1, 2015 Agreement remains in full effect, and all terms and conditions thereof are incorporated into this First Amendment as though fully FIRST AMENDMENT TO SEPTEMBER 1, 2015 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN DBS AND CITY FOR ELECTRICALPLAN REVIEW AND INSPECTION SERVICES PAGE 1 OF 2 set forth herein. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the day of November, 2016. IDAHO DIVISION OF BUILDING SAFETY: MWMWO 10 C. Kelly Pearce, A minpstr CITY OF MERID N: so���ep nucus1,r''�� 04 BY: F` cl�v °{ N e,eP✓'� i g40A®���u Attest: C. y Col ity Clerk FIRST AMENDMENT TO SEPTEMBER 1, 2015 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN DBS AND CITY FOR ELECTRICAL PLAN REVIEW AND INSPECTION SERVICES PAGE 2 OF 2 Meridian City Council Meeting q T - DATE: November 15, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: ,,Bf PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: First Amendment to September 1, 2015 Professional Services Agreement Between Idaho Division of Building Safety and City of Meridian for Mechanical Plan Review and Inspection Services MEETING NOTES 9Vp H, ED Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE; E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS Cil fE IDIAN*-- IDAHO Community Development Department Community Development Dept. Meridian City Hall, Suite 102 33 E. Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho 83642 MEMORANDUM November 8, 2016 To: Mayor and City Council From: Bruce Freckleton, Development Services Manager Re: Professional Services Agreements (PSA) with the Idaho Division of Building Safety (DBS) for Mechanical and Electrical Plan Review and Inspection Services Dear Mayor and Council, On September 16, 2016,1 received the attached letter from Ron Whitney, Deputy Administrator of the, (DBS). This letter is essentially requesting an adjustment to the percentages of permit fee revenue that DBS receives as compensation under the Mechanical and Electrical Plan Review and Inspection Services PSA's. The basic reasoning is given in the fourth paragraph of the letter: "The various programs in DBS, while not managed in silos, are financed in silos. Each program has a separate financial statement and those statements are audited by the State Department of Financial Management and reviewed by the corresponding trade boards. Currently, revenue from the electrical plan review and inspection contract with Meridian is not covering the full cost of running the program and is under scrutinyfrom those reviewing the financials." Ron has also stated verbally and in this letter that their revenue being collected under the mechanical plan review and inspection contract is building a reserve beyond the expenses of the program. To mitigate these two issues, he has suggested a 5% increase in the electrical percentage, and a 5% reduction in the mechanical percentage of permit revenue. As a result of these requests, I asked Todd Lavoie, CFO, for a financial analysis that would look back historically. The result of his analysis is attached in an email dated September 23, 2016. You will see that Todd looked at the past eight years Revenue and Expenditures for the Mechanical and Electrical Services. Under Revenue, you will see that over the eight year period, there has only been a fluctuation of 7.21%. Ron points out in the second to last paragraph of his letter, "...a 5% increase in fees to DBS on the electrical program will be less than the 5% reduction in fees to DBS on the mechanical program." This was proven out by Todd as well in the Expenditures section over the past eight years. The adjustment in percentages would have resulted in a modest $59,047 savings to the City. Based on the analysis by Todd Lavoie, I am recommending approval of the request for a 5% increase in the fees collected by DBS for the Electrical Plan Review and Inspection Services PSA, and a 5% reduction in fees collected by DBS for the Mechanical and Electrical Plan Review and Inspection Services PSA, and authorize the Mayor to execute the First Amendment to the respective PSA's for that purpose. Thank You, Bruce Freckleton Development Services Manager aTpSEac H o State of Idaho �� q4 DIV/S/ONOFBUILDING SAFETY ti rE o� Building a Safer Idaho C.L. `BUTCH" OTTER 1090 East Watertower Street Suite 150 Governor Meridian, Idaho 83642 C. Kelly Pearce Main 4 1-800-955-3044 Administrator Fax 4 1-877-810-2840 dbs.idaho.gov September 16, 2016 Bruce Freckleton City of Meridian Development Services Manager 33 E. Broadway, Suite 102 Meridian, ID 83642 RE: Electrical & Mechanical Inspection Services Dear Bruce, I would like to propose a modification to the percentage of revenue that the Division of Building Safety (DBS) receives from The City of Meridian (Meridian) for both the electrical and mechanical professional services agreements. In August of 2012, prior to discussing DBS performing mechanical plan review and inspections for Meridian, both parties had agreed to a 70% compensation allowance for the electrical plan review and inspection services. When Meridian made the request to have DBS perform mechanical plan review and inspection services also, DBS agreed to provide both programs at 65% of fees collected. My calculations at the time indicated the electrical program would be running precariously thin on revenue while the mechanical program would potentially be building up a substantial reserve. This forecast has proven to be quite accurate. The various programs in DBS, while not managed in silos, are financed in silos. Each program has a separate financial statement and those statements are audited by the State Department of Financial Management and reviewed by the corresponding trade boards. Currently, revenue from the electrical plan review and inspection contract with Meridian is not covering the full cost of running the program and is under scrutiny from those reviewing the financials. I believe we can mitigate this concern by making an adjustment to both the electrical contract and the mechanical contract that should result in a slight increase in revenue retention by Meridian. My proposal is to increase the electrical program to 70% of electrical permit fees and reduce the mechanical program to 60% of mechanical permit fees. There is rational to support the suggested fee adjustment when you look at historical revenue in these programs vs. number of inspections performed. My investigation for the period of October 1, 2015 through September 1, 2016 found total electrical permit revenue at $383,071 with 7693 inspections performed which is equivalent to $49.80 per inspection. Mechanical permit revenue was $566,235 with 8852 inspections resulting in $64 per inspection. Simply stated, the fee structure for the mechanical program is more robust then the electrical program. For Meridian, a 5% increase in fees to DBS on the electrical program will be less than the 5% reduction in fees to DBS on the mechanical program. For DBS, the electrical program will support itself on the 70% fee and the mechanical program will still have enough revenue to cover cost on the 60% fee. Please give this proposed fee adjustment some thought. If possible, I would like to make it effective October V Thank you for your consideration, Ron Whitney Deputy Administrator Bruce Freckleton To: Todd Lavoie Subject: RE: Mechanical and Electrical Revenue From: Todd Lavoie Sent: Friday, September 23, 2016 3:22 PM To: Bruce Chatterton; Bruce Freckleton; Brent Bjornson; Jenny Fields; Keith Watts Subject: Mechanical and Electrical Revenue Hello Bruce, Please see below the 8 year actual revenue amounts for Mechanical and Electrical Permit Revenue. The second set of numbers refers to the proportionate share of revenue each source contributes amongst the two revenue sources. As you can see, the proportionate share has been very steady over the past 8 years with only a 7.21% fluctuation in the Minimum and Maximum differences for revenues. In my opinion using past actuals, the future proportionate share should follow the same trend line thus supporting the claim by Ron Whitney. From an expense standpoint the City should see modest savings from the proposed rate changes promoted by Ron Whitney. Below data shows you what the savings would have been if we had implemented the % changes to the past 8 years. 5159,292 5165,447 Revenue 5212,535 5299,833 $316,164 $329,960 $ 358,353 52,004,221 Expenditures $138,626 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY20D FY2014 FY2015 FY2U16 FY2014 FY2015 32214 Mechanical Permit Revenues $265,487 5275,745 $27,060 5354,225 5199,722 %26,940 5549.934 S 597,255 0% Electrical Fees paid to DBS $128,84 32215 Electrical Permit Revenues $198037 S190437 $167488 $246639 5311902 5290258 $350,152 $ 404,522 $531,179 5585,056 5 651,155 Total REVENUES $463,525 $466,182 $438,549 $600,865 $811,624 5817,198 $900,086 $1,001,T Please let us know if we can be of any help on this project. :e7c5lia,+ Yew To�0.E Make it a good day. AVERAGE MIN MAX Fluctuation 32214 Mechanical Permit Revenues 57.28% 59.15% 61.81% 58.95% 61.57% 64.48% 61.10% 59.62% 60.49% 57.28% 64.48% 7.21% 32215 Electrical Permit Revenues 42.72% 40:85% 38.19% 41.05% 38.43% 35.52% 38.90% 40.38% 39.51% 35.52% 42.72% 7.21% From an expense standpoint the City should see modest savings from the proposed rate changes promoted by Ron Whitney. Below data shows you what the savings would have been if we had implemented the % changes to the past 8 years. 5159,292 5165,447 5162,636 5212,535 5299,833 $316,164 $329,960 $ 358,353 52,004,221 Expenditures $138,626 $133,306 $117,242 5172,647 $218,332 $203,180 FY2009 FY2010 FY20U FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 FY2016 $279,878 55% Mechanical Fees paid to DBS $172,557 5179,234 5176,189 $230,246 $324.819 5362,511 $357,457 5 388,216 $2,171,240 0% Electrical Fees paid to DBS $128,84 5123,784 $108,867 $160,315 $202,736 $188,667 $227,599 $ 262,939 $1,403,633 5 4,265 Total Fees paid to D85 $301291 5303,018 5285,057 5390,562 5527,556 $531,179 5585,056 5 651,155 $3,574,873 60% Mechanical Fees paid to DBS 5159,292 5165,447 5162,636 5212,535 5299,833 $316,164 $329,960 $ 358,353 52,004,221 70% Electrical Fees paid to DBS $138,626 $133,306 $117,242 5172,647 $218,332 $203,180 $245,106 $ 283,165 $1,511,605 Total Fees paid to OBS $297,919 $298.753 $279,878 $385,183 5518,165 5519,344 $575,067 5 60,519 $ 3,515,826 Savings to the City $ 3,372 5 4,265 $ 5,179 5 5,379 $ 9,391 5 11,834 $ 9,989 5 9,637 5 59,047 Please let us know if we can be of any help on this project. :e7c5lia,+ Yew To�0.E Make it a good day. `amu tv\5S Todd Lavoie I Chief Financial Officer City of Meridian I Finance 33 E. Broadway Ave., Meridian, Idaho 83642 Phone: 208.489.0420 C>WE IDIS IAN,- FIRST AMENDMENT to SEPTEMBER 1, 2015 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN IDAHO DIVISION OF BUILDING SAFETY AND CITY OF MERIDIAN FOR MECHANICAL PLAN REVIEW AND INSPECTION SERVICES This First Amendment to September 1, 2015 Professional Services Agreement Between Idaho Division Of Building Safety And City Of Meridian For Mechanical Plan Review And Inspection Services ("First Amendment") is made this E day of November, 2016, by and between Idaho Division of Building Safety ("Contractor"), whose address is 1090 East Watertower Street, Suite 150, Meridian, Idaho and the City of Meridian ("City"), whose address is 33 East Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho. WHEREAS, on September 1, 2015, City and Contractor entered into a Professional Services Agreement Between Idaho Division Of Building Safety And City Of Meridian For Mechanical Plan Review And Inspection Services ("September 1, 2015 Agreement"); WHEREAS, fee revenues paid by City to Contractor under the September 1, 2015 Agreement sometimes exceed the full cost of mechanical plan review and inspection services provided by Contractor; and WHEREAS, City finds that it is in the public interest to decrease the percentage of the portion of fees collected for mechanical plan review and inspection services paid to Contractor; 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, the Parties agree as follows: I. Effective date. The effective date of this First Amendment shall be October 1, 2016. II. Section IH(C) modified. Section III(C) of the September 1, 2015 Agreement shall be amended to read as follows: C. Revenue Allocation. Contractor shall be entitled to sixty percent (60%) of all commercial and residential mechanical permit fees collected by the City collected by City directly relative to the specific fee schedule adopted by the City of Meridian on the effective date of this contract, attached hereto as Exhibit D, Fee Schedule. If changes or new permit fee schedules are adopted by the City of Meridian, the contractor payments will not be adjusted and will be payable per the fee schedules in effect on the date of the commencement of this contract. III. September 1, 2016 Agreement Fully in Effect. The intent and effect of this First Amendment is to decrease the payment amount for services provided by Contractor as set forth in the September 1, 2015 Agreement. Except as expressly set forth herein, this First Amendment does not otherwise modify or alter any term or condition of the September 1, 2015 Agreement in any way. The September 1, 2015 Agreement remains in Rill effect, and all terms and conditions thereof are incorporated into this First Amendment as though fully FIRST AMENDMENT TO SEPTEMBER 1, 2015 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN DBS AND CITY FOR MECHANICAL PLAN REVIEW AND INSPECTION SERVICES PAGE 1 OF 2 set forth herein. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the j5 day of November, 2016. IDAHO DIVISION OF BUILDING SAFETY: wil a497;�� C. Kelly Pearce, Administrator CITY OF MERIDI `N. BY: `- Z Attest: ty Clerk pUGUSTI X903 �a o E �y6 S 1, eti Nr6R of lke4��T FIRST AMENDMENT TO SEPTEMBER 1, 2015 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN DBS AND CITY FOR MECHANICAL PLAN REVIEW AND INSPECTION SERVICES PAGE 2 OF 2 Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: November 15, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: �� Legal Department: Beer and Wine License Contingent Approval for Frankie's Java LLC MEETING NOTES V/ C✓i 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: November 15, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing for Proposed Winter 2016 - 2017 Fee Schedule of the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department 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: November 15, 2016 Item # 9A Project Number: Project Name: Parks Fee Schedule Please print your name For Against Neutral Do you wish to testify (Y/N) k__ 7U IFY CLERKS OFA`, CE Meridian City Council Meeting 1013 DATE: November 15, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: 99 PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: '�nI Resolution No. : A Resolution Adopting the Winter 2016-2017 Fee Schedule of the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department; Authorizing the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department to Collect Such Fees; and Providing an Effective Date MEETING NOTES mr 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 CITY OF MERIDIAN RESOLUTION NO. 16 - BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BIRD, BORTON, CAVENER, LITTLE ROBERTS, MILAM, PALMER A RESOLUTION ADOPTING FEE SCHEDULE OF THE MERIDIAN PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT; AUTHORIZING THE MERIDIAN PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT TO COLLECT SUCH FEES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, following publication of notice according to the requirements of Idaho Code section 63-1311A, on October 31, 2016 and November 7, 2016, the City Council of Meridian held a hearing on the adoption of the proposed Fee Schedule of the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department, as set forth in Exhibit A hereto; and WHEREAS, following such hearing, the City Council, by formal motion, did approve said proposed Fee Schedule of the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY, IDAHO: Section 1. That the Fee Schedule of the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department, as set forth in Exhibit,4 hereto, is hereby adopted. Section 2. That the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department is hereby authorized to implement and carry out the collection of said fees. Section 3. That this Resolution shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its adoption and approval. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Meridian, Idaho, on November 15, 2016. APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Idaho, on November 15, 2016. APPROVED: •��de ffVdmr— RESOLUTION ADOPTING FEE SCHEDULE OF MERIDIAN PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT PAGE 1 RESOLUTION ADOPTING FEE SCHEDULE OF MERIDIAN PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT PAGE 2 EXHIBIT A CITY OF MERIDIAN NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN pursuant to the ordinances of the City of Meridian and the laws of the State of Idaho, that the City Council of the City of Meridian will hold a public hearing at 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, November 15, 2016, at Meridian City Hall, 33 East Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho, regarding the 2015 Meridian Parks and Recreation Department Fee Schedule, including proposed new fees as set forth below. Further information regarding these fees, as well as the entire Parks & Recreation fee schedule, is available at the Parks & Recreation Department at Meridian City Hall, 33 East Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho, (208) 888-3579. Any and all interested persons shall be heard at the public hearing. Written testimony is welcome; written materials should be submitted to the City Clerk no later than 48 hours prior to the public hearing. All testimony and materials presented shall become property of the City of Meridian. For auditory, visual, or language accommodations, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (208) 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public hearing. Activity Guide Class Fees: Preschool Fun $34.00 Preschool Fun Plus $42.00 Jump Jive Boogie Woogie $28.00 Prince and Princesses $36.00 Learn To Read $50.00 Kids Yoga $50.00 Rec Cheerleading $25.00 - $35.00 Tumble & Flip $45.00 Stretch & Strengthen $35.00 All Star Cheerleading $35.00 Lyrical Jazz 1 $35.00 Teen Ballet 1 $35.00 Beginning Hip Hop $30.00 - $35.00 Break Dance Level 1 $30.00 - $35.00 Zumba – 1 day a week $24.00 - $36.00 Zumba – 2 days a week $42.00 - $60.00 Zumba Gold $24.00 - $40.00 Family Tang Soo Do – Martial Arts for Kids $40.00 Family Tang Soo Do – Martial Ages for All Ages $40.00 MCC Art Group $90.00 Experiential Crystal & Rock Workshop $32.00 Camp Mer-IDA-Moo – Spring Break Full Day – 1 Week $99.00 Camp Mer-IDA-Moo – Spring Break Half Day – 1 Week $79.00 Hot Hula Fitness $24.00 - $32.00 Basketball Fundamentals $140.00 Family Tang Soo Do – Intermediate/Advanced Class $40.00 DATED this day of . C.Jay Coles, CITY CLERK PUBLISH on October 31 and November 7. Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: November 15, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing for CDBG Substantial Amendment MEETING NOTES VA - Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION l0C -9e DATE; E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS Community Development Block Grant Substantial Amendment Reallocation of Funds (PY 2015 Projects) Situation: H2 Pathway Segment did not move forward as expected Idaho Avenue Sidewalks completed under budget Boys & Girls Club “Brush Up” did not move forward as expected Residual Admin from prior years (Unallocated) Opportunity to do some projects early!! Substantial Amendment to PY2015 Action Plan Staff Recommendation: Reallocate $150,000 to Public Works for Streetlights (Keep streetlight project open for 2016) Reallocate $30,000 to Neighborworks Boise for Homebuyer assistance (Keep Neighborworks Boise project open for 2016) (Parks) Make 5-Mile Pathway project ($85,000) an alternate for PY2015 (Public Works) Make LMI sewer projects ($100,000) an alternate project for PY2015 Substantial Amendment to PY2015 Action Plan Open Public Hearing All testimony will be recorded for record Close Public comment period Staff is recommending approval. Substantial Amendment Public Hearing CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING SIGN -IN SHEET Date: November 15, 2016 Item # 9C Project Number: Project Name: CDBG Substantial Amendment Please print your name For Against Neutral Do you wish to testify (Y/N) U TA T RE C'Jh I V ED 3 W_ CITY OFC_70'�" ra, Y CLERKS Meridian City Council Meeting l DATE: November 15, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: H-2016-0119 ITEM TITLE: Interstate Center FUNIC Hearing for InTerstate enter a ooz oaringSprings) - - y Bowden Properties, LLC and Black Mor, LLC Generally Located Near the NW Corner of W. Overland Road and S. Meridian Road 1. Request: For a Modification to the Development Agreement to Amend the Recorded Development Agreement (DA#97044085) for the Purpose of Modifying the Approved Concept Plan, Including a Sign Plan and a Landscape Plan and Modifying other Specific Provisions MEETING NOTES F1 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 USING SUSTAINABLE PRODUCTS WHICH PROVIDE SAVINGS BY CONSERVING ENERGY COPYRIGHT © 2015 _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ All signs are listed by Underwriters Laboratories and will be (U.L.) installed in accordance with the installation instructions and Article 600 of the National Electric Code w w w .i e s i g n .c o m Full Service Sign Company Boise's Only 6528 SUP PLY WAY / BOISE, ID 83716 208-338-9401 REVISIONS DATE LOCATION CUSTOMER ERIC'S FILE SKETCH # DESIGNER SALES PAGE # THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED DRAWING/DESIGN SUBMITTED FOR YOUR PERSONAL USE IN CONNECTION WITH A PROJECT BEING PLANNED FOR YOU BY IDAHO ELECTRIC SIGNS, INC. AND IS NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, COPIED OR EXHIBITED IN ANY FASHION WITH OU T WRI T TEN PERMI S S ION O F I D A H O E L E C T R I C S I G N S , I N C . THE COLORS DEPICTED IN THIS DRAWING ARE TO ASSIST YOU IN VISUALIZING OUR PROPOSAL AND MAY NOT MATCH ACTUAL COLORS USED ON THE FINISHED DISPLAY. HELPING OUR CUSTOMERS SUCCEED FOR 31 YEARS WAHOOZ FREEWAY PYLON 2015 2-13-15 MERIDIAN, ID ROARING SPRINGS/ WAHOOZ ERIC NEIL 50 ' - 0 " O .A .H . 15 ' - 6 " E X I S T I N G 20'-0" EXISTING WAHOOZ CABINET DOUBLE FACE INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED PYLON SCALE 3/16"=1'-0" EXISTING CABINETS 204.2 SQ FT NEW EMC- 85 SQ FT FULL COLOR MESSAGE CENTER TWIN PAK OPTION B - 10MM 150 X 510 MATRIX CROSS SUPPORTS ARE 4X4 STEEL SQUARE TUBE PRIMED & PAINTED BLACK. TOTAL SQUARE FEET= 289.2 30 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 3 " SUPPORTS- FT LBS= 418,860/2= 209,430 (BASE) TWO 20" STEEL PIPES PRIMED & PAINTED BLACK. SUPPORTS- FT LBS= 98,922/2= 49,461 (REDUCTION) TWO 10" STEEL PIPES PRIMED & PAINTED BLACK. #2 DATE: 3/8/16 ERIC - INCREASED SIZE OF EMC'S LENGTH OPTION OF 10MM EMC FROM 6'-5" X 13'-3" CABINET, TO 6'-5" X 18'-3" CABINET.17'-0" NEW EMC V.O. 5' - 0 " NE W E M C V .O . 3 OF 8 USING SUSTAINABLE PRODUCTS WHICH PROVIDE SAVINGS BY CONSERVING ENERGY COPYRIGHT © 2016 _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ All signs are listed by Underwriters Laboratories and will be (U.L.) installed in accordance with the installation instructions and Article 600 of the National Electric Code w w w .i e s i g n .c o m Full Service Sign Company Boise's Only 6528 SUP PLY WAY / BOISE, ID 83716 208-338-9401 REVISIONS DATE 11-14-16 LOCATION MERIDIAN, ID CUSTOMER WAHOOZ WAHOOZ FREEWAY PYLON 2015 ERIC'S FILE SKETCH # ERIC DESIGNER NEIL SALES PAGE # THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED DRAWING/DESIGN SUBMITTED FOR YOUR PERSONAL USE IN CONNECTION WITH A PROJECT BEING PLANNED FOR YOU BY IDAHO ELECTRIC SIGNS, INC. AND IS NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, COPIED OR EXHIBITED IN ANY FASHION WITH OU T WRI T TEN PERMI S S ION O F I D A H O E L E C T R I C S I G N S , I N C . THE COLORS DEPICTED IN THIS DRAWING ARE TO ASSIST YOU IN VISUALIZING OUR PROPOSAL AND MAY NOT MATCH ACTUAL COLORS USED ON THE FINISHED DISPLAY. HELPING OUR CUSTOMERS SUCCEED FOR 32 YEARS 1 OF 3 USING SUSTAINABLE PRODUCTS WHICH PROVIDE SAVINGS BY CONSERVING ENERGY COPYRIGHT © 2016 _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ All signs are listed by Underwriters Laboratories and will be (U.L.) installed in accordance with the installation instructions and Article 600 of the National Electric Code w w w .i e s i g n .c o m Full Service Sign Company Boise's Only 6528 SUP PLY WAY / BOISE, ID 83716 208-338-9401 REVISIONS DATE 11-14-16 LOCATION MERIDIAN, ID CUSTOMER WAHOOZ WAHOOZ FREEWAY PYLON 2015 ERIC'S FILE SKETCH # ERIC DESIGNER NEIL SALES PAGE # THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED DRAWING/DESIGN SUBMITTED FOR YOUR PERSONAL USE IN CONNECTION WITH A PROJECT BEING PLANNED FOR YOU BY IDAHO ELECTRIC SIGNS, INC. AND IS NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, COPIED OR EXHIBITED IN ANY FASHION WITH OU T WRI T TEN PERMI S S ION O F I D A H O E L E C T R I C S I G N S , I N C . THE COLORS DEPICTED IN THIS DRAWING ARE TO ASSIST YOU IN VISUALIZING OUR PROPOSAL AND MAY NOT MATCH ACTUAL COLORS USED ON THE FINISHED DISPLAY. HELPING OUR CUSTOMERS SUCCEED FOR 32 YEARS 2 OF 3 USING SUSTAINABLE PRODUCTS WHICH PROVIDE SAVINGS BY CONSERVING ENERGY COPYRIGHT © 2016 _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ All signs are listed by Underwriters Laboratories and will be (U.L.) installed in accordance with the installation instructions and Article 600 of the National Electric Code w w w .i e s i g n .c o m Full Service Sign Company Boise's Only 6528 SUP PLY WAY / BOISE, ID 83716 208-338-9401 REVISIONS DATE 11-14-16 LOCATION MERIDIAN, ID CUSTOMER WAHOOZ WAHOOZ FREEWAY PYLON 2015 ERIC'S FILE SKETCH # ERIC DESIGNER NEIL SALES PAGE # THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED DRAWING/DESIGN SUBMITTED FOR YOUR PERSONAL USE IN CONNECTION WITH A PROJECT BEING PLANNED FOR YOU BY IDAHO ELECTRIC SIGNS, INC. AND IS NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, COPIED OR EXHIBITED IN ANY FASHION WITH OU T WRI T TEN PERMI S S ION O F I D A H O E L E C T R I C S I G N S , I N C . THE COLORS DEPICTED IN THIS DRAWING ARE TO ASSIST YOU IN VISUALIZING OUR PROPOSAL AND MAY NOT MATCH ACTUAL COLORS USED ON THE FINISHED DISPLAY. HELPING OUR CUSTOMERS SUCCEED FOR 32 YEARS 3 OF 3 Exhibit A.3: Staff’s Recommended Changes to the Proposed DA 4. Uses Permitted By This Agreement: Modify condition 4.1 as follows: 4.1 “The uses allowed pursuant to this agreement are only those uses listed as permitted, conditional or accessory, including parking, in the approved C-G zone zoning district under the UDC in effect as of the Effective Date (the “Uses”), which are generally set forth on: the conceptual development plan, attached hereto as Exhibit C and made part hereof (the “Conceptual Development Plan”); and the signs substantially similar to the signs depicted on Exhibit D attached hereto and made part hereof (the “Sign Plan”);. And the landscape depicted on Exhibit E, attached hereto and made part hereof (the “Landscape Plan”). Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein or the UDC, outdoor arts, entertainment or recreation facility or facilities may be located within fifty feet (50’) of the exterior Property Boundary.” 5. Conditions Governing Development of the Property: 5.1 Development Conditions: Owner/Developer shall develop the Property in accordance with the following special conditions: Remove condition 4. This is not applicable. Modify condition 6 as follows: “Setback along the west property boundary shall be five (5) feet for parking and eight (8) feet for recreation/entertainment facilities. Setback The landscape buffer along the north property boundary adjacent to interstate I-84 shall be twenty (20) feet. Setback The Landscape buffer along the north property boundary adjacent to the existing C-G zoned property shall comply with the setback requirements of the C-G zoning district. Setback The landscape buffer along the east property boundary shall be twenty-five (25) feet, which includes 5 feet of landscape and a 20-foot gravel road. Setback The landscape buffer along Overland Road shall be thirty-five (35) feet. Remove Condition 8. Landscaping is reviewed with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance. Modify condition 9 as follows: replace “City of Meridian Design Manual with “City of Meridian Architectural Standards Manual.” Remove condition 10. This is a duplicate of condition 9. Add a DA condition as follows: The landscape buffers (35 feet of landscaping along Overland Road, 25 feet along the east boundary of the proposed expansion, which includes 5 feet of landscape and a 20-foot gravel road and 20 feet along the I-84 frontage) shall all be installed with the first Certificate of Zoning Compliance approved on Parcel 6 (as indicated by the proposed concept plan). CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING SIGN -IN SHEET Date: November 15, 2016 Item # Project Number: Project Name: H-2016-0119 Interstate Center .e Please print your name For Against Neutral Do you wish to testify (Y/N) 7_7r1,71rTiv_r_,U 'iTY CLERKS OFFILE Changes to Agenda: None Item #9D: Interstate Center (AKA Wahooz/Roaring Springs) (H-2016-0119) Application(s):  Development Agreement Modification Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of vacant/undeveloped land and developed commercial land, zoned C-G, located near the NW corner of W. Overland Road and S. Meridian Road History:  In 1997, the property was annexed and zoned, entered into a development agreement (Instrument # 97044085) and platted as Interstate Center.  In 1998, a conditional use permit (CUP-98-100) was approved for a family water park.  In 2006 the property received certificate of zoning compliance (CZC-06-211) approval to upgrade the lighting throughout the waterpark.  In 2009 the property received certificate of zoning compliance and design review (CZC-09-033, DES-09-015) approval for a 61,813 square foot building addition.  In 2011 the property received certificate of zoning compliance and design review (CZC-11-005, DES-11-002) approval for a 27,522 square foot building expansion.  In 2015, a Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review (CZC-15-010, DES-15-009) were approved to add six (6) cabanas and a barbeque area.  Also in 2015, a Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review (A-2015-0071) application were approved for a 16,991 square foot building addition to an existing 54,454 square foot structure. Summary of Request: The applicant proposes a modification to the development agreement (DA#97044085) for the purpose of incorporating a concept plan; a comprehensive sign package for the overall development; and updating other specific DA provisions. The applicant has also requesting a landscape plan to be approved with the proposed DA modification. Landscaping improvements are typically reviewed with a development application however; staff recommends the DA address the timing for the improvements. Written Testimony: None Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2016-0119, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of November 15, 2016: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2016-0119, as presented during the hearing on November 15, 2016, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2016-0119 to the hearing date of __________ for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) Item #9E: Citadel 4 Storage at Ten Mile (H-2016-0114) Application(s): Annexation Size of property, existing zoning, and location: The site consists of 9.97 acres of land, zoned RUT in Ada County and is located at 4015 N. Ten Mile Road. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: MU-NR Summary of Request: The applicant requests annexation and zoning of 9.97 acres of land with an I-L zoning district, consistent with the MU-NR land use designation. The purpose of this MU-NR designation is to set-aside areas where new residential dwellings will not be permitted, as residential uses are not compatible with the planned and/or existing uses in these areas. The City envisions a wide variety of non-residential land uses may occur in MU-NR areas. Employment opportunities, professional offices, warehousing, flex buildings, and storage uses as well as retail uses are envisioned. This project is a single use, but part of a larger MU-NR area that surrounds the Wastewater Treatment Plant, so staff does envision a mix of uses developing in the area. Currently, there is a mix of commercial near the intersection of Ustick and Ten Mile Road s and across the street will be a future City park and existing and future single family homes. Concept Plan: The applicant proposes to develop a 193,823 square foot self-service storage facility consisting of a 1,156 square foot office building and a combination of enclosed and open outdoor storage. The site is proposed to develop in two phases, with approximately 63,187 square feet of storage in the first phase, and 130,636 in the second phase. Access to the site is proposed via Ten Mile Road, designated an arterial roadway. Staff recommends a minimum 20-foot wide driveway and cross-access be provided from the proposed site to the property to the north and south in accord with UDC 11- 3A-3. The applicant is requesting the DA provision requiring the cross access (DA provision 1.1.1d.) to be modified if the subject property does not develop with self-storage facility as proposed. Landscaping: A 35-foot wide street buffer is proposed along N. Ten Mile Road. A 25 foot landscape buffer is required to be landscaped in accordance with UDC 11-3B-7C however; the dimensional standards require that all buildings be setback from the road 35 feet. Further, the subject property abuts a residential use along a portion of the south boundary (approximately 500 feet). UDC Tab le 11-2C- 3, the applicant is required to construct a 25-foot wide landscape buffer with vegetation that touches at maturity. The DA provision allows for reduction to the buffer if reduced by City Council. The applicant has requested that the buffer be reduced to 10 -feet which is consistent with similar storage facility projects approved by the City (DA provision 1.1.1c.). Existing Structure(s): There is an existing home and associated outbuildings on the site that will be removed with development of the site. Conceptual Building Elevations: Building materials for the proposed storage structures/wall around the perimeter of the development consist of split face CMU with accent mortar, ribbed metal wall accents and trim and metal roofing. The office will consist o f two different colors of stucco. The applicant is required to obtain approval of a CZC and design review application for the proposed structures and site design for the self-service storage facility in accord with the design standards listed in UDC 11-3A-19 and the ASM. Commission Recommendation: Approval Summary of Commission Public Hearing: i. In favor: Jim Conger ii. In opposition: None iii. Commenting: Jim Conger iv. Written testimony: Jim Conger v. Staff presenting application: Bill Parsons vi. Other staff commenting on application: None b. Key Issue(s) of Discussion by Commission: i. Whether to recommend approval of reducing or waiving the landscape requirement in condition 1.1.1C. c. Key Commission Change(s) to Staff Recommendation: i. Modify condition 1.1.1C , as follows: The applicant is also required to construct a ten foot wide landscape buffer for the eastern 150 feet of the southern boundary adjacent to the existing rental house. ii. Modify condition 1.1.1D as follows: The applicant shall provide cross access from the north to the south if the site does not develop as a self-storage facility. d. Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: The applicant is requesting that they only be required to install a 10-foot landscape buffer along the southern boundary of the property and only for the first 150 feet of property starting from N. Ten Mile Road. Written Testimony since Commission Hearing: None Notes: Recommended Motion: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of File Number H- 2016-0114, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of October 20, 2016, with the following modifications: Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2016-0114, as presented during the hearing on November 15, 2016, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2016-0114 to the hearing date of November 15, 2016 for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) Item #9F: Paramount Director (H-2016-0104) Application(s):  Rezone  Preliminary Plat  Development Agreement Modification Size of property, existing zoning, and location: The subject property consists of 35.63 acres of land zoned C-C & TN-C, located at the SWC of W. Chinden Blvd. & N. Meridian Road. History: This property was annexed in 2013 & a modification to the DA for the larger Paramount development was approved to include the annexation area in the existing agreement. A preliminary plat was approved for this property earlier this year (Paramount North 40). Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: MU-C (northern 26 acres) & MDR (southern15 acres) Summary of Request: A rezone of 37.31 acres of land from the C-C & TN-C zoning districts to the R-15 zoning district is proposed for the development of 196 SFR attached units consistent with the associated MU-C & MDR FLUM designations for this site. An amendment to the existing DA is also proposed that will update the development plan for this site and amend certain provisions. A preliminary plat is proposed that consists of 196 building lots, 12 comm on area lots & 2 future ROW lots on 35.63 acres of land in the proposed R-15 zoning district. Two different types of single-family attached structures are proposed within this development. The Encore units are an age qualified 55+ single-story attached product configured in quads with shared driveways and side-entry garages located on the western portion of the development consisting of 98 units. The Cadence units are a 2-story, attached product with side-entry garages accessed from shared driveways located on the eastern portion of the development consisting of 98 units. All development is required to comply with the dimensional standards of the R-15 district. The applicant has submitted an exhibit for each of the unit types that depict building footprint, setbacks, common driveways and off- street parking. The rear setback for the Encore units that back up to common area needs to be extended from 3’ to a minimum of 12’; and the parking pad for the Cadence units does not meet the minimum dimensional standards for the 2 off-street parking spaces per unit that are required which makes the development short 196 off-street parking spaces. The plat and/or unit types will need to be revised to comply with the minimum setback and parking standards; or, the applicant may submit an application for Alternative Compliance to the parking standards. Access is proposed via N. Fox Run Way, a collector street, which was previously approved with the DA & PP for Paramount North Forty and is shared with the assisted living facility to the west. Two accesses are proposed via W. Director St., a collector street. Direct lot access is not proposed or approved via W. Chinden Blvd. or N. Meridian Rd. Common lots are proposed along Chinden & Meridian for future ROW for expansion of these streets. Common/shared driveways are proposed throughout the development for access to the units. A total of 8.63 acres (or 24.2%) of qualified open space is proposed. Proposed site amenities consist of a swimming pool & clubhouse in the Encore portion of the development; and a swimming pool with a restroom facility, tot lot, and associated parking area in the Cadence portion. A 10’ wide multi-use pathway is proposed along Chinden & Meridian in accord with the Pathways Master Plan. Conceptual building elevations were submitted for each of the 2 types of attached units (Cadence & Encore). Building material s consist of 2 different types of materials with stone veneer accents. The applicant states there are 2 different Encore floor plans – 1 for the front units & 1 for the rear units with elevation variations; and 1 floor plan for the Cadence units with a few differences between the back-to- back units, primarily on the first floor. All attached structures are required to comply with the residential design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. Commission Recommendation: Approval Summary of Commission Public Hearing: vii. In favor: Mike Wardle viii. In opposition: Elizabeth Davis & Brian Davis ix. Commenting: None x. Written testimony: Mike Wardle (in agreement w/staff report) xi. Key Issue(s): a. Not in favor of the attached housing type & higher density proposed within the Cadence portion of the development as compared to the detached homes & lower density within the adjacent Paramount Subdivision. b. Concern that the homes will be purchased by investors & turn into rental properties Key Issue(s) of Discussion by Commission: ii. Concern regarding the lack of off-street parking (below UDC standards) within the Cadence portion of the development. iii. In favor of the proposed housing types, density, and transition between developments. Commission Change(s) to Staff Recommendation: i. None Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: i. Off-street parking in the Cadence portion of the development is significantly below that required by the UDC [a condition is included (#1.2.3c) for the applicant to reconfigure the lots to meet the UDC parking standards; or, submit & obtain approval of an application for alternative compliance with the final plat application.] Written Testimony since Commission Hearing: None Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2016-0104, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of November 15, 2016: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2016-0104, as presented during the hearing on November 15, 2016, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2016-0104 to the hearing date of November 15, 2016 for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) Item #9G: Linder Road Apartments (H-2016-0111) Application(s):  Annexation & Zoning  Conditional Use Permit Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 4.35 acres of land, zoned RUT in Ada County, located at 1770 N. Linder Road. History: None Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: MDR Summary of Request: The applicant proposes to annex & zone 4.55 acres of land with an R-15 zoning district and requests a “step up” in density from MDR to MHDR as allowed by the Comprehensive Plan with approval by City Council without an amendment to the FLUM. The proposed density of 14.71 units per acre is consistent with that allowed in the R-15 district and with the MHDR designation. A CUP is also requested for a multi-family development consisting of 63 dwelling units in an R-15 zoning district. The site plan depicts (16) 4-plex structures that contain (63) 2-bedroom units and a management office. Access is proposed via S. Linder Road; ACHD is restricting the access to a right-in/right-out. An emergency turnaround for the Fire Dept. is proposed at the SEC of the site. The proposed off-street parking complies with UDC standards. A 10’ wide multi-use pathway is required along Linder Road in accord with the Pathways Master Plan. Staff recommends pathway connections are stubbed to the north & east property boundaries for future pedestrian interconnectivity. A total of 1.99 acres (or 44.6%) of qualified open space along with site amenities consisting of large open grassy areas, a covered BBQ area, a tot lot, a sports court, bicycle maintenance station and a segment of the City’s multi-use pathway are proposed in accord with UDC standards. Two types of multi-family structures are proposed within the development. Building material consist of a mix of horizontal & vertical siding with stone veneer accents. The two building types appear to be identical except that they have different roof forms. Variety in the architectural character of the structures and design should be provided as set forth in the Architectural Standards Manual (ASM). Windows are required on all elevations that face pathways and areas used for children’s recreation to allow views of these areas. All structures on the site are subject to design review. Commission Recommendation: Approval Summary of Commission Public Hearing: i. In favor: Kent Brown ii. In opposition: None iii. Commenting: None iv. Written testimony: Kent Brown (in agreement w/staff report) v. Key Issue(s):None Key Issue(s) of Discussion by Commission: None Commission Change(s) to Staff Recommendation: None Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: Council should determine if a “step up” in density from MDR to MHDR should be approved for this development as allowed by the Comp Plan without an amendment to the FLUM. Written Testimony since Commission Hearing: Kent Brown (in agreement w/Commission recommendation) – submitted a revised site plan as discussed at the Commission hearing that complies with ROW requirements & parking standards. Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2016-0111, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of November 15, 2016: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2016-0111, as presented during the hearing on November 15, 2016, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2016-0111 to the hearing date of November 15, 2016 for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) Item #9H: 2016 UDC Text Amendment (H-2016-0118) Application(s):  UDC Text Amendment Location: City wide Summary of Request: The subject application proposes modifications to the following UDC sections: definitions, density requirements in the residential districts, traditional neighborhood standards (TN-R and O-T districts), ditches, laterals, canals or drainage courses, fencing, pathways, structure and site design standards, landscaping requirements (stormwater facilities), common open space and site amenities requirements, specific provisions (certificate of zoning compliance, annexation and rezones and alternative complia nce), subdivision process, subdivision design and improvement standards including common driveways. Staff has vetted a majority of the proposed changes with the UDC Focus Group and the BCA as the City embarks on changes to the UDC. In summary, the changes proposed in this application represent changes that City Staff believes will make the implementation and use of the UDC more understandable and enforceable. Commission Recommendation: Approval Summary of Commission Public Hearing: i. In favor: City of Meridian Planning Division ii. In opposition: None iii. Commenting: None iv. Written testimony: None v. Key Issue(s): None Key Issue(s) of Discussion by Commission: i. None Commission Change(s) to Staff Recommendation: i. None Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: i. None Written Testimony since Commission Hearing: None Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2016-0118, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of November 15, 2016: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) City Council Meeting November 15, 2016 Item #9D: Interstate Center Development Agreement Modification Proposed Changes to Development Agreement Uses Permitted By This Agreement: Modify condition 4.1 as follows: •4.1 “The uses allowed pursuant to this agreement are only those uses listed as permitted, conditional or accessory, including parking, in the approved C-G zone zoning district under the UDC in effect as of the Effective Date (the “Uses”), which are generally set forth on: the conceptual development plan, attached hereto as Exhibit C and made part hereof (the “Conceptual Development Plan”); and the signs substantially similar to the signs depicted on Exhibit D attached hereto and made part hereof (the “Sign Plan”);. And the landscape depicted on Exhibit E, attached hereto and made part hereof (the “Landscape Plan”). Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein or the UDC, outdoor arts, entertainment or recreation facility or facilities may be located within fifty feet (50’) of the exterior Property Boundary.” 5.Conditions Governing Development of the Property: 5.1 Development Conditions: Owner/Developer shall develop the Property in accordance with the following special conditions: •Remove condition 4. This is not applicable. •Modify condition 6 as follows: “Setback along the west property boundary shall be five (5) feet for parking and eight (8) feet for recreation/entertainment facilities. Setback The landscape buffer along the north property boundary adjacent to interstate I-84 shall be twenty (20) feet. Setback The Landscape buffer along the north property boundary adjacent to the existing C-G zoned property shall comply with the setback requirements of the C-G zoning district. Setback The landscape buffer along the east property boundary shall be twenty-five (25) feet. Setback The landscape buffer along Overland Road shall be thirty-five (35) feet. •Remove Condition 8. Landscaping is reviewed with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance. •Modify condition 9 as follows: replace “City of Meridian Design Manual with “City of Meridian Architectural Standards Manual.” •Remove condition 10. This is a duplicate of condition 9. •Add a DA condition as follows: The landscape buffers (35 feet of landscaping along Overland Road, 25 feet along the east boundary of the proposed expansion, and 20 feet along the I-84 frontage) shall all be installed with the first Certificate of Zoning Compliance approved on Parcel 6 (as indicated by the proposed concept plan). Item #9E: Citadel 4 Storage at Ten Mile -Vicinity/Zoning Map Citadel 4 Storage at Ten Mile –Concept Plan Citadel 4 Storage at Ten Mile –Conceptual Elevations Item #9F: Paramount Director Vicinity/Zoning Map ÚÚd C-N L-O RUT L-O RUT R-8 R-15 C-C L-O R-8 C-C C-G R-8 R-2 R1 C-C RUT C-C RUT TN-C R-4 RUT R-4 RUT R-4 RUT R-8 C-C N L i n d e r R d E Chinden Blvd W CayuseCreek Dr W Chinden Blvd N M e r i d i a n R d N L a n d o n C r e e k P l W C r o s b y D r E Segundo St ESanPedro St WRattlesnakeDr W D i r e c t o r S t W Pr o d u c e r D r N M o r p h e u s A v e W Woodward S t N Isla A v e E Boulder Bar St E Tallinn St N R e d H i l l s A v e E Everest St N B e r g m a n A v e W Heston Dr N S a g u a r o H i l l s A v e N R o s a S p r i n g s A v e N G a r b o Av e E Rio C o l i n a s D r W BacallDr W H e s t o n C t N S e n i t a H i l l s A v e N K e a t o n W a y E SanPedroSt W Br o d e r i c k D r N Moose Creek Ave E P r o d u c e r D r E Tuttle St N G a r b o Av e N M i t c h u m W a y E Chol la Hi lls St E Joshua Tree D r W G a b l e S t E San Pedro St W PuzzleCreek Ct E Segundo St E Giant Saguaro St N G e r t i e P l N B o o t h A v e W Glade Creek St N R e d H i l l s P l W Cedar Grove St WEagleMountainDr WMartenCreekDr E I r o n s t o n e C t N Moose Creek Ave N F o x R u n W a y N D i e t r i c h A v e N S a g u a r o H i l l s A v e N R e d H o r s e W a y WHamRapidsSt W C a y u s e C r e e k D r E Pasacana St E Martello Ln E Klamath Ln N B r y n n e r A v e W C a g n e y S t E Almos St W Everest Ln N M o r p h e u s P l W Coburn St E I r o n s t o n e D r W Caine St E Azan S t N P e p p a r d A v eW D r e y f u s s S t N P i n e r y C a n y o n A v e E C h olla Hills St E Martello Ln E Lockhart Ln WRootCreekSt N K e a t o n A v e W Bacall St E Cholla Hills St N M i t c h u m A v e N R o s a S p r i n g s A v e N S e n i t a H i l l s A v e N B e a h a m A v e N L a r k w o o d P l N P e p p a r d A v e N S a g u a r o H i l l s P l E Pasacana St W Brandt Ln W Barrymore D r W V a l e n tino Dr N E l k R a n c h L n W C o l b e r t S t W P i c k f o r d S t W V a l e n t i n o S t W Hitchcock St WIslandGreenDr N H o o d A v e N R i o V i s t a W a y N D i a m o n d C r e e k A v e N A r l i s s A v e N R e d H i l l s A v e N L a n g e A v e N C l a r e t C u p W a y N M a x i m u s P l N D e m i l l e A v e N R e d H i l l s A v e N B a r n e y L n N M a x i m u s W a y N R o s a S p r i n g s A v e W R edgrave D r N B e a h a m A v e N C h a n n i n g W a y N R i o L o m a s A v e W C a g n e y D r SAINT IGNATIUS SCHOOL PARAMOUNT SUB NO 16 PARAMOUNT SUB NO 27 PARAMOUNT SUB NO 05LOCHSA FALLS NO 11 PARAMOUNT SUB NO 07 LOCHSA FALLS NO 06 SAGUARO CANYON NO 03 ARCADIA LOCHSA FALLS NO 01 PARAMOUNT SUB NO 04 KNIGHTSKYESTATES KNIGHTHILL SUBDIVISION HIGHTOWER SAGUARO SPRINGS/MADELYNN ESTATES VENTANA NO 02 CARDIGAN BAY PARAMOUNT SUB NO 12 VENTANA NO 01 SAGUARO CANYON NO 02 LOCHSA FALLS NO 03 LOCHSA FALLS NO 07 PARAMOUNT SUB NO 02 PARAMOUNT SUB NO 01 PARAMOUNT SUB NO 08 PARAMOUNT SUB NO 03 LOCHSA FALLS NO 12 LOCHSA FALLS NO 02 PARAMOUNT VILLAGE CENTER PARAMOUNT SUB NO 09 SAGUARO CANYON NO 04 PARAMOUNT SUB NO 11 SCHOOL PARAMOUNT ELEM PARAMOUNT SUB NO 06 SCHOOL ROCKY MOUNTAIN HIGH MOULTON BRADFORD PARAMOUNT SUB NO 13 JERICHO SUBDIVISION PARAMOUNT SUB NO 15 SCHOOL CHALLENGER PARAMOUNT SUB NO 17 VILLAS AT LOCHSA FALLS PARAMOUNT SUB NO 18 PARAMOUNT SUB NO 22 PARAMOUNT SUB NO 21 PARAMOUNT SUB NO 19 HACIENDA SUBDIVISION NO. 3 HACIENDA SUBDIVISION NO.2 HACIENDA HACIENDA NO.5 SPURWING CHALLENGE LINDER & CHINDEN PARAMOUNT SUB NO 24 PARAMOUNT ADDITIONAL PHASES BULL RANCH BIRKDALE ESTATES PARAMOUNT NORTHEAST ASSISTED LIVING Paramount No. 29 PARAMOUNT DIRECTOR EXTENSION HACIENDA SOUTH Proposed Preliminary Plat & Phasing Plan Proposed Landscape Plan Parking pads do not comply with UDC standards Rear setback doesn’t comply with minimum 12’ setback Encore Cadence55+ Item #9G: Linder Road Apartments Vicinity/Zoning Map ""d R-2 I-L C2 R-4 R-8 RUT RUT R-2 I-L C-C RUT TN-C C-G L-O R-4 R-15 TN-R R-4 RUT RUT R-8 S L I N D E R R D S S T O D D A R D R D W OVERLAND RD S W O O D H O U S E A V E S F A R M I N G T O N A V E W H E A V Y TIM B E R DR S S P A N I S H F O R K W A Y W A M E R I C A N F O R K D R S B E A R C L A W W A Y W CHRISTOP H E R S T S M A L A Y A N A V E W ELIAS ST W DAVENPORT ST W K O D I A K D R W WOODINGTON ST W W O O D IN G T O N S T S T E C H L N W C A L D E RW OOD ST S B E A R T O O T H W A Y S S P A NISHSUN WAY S B L U E M A R L I N L N S O L D T H O R N L N S OLD THORN LN Site Plan (Revised) Building Elevations Meridian City Council Meeting /0 C DATE: November 15, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: H-2016-0114 ITEM TITLE: Citadel 4 Storage Ten Mile Public Hearing for Citadel 4 Storage Ten Mile (H-2016-0114) by Citadel Storage, LLC Located 4015 N. Ten Mile Road 1. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 9.97 Acres of Land with an I -L Zoning District MEETING NOTES 9 APPROVEO Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS Citadel 4 Self-Storage Modified Conditions •Site Specific Condition Item 1.1.1. c. –landscape set back regarding the South Boundary Modify to read: The applicant is also required to construct a 10-foot wide landscape buffer for the eastern 150’ on the southern boundary adjacent to the existing rental house. •Site Specific Condition Item 1.1.1. d. –Cross Access Modify to read: The applicant shall provide cross access from the north to the south if the site does not develop as a self-storage facility. Southern Rental 75’ +/- Meridian Future Land Use Map Vicinity Map Adjacent Uses CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING SIGN -IN SHEET Date: November 15, 2016 Item # 9E Project Number: H-2016-0114 Project Name: Citadel 4 Storage Ten Mile Please print your name For Against Neutral Do you wish to testify (YIN) w ti <.r i ¥ CLERKS OFFICE Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: November 15, 2016 ITEM TITLE: Paramount Director ITEM NUMBER: /G,F 191� PROJECT NUMBER: H-2016-0104 Public Hearing for Paramount Director (H-2016-0104) by Brighton Investments / Land Holdings Located Southwest Corner of W. Chinden Boulevard and N. Meridian Road MEETING NOTES � pPPROYED Community Item/Presentations Presenter Contact Info./Notes CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS 1 VERANDA ASSISTED LIVING PARAMOUNT DIRECTOR SUBDIVISION CHINDEN 2 MU-C Density: 6 to 15 d.u./ac. MDR Density: 3 to 8 d.u./ac. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DENSITY OBJECTIVES PARAMOUNT DIRECTOR PROPOSED DENSITY: 5.5 D.U./AC. 3 3.4 4.0 4.2 3.5 18 Overall Paramount SF Density: 3.25* 5.5 3.8 4.3 4 ENCORE single-story, age-qualified townhome* community (aprox. Living area: 1600 s.f.) CADENCE two-story townhome* community (aprox. Living area: 1900-2100 s.f.) 5 ENCORE – an age-qualified Community VERANDA PRIVATE POOL AND CLUB HOUSE 6 “ENCORE” AGE QUALIFIED PROJECT EXAMPLE (paired units in a “quad” configuration) 7 CADENCE – a family Community COMMUNITY POOL & PLAYGROUND 8 ENCORE CADENCE 9 QUESTIONS? CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING SIGN -IN SHEET Date: November 15, 2016 Item # Project Number: Project Name: H-2016-0104 9F Paramount Director Please print your name For Against Neutral Do you wish to testify (Y/N) OxE 0z t n-( (_EBNA Woo4bA CHLC-13 AA Y --r vva; LA X J\J TC9 P RECEIVED CITY OFoil.E�-� o CiPf CLERKS OFFICE X K x 110 Meridian City Council Meeting /I U � DATE: November 15, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: -.9G- PROJECT NUMBER: H-2016-0111 ITEM TITLE: Linder Road Apartment Public Hearing for Linder Road Apartments (H-2016-01 1 1) by S 3 Investments LP, Located at 1770 S. Linder Road 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 CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING SIGN -IN SHEET Date: November 15, 2016 Item # 9G Project Number: H-2016-0111 Project Name: Linder Road Apartments Please print your name For Against Neutral Do you wish to testify (Y/N) Cff OSS � `_ti. Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: November 15, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: 16 1w PROJECT NUMBER: H-2016-0118 ITEM TITLE: UDC Text Amendment Public Hearing for 2016 UDC Text Amendment (H-2016-0118) By Meridian Planning Division MEETING NOTES 51-6 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 City Council Meeting November 15, 2016 Item #9H: 2016 UDC Text Amendment 1 Proposed UDC Text Amendments UDC Section Topic Problem/Question Potential Fix 11-1A-1 Define city core Align with streetscape standards in Title 8. City Core: The area bordered on the north by E. Carlton Avenue, on the south by E. Ada Street, on the west by N. Meridian Road, and on the east by NE. Third Street. The City Core includes abutting properties on both sides of the street. 11-1A-1 Define double fencing Prohibit double fencing. The City has had instances where home owners have constructed 6-foot tall fencing adjacent to interior common lots for privacy. This has been an enforcement issue for the City and tends to be an unattractive nuisance in residential developments. Double fencing: Two fences as defined in this title that parallel each other along an abutting common property line. 11-1A-1 Define Green Stormwater Facilities New term. Stormwater Facilities, Green: A stormwater facility designed in accord with ACHD’s Drainage and Stormwater Management Policy Manual that enhances and/or mimics the natural hydrologic cycle processes of infiltration, evapotranspiration and reuse. 11-1A-1 Define interior common open space Need to define interior open space to ensure double fencing is prohibited around them. Interior common open space: Open space as defined in this title located internal to a development; exclusive of open space on the perimeter of a development. 11-1A-1 Define streetscape Align with the Downtown Meridian and City wide Streetscape: A. The visual character along a roadway created by the combined use of elements such as building facades, landscaping, trees, open space, paving, plantings, sidewalks, lighting, signs and furniture. B. In the City Core, that portion of right of way adjacent to the roadway, between the back of curb and face of building, including use zone, clear zone, and street furnishing zone. 11-2A-1 Purpose See commentary below. The purpose of the residential districts is to provide for a range of housing opportunities consistent with the Meridian comprehensive plan. Residential districts are distinguished by the allowable density of dwelling units per acre dimensional standards of the corresponding zone and corresponding housing types that can be accommodated within the density range. Residential land uses are also allowed within the O-T, TN-C, and TN-R districts as set forth in article D of this chapter. Table 11-2A-1 Maximum density requirements There is a disconnect between the dimensional standards and the number of lots one can design to get to maximum gross density. Often times, projects request a higher-density zone for lot size purposes, not density purposes (eg – R-8 lot sizes give you 4 dwelling units/acre). Due to open space requirements, roads and other factors, it is near impossible to get 8 du/acre in the R-8 zone. If we remove the maximum gross density requirements from the UDC then this won’t be a question. However, it may cause some confusion about what the number in the district name stands for if it no longer represents density. TABLE 11-2A-1 MAXIMUM GROSS DENSITY IN THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS District Maximum Gross Density (Per Acre) Low-density residential district (R-2) 2 Medium low-density residential district (R-4) 4 Medium-density residential district (R-8) 8 Medium high-density residential district (R-15) 15 High-density residential district (R-40) 40 11-2A-4 Low-density residential district Remove maximum density requirement. The maximum gross density allowed is two (2) dwellings per acre. Dimensional standards for development in the R-2 residential district shall be as follows: 2 11-2A-5 Medium low-density residential district Remove maximum density requirement. The maximum gross density allowed is four (4) dwellings per acre. Dimensional standards for development in the R-4 residential district shall be as follows: 11-2A-6 Medium-density residential district Remove maximum density requirement. The maximum gross density allowed is eight (8) dwellings per acre. Dimensional standards for development in the R-8 residential district shall be as follows: 11-2A-7 Medium high-density residential district Remove maximum density requirement. The maximum gross density allowed is fifteen (15) dwellings per acre. Dimensional standards for development in the R-15 residential district shall be as follows: 11-2A-8 High-density residential district Remove maximum density requirement. The maximum gross density allowed is forty (40) dwellings per acre. Dimensional standards for development in the R-40 residential district shall be as follows: 11-2D-1 Traditional neighborhood district TN-R is not being used. These “incentives” might help to get more land zoned for TN-R. Proposed changes to the dimensional standards. C. Traditional Neighborhood Residential District (TN-R): The purpose of the TN-R district is to provide for a variety of residential land uses including attached and detached single-family residential, duplex, townhouse, and multi-family. A TN-R district includes open spaces and promotes pedestrian activity through well designed and varied streetscapes that also provide for the safe and efficient movement of vehicular traffic. Most dwelling units should be accessed from alleys. The maximum density of the TN-R district is fifteen (15) units per acre. The minimum density is eight (8) six (6) units per acre. Density should decrease away from the center and closer to conventional residential districts. The TN-R district should be generally located adjacent to a TN-C district, along a transit corridor, or within a mixed use neighborhood. For the purposes of this title, the term residential district shall also include the traditional neighborhood residential district. 11-2D-4 Standards in the Old Town District Ensure residential conversions maintain the appropriate character in Downtown. D. Streetscape Improvements: Streetscape improvements within the City Core area bounded by Carlton Avenue, East Third Street, Ada Street, and Meridian Road shall be designed in accord with the "City Of Meridian Public Works Design Standards Manual". E. Residential to commercial conversions within Old Town shall comply with the established standards set forth in the Architectural Standards Manual (ASM) and Structure and Site Design Standards set forth in UDC 11-3A-19. Where there are site constraints that prevent a conversion from wholly complying with these standards, the Applicant may submit for a design standard exception as set forth in the ASM. F. When proposed as part of a development, public and other urban open spaces shall have sufficient pedestrian access and be integrated into the overall site design. 11-2D-5D Standards in the Traditional Neighborhood Center District Intent here is to allow compact infill developments part of a larger mixed use area. D. Minimum contiguous district size is six (6) acres; or two (2) acres when adjacent to property with a mixed-use future land use designation. 3 11-2D-6A Standards in the Traditional Neighborhood District TN-R is not being used. These “incentives” might help to get more land zoned for TN-R. Proposed changes to the dimensional standards. Dimensional Standards TN-R Minimum density (dwelling units per acre) 86 net Maximum density 15 net Minimum front setback: For alley accessed properties1 (in feet) 108 For street accessed properties1 (in feet) 20 to garage 108 to living area Minimum rear setback: For alley accessed properties1 (in feet) 20 to garage if alley width 16 feet 18 to garage if alley width 20 feet 5 For street accessed properties1 (in feet) 12 Minimum side setback (in feet): Property lines adjoining unattached walls 53 Property lines adjoining attached walls2 0 Minimum side street setback1 (in feet): Alley 105 Local street 105 Collector (for alley accessed properties)3,4 1311: 86 parkway with class II trees and 5 foot sidewalk Collector (for street accessed properties)3,5 2018: 86 parkway with class II trees and 5 foot sidewalk Street landscape buffer (in feet): Alley 5, except for parking areas Local3 8 parkway with class II trees Collector (for alley accessed properties)3,4 13: 8 parkway with class II trees and 5 foot sidewalk Collector (for street accessed properties)3,5 20: 8 parkway with class II trees and 5 foot sidewalk Arterial 25 Entryway corridor 35 Interstate 50 Maximum height to eave providing roof access (in feet) 30 Maximum building height (in feet) 40 4 11-2D-6C Standards in the Traditional Neighborhood District TN-R is not being used. These “incentives” might help to get more land zoned for TN-R. Proposed changes to the dimensional standards. C. Housing Unit Allocation: In the TN-R district, a minimum of two (2) housing types, including, but not limited to, single-family dwellings with attached garages, single-family dwellings with detached garages, single-family dwellings with alley loaded garages, single- family dwellings with alley loaded garages facing a mew, townhouses, and multi-family dwellings, shall be required on any subdivision submittal or planned unit development application. 11-3A-6 Ditches, laterals, canals or drainage courses Discourage the piping of waterways and encourage more developments to incorporate waterways into developments and limit tiling and piping. DITCHES, LATERALS, CANALS OR DRAINAGE COURSES: A. The purpose of this section is to limit the tiling and piping of natural waterways, ditches, canals, laterals and drains where public safety is not a concern as well as improve, protect and incorporate creek corridors (Five Mile, Eight Mile, Nine Mile, Ten Mile, South Slough and Jackson and Evan Drains) as an amenity in all residential, commercial and industrial designs. When piping and fencing is proposed, the following standards shall apply. AB. Piping: 1. Natural waterways intersecting, crossing, or lying within the area being developed shall remain as a natural amenity and shall not be piped or otherwise covered. See also subsection B1 of this section. 2. Irrigation ditches, laterals, canals, and drains may be left open when used as a water amenity or linear open space. See also subsection B2 of this section. 3. Except as allowed above, all other irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, intersecting, crossing or lying within the area being developed, shall be piped, or otherwise covered. This requirement does not apply to property with only an irrigation easement where the actual drainage facility is located on an adjoining property. a. The city council may waive the requirement for covering such ditch, lateral, canal, or drain, if it finds that the public purpose requiring such will not be served and public safety can be preserved. b. The city council may also waive this requirement for large capacity facilities. BC. Fencing: 1. Fencing along all natural waterways shall not prevent access to the waterway. In limited circumstances and in the interest of public safety, larger open water systems may require fencing as determined by the city council, director and/or public works director. 2. Ditches, laterals, canals, and drains do not require fencing if it can be demonstrated by the applicant to the satisfaction of the director that said ditch, lateral, canal, or drain serves as or will be improved as a part of the development, to be a water amenity. Construction drawings and relevant calculations prepared by a qualified licensed professional registered in the state of Idaho shall be submitted to both the director and the authorized representative of the water facility for approval. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005) 3. Except as allowed above, all other open irrigation ditches, laterals, canals, and drains shall be fenced with an open vision fence at least six feet (6') in height and having an 11-gauge, two inch (2") mesh or other construction, equivalent in ability to deter access to said ditch, lateral, canal or drain, which fence shall be securely fastened at its base at all places where any part of said lands or areas being subdivided touches either or both sides of said ditch, lateral, canal, or drain. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005; amd. Ord. 06-1241, 7-5-2006, eff. 7-15-2006) CD. Easements: In residential districts, irrigation easements wider than ten feet (10') shall be included in a common lot that is a minimum of twenty feet (20') wide and outside of a fenced area, unless modified by city council at a public hearing with notice to surrounding property owners. DE. Impeding Movement Of Water Prohibited: For any irrigation or drainage ditch not within the jurisdiction of an irrigation or drainage district, piping shall not impede the movement of the amount of water crossing the property prior to development or the amount of water delivered to downstream properties. EF. Natural Drainage Courses: All natural drainage courses shall be left undisturbed or be improved in a manner that will improve the hydraulics and ease of maintenance of the channel. Relocation of natural swales is acceptable if the hydraulics and ease of maintenance are provided for. The term "natural drainage course" shall not be deemed to apply to minor swales and depressions that are located entirely on the applicant's property and which serve a relatively small area where runoff is infrequent. 5 11-3A-7A.7b(4) Fences Prohibit double fencing. The City has had instances where home owners have constructed 6-foot tall fencing adjacent to interior common lots for privacy. This has been an enforcement issue for the City and tends to be an unattractive nuisance in residential developments. 7. Regulations for fences abutting pathways and common open space lots are set forth below. These regulations are intended to assist in the implementation of CPTED (crime prevention through environmental design) strategies to reduce the incidence of crime and improve the quality of life. See figure 1 of this section. a. The developer is responsible for constructing fences abutting pathways and common open space lots to distinguish common from private areas. b. Fences abutting all pathways, and common open space lots not entirely visible from a public street shall be: (1) An open vision or semiprivate fence up to six feet (6') in height, as it provides visibility from adjacent homes or buildings; (2) A closed vision fence up to six feet (6') in height may be allowed if the lot connects directly to a public school or a park;does not exceed is no more than two (2) one lots deep or a maximum of 250 feet, and is fully visible from a public street; or (3) If closed vision fencing is used, it shall not exceed four feet (4') in height. An additional two feet (2') in height of open vision fencing may be provided to the top section of the fence. c. Other fences located within the rear or side yard shall be set back a minimum of eight feet (8') from the property line. Within the rear yard other fences shall not exceed fifty percent (50%) of the property width. d. These restrictions are intended to apply to fencing along interior common open space lots and pathways that are not entirely visible from a public street. (4) Double fencing shall be prohibited. 11-3A-8H Pathways Need more explicit standards if lighting is installed or remove (e.g. design and spacing requirements). All pathways through common areas that are not visible from a public street shall be illuminated with a four foot (4') tall bollard style or other appropriate lighting source, unless otherwise waived by the director. Such lighting shall be shielded from adjoining residences. All pathway lighting shall be installed in accord with the city's adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. This is the current language in the UDC which is a vague standard. More details to be shared during the meeting. 6 11-3A-19A.2 and 3 Structure and site design standards Last year, the City re-vamped the design review guidelines into standards. Now, design review (through the Architectural Standards Manual) addresses building/architectural elements and the UDC will address site design standards. The applicable site design standards need to be pulled-in from the Comp Plan and the old Guidelines document. No new standards, just a re-organization of existing guidelines, policies and standards. Incorporate more site design and circulation standards into the UDC. SITE AND STRUCTURE DESIGN STANDARDS: A. Purpose: 1. Encourage site design that provides an interconnected network of walkways, pathways, streets, and/or drive aisles that combined promote pedestrian and vehicular mobility within the development and connect to adjacent developments. 2. To facilitate the efficient movement of traffic into, out of, and through a site, protect pedestrian and bicycle users, establish an aesthetically consistent street presence and limit the visual impacts of large parking areas on a site. AB. Minimum Standards: The following minimum standards shall apply in addition to the detailed guidelines as set forth in the "City of Meridian Architectural Standards Manual": 1. Architectural Character: Buildings shall be designed in accord with the "City Of Meridian Architectural Standards Manual". 2. Site Design: a. Extend or improve streets, drive-aisles, cross access easements or similar vehicular and pedestrian connections provided from adjacent properties. b. For lots with frontage on a public street, a minimum of 40 percent of the buildable frontage of the property shall be occupied by building façades and/or public space. Within mixed use areas, and for large multi-building developments, buildings may be placed away from roadways if a minimum of 30 percent of the buildable frontage is occupied by building façades and/or public space. 23. Parking Lots: a. For properties greater than two (2) acres in size, no more than fifty percent (50%) of the total off street parking area for the site shall be located between building facades and abutting streets. b. For properties two (2) acres or less in size, a maximum of a single drive aisle with parking on one or both sides shall be allowed between the building facades and abutting streets. All other off street parking areas shall not be located between the building facades and abutting streets. c. The design and layout of internal site parking shall avoid long straight unbroken parking aisles; provide crossing drive aisles for internal circulation at approximately 150-foot intervals, or provide parking that is perpendicular to the building. d. Where on-street parking is provided or where vehicle circulation is directed in front of building entries, integrate traffic calming strategies and techniques, such as landscape islands, bulb-outs, and/or detailed crosswalks, to increase safety and enhance the development character. e. In the Traditional Neighborhood districts parking shall be primarily located behind or to the side of buildings and public spaces, away from block corners and roadways. f. When parking and drive-throughs cannot comply with the standards above, they shall be screened by berms, landscaping, walls, architectural elements, or a combination of these elements to produce an appropriate buffer adjacent to public spaces and roadways. 34. Pedestrian Walkways: a. A continuous internal pedestrian walkway that is a minimum of five feet (5') in width shall be provided from the perimeter sidewalk to the main building entrance(s) for nonresidential uses. The walkway width shall be maintained clear of any obstructions, such as vehicles, outdoor sale displays, vending machines, or temporary structures. b. The internal pedestrian walkway shall be distinguished from the vehicular driving surfaces through the use of pavers, colored or scored concrete, or bricks. c. Unobstructed walkways at least five feet (5') in width shall be provided for any aisle length that is greater than one hundred fifty (150) parking spaces or two hundred feet (200') away from the primary building entrance(s). d. The walkways shall have weather protection (including, but not limited to, an awning or arcade) within twenty feet (20') of all customer entrances. BC. Alternative Compliance: If: 1) the location of existing buildings or structures prevents conformance with the standards of this section, or 2) strict adherence to such standards would create inconsistency in the design objectives of the proposed development, the director may consider an alternative design proposal through the alternative compliance provisions as set forth in section 11-5B-5 of this title. The director may approve, or recommend approval of, such an alternative compliance proposal when the overall design, as proposed by the applicant, meets or exceeds the intent and the requirements of this section and is not detrimental to public health, safety, and welfare. (Ord. 16-1672, 2-16-2016) 7 11-3B-1B Purpose Add the word water to the list of benefits of promoting landscaping within developments. B. The City of Meridian recognizes that landscaping can be a significant expense to business people and residents. At the same time, landscaping improves the livability of residential neighborhoods, enhances the appearance and customer attraction of commercial areas, increases property values, improves the compatibility of adjacent uses, screens undesirable views, and can reduce air, water and noise pollution. 11-3B-5H Standards and installation Mulch is not allowed in stormwater detention facilities. H. Mulching: Mulch shall be used in all required planting areas. Approved mulches may be organic, such as bark or soil aid, or they may include rock products, such as "permabark" or similar products. Use of mulch, organic or rock, as the only ground cover in required planting areas is prohibited. Pea gravel, drain rock, road base gravel, and similar products shall not be used as mulch. All mulch shall be contained by a curb or other edging material to contain the mulch and prevent it from migrating to adjacent surfaces. If rock mulch is used, a weed barrier fabric shall be used beneath the rock. Impermeable plastic weed barriers are prohibited because they restrict water and oxygen to the plants. Within stormwater facilities, mulch may not float. 11-3B-6D Irrigation standards D. Nonpotable Water: Use of nonpotable irrigation and/or reuse water is required when determined to be available by the city public works department as set forth in section 9-1-28, "Pressurized Irrigation System", of this code.; reuse water may not be used for stormwater facilities. Water availability during the fall and spring seasons is also required by connecting to city potable water, city reuse water, and/or an on- site well as a secondary source. An exception may be approved for water conserving designs as set forth in subsection 11-3B-5O of this article. In such cases, the requirement for a secondary source may be waived by the director. If city potable water is used, a separate water meter is required. 11-3B-7C.8 Landscape buffers along streets Align with new ACHD standards 8. Stormwater Detention: Stormwater swales and other green stormwater facilities may be incorporated into the buffer in accord with section 11-3B-11 of this article. Other stormwater detention and retention facilities shall not be permitted in the street buffer, except along I-84. 11-3B-11 Stormwater integration Incorporate ACHD new bio-swale standards in accord with their new policies. Many times these drainage areas become unattractive nuisance for many of the City’s residential subdivisions. If designed appropriately they can be counted towards the open space requirements. The new standards align better with the city’s design standards and gives developers’ greater flexibility in their design of their storm drainage facilities. A. Purpose: The regulations of this section are intended to improve water quality and provide a natural, effective form of flood and water pollution control through the integration of vegetated, well designed stormwater filtration swales and other green stormwater facilities into required landscape areas, where topography and hydrologic features allow. B. Applicability: The standards for stormwater integration shall apply to all subdivisions, site improvements and ACHD stormwater facilities. ACHD stormwater policy shall supersede City requirements for stormwater facilities, except that facilities counting towards open space requirements must also meet or exceed City requirements. C. Standards: 1. Stormwater swales incorporated into required landscape areas shall be vegetated with grass or other appropriate plant materials. Such swales shall also be designed to accommodate the required number of trees as per section 11-3B-7 of this article if located in a street buffer or other required landscape area. 2. A rock sump may be incorporated into a vegetated swale to facilitate drainage. The rock sump inlet may not exceed more than five feet (5') in any horizontal dimension. Grates for sand/grease interceptors may also be incorporated, but the inlet structures may not exceed two feet (2') in any horizontal dimension. 3. Gravel, rock, sand, or cobble stormwater facilities are not permitted on the surface of required landscape areas, unless designed as a dry creek bed or other design feature. 4. Plant materials shall be a species that are able to withstand the anticipated changes in soil wetness and moisture levels. 5. Organic mulch shall not be used against drainage catch basins because of potential sediment clogging. 6. Slopes shall be less than or equal to three to one (3:1) (horizontal:vertical) for accessibility and maintenance. 7. The stormwater facility shall be designed free draining with no standing water within twenty four forty eight (24 48) hours of the completion of a storm event. 11-3D-8G.4b Business identification signs Allow for 8’ tall free standing signage in the Old Town District regardless of proximity to the adjacent walkways and public spaces. b. The maximum height of any freestanding sign shall not exceed eight feet (8’)., except where a freestanding sign is within fifteen feet of a pedestrian walkway, sidewalk, and or pathway or public space, the height of the sign shall be limited to six feet (6’) to maintain an appropriate human scale. 8 11-3G-3D Common open space and site amenity requirements Clarifying open space is to be visible and safe. 3. Common open space and site amenities should shall be located in areas of high visibility (i.e., along streets, where doors and windows overlook public areas, etc.) to avoid hidden areas and corners, dark areas, unusable space and reduce the opportunity for crime. 11-5B-1B Certificate of zoning compliance Clarify that a CZC is not required for single family attached and townhome dwellings; covered with the design review section of the code (11-5B-8B2). B. Applicability: These provisions apply to all requests for permits that involve new building construction, building additions, exterior site alterations and/or the establishment of a new use. These provisions do not apply to interior building improvements where the footprint of the existing structure is not enlarged or to exterior building alterations, including, but not limited to: the addition, removal, or modification of architectural elements, such as doors, wind ows, awnings, and arcades; building remodels where all or a portion of a structure is modified, including entrances, facades, and rooflines; a change in exterior materials and/or color scheme; or any other alteration that modifies the exterior appearance of the building. These provisions do not apply to single-family detached, single-family attached and townhome dwellings and/or secondary dwellings. 11-5B-3C.3 Annexations and rezones Clarify details on concept plans requested with annexations and rezones. 3. If the aAnnexation and/or rezone zoning requests is are not accompanied by a plat, conditional use permit, or planned unit development, the applicant shall provide a conceptual development plan that depicts streets, site access points, internal circulation patterns, connectivity to adjacent properties, parking, and general location of buildings, pedestrian walkways and public or private open space, unless waived by the city council. Table 11-5B-5 Common open space and site amenities eligible for alternative compliance process. Allow residential developments exceeding 5 acres in size the flexibility to request alternative compliance with the hopes that it will incentivize developments to include open space and amenities that are more proportionate to the size/density of the development. Permit Section Common driveway 11-6C-3 Common open space and site amenity requirements 11-3G Fence requirements 11-3A-7 Height maximum in commercial districts 11-2B-3 Height maximum in industrial districts 11-2C-3 Height maximum in TN-C district 11-2D-5 Landscape buffer for wireless communication facilities 11-4-3-43E Landscape requirements 11-3B Landscaping for base of freestanding sign 11-3D-8 Lighting standards for pathway along State Highway 55 11-3H-4C3 Outdoor lighting requirements 11-3A-11 Parking and loading plan requirements 11-3C-5 Parking requirements 11-3C-6 Private street standards 11-3F-4 Projecting sign allowance 11-3D-8E and F Sign location in the O-T district 11-3D-5 Structure and site design review standards 11-3A-19 9 11-5B-8B.3 Administrative design review Add the discretion by the director to determine if the exterior modification to a building requires full design review or review through the modification with the tenant improvement application. Unless otherwise waived by the Director, aAdministrative design review shall be required for all exterior building alterations, including, but not limited to: the addition, removal, or modification of architectural elements, such as doors, windows, awnings, and arcades; building remodels where all or a portion of a structure is modified, including entrances, facades, rooflines, and building expansions; a change in exterior materials and/or color scheme; or any other alteration that modifies the exterior appearance of the building, approved conditions, and/or the requirements in this title and/or the "City Of Meridian Architectural Standards Manual". 11-6A-1G.1 Subdivision process Reinforce the importance of connectivity and livability. G. To specify the requirements as to the extent and the manner in which: 1. Roads, and streets, and/or driveways shall be created and improved, including vehicular network and block configurations; 2. Water and sewer and other utility mains, piping connections, or other facilities shall be installed; 3. Pedestrian pathways consistent with the comprehensive plan are to be located and designed; and 4. Opportunities for future transit routes and stations are created; H. To protect existing surface waters (Five Mile, Nine Mile, and Ten Mile Creeks) throughout the city; and I. To specify the administration of the regulations of this chapter by defining the powers and duties of approval authorities. 11-6B-5A.1 Short plat process Residentially zoned parcels are currently prohibited from short platting. Allow residentially zoned property to go through the short plat process. A. Applicability: 1. A subdivision application for property within an industrial, commercial, TN-C or O-T district may be processed as a short plat if all of the following exist: a. The property is an original parcel of record or a lot in a recorded subdivision; b. The property is not the result of a previous short plat of a parcel and/or the property is not the result of an approved parcel division by Ada County development services; c. The proposed subdivision does not exceed four (4) lots (excluding landscaping lots) on previously platted property or does not exceed two (2) lots (excluding landscaping lots) on a parcel of land; d. No new street dedication, excluding widening of an existing street, is involved; and e. There are no impacts on the health, safety or general welfare of the city, and the subdivision is in the best interest of the city. 11-6C-3F.4 Subdivision design and improvement standards If block lengths exceed the 1000’ requirement ACHD and City staff has required traffic calming. 4. Maximum Block Face: In no case shall a block face exceed one thousand two hundred feet (1,200')., unless waived by the City Council. Where appropriate and as set forth in section F3 above, traffic calming may be required for blocks in excess of 1,000 feet. 10 11-6C-3D.5 Common driveways Why require a landscape buffer adjacent to common driveway? Request: Eliminate the requirement for the 5-foot landscape buffer adjacent to common driveway if all of the adjacent lots meet the frontage requirements of the district with the caveat that the driveway placement would be opposite of the common driveway. D. Common Driveways: 1. Maximum Dwelling Units Served: Common driveways shall serve a maximum of six (6) dwelling units. 2. Width Standards: Common driveways shall be a minimum of twenty feet (20') in width. 3. Maximum Length: Common driveways shall be a maximum of one hundred fifty feet (150') in length or less, unless otherwise approved by the Meridian city fire department. 4. Improvement Standards: Common driveways shall be paved with a surface with the capability of supporting fire vehicles and equipment. 5. Abutting Properties: All properties that abut a common driveway Unless limited by a significant geographical feature, or separated by a minimum five foot (5') wide landscaped common lot, all properties that abut a common driveway shall take access from the driveway; however, if an abutting property has the required minimum street frontage, that property is not required to take access from the common driveway. In this situation, the abutting property’s driveway shall be on the opposite side of the shared property line; away from the common driveway. Solid fencing adjacent to common driveways shall be prohibited, unless separated by a minimum five foot (5’) wide landscaped buffer. 6. Turning Radius: Common driveways shall be straight or provide a twenty eight foot (28') inside and forty eight foot (48') outside turning radius. 7. Depictions: For any plats using a common driveway, the setbacks, fencing, building envelope, and orientation of the lots and structures shall be shown on the preliminary plat and/or as an exhibit with the final plat application. CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING SIGN -IN SHEET Date: November 15, 2016 Item # 9H Project Number: H-2016-0118 Project Name: UDC Text Amendment Please print your name Ti . For Against Neutral Do you wish to testify (Y/N) CLERKS (A Meridian City Council Meeting // A DATE: November 15, 2016 ITEM NUMBER: j -GK ITEM TITLE: PROJECT NUMBER: Ordinance No. :AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AMENDING MERIDIAN CITY CODE SECTION 6-2-3, RELATING TO CITY OF MERIDIAN DOG LICENSE; AMENDING MERIDIAN CITY CODE SECTION 6-2-8(K), RELATING TO RABIES VACCINATION REQUIREMENTS FOR DOGS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. MEETING NOTES K 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 CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 3 BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BIRD, BORTON, CAVENER, LITTLE ROBERTS, MILAM, PALMER AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AMENDING MERIDIAN CITY CODE SECTION 6-2-3, RELATING TO CITY OF MERIDIAN DOG LICENSE; AMENDING MERIDIAN CITY CODE SECTION 6-2-8(K-), RELATING TO RABIES VACCINATION REQUIREMENTS FOR DOGS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Clerk's Office, in consultation with the Meridian Police Department, Idaho Humane Society, and contracted dog licensing designees, has identified process improvements and City Code updates related to dog licensing that will enhance customer service and administrative efficiency; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Meridian finds that the following updates to the City of Meridian animal control ordinance will serve the best interest of the public health, safety, and welfare; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO: Section 1. That Meridian City Code section 6-2-3 shall be amended as follows: 6-2-3: CITY OF MERIDIAN DOG LICENSE: A. Dog License Required: 1. Each dog owner living in or visiting Meridian for thirty (30) days or longer shall obtain a city of Meridian dog license for each dog that is owned by such person and that is more than six (6) months of age. 2. Application for a city of Meridian dog license shall be made to the city cleric, " peliee depa,.+."ont, or licensing designee duly authorized by the city as set forth in this chapter. Such application shall include the following: a. A completed application form, which form shall include the name, physical address, mailing address, and telephone number of dog owner and a description of dog to be licensed; I ir f6r a dog that was less than one year old when vaeeinated; or- within the previotis three (3) years f6f a dog that was ofle or- more yeafs old when ; c. A valid spay or neuter certification, if applicable; and d. Applicable dog license fee per fee schedule. Where the fee schedule provides for a lower license fee for a spayed or neutered dog, the city or its licensing designee shall allow the payment of the lower license fee only upon the dog owner's presentation of a certificate of neuter or spay issued by a veterinarian or by the Idaho Humane Society. License fees shall be waived for: AN INIAL CONTROL ORDINANCE UPDATE PAGE I OF 7 ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCE UPDATE PAGE 2 OF 7 1) The owner of any dog used by a visually impaired, hearing impaired, or disabled person and used as a seeing eye dog, hearing ear dog, or service dog shall not be required to pay a license fee. The city or its licensing designee shall allow this exception to the license fee only upon the dog owner's presentation of certification of the dog owner's visual or hearing impairment or disability by a licensed medical doctor. 2) The owner of any dog in training to serve as a seeing eye dog, hearing ear dog, or guide dog shall not be required to pay a license fee. The city or its licensing designee shall allow this exception to the license fee only upon the dog owner's presentation of proof that such dog is in training for such purpose. 3) Any dog owned by a public entity or public agency. 3. The city clerk, Meridian police department, or licensing designee shall issue a dog license tag within two (2) working days of receipt of complete application materials and fees. B. Annual Licensing Required: All city of Meridian dog licenses shall be valid only in the calendar year issued and shall expire December 31 of that year. for one (1) year from date of issuance. C. Lost Dog License Tag: The city or its licensing designee shall reissue a lost dog license tag upon payment of lost dog tag fee as set forth in fee schedule and verification that the license tag sought to be replaced is a current and valid city of Meridian dog license, which verification shall be made by reference to the official log(s) of the city or its licensing designee(s). D. Dog Licensing Designees: In order to facilitate the licensing of dogs within the city of Meridian, the city may enter into agreements with the Idaho Humane Society, veterinarians, or vendors of pet products doing business within the city of Meridian authorizing such licensing designee to issue city of Meridian dog licenses on behalf of the city, except that no licensing designee shall be authorized to issue vicious dog licenses. Section 2. That Meridian City Code section 6-2-8 shall be amended as follows: 6-2-8: PROHIBITED ACTS: A court sentencing a person for a violation of this chapter may assess court costs in addition to the fines and penalties set forth herein. A. Barking Dog: It shall be unlawful for any dog owner to permit a dog owned by such person to carry on excessive, continuous or untimely barking or noise. A violation of this subsection shall constitute an infraction punishable by a fine of one hundred dollars ($100.00). B. Cruelty To Animals: C. Damage To Property: It shall be unlawful for any person owning any animal to cause or allow such animal to damage private or public property without the consent of the property's ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCE UPDATE PAGE 3 OF 7 owner. A violation of this subsection shall constitute a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of three hundred dollars ($300.00) and ninety (90) days' jail. D. Dog At Large In Public Place: Except as otherwise allowed by law, it shall be unlawful for any dog owner to allow or cause any dog owned by such person to be or remain in any public place, unless such dog is controlled by a leash not exceeding six feet (6') in length. A person's first violation of this subsection shall constitute an infraction punishable by a fine of twenty five dollars ($25.00). A person's second violation of this subsection shall constitute an infraction punishable by a fine of fifty dollars ($50.00). A person's third violation of this subsection shall constitute an infraction punishable by a fine of one hundred dollars ($100.00). The animal control officer may seize and impound any dog found in violation of this subsection. E. Dog At Large On Private Premises: It shall be unlawful for any dog owner to allow or cause such dog to be or remain upon any private premises without the consent of the person in possession of such premises. A person's first violation of this subsection shall constitute an infraction punishable by a fine of twenty five dollars ($25.00). A person's second violation of this subsection shall constitute an infraction punishable by a fine of fifty dollars ($50.00). A person's third violation of this subsection shall constitute a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of three hundred dollars ($300.00) and ninety (90) days' jail. The animal control officer may seize and impound any dog found in violation of this subsection. F. Dog Attacking Or Biting: Any owner of a dog which, when unprovoked, attacks or bites another person or other domestic animal upon the streets, sidewalks, any public grounds or places, or private property not owned or possessed by the owner of the biting dog, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of three hundred dollars ($300.00) and ninety (90) days' jail. The animal control officer may seize and impound any dog found in violation of this subsection. Where a dog seized pursuant to this provision shows any symptom of rabies or has not been vaccinated for rabies, the animal control officer shall deliver the biting animal to the Idaho Humane Society or to a licensed veterinarian for examination for rabies, and all related costs of such examination shall be paid by the dog owner upon demand from city. Such examination may include, at the discretion of the Idaho Humane Society or veterinarian to whom the biting dog is surrendered, a period of quarantine, confinement, and/or impoundment. If such biting dog is determined to be free of rabies, the dog shall be returned to the owner upon payment to the Idaho Humane Society or licensed veterinarian who examined such animal of all related fees and/or costs. If such biting dog is determined to be afflicted with rabies, the biting dog shall be euthanized according to the provisions of this chapter. G. Dog Rushing: It shall be unlawful for any owner of a dog which, when unprovoked, in a vicious or terrorizing manner, approaches any person in apparent attitude of attack upon the streets, sidewalks, any public grounds or places, or private property not owned or possessed by the owner of the dog. A violation of this subsection shall constitute a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of three hundred dollars ($300.00) and ninety (90) days jail. ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCE UPDATE PAGE 4 OF 7 H. Failure To Display Dog License Tag: It shall be unlawful for any dog owner to fail to cause any licensed dog owned by such person to wear, at all times, a durable, secure collar bearing a valid city of Meridian dog license tag. Production of proof that such dog is licensed shall be an affirmative defense to a charge of violation of this subsection. The person raising such affirmative defense shall bear the burden of proof that such defense applies. A violation of this subsection shall constitute an infraction punishable by a fine of twenty five dollars ($25.00). I. Failure To License Dog: It shall be unlawful for any dog owner to fail to obtain a city of Meridian dog license for any dog owned by such person. It shall be an affirmative defense to a charge of violation of this subsection that such dog is six (6) months of age or younger. The person raising such affirmative defense shall bear the burden of proof that such defense applies. A person's first violation of this subsection shall constitute an infraction punishable by a fine of twenty five dollars ($25.00). A person's second violation of this subsection shall constitute an infraction punishable by a fine of fifty dollars ($50.00). A person's third violation of this subsection shall constitute a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of three hundred dollars ($300.00) and ninety (90) days jail. J. Failure To Update Dog Owner Contact Information: It shall be unlawful for any dog owner to fail to provide to the city clerk's office or Meridian police department updated contact information where there is a change in such dog owner's physical address, mailing address, and/or telephone number registered with any city of Meridian dog license. A violation of this subsection shall constitute an infraction punishable by a fine of ten dollars ($10.00). K. Failure to Vaccinate Dog Against Rabies: It shall be unlawful for any dog owner to fail to vaccinate his or her dog against rabies within the first year of the dog’s life. Further, it shall be unlawful for any dog owner to fail to renew his or her dog’s rabies vaccination every three (3) years. K.L. Female Dog In Heat: It shall be unlawful for any owner of a female dog in heat to fail to enclose such female dog in such a manner as to preclude other dogs from attacking or being attracted to such female dog. A violation of this subsection shall constitute a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of three hundred dollars ($300.00) and ninety (90) days jail. L.M. Fraudulent Display Of Dog License Tag: It shall be unlawful for any dog owner to fail to cause or allow any dog owned by such person to wear a dog license tag issued for another dog, or to wear any imitation of a city of Meridian dog license tag. A violation of this subsection shall constitute a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of three hundred dollars ($300.00) and ninety (90) days jail. M.N. Harboring Excess Dogs: It shall be unlawful for any person to own; keep, harbor, possess, accept, or maintain custody, control, or care of; or license more than three (3) dogs at any single residence, property, or premises. It shall be an affirmative defense to a charge of violation of this subsection that such dogs comprise a single litter of puppies under six (6) months of age that is kept at a single location with the mother dog. The person raising such ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCE UPDATE PAGE 5 OF 7 affirmative defense shall bear the burden of proof that such defense applies. A violation of this subsection shall constitute a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of three hundred dollars ($300.00) and ninety (90) days jail. N.O. Harboring Rabid Animal: It shall be unlawful for any person to own, keep, harbor, possess, accept, or maintain custody, control, or care of any animal afflicted with rabies. A violation of this subsection shall constitute a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of three hundred dollars ($300.00) and ninety (90) days jail. The animal control officer may seize and impound any animal found in violation of this subsection. O.P. Harboring Vicious Dog: It shall be unlawful for any person to own a vicious dog in the city of Meridian more than fourteen (14) days following the entry of a final decision that the dog is a vicious dog. Fourteen (14) days following the entry of a final decision that the dog is a vicious dog, such dog may be considered to be contraband, and may be seized pursuant to warrant and euthanized. A violation of this subsection shall constitute a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) and one hundred eighty (180) days jail. Additionally, upon conviction, the court may authorize the animal control officer to seize, impound, and/or euthanize the dog giving rise to the violation. P.Q. Improper Disposal Of Dead Dogs: It shall be unlawful for any person to place or leave any dead dog on public or private property, including premises lawfully owned or possessed by such person. A violation of this subsection shall constitute a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of three hundred dollars ($300.00) and ninety (90) days jail. Q.R. Interference With Animal Control Officer: It shall be unlawful for any person to hinder or interfere with in any manner an animal control officer who is enforcing any of the provisions of this chapter. A violation of this subsection shall constitute a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of three hundred dollars ($300.00) and ninety (90) days jail. R.S. Removal Of Dog Feces: It shall be unlawful for any person to fail to promptly remove and dispose of, in a sanitary manner, any and all feces left by a dog owned or being handled by such person on property, public or private, other than the premises of the owner or handler of such dog. A violation of this subsection shall constitute an infraction punishable by a fine of twenty five dollars ($25.00). S.T. Unlawful Reclamation Of Impounded Dog: It shall be unlawful for any person to recover or attempt to recover possession of any impounded dog, in any manner contrary to city policy or the provisions of this chapter. A violation of this subsection shall constitute a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of three hundred dollars ($300.00) and ninety (90) days jail. Section 3. That this ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this ____ day of November, 2016. APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this 15; day of November, 2016. APPROVED: T-armn eerdy� /�i �; c' CAY Coles �i/1,2c3 �� ��D nucos� lty Clerk ATTEST: Qgo r q to G °a City of E IDIAN IDAHO srnL Pym V Ih, TAB 0-01,00 ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCE UPDATE PAGE 6 OF 7 NOTICE AND PUBLISHED SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE PURSUANT TO I.C. § 50-901(A) CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 16- : 3 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AMENDING MERIDIAN CITY CODE SECTION 6-2-3, RELATING TO CITY OF MERIDIAN DOG LICENSE; AMENDING MERIDIAN CITY CODE SECTION 6-2-8(K), RELATING TO RABIES VACCINATION REQUIREMENTS FOR DOGS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DA RE Mayor and City Council By: C.Jay Coles, City Clerk e�ty pr E IDIANk— � rnarro S� tiw First Reading: Adopted after first reading by suspension of the Rule as allowed pursuant to Idaho Code § 50-902: YES NO Second Reading: Third Reading: STATEMENT OF MERIDIAN CITY ATTORNEY AS TO ADEQUACY OF SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 16 - The undersigned, William L.M. Nary, City Attorney of the City of Meridian, Idaho, hereby certifies that he is the legal advisor of the City and has reviewed a copy of the attached Ordinance no. 16- 121 �� of the City of Meridian, Idaho, and has found the same to be true and complete and provides adequate notice to the public pursuant to Idaho Code § 50-901A(3). DATED this t � day of IVOLlenM� , 2016. William. L.M. Nary City Attorney ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCE UPDATE PAGE 7 OF 7