Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-02-26• E IDIAN~%~=-- ~, CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA City Council Chambers 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho Tuesday, February 26, 2008 at 7:00 p.m. "Although the City of Meridian no longer requires sworn testimony, all presentations before the Mayor and City Council are expected to be truthful and honest to the best of the ability of the presenter." 1. Roll-call Attendance: David Zaremba ~ Joe Borton Charlie Rountree / ~ Keith Bird Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. Pledge of Allegiance: 3. Community Invocation by Bishop Wayne Nichols of the Loc sa Falls Ward of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints: ' A a ~ ttiC.Q ~~'~' 4. Adoption of the Agenda: ~0~~ ~ c~'~~ C~ 5. Consent Agenda: ~ ~ ~ ~7~ 125, 9 ~ ~F• ~ ~ ~ A. Approve Minutes of January 22, 2008 Pre-Council Meeting: B. App ve Minutes of February 1, 2008 City Council Special Meeting: ~p~ rdVt- C. Approve Plledestrian Pathway Easement Agreement with Ten Mile Center. LLC for McNelis Subdivision: ~~~~~ D. Water Main Easement Agreement for Hickory Office by Hickory Land Partners, LLC: ~rp~/! E. Task Order No. 2.1 for the Ten Mile CreE Replacement with JUB Engineers, Inc. for $13,270: Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -February 26, 2008 Page 1 of 4 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. Black Cat Water Main Reimbursement Agreement with Primeland Development, Keeao Springs, Poles Creek ,~~qy3 Properties, and Dwer Development for $31,48~h~'~' G. Task Order 0733 with Hvdro Logic, LLC for Well 28 Test and Production Well Design, Development and Inspection for a Cost Not to Exceed $57,420: '1" 1 ~((~~C.~ H. Task Order 0732 with Hvdro Loaic, LLC for Well 14 Rehabilitation Design for a Cost Not to Exceed $25,000: ~. ~ro~ 6. Department Reports '~ A. Legal Department /Police Department: 1. Tabled from February 19, 2008: Presentation on Police Pay Plan by Bill Nary and Jeff Lavey: G ~~ii. ~v~-G B. Parks Department I 7. Items Moved from Consent Agenda: ~, ~~Q 8. Continued Public Hearing from February 19, 2008: Proposed Fee ,/ Increase for Planning Department: Q~ -~a~.e~-ham ~ ~-~~ 9. Public Hearing: CPA 07-013 Request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to modify the Future Land Use Map to change four nodes with land use designations of Light Industrial to Commercial, two nodes from Commercial to Light Industrial and one node from Light Industrial to Public /Quasi Public for a future school site. The amendments are intended to bring the City's Future Land Use Map into conformance with the City's Zoning Map. An additional request is to remove the Urban Service Planning Area (USPA) designation from the map legend and replace it with the Area of City Impact (AOCI) Boundary by the City of Meridian Planning Department -two parcels north of Northwest 10~' Place and west of Taylor Street; north of East Franklin Road and east of Taylor Street; two parcels north of East Overland Road and east of South Teare Avenue; east of South Locust Grove and north of East Overland Road; two parcels northwest comer of North Eagle Road and East Lanark Street; six parcels west of North Eagle Road and north of East Florence Street; Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -February 26, 2008 Page 2 of 4 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. Discussion of Heroes Park Construction: CSC CSC(` 2. Discussion of Adventure Island Playground Phase 4: •~ (~ u~Sed • • three parcels west of North Eagle Road and south of East Florence Street; Paddington and Elliott Park Subdivisions south of East Wilson Lane and east of orth Lo ust Grove Road: ~~,, ~ ~ Prue reso~ c~ 10. Public Heari g: RZ 07 017 Request for Rezone of 5.29 acres from R-8 zone to C-G zone (1.62 acres) and L-O zone (3.67 acres) for Verona Commercial by Primeland Development Group, LLC - Northe,,ast Comer of W~es~t McMillan Road and North Ten Mile Road: Q~~ -~ ~-o~~~~ / 11. Public Hearing: PP 07-022 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 12 commercial lots and 2 other lots on 18.82 acres in the proposed C-G and L-O zoning districts for Verona Commercial by Primeland Development Group, LLC -Northeast Comer of West McMillan~ad and North Ten Mil oad: ~ ~; ~ ~,e~,(~~, ~c~c C ~ /~12. Public Hearing: MI 07-013 Request for Miscellaneous a lication to PP modify the Recorded Development Agreement for Verona Commercial by Primeland Development Group, LLC -Northeast Comer of We t McMillan Road and North Ten Mile Road: ~~~;~~t ~ iZ~..~-a~~~~,w~--- 1 X13. Public Hearing: IZZ 07-018 Request for a Rezone of 12.64 acres from R- 4 to an L-O zone for Bridaetower Crossina Office by Primeland Development Group, LLC -Southwest Comer of West~~McMiI Road and No~ Linde~r~ o~~C ~ ~c~.o~.~4-0- ~4. Public Hearing: PP 07-023 Re uest for Prelimina Plat q ry approval of 11 commercial lots and 2 other lots on 10.2 acres in the proposed L-O zoning district for Bridaetower Crossina Office by Primeland Development Group, LLC -Southwest Comer of West McMillan Road and North Linder Road: ~-...~~ a ~~~~ Pre FF c ~.- ~/15. Public Heann MI 07- g 014 Request for a Mlscellaneous application to modify the recorded Development Agreement for Bridaetower Crossina Office by Primeland Development Group, LLC -Southwest Comer of West McMillan Road and North Linder Road: ~ ~ ~ou,~~ 16. Public Hearing: RZ 07-022 Request for a Rezone of 7.37 acres from C- G and R-4 to C-N zones and a Rezone of 5.88 acres from R-4 to L-O zones for Bridaetower Crossina Commercial by Primeland Development Group, LLC -east of North Ten Mile Roa~,i and south of est McMillan Road: Q~~.c~ ~ ~,~.El ~ 17--o u-+n.~-~ 17. Publi~Hearing: PP 07-026 Request for Preliminary Plata royal of 8 PP commercial lots and 1 other lot in the proposed C-N zone for Bridaetower Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -February 26, 2008 Page 3 of 4 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. • • Crossing Commercial by Pl~imeland Development Group, LLC -east of North Ten M`ile,l<toa and so h f West McMillan Road: ~- ~ ~3~P d ~ ~. 18. Public Hearing: RZ 07-019 Request for a Rezone of 0.602 of an acre from I-L to C-G zone for Rockin KB Saloon by Patrick McKeegan - 3163 East Lanark: Qr~pa~ ~ L, ~_ 19. Public Hearing: CUP 07-019 Request for Conditional Use Permit approval of a drinking establishment in a proposed C-G zone for Rockin KB Saloon by Patrick McKeegan - 3163 East Lanark: c~~'~ l~ Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -February 26, 2008 Page 4 of 4 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. Page 1 of 1 Tara Green From: Ted Baird Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 3:09 PM To: Jaycee Holman Cc:- Tara Green; Bill Navy; Emily Kan®; Miche!!e Albertson Subject: FW: Exec Session Notes Template a2 26 08 final draft Attachments: Exec Session Notes Template 02 26 08 final draft.doc Here is a form that we came up with to keep track of exec session notes. Perhaps the Clerk's office can have a notebook for notes that you take, and Legal will have our own notebook for those that we keep. As you use the form, please let us know what changes could make it more useful. °L- ~~~n~ ~~.~g~ 31, ~ ~''~ 3~. ~ ~. .3i.~~~° y~ ~ZSR 2/26/ZE34II Page 1 of 1 Karie Glenn To: Tara Green Subject: RE: S8~W Easement Yes - l have it. I thought that Shari was going to take down to straighten out but will get everything back to you for proper cover sheet so that it can be fixed correctly. kg - -- From: Tara Green Sent: Monday, February 11, 2008 1:02 PM To: Karie Glenn Cc: Jaycee Holman Subject: S&W Easement Hi Karie, I'm missing a 5&W Easement for McNelis that I sent to record z weeks ago. Have you seen it by any chance? I have to send it back as they recorded it wrong. Thanks, Tara Tara Green Deputy City Clerk City of Meridian City Clerk's Office 208-888-4433 Fxt. 210 ~~~,~~ ~ ~ ~' ~x~ ~ m 2/14/2008 Meridian City Council Meeting February 26.2008 A meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:20 p.m., Tuesday, February 26, 2008, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd. Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Keith Bird, Charlie Rountree, and David Zaremba. Members Absent: Joe Borton. Others Present: Bill Nary, Will Berg, Jaycee Holman, Anna Canning, Jeff Lavey, Ron Anderson, Steve Siddoway, Jeff Lavey, Bob Stowe, Pete Friedman, Elroy Huff, Clint Dolsby, Keith Watts, and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll-call Attendance: Roll call. X David Zaremba 0 Joe Borton X Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird X Mayor Tammy de Weerd De Weerd: Okay. Council, I will go ahead and call this meeting to order. Thank you all for being here tonight. Sony for the late start. It is, for the record, Tuesday, February 26. It's 20 minutes after 7:00. We will start tonight's meeting with roll call attendance. Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance: De Weerd: Item No. 2 is the pledge of allegiance. Tonight we will be led in the pledge by Tyler Signmont. If you will all rise and join us in the pledge. (Pledge of Allegiance recited.) Item 3: Community Invocation by Bishop Wayne Nichols of the Lochsa Falls Ward of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints: De Weerd: Tyler, I do have a City of Meridian pin to thank you for joining us and leading us in the pledge. Thank you. Hopefully, your parents give you extra credit or you get some benefit by doing that. Okay. Item No. 3 is our community invocation. Tonight we will be led by Bishop Wayne Nichols. He is of the Lochsa Falls Ward of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. If you will all join us in the community invocation or take this as an opportunity for a moment of reflection. Bishop. Nichols: Our Father in Heaven, in gratitude we come before thee this evening at the beginning of this meeting. We wish to thank thee for the many kind blessings that we all • Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 2 of 81 enjoy at thy hand, for the opportunity to live in this wonderful community. We ask thee to bless the people who serve diligently in our behalf as citizens. Wilt thou bless them with wisdom and understanding in making the decisions that come before them. We ask thee, Father, that those who will speak here tonight may do so clearly and effectively to convey their message and those who are listening might do so clearly with discernment and understanding. We ask thee to bless the families of those who are here while they are separated from them, that no harm or accident may come to them. These favors and blessings, Father, we ask and do in the name of thy son, Jesus Christ, amen. Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda: De Weerd: Bishop, we'd like to thank you again for joining us. Okay. Item No. 4 is adoption of the agenda. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I would ask that we note that on Item F of the Consent Agenda, the grand total that we are being asked to approve is four times the amount printed for 125,944 dollars. And with that I move that we approve the agenda as published. Rountree: Second. Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the agenda as amended. All those favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIES: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 5: Consent Agenda: A. Approve Minutes of January 22, 2008 Pre-Council Meeting: B. Approve Minutes of February 1, 2008 City Council Special Meeting: C. Approve Pedestrian Pathway Easement Agreement with Ten Mile Center, LLC for McNelis Subdivision: D. Water Main Easement Agreement for Hickory Office by Hickory Land Partners, LLC: • Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 3 of 81 CJ E. Task Order No. 2.1 for the Ten Mile Creek Crossing Replacement with JUB Engineers, Inc. for $13,270: F. Black Cat Water Main Reimbursement Agreement with Properties, and Dwer Development for $31,486 each: G. Task Order 0733 with Hvdro Logic, LLC for Well 28 Test and Production Well Design, Development and Inspection for a Cost Not to Exceed $57,420: H. Task Order 0732 with Hvdro Logic, LLC for Well 14 Rehabilitation Design for a Cost Not to Exceed $25,000: De Weerd: Item 5 is the Consent Agenda. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Again, with a note that Item F is for a grand total of 125,944 dollars, I move that we adopt the Consent Agenda and for the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to adopt the Consent Agenda as noted. If there is no discussion, Madam Clerk, will you, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, absent. MOTION CARRIES: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 6: Department Reports A. Legal Department /Police Department: 1. Tabled from February 19, 2008: Presentation on Police Pay Plan by Bill Nary and Jeff Lavey: De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Item 6 under Department Reports. We'll kick it off with legal. Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 4 of 81 Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this actually is an HR report with the police. This matter was set over from last week for you to have some opportunity to review the report that was submitted to you, as well as the comparisons and the pay schedule that we were looking at. The chief could probably give more of the detail, but this is an opportunity for you to have some time to review the report and formulate any questions or issues or concerns that you may have for us to do and, then, I think the chief maybe can have a discussion or conversation with you about implementation of this plan, if that's your direction to go forward. Lavey: Madam Mayor and Council, we were here last week to discuss the pay proposal. And, then, we tabled it for a week so you could review your documentation and in that documentation it kind of talks about how we got to where we are at here today and I guess I'm here to answer any questions that you may have come up with over the week's time. But, basically, what our plan would be is to adopt this new pay schedule and to implement it as fast as we probably could. We have talked with finance -- HR and myself have talked with finance as far as how to implement it -- implement the plan. Also, we are looking to do it in stages. One would be the pay adjustments and the longevity portion of it would be immediately and the specialty pay, work assignment pay, and those sort of things would be adopted into FY-09 budget. And we do have the monies available to implement it and I believe those are in front of you as well. It would cost 90,000 dollars to implement it as of March 21st and carry us through the rest of the fiscal year. I do not know what the figures are. You have it spelled out, but it's about 1.3 million dollars over a five year period, which is about 300 and some thousand would be FY-09 to implement the plan. And with that being said, kind of the reason why we are here in the first place was that we knew there was some issues. We did some unofficial checking and, then, with the Council's direction we hired a consultant and the consultant has brought some figures in front of you. But also the -- the other thing is to kind of market Meridian police department and fill the open positions that we have had for a long time. What we are finding is that the police work is inherently more dangerous today than it ever has been and we are also finding that the type of job now a lot of people don't care for and it's the kind of profession where if you need help they are the first person that you want to see and if you are causing that trouble, you're the last person they want to see and so it's kind of hard to attract good quality people. We wash more people out than we actually hire. And as of today I currently have ten openings and I have not been able to fill those openings. It seems like as soon as we fill them that we are losing other people. And so that's of kind where we are at and if you'd look at the figures, I believe they are reasonable. If you compare it to the average it gives us a little bit above average based on everybody that we had analyzed, but it still puts us at number four here in the valley. So, I believe the request is also reasonable. And with that being said -- unless Mr. Nary has some information I may have missed, I am open to questions and just the discussion. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, chief. Any questions? • i Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 5 of 81 Rountree: Madam Mayor. Chief, you indicated a cost for five years of 1.3 million. That's at the current staffing level or is that at projected increase in staff? Lavey: That would be at current projected staffing level of 80. Rountree: Okay. Lavey: So, any --any planning of the future, then, it would definitely be higher than that. Rountree: And was any thought given to what the increase would do to impact fees for police? Lavey: No, it was not, I do not believe. I don't believe impact fees can be used for -- Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Rountree, because it's personnel, impact fees don't cover personnel, they only cover capital improvements. So, the impact fees wouldn't cover any costs regarding personnel. Bird: And certain capital improvement, as I understand. Nary: Correct. Just certain capital improvements. Rountree: Other than the capital improvements that might be required for additional police officers. Nary: Correct. Yeah. And that wasn't factored in, expanding the building, or those types of things, no. That wasn't factored into this particular number, no. Rountree: And one last question, Madam Mayor. Were benefit packages factored into this analysis or is it strictly -- Lavey: Benefit package as well. The three hundred and some thousand per year includes all benefits. Rountree: Okay. Lavey: That 90,000 for this year also includes all benefits. De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Yes. Chief, first, can we implement this at the end of the March -- starting of April pay period or -- because we are probably too late to start in March, aren't we? Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 6 of 81 Lavey: When we discussed it with finance, if we would have done it last week we could have implemented it for March 21st. There is still a possibility to -- I was shooting for April 1st and finance wants to do it at the start of the pay period, which is March 21st, which is what we are going to shoot for if it's approved today. And if we can't make it by then, then, we will just do the next pay cycle. But we are going to implement it on the pay cycle, not on the first of the month. Bird: And my second follow-up question, Madam Mayor, is this has been explained to all officers, because a couple years from now all they will get is their COLAs, some of the officers, because they will be at the top and they all have been -- this has all been explained to them as I understand. Lavey: Yes. You can actually look at it to the point -- there is one figure in there where it's -- it's actually a pretty good benefit to the city. Bird: I know. Lavey: And it's -- it has been explained to them and just to let you know how we got to where we are at is we put a group of officers in place and those officers were some veteran officers and some new officers and the figures that you have in front of you was taken to them with the mind set that this is what we are proposing and this is what you're going to get and this is only what you're going to get and they are good with that, because a couple different things is that it's going to shorten it up, so they are going to get more sooner, less later. But the other things it's giving them is a couple areas that they don't have currently, which is a couple different certification levels. We have always had basic, intermediate, and advanced and we added -- Council added a couple years ago a masters level, but we had about six people eligible for that masters level, but we never gave it to them and, then, they weren't going to get it for another six years. So, there would be -- of our officers that currently have masters certificates, they are going to move into that slot. And, then, with our supervisors, you can actually get supervisory certificates and management certificates that we have never paid for as well. These are in -- and so these are some areas of additional monies. The whole thought process on the longevity was to accommodate that, where you're not going to be getting anything else on your pay -- or on the pay unless you go into a specialty area or unless you go through a promotion, but you're going to get something for the years of service that you have given to the city. Fortunately for us is there is only 12 people, including myself, that have over ten years of experience here -- or ten years with Meridian and six people that have longevity of 15 years, and so the longevity costs are pretty insignificant, 6,100 dollars. Over time it would be a great cost. They are aware of it. The one thing that HR has said is that over the course of the years we will evaluate the current levels that we are paying and adjustments may or may not happen. So, that's -- they are aware of that. Bird: Well, I think that's only smart to take a look at it over the years. Meridian Ciry Council February 26, 2008 Page 7 of 81 Nary: In fact, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Bird, one of the things that I think was the flaw of the prior system was that the system itself wasn't bad, it was there was no maintenance of the system. No one evaluated it after a period of time that it was still valid and it was still marketable, that it was being kept current with the local economy. And that's not our intent. And that's -- but it has been the discussion with the officers and I have certainly offered to Chief Lavey between now and whenever we implement this, that him, myself, whoever he would like to be a part of that, to have those one on ones or group sessions with officers, I'm happy to do that. I certainly don't want two or three years from now people concerned that it's still not meeting their needs, but I don't anticipate that. But we did have this lengthy discussion at a number of these meetings with the employees that other than the potential of, essentially, maintenance costs for keeping it current from that five year mark until the ten year mark, there were no other increases built into the system. That's not uncommon in the industry and that's not uncommon in the local marketplace. So, that wasn't foreign to them. They did understand that and they were comfortable with that and they did look at -- at least the people on the committee really looked at this. This was an attempt to really make some adjustments to get the pay program where it should be, where it was comfortable and competitive with other agencies in the valley, not to say they -- you know, they may not be coming in another budget year for increases or some changes, I think that's inevitable, but I think we are trying to put together a program that could allow for that. It made it simpler to understand than what you have today. Some of us recall a few years ago with out general employees pay we did the same thing. We changed it to make it simpler and understandable for folks and, then, we still make -- make a lot of efforts to make sure we keep current. That's our intent with this. Lavey: And also just to add to that is that it compares to everybody else around the area. So, when they are having that late night side by side chat, they are talking apples to apples pretty much now because of the -- the makeup of this scale. And the other thing that I bring before you is -- and it's probably of less interest to you and more interest to HR and myself is the administrative guidelines. One of the things that I found when I took over the roll of chief is that we had people in positions in -- that we couldn't explain why they were in the positions they were at and so I asked for some -- basically a play book, a roll book, that says this is how you got to where you're at. It will also cover with the certified officers as well. There is no mistaking where you fall into the pay scale and if there is any doubt you just look at the words that we have written down and so it kind of helps us now, so Mr. Nary and myself are not pulling our hair out trying to figure how we got to -- how they got to where they are at. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba. Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 8 of 81 Zaremba: That raises the question are there any individuals that are likely to be paid less than they were the week before once this goes into effect? Lavey: What we have done is we made the administrative decision to insure that nobody loses any money, but there is a couple groups of people that get substantially less of an increase, but, then, I was quick to point out last year Council had made an adjustment and that's why the increase is much less, is that we have already taken care of some of the issues, just not all of the issues. And so we are actually talking about like a half a percent increase, yes. But nobody will get zero. Zaremba: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Either you or Bill and probably Bill. I'll preface this by saying I'm not a real fan of longevity, but I don't understand the situation here as it relates to just a statement that there will be longevity that recognizes ten years or more of service. So, explain what the intent is. Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Rountree, I mean what part of the plan that we were looking at -- initially, the chief had been looking at phasing in different aspects of this, doing pay adjustments maybe in this budget year, if the financial means were there to do that and, then, looking at some other enhancements to it. What we found is in longevity that providing some additional compensation for officers at the ten, 15, and 20 year mark of a per hour increase was a marketable type of program that was consistent with other departments in the valley, so that was a means for retention. We don't want to lose ten year officers. We have invested a lot of money to that point in the officer to, then, have them leave for another agency would be really a loss to the city. So, finding a way to create some retention in that was what we were looking for. What we found is we still have a fairly young department and so the cost of that is something that we could incorporate now and that's -- that was the intent is that -- to try to bring some of those folks that have waited a long time for some increases that have not been kept current as they probably should have been over the years to be able to make those adjustments now. The expense was fairly small and so when the chief and I and finance talked about it, we found it was -- it was doable to propose to do that in this current budget with the dollars that are saved and the long- term impact was still a plus to the city, because, again, we have a fairly young department. I mean as the chief stated, we only have a certain number of officers that would even be eligible for that. But it does provide an incentive at the ten year mark, fifteen year mark for folks that don't have other options maybe at that point. It may not ~ i Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 9 of 81 be practical for some of the specialty pay, may not necessarily be reasonable, but it does provide a retention method. Lavey: In the -- in the old scale we actually covered from zero to 121 percent increases over the length of the scale and it was kind of an idea that we will scale that back to 59 percent, so from start to finish is 59 percent, and instead of going up to the 121 percent, that we put in some sort of longevity plan. Longevity is something that they recognize as far as when we are marketing other agencies they have longevity plan in place and that's one of the questions that's asked of us and so it was kind of a give-take thing. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Rountree: My concem is that -- and it -- maybe it's just how it comes across to me -- is that longevity in a pay system implies to me an entitlement, whether you perform or not, you know, if you show up for ten years you get increase, as opposed to defining it something along the lines of a market adjustment or retention adjustment or something of that nature that equates to me as a reasonable thing to do for somebody is you're going to lose them. There may be people that have ten years that if you lose them is not going to be critical. So, I -- that's where I come from. Lavey: And I understand that and I respect that. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I, for one, like the longevity, because if -- and if you let them get ten years there and they are not -- they are not worth being there, then, that's administrations fault. Us four Councilmen and the chief of police's fault in Meridian. I think you should award people that would stay -- somebody that's been there ten years has got to be more valuable to the department than somebody that's been there six months or a year or two years. So, I like the longevity. I think it's fair pay for the people. My main concem -- and you answered it, which I'll renew, that nobody takes -- nobody takes a pay cut and I'm definitely -- not ever want to see that happen. Lavey: I wouldn't to go in front of those 80 officers and tell them that I'm going to cut their pay. Bird: I like the program. Rountree: They all cant' guns. Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 10 of 81 Lavey: I'd have to -- yeah, but I'd have to -- I would have to find my gun first. Bird: I think I'd want more than a pistol. De Weerd: And you're not bringing the Mayor with you either. Bird: I think it's a good plan. I think it's something that is doable. And I'm for getting on with it as fast as we can. De Weerd: Any other questions from Council? Zaremba: Madam Mayor, just a comment. It appears to be well thought out and apparently supported by the troops and if it helps in recruiting ten more people, I think it's great. Lavey: Well, I hope it's well thought out and if it's not, it's Bill's fault. Zaremba: There we go. De Weerd: Now, I would have blamed it on the members from your department that served on it, so -- Lavey: Oh, no, no, no. De Weerd: We appreciated their involvement and time, because there was considerable time and debate that went on, but they stuck with it and I think they came up with a good final product. Lavey: They are mentioned in the executive summary and I would like to take note that they did do a great job. De Weerd: Okay. Council? Rountree: Madam Mayor, just a final comment that the retention, as well as the vacancies that we have managed to maintain for too many months was a critical issue in the hiring of a new chief and if this helps the new chief accomplish full compliment, then, I'm all for it. We need to get those ten filled and maintain afull --full service. De Weerd: I think that the premise that this was happening has allowed us not to have more openings to fill, so we appreciate that. Lavey: That and I do have certified officers that are interested in coming. Three are currently going through the process. And they have an idea of where we are trying to go, but I have several more that have been inquiring and are just kind of sitting back i ! Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 11 of 81 and watching what happens tonight and I'm confident that we will get several more certified officers to Meridian Police Department, which will also help us with that youngness of our department. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: If everybody is done discussing, I'd make a motion that we accept the new pay scale and implement it for the pay period starting March 21st. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Madam Clerk, will you, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, absent. De Weerd: All ayes. MOTION CARRIES: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. B. Parks Department 1. Discussion of Heroes Park Construction: De Weerd: Okay. And thank you, chief. Thank you, Mr. Nary. Okay. Item 6-B is our Parks Department. I'll tum this over to Mr. Siddoway. Siddoway: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. First off tonight is a discussion of the Heroes Park construction project that we'd like your direction on. Heroes Park is located along Ten Mile Road at the intersection with Malta Drive on the west side of Lochsa Falls Subdivision, under construction with an agreement or in partnership with PAL. As you know, we have been working out the agreement side of issues on this project and our direction has been to continue moving forward and making progress with the park while the details of the agreement are worked out. Just some general orientation through the park. Along Malta Drive you have the main parking lot and to the east of that you have got an area that could be used in the future, a portion of it, for overflow parking and this area where that circle is is the playground or tot lot area. The irrigation pond sits over against Ten Mile. Storm drainage. And, then, the majority of the park itself is used for soccer. Last fall we went into the parking lot as the department -- and, Anna, if you could bring up the Powerpoint. Last fall we made the improvements to the parking lot. The trees and the grass and shrubs that are -- in Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 12 of 81 the entry of the parking lot are complete at this time and were done last fall. There are still remaining improvements to that front area, landscaping that are remaining and yet to be done. The area to the east of the parking lot is currently dirt, needs to be graded. The imgation system needs to be completed. There is an area between the parking lot and where the grass is for the ball fields, a strip of grass there between -- next to the pathway or sidewalk area that needs irrigation and grass. The concrete pad -- I don't know if I can -- the concrete pad is in this area. It's currently there as overFlow parking, but just dirt and we would be paving that as well. And, then, the curbing around the that parking area would also be added. Trees could be done as part of this project, but we could save some money by having them done by staff. So, we can either add the trees as an addendum or have them planted after the grass and the irrigation and such are installed. We do have a current budget already in place for Heroes Park. That budget of 175,000 dollars was approved for the shelter in the park, trash cans, drinking fountains, tables and trees. We estimate that for the improvements that we are proposing, our current construction estimate that we received around 146,000, the remaining leftover budget would be used for the -- to get the trash cans, trees, and park signage into the park, but we would need to come back to you, if we did this, to rebudget for the shelter, the tables, and the fountain, because we would be using the money that had been budgeted for that shelter to make improvements to the -- the landscaping and getting that finished. So, we are seeking your direction as to whether we should move forward with this project, sending it out to bid using our existing budget and, then, in order to keep those improvements moving forward and, then, we would come back to you to reestablish funds for the shelter and related improvements. And with that I would seek your direction and stand for questions. De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Siddoway. Any questions for staff? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Steve, can you go back to the picture? Siddoway: Oh, yeah. The picture. Bird: Right there. I have got some real concern on -- on parking there, with the amount of fields. You got 16 fields and I realize some of them are little ones, but tell me if I'm wrong, but the little teams probably have the same amount of kids as the bigger teams, don't they? I don't know -- De Weerd: They have fewer players. Rountree: Fewer players, but more parents. C~ Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 13 of 81 • Bird: More parents. There is 16 and I don't know, is there -- I hate to take up any of their fields, but I'm afraid for parking. I can see our police department being out there along that subdivision and settling fights, disputes, and everything else. every Saturday or whenever they have it. I wish we could find more ways to -- more area to park. But at the same token I don't want to give up the playground equipment or anything like that either. I'm kind of selfish that way, too. De Weerd: Mr. Bird, they have -- the police have been out there that have helped with some parking on neighborhood streets. The PAL board responded by putting up signage that did help. They also helped by scheduling their games a little bit different and they do limit the number of games going at any particular time. Additionally, the city has worked with the church that is up in the northwest comer that allows parking on their property. So, there is a number of things that our staff, the police department, and the neighboring subdivisions have worked on to try and mitigate the impact of Saturday soccer games. Steve, do you have anything you want to add? Siddoway: Yes, Madam Mayor. Two things. One is that we are -- in our discussions with PAL actively working on having them extend their playing time on Saturdays, so that they have fewer games scheduled at the same time, so that we can alleviate some of the parking issues. They have also agreed to purchase some additional signs for the area south -- currently, they sign the residents requesting their patrons not to park in front of the residences on the east side. They have agreed to do the same along the south. And, then, if -- if, as we move on, we continually find that we do not have additional -- or we do not have enough parking, there is area in here that is reserved that could be used for future parking and (believe -- how many spaces is that? Around 60 spaces could be added in the future without having to move the playground. Bird: Okay. Yeah. That's -- De Weerd: And it was believed that, Mr. Bird, some of the people were choosing to park on the streets, even though there were -- there was parking in the lot. Bird: Surprise. Surprise. De Weerd: So, by buying the additional signage, we are hopeful that that will help some of the circulation issues. Any other questions? Siddoway: I would just seek your direction, then, in whether we should move forward in sending this landscape project out to bid. Rountree: Yes. Bird: Can't leave it sitting there. • • Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 14 of 81 De Weerd: Do you have a motion? Zaremba: I would move that we move ahead with sending the bid out to the landscape department -- or to a landscape bidder. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Was that not to exceed or -- Siddoway: I think it's just not to exceed approved budget for this item for the park. Council's authority to use funds that were towards these improvements. our current budget. I mean we have an We are just wanting to make sure we have approved for a shelter and other amenities Zaremba: Yeah. Siddoway: And that that's up front and clear. De Weerd: Okay. So, I have a motion and a second to approve the reallocation to these other items. Any discussion? Madam Clerk, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, absent. MOTION CARRIES: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. 2. Discussion of Adventure Island Playground Phase 4: Siddoway: Okay. Thank you. The second item is just informational. Adventure Island Playground, it's in our current budget. The phase four -- or if I can bring up a site plan of this one for you as well. While she's bringing up the site plan, there is three main components to this next phase. The tree of hope. And this area is to just north of the existing playground. It's got the sound garden and climbing areas. The funds are already approved in the current budget, so I'm not here seeking any additional funds. I simply wanted to let the Commission know -- or the Commission -- the Council know that we are moving forward on this. It's currently out for bid. Boy, the lines aren't showing up very well on there. But just to orient you, this is the edge of the existing parking lot. You can come in to the play structure that's in here. The tree of hope will sit right in the center. This area to the right will be the sound garden and will have play activities that are related to music and sound. The area to the left of the tree of hope is where the climbing rocks will be. And this was all designed previously and budgeted, but just wanted to let you know that this project is moving forward. It's out to bid. We hope to be before you in a couple of weeks with a successful bidder and moving this project toward construction. And with that I'll stand for any questions. Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 15 of 81 De Weerd: Thank you. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Rountree: Steve, this hasn't got a thing to do with this project, but what's the status of the tennis court project? Siddoway: The tennis court project is Settler's Village Square. It is currently budgeted for construction documents. Those construction documents are approximately 80 percent complete. Elroy and I reviewed a set of those a couple of weeks ago and sent comments back to The Land Group for their response. Rountree: So, help me understand what you just said. You said it was budgeted for the construction documents. My recollection is it was budgeted for construction documents and construction this year. Siddoway: All the information I'm -- I may need to dig into this further to come back to you, but my understanding right now is that the construction documents are budgeted. We have some funds for the green up of the comer in grass for this year. But the actual construction of the horseshoes and the tennis courts are not budgeted currently, is my current understanding now. I will -- I guess I need to look into the last budget cycle. Rountree: Please do. Siddoway: Okay. De Weerd: It's always the new guy thing; right? Siddoway: I'm song, Mayor? De Weerd: It's the new guy thing. Siddoway: Yes. I will -- I will dig into that one. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Anything further, Council? Bird: I have none. Rountree: I have nothing. De Weerd: Thank you, Steve and Elroy. Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 16 of 81 Item 7: Items Moved from Consent Agenda: De Weerd: Okay. There were no items moved from the Consent Agenda. Item 8: Continued Public Hearing from February 19, 2008: Proposed Fee Increase for Plannina Department: De Weerd: So, we will move to Item 8, continued Public Hearing from February 19th and tum this over to Mrs. Canning. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the first item before you tonight is the proposed fee increase and I have provided information in the packets. If you'd like forme to put my spreadsheet up on the overhead I can. But I think I'll forego that at this time and just talk a little bit about the history of where our fees are right now. I think I have explained this before. We adopted the current fee schedule as part of the new Unified Code in 2005 and I have not adjusted them since that time. That fee structure was significantly different than our former fee structure in that there was no per acre or per square foot charge. We wanted to give it a little time to work itself out and see how those new fees worked. We switched away from that, because of the -- a little easier to -- for folks to understand -- our customers to understand what the fee schedule was and to have a more predictable and, hopefully, more rational fee when they came in. So, we have gone for two years now. If I look back at -- at the applications we did during those two years and kind of compare the two fee schedules, we are getting a lot less money than we would have under the previous fee schedule. So, I felt it important to come back to you to propose some modifications to that. The modifications that you're seeing tonight are a result of two major things. One was Public Works and Planning going back and reevaluating the estimates we have done in the original fee schedule on how much time it takes to actually practice -- process a kind of typical application. The big change there was the time that it takes to get that application complete and off to the clerk's office. Sometimes it can take us up to four hours to gain a complete applicant that we weren't counting into the process previously. The other big change comes about on hearing items more than anything else and that's because we accounted for the time of the attorney's office and for the clerks, so that we are covering some -- and the stenographer, so that we are covering some of those hard costs that we -- that are passed along to our department. The goal here is to have the current planning division -- not the whole planning department, but the current planning division recoup most of the fees necessary for running that department. We do not want to become a burden to the general fund as far as the planning staff goes, so we do want to have that current planning staff that is there primarily to process development applications supported by the development fee. Okay. Let me go through some of the new fees. There are three new fees. One is a development agreement, development modification, and surety fee. Currently we just charge a miscellaneous application fee to the -- for the development agreements. So, that miscellaneous fee is 459 dollars. For a new development agreement we are proposing a fee of 303 dollars, so it's actually a decrease. And for a • Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 17 of 81 modification we are proposing 502. That may seem like it should be reversed, but it, actually, takes us more time to do a modification, because we have to go research the entire previous development agreement and the hearings that went on behind that. Surety fee we just currently don't charge one. They do take quite a bit of time for us to process, so we are looking to institute that fee. There are two other fees that we are proposing a decrease. They are modest decreases for accessory use for a day care or a home occupation. The other one is a director determination. Then, we had a few fees that were just a modest increase in fees. Those were inspections, planned unit developments, sign -- planned sign programs and zoning verification letters. And those, really, are about seven percent, which is about to change. It reflects the cost -- or the change in our average wage over the last two years. I think the big question for Council is often how does this compare to other cities and in your packet I provided a comparison to Boise city, Eagle city, Nampa, Middleton, Kuna, and Ada County. And I did have a chance to follow up with either the current planning manager or the planning director for those communities or several of them. Talked to Boise city and they felt that -- in general they just felt that they weren't recouping the fees necessary to cover the time that it takes to process those applications. They had not had direction from Council and it had been awhile since they updated their fees. So, they just didn't reflect that time necessary. All of the people I talked to were interested in my methodology and what we had talked about, because I think they all are mindful of budget these days and looking to work on it. For other communities it was -- the fees -- it's -- it's a lot of comparing apples and oranges, because some communities charge -- or send out separate bills for the engineering review. So, like where Eagle city looks like we are about the same as Eagle or a little bit more expensive than the city of Eagle, actually, they get a bill for an engineering fee that's anywhere like 300 dollars for a lot line adjustment to 1,300 dollars or 500 dollars. I mean most of them varied between 500 and 1,000 dollars. So, there is significant other fees that they pay. And we all are structured differently. Public works does take in a fee when they review a construction plan. So, it's really hard to compare apples and oranges just for the planning department, because some of them tie in more, some of them tie in less. and Ada County was kind of that way, too. I noticed Ada County fees are a little bit less on the ones that involve engineering and I think it's because there is not the loop of the Ada County engineer in the process. So, they tended to have -- be a little bit cheaper on the things that required engineering review. Talked to the planning director for the city of Caldwell. He was just told when he did his fee increases to not be more than Nampa. So, you know, there is competitive advantage sometimes that goes into these fees, it's not always cost based. But the methodology that I have presented to you is cost based, it was justifiable and I think it's important that we started looking at -- at some of those fees that make -- or some of that time and commitment we put into it that we are not recovering from the attorneys office, from the clerk's ofFce, from our stenographer. I think that the development community gets a great benefit from having those word-by- word minutes that they can go back to and look at, as do all of us. So, with that I'll answer any of your specific questions Council may have. Or Mayor. i ! Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 18 of 81 De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions? Bird: I have none. Rountree: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. This is a Public Hearing. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony on this item? If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. Kunz: Joe Kunz with the Building Contractors Association at 6206 Discovery Way in Boise. De Weerd: Thank you. Kunz: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Council Members. It is a pleasure to be here with you this evening. Upon review of the proposed fee increase, the BCA - SWI did note the discrepancy in revenues collected by the planning department between the fiscal years 2005 and 2007, during which time the city processed a similar number of applications. And we also see the problems associated with that decline in revenue. However, if the fee adopted at the end of 2005 with the UDC was based upon time of process applications, as was part of that factoring, then, it would be reasonable to assume that there was a decrease in the number of hours worked with that decrease in revenue. But we also recognize the importance of the fees that we pay and we do -- we are supportive of a formula to calculate fees according to the time that it takes the city to process those fees. But we are leery of a fee increase because the calculation does not recoup as much as the previous fee structure does. So, off the top we - we were concerned about that. We did invite Mrs. Canning to our developers council and she went through the process, eased some of those concerns, but also, as you are aware, there has been a significant down turn in the housing market, both locally and nationwide and this situation has required all of our builder developers to reevaluate the way they are doing business and to even lay off some employees to meet the bottom line and we, as a building industry, don't feel this down turn should -- should only rest upon -- should not just affect us as builders and developers, but should affect all those agencies that rely upon our industry and as you are contemplating a fee increase we also ask the city to evaluate the way that they do business during this downturn and before asking a currently struggling fee increase to insure that their departments are operating efficiently. Not saying that the department is not. Meridian has always been excellent in operations and run a -- run a good department, but it is a tough time and everything affects our builders and developers, especially at this time. Also, as the association and as I have stated to you and to the city through previous letters, at previous council meetings, and through conversations that have been had, any increase in fees does affect the bottom line of a home and, in turn, affects the affordability of that home. And we at the Building Contractors Association feel it is a mandate by our customers to provide homes -- quality homes at an affordable rate and these fees do Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 19 of 81 affect that affordability. However, we do realize the -- that the fees are that our industry should pay its equitable share of the growth cost. So, balance that is there and a decision that policy makers like you get to envy you for your task and -- but I do thank you for your service as yc serve the cities and do have to make these tough decisions and so I w stand for any questions. De Weerd: Council, any questions? Bird: I have none. Rountree: Thanks, Joe. De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. necessary and it is a delicate make. I don't u--asyoudo Auld be glad to Zaremba: I will begin with a comment that I always appreciate the BCA's participation in all of these kinds of subjects. It's good to have perspective sometimes that differs from our own. As Director Canning mentioned, it sounds like every jurisdiction in the valley has a different method of figuring out their fees and I guess my pinpoint question to you would be are you supportive of the methodology that came up with these fees for us? Kunz: We are supportive of a cost base per time spent on the application. Yes. It causes a little bit of hesitation wondering two years ago it was a similar methodology and came up very far off. And so not that this methodology is not correct now, it may be the correct methodology, but it causes doubt into our minds as to whether or not it is needed or if it will be -- need to be adjusted again in two more years. De Weerd: Well, I hate to tell you this, but I have asked staff to annually review fees, so that you don't get hit with big increases. So, you have an opportunity annually to stand in front of us I think. Kunz: And it seems more than annually. De Weerd: Oh, come on. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Zaremba: Just as sort of a follow up. Is there any other system or methodology that you have -- as a group would -- that you like better? I'm sure one that comes out cheaper I'm sure, but is there somebody who is simpler or -- Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 20 of 81 Kunz: I mean as Anna said, it's comparing apples to oranges and I don't know that there is one silver bullet. This is the right way that it should be. Every -- every city does it differently and we do commend Anna and the planning department for trying to tie those fees directly to the cost of service. Our builders and developers are not anti-fee. They aren't opposed to paying -- to paying fees, they just want to feel that they are getting value out of the fee that they are paying and a fee related to the cost of service is our preferred method. Zaremba: Great. Thank you. De Weerd: Well, we hope we add value, because the fee gives staff time to be one of the fastest in the valley and most efficient. I would say more most efficient. So, that should add value, because it does affect the bottom line. Okay. Anything else, Council? No? Rountree: I have no questions for Joe. Thank you, Joe. De Weerd: Thank you. Any additional testimony? Okay. Canning: Madam Mayor? Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I did want to say you don't -- the BCA was very kind to me when I went over there as well. They are -- you know, they are very supportive. I understand the reluctance to not comment on a fee increase. I did want to point out for BCA's benefit, as well as some of Council may not know this, but since I went to talk to BCA, I have resigned one of the current planning staff to -- to not, essentially, be current planning. She's an assistant planner. Instead of an associate, replacing our associate planner. We hired an assistant planner and, then, I volunteered that assistant planner up to be the community development block grant administrator. So, most of her salary for this year will come out of the CDBG funds, instead of the current planning division funding -- or enterprise funding. So, I have accommodated that slow down in that way and we have, essentially, lost one of our current planning staff to -- to other duties. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Council, any additional information needed? Bird: I have none. Rountree: I have none. De Weerd: Your questions have been answered? Zaremba: They have. Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. No further testimony? Council, I would entertain a motion on this item. Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 21 of 81 Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Zaremba: I move we close the Public Hearing on the proposed fee increase for the planning department. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close the Public Hearing on this item. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carves. MOTION CARRIES: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Zaremba: I move we approve the proposed fee increase for the planning department as published. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: And to draw up the appropriate paperwork? Nary: Resolution. Rountree: Resolution. De Weerd: Yes. Resolution. Zaremba: That's part of the motion, yes. De Weerd: Okay. Bird: And date certain? De Weerd: It's been agreed. When is the effective date? Zaremba: Should we make the effective date April 1st? Rountree: April 1st. , De Weerd: Anna, is there an effective date that you're seeking? • Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 22 of 81 Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is where I always get a little confused on these items. I think the resolution needs to be adopted first, so that could be done next week. So, April 1st would make logical sense, then. De Weerd: That would make it April Fool's Day. Canning: I will wear a jester's hat all day if anybody would like me to. De Weerd: Okay. Second agrees? Rountree: Yes. De Weerd: Any discussion? Rountree: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. Madam Clerk, will you, please, call roll on this item. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, absent. MOTION CARRIES: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 9: Public Hearing: CPA 07-013 Request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to modify the Future Land Use Map to change four nodes with land use designations of Light Industrial to Commercial, two nodes from Commercial to Light Industrial and one node from Light Industrial to Public /Quasi Public for a future school site. The amendments are intended to bring the City's Future Land Use Map into conformance with the City's Zoning Map. An additional request is to remove the Urban Service Planning Area (USPA) designation from the map legend and replace it with the Area of City Impact (AOCI) Boundary by the City of Meridian Planning Department -two parcels north of Northwest 10~' Place and west of Taylor Street; north of East Franklin Road and east of Taylor Street; two parcels north of East Overland Road and east of South Teare Avenue; east of South Locust Grove and north of East Overland Road; two parcels northwest corner of North Eagle Road and East Lanark Street; six parcels west of North Eagle Road and north of East Florence Street; three parcels west of North Eagle Road and south of East Florence Street; Paddington and Elliott Park Subdivisions south of East Wilson Lane and east of North Locust Grove Road: De Weerd: Okay. Item 9 is a Public Hearing CPA 07-013. I will open this Public Hearing with staff comments. Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 23 of 81 Friedman: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. These are amendments to the Comprehensive Plan land use map that were initiated by staff. They are essentially housekeeping measures. Seven of them are intended to bring our Comprehensive Plan map more into a consistency or parody with our zoning map. The two changes are to kind of accurately portray the location of two schools and, then, the tenth item is for the removal of the designation of the urban service planning boundary that currently exists on the Comprehensive Plan land use -- future land use map. A description of the individual changes is contained in your staff report, but I will go over them briefly with you just to kind of give you the intent of what was being proposed. And these were a -- reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a Public Hearing on November 1st. There was no testimony either for or against. Notice of both the Planning Commission's hearing on the changes, as well as tonight's hearing, has been sent to the individual property owners. So, kind of contrary to what we do with a lot of comp plan amendments, because of the limited nature of this, we were able to notify the individual property owners. There has really been -- I've only had one communication and that was from Brad Miller with Van Auker Properties and they were fine with it. They really didn't have any comments. So, briefly, changes one and two are changing the land use designations from commercial to industrial and that is to reflect the current zoning on the property. Change three is a change from industrial to high density residential, again, to reflect the zoning on the property and also the current use of the property as a high density residential. I believe that's the Paddington project. Oops, I can't mention that. Sony. Please ignore that last comment. Change number four and number five, again, are a reflection of both the current use of the properties and the zoning actions, particularly in number four, even though the cun'ent Comprehensive Plan designation shows the area as industrial, because it was part of a planned development there is a significant amount of commercial development and retail development adjacent to Eagle Road. So, we felt it was more appropriate that that be designated commercial to reflect the true use of the property. Number five was a rezone that occurred approximately a year, year and a half ago, from industrial to commercial. Let's see what we have down here. Number six is a change from industrial to quasi-public and commercial. The quasi-public reflects the ownership of the property by a church and the commercial for the small piece that you probably can't make out, which is right down there, again, is a reflection of the current zoning for the property and number seven is a change in the designation from industrial to commercial, again, to reflect the current zoning on the property. And, then, the number two school designations were moved. As you know, we generally locate schools in areas where we feel it's appropriate to serve the area and this is an adjustment that was made to reflect the location of two schools that were now committed to those properties. And, finally, the one that you can't see on the map is the removal of the Urban Service Planning area. We currently have Urban Service Planning area that is shown on our future land use map, but it hasn't kept up with some of our changes in our area of city impact, plus we do planning outside that area, our sewer plans and our water plans reflect -- have examined areas beyond that. So, rather than have to go change it every time we amend a sewer or water plan, we felt it was appropriate to take that designation • Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 24 of 81 off and also we took it off because we were mindful of the conversations that are going on through Blueprint For Good Growth in establishing a planning area. So, it really is, in effect, irrelevant at this point. So, in conclusion, the Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended approval of these changes. Again, no testimony either for or against, other than staff recommendation for approval and if you have any questions I would be happy to answer them. De Weerd: Thank you, Pete. Any questions for staff? Zaremba: Madam Mayor. On the subject of the Urban Service Planning Area, I think there are references to that in the UDC and always in the staff reports the Public Works Department makes reference to them. Are those being searched out and expunged as well? Friedman: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Councilman. We will have to go through that. I know there is a couple of references in the Comprehensive Plan to that and we will be looking at those and making changes, because under the actual heading of Urban Service Planning Area it says that and, then, it goes on and proceeds to talk about the area of city impact. So, yeah, we will make appropriate text amendments to follow that. Zaremba: Thank you. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Zaremba, if need be, if we need an Urban Service Planning Area, we can always put it on a separate map on the Comprehensive Plan. The problem with having it on the land use map is that it limits the amount of time that we can modify it and it's much more rigorous than if it's somewhere else in the text. So, it may be that we end up putting additional graphics in, but in other places of the Comprehensive Plan. Zaremba: Okay. Canning: Or separately adopted. Zaremba: I just didn't want to have conflicting ordinances. De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions from Council? This is a Public. Hearing. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony on this application? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Rountree: Seeing no further desire for testimony, I move that we close the Public Hearing on Item No. 9. Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 25 of 81 Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close the Public Hearing on Item 9. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carves. MOTION CARRIES: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Okay. Any discussion? Rountree: Just a question, Madam Mayor resolution, ordinance, or both? On any action we take does this require a Nary: Resolution. Rountree: Resolution. Okay. Madam Mayor, I move that we approve Item No. 9, the Comprehensive Plan amendment, and instruct staff to prepare a resolution that indicates approval of these changes. Is there a statutory effective date required on that? Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Rountree, we will make it effective on approval of the resolution. Rountree: Okay. Nary: Since this is a text amendment -- or map. Rountree: That's my intent, then. De Weerd: Okay. Second agree? Zaremba: Second agrees. De Weerd: Okay. Any further discussion? Madam Clerk, will you, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, absent. MOTION CARRIES: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Okay. Anna, I guess I would ask. This is the end of the Comprehensive Plan amendments, can we get updated maps in all the appropriate places? Canning: We have a list. Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 26 of 81 Friedman: Yes, Madam Mayor, Council Members, we will be meeting with our GIS folks probably next week and we will sit down. We have a number of amendments that we need to add to our map, so -- De Weerd: It will be exciting to see a new one and that it exists for a little while. Friedman: Thank you. We have already had a volunteer to hand carry the new prints over here, so - Item 10: Public Hearing: IZZ 07-017 Request for Rezone of 5.29 acres from R-8 zone to C-G zone (1.62 acres) and L-O zone (3.67 acres) for Verona Commercial by Primeland Development Group, LLC -Northeast Comer of West McMillan Road and North Ten Mile Road: Item 11: Public Hearing: PP 07-022 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 12 commercial lots and 2 other lots on 18.82 acres in the proposed C-G and L-O zoning districts for Verona Commercial by Primeland Development Group, LLC -Northeast Comer of West McMillan Road and North Ten Mile Road: Item 12: Public Hearing: MI 07-013 Request for Miscellaneous application to modify the Recorded Development Agreement for Verona Commercial by Primeland Development Group, LLC -Northeast Comer of West McMillan Road and North Ten Mile Road: Item 13: Public Hearing: RZ 07-018 Request for a Rezone of 12.64 acres from R- 4 to an L-O zone for Bridaetower Crossina Office by Primeland Development Group, LLC -Southwest Comer of West McMillan Road and North Linder Road: Item 14: Public Hearing: PP 07-023 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 11 commercial lots and 2 other lots on 10.2 acres in the proposed L-O zoning district for Bridaetower Crossina Office by Primeland Development Group, LLC -Southwest Comer of West McMillan Road and North Linder Road: Item 15: Public Hearing: MI 07-014 Request for a Miscellaneous application to modify the recorded Development Agreement for Bridaetower Crossina Office by Primeland Development Group, LLC -Southwest Comer of West McMillan Road and North Linder Road: Item 16: Public Hearing: RZ 07-022 Request for a Rezone of 7.37 acres from C- G and R-4 to C-N zones and a Rezone of 5.88 acres from R-4 to L-O zones for Bridaetower Crossina Commercial by Primeland • Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 27 of 81 Development Group, LLC -east of North Ten Mile Road and south of West McMillan Road: Item 17: Public Hearing: PP 07-026 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 8 commercial lots and 1 other lot in the proposed C-N zone for Bridgetower Crossing Commercial by Primeland Development Group, LLC -east of North Ten Mile Road and south of West McMillan Road: De Weerd: All right. Okay. Our next items are 10, 11 -- 10 through 17 and it's RZ 07- 017, PP 07-022, MI 07-013, RZ 07-018, PP 07-023, MI 07-014, RZ 07-022 and PP 07- 026. I will open these public hearings with staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, thank you for opening all those items. For the benefit of any public that may have snuck in that I didn't get a chance to talk to, we did ask Mayor and Council to consider all of these, because the development agreements are intertwined and we didn't want to have to repeat testimony with regard to the development agreements. I will go through each project one by one, so you will have three projects and three discussions on appropriate development agreements for those, so -- having said that, we are going to start with the Verona Commercial project. It's located at the northeast comer of Ten Mile and McMillan. It's 18.82 acres and the existing zoning is C-G and R-8, as you can see on a small portion of the property right there. The applications before you tonight are a rezone and preliminary plat. The proposed development includes 12 nonresidential building lots and two others on the 18.82 acres and there are ten buildings shown on the submitted concept plan. The Comprehensive Plan designation is both commercial and office. We are proposing a new development agreement specifically for this area, so that we don't have to reference the old Verona planned development agreements, so that we are asking for a brand new one that applies only to this area. Just to back up a little bit on those histories of the DA -- so, this area was proposed as commercial area and was originally subject to both the Bridgetower Crossing DA and those are the properties currently zoned C-G and the Corona DA. Those are the properties currently zoned R-8. And they are currently proposed for both L-O on the east side and, then, C-G on the west side of those R-8 areas. Staff is tying the developer to the elevations submitted with the application and those same elevations will be used for each development agreement that we have discussed tonight. By developing a new DA for this commercial and office area, staff believes it will allow for more efficient implementation of the DA and more consistent implementation of the DA over time. So, we are recommending a new development agreement for this area and it would contain the following provisions: The proposed commercial and office building shall be constructed with high quality materials, including, but not limited to, stucco, wood and brick, with substantial stone accents, four-sided architecture, highlighted main entrances, stamped decorative concrete, composite or the roofing material, variations in color, roof planes, and parapet heights. And those are related to the elevations that we will show you that -- we have six photos. So, those are kind of sample elevations that led to that list, but they will be +~ s Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 28 of 81 tied to these elevations as well. And, then, for this project a minimum of nine buildings with no one building exceeding 50,000 square feet, shall be constructed on -- within this area and the maximum allowable nonresidential square footage for the development shall be 225,000 square feet. And the development of the site shall generally conform to the site plan. Okay. That's the recommendation that's coming forward from the Planning and Zoning Commission, who did recommend approval at their December 6, 2007, Public Hearing. Chuck Christensen spoke for the applicant. Gary Payne, a resident of Verona Subdivision spoke in opposition. There was no one else commenting and no written testimony. Key issues of discussion by the Commission were they discussed the impacts of the through traffic entering the surrounding residential neighborhoods and those were concerns raised by Mr. Payne. The majority of the Commission felt the commercial project would not impact the residential neighborhoods. Furthermore, it would provide access for the residents of the Verona community, rather than forcing them out onto arterials to access the commercial development. They also discussed the access points along Ten Mile and McMillan, the history of the commercial lots for the proposed development, and the planned intersection improvements at Linder and McMillan. The key Commission changes to the staff recommendation -- they modified condition 2.15 and deleted the reference to the Fair Housing Act, since there is no housing in this project. The outstanding issues before City Council -- currently, the DA provisions read that the applicant should construct a minimum of nine buildings. The applicant would like that number decreased to five buildings. And staff is recommending that the Commission -- or the Council add an additional provision to this DA that drive access needs to be stubbed to the eastern property line for the two office lots for future connectivity. Let me get an overall -- these lots are all approved office lots with -- they still have R-8 zoning on them, but these are approved for office uses. They do -- there is about four or five lots there that were preliminary platted and, then, just for reference, because I know this was an issue, the Selway Apartments are on the property just to the north of that. So, we are recommending that the two lots here on the east have drive aisle access that connects to those L-O lots, so that we get future connectivity. The applicant did call me today about this issue and it is an outstanding issue. We do try and get cross-access where ever possible. One consideration may be that maybe we just get one of those lots, the southern lot, to provide that cross-access and not worry about the northern lot, which is closer to the residential development. So, if we could get cross-access at least on this south lot it would be beneficial to get through traffic among the commercial development. And with that I will answer any other questions Council may have. De Weerd: Okay. Council, questions on this item? Bird: I have none at this point. De Weerd: Okay. Do you want to go through all of these or you want to do them item by item? Okay. Is there public testimony on this application? I didn't show anyone as signing up, but is there any testimony desired? s ~- Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 29 of 81 Canning: Madam Mayor, you might ask the applicant. De Weerd: Oh. Well, they didn't jump up and down either. That's right. I guess I do have to ask the applicant, uh. Would the applicant like to come forward at this time. I always thought it was so strange that no one was standing forward. Larsen: Madam Mayor, Members of the City Council, my name is Comell Larsen. Address is 210 Murray in Garden City. I'm here tonight representing the application on this project. A lot of our comments that were -- are pretty well directed to all of the projects. A lot of the staff conditions carry through from each project and they go on for -- for the three hearings you have before you tonight, so I could certainly address those now or at the end, but in this particular case I can take this one and, then, come back again and repeat the testimony for each subsequent one after or I can do it once, whatever you would prefer to -- to do. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: It would probably be helpful, Comell, if you could do it -- the specifics on each one -- Larsen: On each one? De Weerd: -- as they are presented. Larsen: Okay. Zaremba: Thank you. Larsen: Be happy to do that. De Weerd: Okay. Larsen: We have read the staff report and I also have -- just so you know, I have Chuck Christensen here who is with me tonight with Quadrant and he may need to answer some questions, if you have questions on platting, because I'm not sure I'm up to speed on that, but I am on the rest of the project. So, he may need to come up and visit with you if you have a question there. We have looked at the staff report and we wanted to suggest some modifications to the conditions -- to the bullet points under the Verona development agreement. First, I'd like to talk about the building materials. We submitted many photos to staff and they had picked the ones that you have seen in the staff report, but we actually submitted probably 30 or 40 photos. So, the photos that are in the packet are not necessarily consistent with what our long range plan is. We would like to have a little more flexibility in the materials and type of design of the buildings. ~ ~ Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 30 of 81 Those buildings were geared towards a smaller user and as we move through the Verona project we may have the bigger buildings that may have one or two entries, may have common areas, may have other things, so we would like to have some flexibility on the types of materials that we might use in the building and, again, we did submit quite a few photos and staff has selected some good looking buildings and we did some upgraded buildings on that site and -- in an effort to attract some users to a new retail area. What we would like to suggest is that we -- after the word four-sided architecture we add the term where needed. There may be instances where we have a building that may not need four-sided architecture, it may need -- may not need glass on all four sides. But it may need some decoration or some relief on all four sides. So, we'd like to add the words where needed. The stamp and decorative concrete, we'd certainly like to use that selectively, not everywhere. We would like some flexibility on the roofing. If it all has to be composite roofing and the roofing, that, in itself, won't work for us, because we will probably have some flat roofs and some -- maybe even some metal accents. So, we'd like you to consider changing that to also allow us to do some flat roofs and maybe some metal accent roofing. As far as the elevations conforming to the photos that we have submitted, again, we would just like to have a little more flexibility in those particular buildings. I believe we submitted pictures from various projects, including Silverstone, EI Dorado, Boise Research Center and a lot of the buildings in those projects are fairly nice and would be fine in this facility as we move forward with this development. I think staff recommended five -- a minimum of five buildings with no building exceeding 50,000 square feet and we are okay with that change. What we were trying not to do is get a whole bunch of small buildings on the site and we would like to make sure that the minimum number of buildings does give us flexibility for size. As you probably all know at Silverstone and EI Dorado and some of the other projects I have been involved in, we have made many lot splits and many lot line adjustments. Commercial development, unfortunately, is a little different than residential and we have to adjust to the user and as a result of that we have to adjust the lot lines according to some of the users we get. So, that reducing the minimum number of lots will help us to -- required minimum number of lots will help us to make sure that we can adjust accordingly. There was a comment on generally conforming to the concept plan. Sort of as I just explained, as you know, I don't know that our concept plan for Silverstone and EI Dorado has came out exactly or even close to what he had initially submitted, so we want to make sure that you understand that it is a concept plan and we do need the flexibility in order to move forward with a commercial development, so we'd like to have you add some wording in there that may state that we must meet the requirements of the current UDC, so that we can have a little bit of flexibility in the -- in the concept plan and not be locked into it as it's currently designed. Then, the last comment we had was on the connection to the adjacent property. We have made over time commitments to the people that have bought in Bridgetower that we would try not to connect those properties together for traffic reasons and for circulation through the project. We understand connectivity, but we would -- we might suggest that we make a connection with a pathway system and it might be in this general area right here. We have an easement through there that we could certainly make a pathway connection that might • • Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 31 of 81 allow users from the adjacent property to come over into this -- into the facility itself and use whatever buildings or services are in that project. Just a brief overview of the master plan. We had potentially looked at a gas station facility here: We were exploring a car wash here. We have some interest in a couple of drive-thru banks, smaller fast food retail has looked at it. Up in this particular area we do have a commitment for some medical. We thought we might be able to track down some health club type uses on the site, potentially. So, those are some of the things we are looking at on this site to maybe give you a feel for the overall concept that we are in search of there. I believe in a couple of the earlier staff reports staff had suggested that we move a couple of these buildings out to the street and we agree to do that, so we get a little bit more connectivity to the street and a little bit more variety of design. I would be happy to answer any questions if you have concerns or comments. De Weerd: Council, any questions? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: Cornell, with the material that we have listed in here, would that, in your opinion, disallow tilt up buildings? As I read it, it would disallow tilt ups, which you said EI Dorado and -- and you took a lot of your pictures out of EI Dorado and Silverstone and Tumbull's project over there at BRC and most of those are tilt ups. Larsen: Madam Mayor, Councilman Bird, we have done quite a few tilt up buildings, but we have usually tried to create a variety of materials on those buildings from the rock to stone to glass, heavy cornice, a lot of different elements to try to break those -- those buildings up, so they didn't look like a concrete building and, in general, a lot of times we put a textured coating on the building, so it looks more like a stucco project. So, we would hope staff wouldn't eliminate that flexibility, as those have been fairly economical buildings and pretty good energy buildings as well. Bird: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Additional questions? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Comell, you suggested some additional words in one of the recommended comments from staff on the DA and one of them was four-sided architecture as needed and that always puts us on the spot, because I would interpret that as needed to be determined by staff and you would interpret it as to be as needed as determined by you Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 32 of 81 or your client. So, I know we attempt to wordsmith these things to make them sound and do what we all agree to do, but that doesn't do it for me. So, we need some better wards there, so you and/or your client and/or our staff have an expectation of what's going to happen there. So, I don't have a problem with what you're saying that there is some flexibility there, but when we just make a statement like that it gets us all in a position of being really angry with one another. Larsen: Madam Mayor, Councilman Rountree, I understand your concerns. I guess where we are coming from is that, you know, on occasions we have retail buildings that have backs to them and we really want to be careful about addressing the backs to make sure that they look decent. We have other buildings that may have service entries or locations where we need to get trucks up to them or for whatever reason and we want to be careful that we don't get into trying to design a bunch of costly facades that really is of no benefit to -- to the end user. In other words, we have double loaded retail buildings with glass on both sides, it's very tough for a retail user to have a back room, a store room, those kind of issues. So, we are concerned, we want the buildings in the City of Meridian to look very nice, be first class. We do not want to get into a situation where we are in disagreement with staff, but we wouldn't like to use all buildings -- we try to design all buildings with four-sided architecture, but sometimes the sites don't need to be as well done as maybe three of the sides on the building. And I'm not sure that I have answered your question, but Iunderstand -- Rountree: Iunderstand your intent and I would ask Anna if she has maybe a better way of stating that to where everybody knows what's going on. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Rountree -- or President Rountree, perhaps it could be for retail uses or those that require loading areas, one facade may be screened in lieu of facade treatment or something like that. Larsen: Yeah. We are open for that -- any kind of language on that that gives us some flexibility where we have service equipment or vehicles or we may have an office building, for example, that may have some generators on the ground, some equipment, some things like that that we don't necessarily have to spend a lot of money on the building, because we have got a lot of equipment right next to the building. So, we would like a little flexibility on that and I think we could work with staff on some verbiage. Rountree: Thank you. Are you comfortable with that, Anna? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, yes, I am. I think the reason the four-sided is in there is related to the concept plan. The concept plan does show very -- kind of open site plan with individual buildings that kind of would need fairly -- most of them would require four-sided architecture the way it's currently drawn. I did want to comment on the need for flexibility in the concept plan and I know that this is difficult for the development community to commit to a concept plan and we are very mindful of Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 33 of 81 that. We do try to be very flexible in our interpretation of what's consistent with that concept plan. Our problem is if you just tie it to the UDC there is nothing to say that they couldn't come back with one building that's partitioned into five -- you know, one massive building that's perhaps partitioned into five and that would be consistent with their DA, but clearly not consistent with what was presented tonight. And I'm not trying to say that Mr. Vareille will propose that, it's just that those are the kind of issues that come up when we don't have something to fall back on that says, well, you kind of told us you were going to distribute this around the site and not just have a sea of parking and one large building. So, that's why we do ask that you tie it to the concept plan and not just the provisions of the UDC. We commit to developers on a regular basis that we will provide them every sort of flexibility that -- that we can afford to help them get toward the end. Larsen: Madam Mayor, may I address that for just a minute? We -- when we have a building in a situation like this regarding the four-side architecture, a lot of times those are tenant buildings and they may be loaded from two or three sides as a result of how the building's leasing and so in a case where we have a building out on its own like that surrounded by parking or if it's out -- one side is up next to the street and it has parking on three sides, we assume that we are going to need four-sided architecture there in order to attract tenants and make sure that they are all on a level plane. A lot of tenants that lease space in buildings now they want to have their own separate identify and they don't want to look different than the tenant next to them. So, it's important that we do have the four-sided architecture on a lot of that product. The other item with regard to Anna's comments on the concept plan, staff has been very flexible with us in the past on allowing us to do things to the concept plan that generally conform to it and we have had pretty good -- pretty good luck in working with them through those issues. Several of things that Silverstone and EI Dorado have all had to be brought back in for staff to look at it and it's gone fairly well. Rountree: Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Anything further, Council? Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Zaremba: I was just going to add to the same discussion that the flexibility in the roofing materials, it would be the same discussion that we already had, but it's the same as the facades. De Weerd: Okay. Larsen: Thank you. Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 34 of 81 De Weerd: Thank you. Larsen: Now, if you have questions on platting, I would defer to Chuck. Did we have any issues on -- I guess there is no issues on platting or any of the subdivision stuff, so we are okay with those. De Weerd: Thank you. Larsen: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. At this point -- at this time we are taking testimony on Verona, the commercial aspect. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony on this application? Okay. Seeing none, Anna, we will just go ahead and go to the next item. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I think you can take action, if you'd like to, on the -- De Weerd: Ten and eleven? Canning: On ten and eleven and, then, we will come back to the development agreement. I think all the changes that were requested were in the development agreement, so you can make those modifications later if you want to take up that item later. De Weerd: Okay. So, there is no public testimony on either Items 10 or 11? No further comment by the applicant? Okay. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Council, any further information? Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I would like to discuss the subject of the drive aisle to the east. We had asked the developers of the property to the east to provide more connectivity than they intended to. They seem to have been resistant to that and, apparently, they have conveyed that to the current applicant as well. But I feel the connectivity is important in spite of the fact that the neighbor is not in favor of it and I would support the staffs request for a drive aisle connection to the east. It's fine with me if it's on the lower property or the southern most property. I'm supportive of the staffs request on that. De Weerd: Council, any further comment on that? Bird: Madam Mayor? Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 35 of 81 De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Anna, show us where you -- where the staff kind of has plans to have an access out. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the staff report says that each drive aisle should have some sort of stub currently. I guess as a -- as a proffer, I would say, you know, if we could at least get one, I think that that would be beneficial. And somewhere on this southern lot would seem to make more sense, because you do have residential up here. So, bringing that traffic any -- somewhere away from the residential makes sense. It could come in anywhere along this -- that boundary. Bird: Put up -- excuse me, Madam Mayor. Anna, put up a site for the whole area. Isn't there a road that goes right up there? Canning: No. It looks like that. It's an irrigation feature that's been tiled. Bird: Oh, that's the irrigation deal? So, you want it to dump over in that -- Canning: This is the road. I'm sorry. That's a road. Bird: That's what I thought. Canning: That's that road. Bird: Yeah. Canning: But, then, you have two lots to the east of it. So what we are trying to do is get this office traffic to have across-access all along here, so that they are not having to go onto the arterial roadway and it's very typical from commercial development to commercial development we try and get cross-access where ever we can. Zaremba: Madam Mayor. We did -- what we required of Selway is that they have a western stub from the apartment section into what will be the commercial section and it would make sense that that would connect to something on the eastern end of this property. Bird: Do they come down to the top of that, though? Does Selway come down to the -- north of this project? Zaremba: It's not the entire thing, but it's about -- Bird: I think it goes right across there, don't it? Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 36 of 81 Zaremba: Oh. I'm song. It ends at Apgar Creek. Bird: Yeah. So, it goes -- it actually don't butt up to this project at all, so what we required them to go to the west is up in that subdivision. Canning: No. We required anorth-south street along the western edge of their property -- development. Bird: Okay. North-south. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Bird, you're correct, this would not connect directly to Selway Apartments. Zaremba: It would go through the other owner's commercial property. Canning: Correct. De Weerd: So, will that other property have access out onto McMillan? Canning: The preliminary plat for the office lots currently show I believe three access points to McMillan. De Weerd: Okay. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Bird: My concern is that -- is that North Goddard Creek Way road is -- you're dumping everything out on that, why not just let it dump -- let this project dump out on that one road between McMillan and Ten Mile? I don't know why you wanted to go out back through there. And that other project's got all kinds of frontage along McMillan. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, as ACRD progresses in their efforts we are seeing access controls at the arterial roadways. Possibility of more medians to control that access where you have driveways versus public streets, we are really trying to get folks to the public streets, so that they don't have to take the -- necessarily take the arterial roadway. If, for some reason, you have a dentist here and you want to go pick up milk at the -- the Rite-Aid there or something, you don't want to have to get out onto the arterial roadway and that's always staffs goal in asking for the cross-access is to relieve the congestion on the arterial roadways. De Weerd: Would the applicant care to comment on this? • Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 37 of 81 Larsen: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Cornell Larsen again. De Weerd: Thank you. Larsen: I was just curious. Anna, did you say there was a road that would just come down along that boundary of the property? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Mr. Larsen, it's not right along the boundary, it's a couple hundred feet, probably, a stub. It's about a -- maybe a quarter of the way over. Larsen: Madam Mayor, I guess our biggest concern is just the -- I guess our biggest concern was just that the residents that have purchased from Bridgetower in the past have been really concerned about that connection and the flow-through traffic and they have not desired that and we were here expressing their wishes tonight as well, so -- De Weerd: So, these are representations that were provided through your neighborhood meeting, then? Larsen: Through the owner, as he's developed these parcels, he's trying to not allow this through traffic or has indicated to the neighbors that he would prefer not to have that traffic through there and -- as it feels like it does end up being a detriment to his neighborhood. And the applicant has indicated to me that they have also discussed that at the neighborhood meetings. De Weerd: Okay. Any questions, Council? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Larsen: Thank you. De Weerd: Council? Rountree: Madam Mayor. Anna, would you put up the site plan. Canning: That one or this one? Rountree: Okay. So, on the eastern boundary of the two commercial lots, I don't see any provision for a fence or landscaping or whatever. If we are talking about access or no access, it seems to me if there is no access there ought to be some kind of a barrier there. ~ • Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 38 of 81 Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we -- they seem to be depicting a five foot landscape buffer for the parking lot. Rountree: Is that indicated on the plat? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, no, because we don't usually put just parking lot landscaping on the plat that the -- landscape easements that we general show on the plats are either street buffers or land use buffers. So, this wouldn't be one of those times that we ask for that. It would allow a little more flexibility in the design of the building. Rountree: So, I guess what I'm getting at -- I'm confused on the landscaping requirements. If this was an industrial site it would be required to be landscaped with a buffer. Canning: Yes. They would have to have a buffer to residential uses. We are not -- it's an unusual situation. It's zoned R-8, but it's approved for L-O, so we tend to treat it as if it's nonresidential use. Rountree: Okay. Canning: So, we did not require the land used buffer to those properties, because they are approved for office uses. Rountree: Okay. Thank you. De Weerd: But how about on the north side of that? Isn't that residential? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, yes, it is. I suspect that the staff report already notes that there is a land use buffer required there. I can verify. But there is a land use buffer required there. De Weerd: Okay. Larsen: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Larsen: Cornell Larsen again. There is a planted buffer along there already currently existing. De Weerd: Oh. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Anything further, Council? If there is nothing further, I would entertain a motion to close the public hearings on Items 10, 11 and 12. r ~ Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 39 of 81 Bird: No. No. Not 12. Rountree: ten and eleven. De Weerd: Ten and eleven. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Rountree: I move that we close public hearings on Items 10 and 1. Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close the public hearings on Items 10 and 11. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carves. MOTION CARRIES: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Anna, on the rezone, it had nothing to do with the development agreement, so all we are doing there is going from a minimum of nine to five; is that right? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the DA is associated with the rezone, but you could take action on the rezone without worrying about the DA agreement at this time. Bird: I thought the DA come down on the 12. Maybe I misunderstood. Canning: Correct. So, the rezone -- we can for the development, because there is a rezone application before you, but the two aren't -- Bird: Where would you prefer it? Canning: It needs to be in the DA discussion. Bird: In what? Canning: The DA discussion. Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 40 of 81 Rountree: Item 12. Bird: In Item 12. Canning: Yes, sir. Bird: Right. Okay. So, RZ is just the rezone from five to -- or from nine to five. And from C-G -- or R-8 to C-G and L-O; right? Canning: Correct. The latter. Yes. Bird: Okay. Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we approve RZ 07-017, the rezone of 5.29 acres from R-8 to C-G and L-O zone for Verona Commercial by Primeland Development Group and to include all staff, applicant, and public testimony. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve Item 10. Is there any discussion or clarification needed? Seeing none, Madam Clerk, will you, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, absent. MOTION CARRIES: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Okay. Item 11. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we approve PP 07-022, preliminary plat approval for Verona Commercial by Primeland Development Group, LLC. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve Verona, Item 11. Discussion? C~ Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 41 of 81 Zaremba: Madam Mayor, again, this is a question of where is it appropriate. Would it be the preliminary plat where we decide whether there will be access to the east or not? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, if we knew -- Councilmember Zaremba, if we knew exactly where it needed to be on the plat we could, but I don't think -- staff didn't have that specificity at this time. We'd like to leave the developer that ability to move it, so it would be better as a DA provision. Zaremba: Okay. Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Any further discussion? Hearing none, Madam Clerk, will you, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, absent. MOTION CARRIES: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Okay. Items 13 and 14. Rountree: Twelve. De Weerd: Did you want to do the DA's at the end of all of these? Canning: Yes, ma'am. Bird: We are going to move 12? De Weerd: Yes. We are going to consider it at the end of all of these discussions. Twelve and fifteen we will consider after Item 17. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, one of the things I forgot to mention when I get to the last presentation is part of the reason we are asking you to defer on those, the reason they are still intertwined is because although we proposing new DA's for these projects that are before you tonight, the existing DA remains for the properties that are not under not the applicant's control. So, that's why they are -- still go on. So, they are just -- the only complicated thing about this is the development agreements and so they -- De Weerd: The only complicated. Bird: Don't confuse me. Canning: I'm song. Okay. We are going to move onto -- we are going to move onto Bridgetower Crossing Office. This is -- we switched roads on this one. We have moved C~ Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 42 of 81 over about a mile to the east. It's the southwest comer of Linder and McMillan. This project is 12.64 acres and the existing zoning is R-4. The applications before you tonight are a rezone and preliminary plat. They are asking for 11 nonresidential lots, which would be -- and, actually, 12 buildings as shown on the submitted concept plan. The Comprehensive Plan designation for this property is office, reflecting its planned development approval in years past. We shift aspects here, so north is going to the -- the left side of the page -- or the screen. The Planning Commission has recommended a new development agreement specifically for this area and the discussion with regard to the materials is the same as the previous one and the elevations are the same as previously proposed. The development -- the other site specific comment would be that the development of the property shall generally comply, as determined by the planning director, with the concept site plan submitted as you see before you. Minimum of -- there is the concept plan. Minimum of eight buildings with no one building exceeding 15,000 square feet shall be constructed on the lots associated with the Bridgetower Crossing Office Subdivision. The maximum allowable nonresidential square footage for this development shall be 137,640 square feet. The Commission recommended approval at their January 3rd, 2008, Public Hearing. Chuck Christensen spoke in favor of the application. No one spoke in opposition or commented or provided written testimony. Key issues of discussion by the Commission were tiling the Settler's Canal along the northern property boundary, which, again, is toward the left of your page -- of your screen. Limiting the number of access points on Linder Road. In the key Commission changes to staff recommendation were the portion of the Settler's Canal along McMillan Road and west of Bellagio Way is not expected to be tiled. So, that would be this portion. Outstanding issues for the Council -- in the Bridgetower Crossing DA modification section it reads that to remove the properties shown in Exhibit C and it says pages nine to 14. It just should say pages seven to 14. That's just clerical edit that we would ask Council to put on the record. With that, I will answer any questions Council may have with regard to this application. De Weerd: Council, any questions? Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Uh-huh. Zaremba: In the section where the waterway would not be tiled is there still -- it looks like this is depicting sidewalk. Am I correct that there is sideway there? Canning: I believe so. It's already platted as residential, as you can see from the -- from the photo. So, I -- I'm sure the applicant will address that in his testimony. Zaremba: Okay. Thank you. Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 43 of 81 • De Weerd: Okay. We will ask that of the applicant. Okay. Anything else for staff at this point? Okay. Would the applicant like to comment? Larsen: Madam Mayor, Members of the City Council, my name is Cornell Larsen, address is 210 Murray Street, Garden City. This under the development agreement had the same bullet points as we had on the previous application. However, we wanted to suggest a couple of modifications on that as well and, then, in addition to the -- I'll give you a little insight on the Settlers Canal. We tiled a portion of this to widen the road and to have access at this point. The Settlers Canal requested that we not the the rest of it. There is a walkway, a fence way, and, then, an open ditch, I believe, along the -- along the boundary of McMillan. And so that's what currently exists there at this point in time. Under the bullet points in the development agreement we had already mentioned are concems about the materials. Second bullet point was the elevations. Under the third bullet point it required a minimum of eight building lots and we were going to request that we'd like to see that made five building lots and when we met with staff on the Verona project we had talked to them about 25 percent coverage being kind of a normal coverage that we shoot for on the -- on the projects and so that's how they got to the 137,650 number that's in your report. We'd like to see if you would consider that going to 155,00 square feet, instead of the 137,650. And part of the reason for doing that is some of the buildings that we do actually have a little better coverage than 25 percent. We get a little better land use and some buildings that we do, don't, and it sort of depends on the use. For example, a medical facility we may put quite a bit more parking on it, because of their use and the number of patients they have coming and going, whereas an ofFce building that may have a lot of offices and have very little parking, we could actually get a little more coverage on it. So, we'd like to see that number potentially up in the 155 range. And, then, on the last bullet point it would be our same concems, we would like you to make sure that you know that this is a concept plan and there will be changes to it as a result of the type of project that it is. And I would be happy to answer any questions if you have those. De Weerd: Council, any questions? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: I just -- so, you want a minimum of five? Larsen: Minimum of five lots. De Weerd: And no one -- Larsen: Five buildings. Excuse me. De Weerd: Buildings. Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 44 of 81 Larsen: Five buildings. De Weerd: And no one building exceeding -- Larsen: Fifteen thousand square feet is okay. That's what staff had asked for. De Weerd: Okay. And, then, you have 155,000 square feet. Larsen: For the total square footage. De Weerd: Okay. Larsen: That gives us a little bit of flexibility, we can only get on there what we can, but if we are locked into 25, we can't -- percent coverage we may not be able to exceed that on a given site and we want to be sure we have got a little flexibility. De Weerd: Okay. Larsen: And I believe staff does have some flexibility in the ordinance, too. I think they can have a little flexibility as well. De Weerd: Okay. So, Council, anything further? Thank you. Larsen: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. This is a Public Hearing. I would accept public testimony on Items 13 and 14. Okay. Seeing none. Council, any further information needed? Rountree: Madam Mayor. Anna, if you would put the aerial back up, I just need to -- and, then, if you would -- one of the items for discussion was minimize access on Linder. Are we talking about the need for this particular street? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, because that one lines up directly across the street I don't think it was, but -- Rountree: I think they both apparently line up, so -- Canning: Yeah. I'd have to -- I would have to peruse the minutes. I'm not sure. This cushion may have actually been that they are consolidating the access on those public streets and it may have been more of a positive comment than the way it appears in the bulleted items. Rountree: Okay. Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 45 of 81 Canning: And, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I don't have any concerns with the changes proposed by the applicant. Bird: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. If there isn't anything further -- Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Having heard staff and applicant testimony and given the opportunity to the public to testify, I move we close the public hearings on Items 13 and 14. Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close the public hearings on Items 13 and 14. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIES: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Canning: Okay. Any discussion? Zaremba: And, again, I would clarify that the changes that Mr. Larsen mentioned would be appropriate to the DA motion later; right? In that case, Madam Mayor, I move that we approve RZ 07-018, request for a rezone, and at the same time approve PP 07-023, request for preliminary plat approval, both relating to Bridgetower Crossing Office. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve Items 13 and 14. Any discussion? Hearing none -- Zaremba: And part of the motion was to include all staff comments and -- Rountree: I agree. De Weerd: Okay. Madam Clerk. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, absent. MOTION CARRIES: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. • Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 46 of 81 De Weerd: Okay. And, finally, Items 16 and 17. C~ Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we are back over toward the Verona side of life and we have Bridgetower Crossing Commercial and it is located on the east side of Ten Mile Road and approximately 400 feet south of McMillan Road. It's 7.37 acres, the preliminary plat is, and the existing zoning is C-G and, again, a residential designation of R-4. The applications before you tonight are a rezone and preliminary plat and a development agreement, of course. The highlights of the proposed development are eight nonresidential building lots and one other lot with two to seven buildings as shown on the submitted concept plan. So, we have quite a few for this one. Let me tell you what the recommended DA provisions are and, then, we will get into some of the issues for the end again. Again, the same quality of materials, same elevations, same concept plan comments. Minimum of four buildings with no one building exceeding 33,725 square feet shall be constructed on lots within this subdivision and the maximum allowable nonresidential square footage for the development shall be 80,260 square feet. Again, our aspect has shifted. I think north is to the right side of the screen now. It's still to the left? Okay. I'm song. Now, they are back at the top. North is back at the top. So, these were the concept plans submitted with the application. The applicant's preference is shown to the left there. The concept plan that the Planning and Zoning Commission approved was kind of a hybrid of a couple of those, so this is the Planning and Zoning recommended plan. The Planning and Zoning Commission did recommend approval at their January 3rd Public Hearing. Chuck Christensen spoke in favor of the application. No one spoke in opposition, nor commented, nor provided written testimony. Key issues of discussion by the Commission forwarding the project to City Council without the Ada County Highway District staff report. Tiling of the White Drain along the southern boundary of the project. The combination of concept plan one and three to allow the larger building pads north of Capris Street and transition to smaller buildings south of Capris Street and that's the concept plan you see before you. Key Commission changes to staff recommendation. They didn't require two mains to Locust Grove within the Public Works Department. And the concept plan was -- as shown before you tonight was recommended forward. So, the outstanding issues -- the applicant is very concerned about this concept plan as recommended by Planning and Zoning Commission. They are working on a project immediately across the street to the west. They are re-thinking the approved commercial project to the west of this site and that would have a number of smaller uses as shown on the recommended site plan for the south of Capris Street. So, they are concerned that these will compete with the project they are working on across the street. The applicant prefers the concept plan that allows the one larger tenant, as noted as the applicant's preference. When the Council acts on this one for the development agreement, you will need to specify which concept plan or plans should be included in the DA. All of them work to some extent and all could be included or they -- the Council can select one, if you would like. And with that I'll answer any questions you may have about this project. Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 47 of 81 De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions? Zaremba: Not at this time. Rountree: Not right now. De Weerd: Would the applicant like to comment? Larsen: Madam Mayor, Members of the City Council, my name is Cornell Larsen, 210 Murray Street, Garden City. I'd like to take a minute and maybe walk you through this project a little more. If Anna would be so kind as to go back to kind of the overall aerial that shows the zoning. That one would be good. Thank you. We've -- as Anna, said, we have been looking at developing a project here, as well as up in this particular area and when we started through this project over here we were trying to keep the White Drain open, use that as an amenity for the back side of some buildings that would be along a streetscape and they would be smaller buildings, maybe in the same form as Ballen Crossing, we would be looking for some smaller tenants, a little bit more of a streetscape design and as we started looking at that project and, then, realizing that we had a good deal of product in this area that was small and we felt like it would be advantageous to the overall area to have a couple of larger sites that we could use for a -- for example, a garden store or an office store, craft store, something like that that would allow us -- maybe even a hardware store that would allow us to have a larger user in that particular area that may benefit the residences. So, when we picked the larger buildings for these sites we were looking at a couple of things. There is a fairly large 100 foot landscape bamer between these residences and the roadway that separates these buildings. I believe the Bridgetower waterfall and water features in this area and, then, it wraps up clear up into here. So, we felt like that with that extended buffer, with the street buffer, we could potentially support a few larger users on that site without being detrimental to the adjacent residential area. And with what we were doing in the proposed adjacent property that we will have before you in the near future -- and we have shown that concept to staff, they have looked at -- at our proposed overall project, and we felt like that we needed some -- some bigger builders. Now, we did -- at staffs request submit three or four different concept plans, but the one we preferred was the two building concept. And so with that I could go through the bullet points again on the development agreement. That's kind of how we got to where we are on that particular project. As far as tiling the White Drain, the White Drain -- we are finding the same situation we are in Settlers, they wanted us to leave that open and we have had that before the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council before and as a request we are continuing to leave that open, we would like to do so. We hope to be able to utilize that as an amenity as we move over onto the other project, as I mentioned before, so -- but under bullet point -- the first bullet point we would, again, pretty much the same comments as we had on Verona regarding the building materials. Bullet point two, same comments on the elevation, so we'd like to see a little flexibility in the elevations. Minimum buildings, we would like to change that from what it is down to • Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 48 of 81 two, I think, would be acceptable to us for minimum buildings. We are okay with the size of the 33,725. And, again, we'd like to have a little more flexibility than 25 percent coverage and would like to suggest 90,000 square feet for the development. And, then, once again, our concerns about the concept plan that we have flexibility in that. And with that I would be happy to answer any questions you might have. De Weerd: Council, any questions? Mr. Zaremba? Zaremba: Madam Mayor. I didn't do the math on the other ones, but this one is fairly simple. If you have two buildings that don't exceed 33,700, you're not going to be anywhere near 90,000 -- Larsen: Correct. Zaremba: -- square feet. Larsen: Correct. Zaremba: So, you're saying that you may possibly put three buildings there and that might be up to 90. Larsen: Correct. Madam Mayor, Councilman Zaremba that would be correct. We could put three buildings on there. We could -- we could work around the 90,000 number or the 33,000 number on the two sites. So, it does give us flexibility and we may only have 33,000 on each site as it develops out, as we know what the user is and know what the parking requirements are. But we were willing to live with it. The down side, too, if that occurred, we just needed to -- we thought we needed to have some larger users there for marketability and services in the area. Thank you. De Weerd: Anything further, Council? Bird: I have none. Rountree: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. Larsen: Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. This is a Public Hearing. Is there any public testimony on Item 16 or 17? Okay. Staff, any additional information? Canning: No, ma'am. Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 49 of 81 De Weerd: Council, any further information needed? Rountree: Madam Mayor, just a question for Anna. On the photos that were submitted and apparently we just saw a portion of them, were there any buildings of the magnitude that have been described here for these two presented for consideration? Canning: I'll have to check the file, sir. Rountree: And maybe Cornell has one in his portfolio. I don't know. Larsen: Madam Mayor, President Rountree, We took several pictures of buildings out in Silverstone and EI Dorado and a lot of those buildings are in the 20 to 40 thousand square foot range as their average size, but we do have smaller ones, obviously, but a lot of the commercial office buildings or -- and, actually, a couple of the retail buildings along the street are in the 18 to 20 thousand range. De Weerd: Yeah. I looked through my packet and (couldn't -- Bird: I didn't see it. De Weerd: I only saw the ones that were -- Rountree: Give me a name on a couple of those, so I can have a point of reference, if you would, please. Larsen: Let's see. The building that is called EI Dorado One Retail Building, which is at the comer of Bonito and Eagle Road is about 21,000 square feet. Fairly good sized building. The building that is in Silverstone, which would be right at the gate on Overland Road, is about 40,000 square foot building. That is on what I'd call the intersection of Silverstone and Overland. It would be on the southwest side of Overland and it was the very first building that went up in that project. De Weerd: Who's in that? Larsen: I know Pioneer Title was in it for awhile, but they have moved out. I'm not sure who's -- they kind of blend together after awhile. De Weerd: Ooh, I don't think they would like to hear that. Bird: Him they do. Larsen: Yeah. • Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 50 of 81 Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, anticipating -- or I suspect that Councilmember Rountree is asking for examples so that we can reference them in the DA. Maybe one thing we can do is you do act on the DA separately from tonight. You approve it separately. We could work with the applicant to get additional photos to include in the DA and just make sure we point them out to Council before you approve that development agreement. Rountree: Thank you. Larsen: Madam Mayor, President Rountree, another building that might be a good example would be an Office Max is about 25,000 square feet. GI Joe's was about 50,000 square feet over in Centre Pointe. That might give you another feel for scale. Rountree: I have a sense of scale. I don't have a sense of the architecture at that scale. Larsen: No. De Weerd: Those two examples of scale are kind of scary on the residential side. Larsen: Yeah. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Just in trying to mull over the concept plan that the Planning and Zoning Commission moved forward with a recommendation, the difference seems to be in the southern portion that they were liking the buildings closer to the street. I can see the practicality of that with the smaller buildings, but would it be appropriate to have a single large building move forward like that? Would you do that or would you want to set that back? Larsen: Madam Mayor, Councilman Zaremba, we would probably prefer to set that back. We'd like to keep the parking away from the residential area, probably keep the back of the building with some -- some four-sided architecture, if you will, but try to keep traffic and noise off of the side that would be facing the residential area. De Weerd: Anything further, Council? Rountree: I have nothing. De Weerd: ®kay. ~ ~ Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 51 of 81 Larsen: Thank you very much for all the trips and listening. Rountree: Got your exercise. De Weerd: Good exercise. Bird: You're not done yet. De Weerd: If there is no further public testimony or staff comments, Council, I'd entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing on Items 16 and 17. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we close the Public Hearing on RZ 07-022 and PP 07-026. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion to close Items 16 and 17. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carves. MOTION CARRIES: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Okay. Discussion or comments? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Hearing no discussion, I move we approve RZ 07-022 and PP 07-026 with applicant and staff comment. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second. Council -- oh, is it in the DA that you would want the specifics on the buildings? Bird: Yes. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Hearing none, Madam Clerk. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, absent. Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 52 of 81 MOTION CARRIES: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Okay. Canning: Madam Mayor, on the remaining two items, what I would recommend is that I can guide you -- kind of facilitate a discussion on the five development agreements that are really before you tonight and, then, you could make a motion based on staff, applicant, and public comments. Bird: We need the help. Canning: I think the first issue of discussion for the Council and Mayor is are you in favor of removing the properties that you have discussed tonight from the existing Verona and Bridgetower Crossing development agreements. Rountree: I believe so. De Weerd: It looks like it. Canning: Okay. Rountree: Do we need a motion to that effect or -- Canning: Well, it's -- as long as -- Rountree: We already moved to include that with the plats. Canning: Pardon, sir? Rountree: We already made a motion to essentially, approve that when we approved the plats. Canning: It's just a development agreement discussion. These were the -- the issues that were raised in the miscellaneous applications before you tonight. So, the first one is a larger one of -- we are just recommending that you get new DAs for these and just remove them from the existing development agreements. So, it sounds like there is consensus that that's the appropriate approach to take. Rountree: I believe so. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. ~ i Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 53 of 81 Zaremba: I would say yes, but just to confirm, the old DA still applies to all the remaining property? Canning: Yes, sir, it does. Zaremba: That we have not specifically talked about tonight. Canning: Correct. They will remain in effect and we will continue to try and get those rezoned from R-4 to an appropriate commercial designation. But it will remain in effect for those properties. Zaremba: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Canning: Okay. The second issue -- I think these are the general provisions that are common to all three development agreements that I'm anticipating you'll want the same treatment for all three DA's, but if you don't, just, please, let me know. One was the building materials. What I -- and at this point I'm not sure if you want me to summarize what I have heard or if one of the Council members wants to recommend language with regard to these items. De Weerd: Council, would you like Anna to paraphrase what she's heard? Rountree: That would be good. Canning: With regard to building materials, I have heard that stamped decorative concrete is expected, but not with every project. But it is -- selectively I wasn't quite sure .what to do with that, so it sounds like it should be an accent within the development pattern. Rountree: Madam Mayor -- and a point on Anna. The way that paragraph reads to me is that these are suggested items, but not limited to. So, if they use a combination of these, it doesn't mean they need to use all of them, but these are the kinds of materials that represent the high quality materials we would expect. Canning: Okay. Rountree: So, I don't know that I would interpret that that they have to have that. Canning: With that clarification, then, I think all we need to do is add flat roofs and accent metal roofing or metal roofs, as an example, within that list. Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 54 of 81 Zaremba: I would agree with that, but, then, add the end of the sentence that additional variations may be approved by the director. Canning: And I believe it already says that. It says including, but not limited to. Zaremba: Okay. Canning: So, I think that gives that kind of flexibility. Zaremba: My point was to decide who it is that's going to decide. Canning: Ah. As determined by the director? Zaremba: Yes. Canning: Excuse my pause. Sorry. With regard to four-sided architecture, I believe that the discussion was for retail development, one side may not need full facade treatments if there is screening for loading areas. With regard to elevations, the applicant will submit -- or the applicant and staff will work on examples of larger buildings to include in the development agreement and those will be shown to Council prior to approval of the DA? Rountree: Okay. Zaremba: Works for me. Canning: And the last one was with regard to the concept plan. I believe that the applicant has the flexibility he's looking for. I understand that -- the hesitancy on the part of the development community on just relying on the fact that I'm going to be good to them. I mean I know that's difficult. But I don't know if Council wants to make a statement with regard to the need for flexibility in concept plans or not. That's -- that's something I -- I feel it's there, but if you want to make a statement with regard to that, that's fine, too. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: We are trusting them in building materials, so they can trust you; right? Yes. Zaremba: I would just express an opinion that a concept plan is a concept, it isn't necessarily etched to be exactly the same, but there is some point at which a concept isn't being followed. If they are proposing offices and, them, some day they come in and say, well, we want this to be an airport, they clearly haven't followed the concept. • Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 55 of 81 But if it's just a different kind of office or a different kind of retail or a different shape, that still, to me, within the concept. De Weerd: Anna, maybe you can kind of give a summary of the things that -- that you really look for that would be a substantial difference. Canning: Certainly, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. I typically look at the relationship of the buildings to the surrounding property owners, if they have changed significantly. If there was, you know, 50 feet of landscaping and now there is five feet of landscaping and a hundred foot concrete block wall with no fenestration on it. That would be a significant change in my book, because it affects the surrounding property owners significantly. If they took -- if the concept plan were for a distributed max'ing of individual buildings and they came in with a strip mall that would be something where I would call their bluff, basically. Well, not call their bluff, but say, no, I won't approve this and they'd have to appeal it up to you and I have done that before. So, those are kind of the big scale changes that we are looking for. If, for some reason the access points change significantly or the traffic flow was significantly different and it's an impact to surrounding property owners, I would probably bring -- raise concerns with that as well. So, those are typically the things I am looking for. With regard to the number of buildings and the square foot and the overall square foot, those are spelled out in more concrete terms and there is certainly flexibility there. I mean you can't state it as a concept plan and have only two buildings. I mean it's not going to work. Or the ones where they have ten lots and asked for the flexibility of five buildings. Obviously, there is flexibilities open to those parameters as well. De Weerd: Thank you. Rountree: Madam Mayor, I just was going to comment to what Anna was saying. There is a great deal of latitude that we allow the director. I think in approving a concept plan of this nature there is a lot of trust on both sides of this that what we want and what you want will be accomplished. It's when that trust is violated that things really get uncomfortable on both sides. I agree with Anna, what she explained in terms of conceptually we see a smattering of buildings on this particular property. If you want to twist and turn them or whatever, as long as you don't put five Walgreens on your property, I'm fine with it. De Weerd: Probably even if you don't put two. Maybe even one. Rountree: So -- but, you know, there is a lot of give and take with these things that are somewhat nebulous. The other extreme, I guess, is that we could require that this be platted and engineered and we'd know what the building -- each building is going to look like and who is going to be in it and that doesn't do these guys any good. It doesn't do the community any good, because we don't know what we are going to get, then, either. Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 56 of 81 So, I think as long as we can play together well we will be just fine and our trust and our mutual respect remains high and I think in this particular application it's there. De Weerd: Well, this applicant has had a great track record, so -- Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Zaremba: I would support that comment. The only issue I have with being too liberal is that it is possible for the applicant sell it to somebody who we might not have quite as good a relationship with and that has burned us a couple times before. Rountree: That's why we are getting a little more specific all the time. De Weerd: We know his address. Canning: All right. Madam Mayor, moving on to the other -- on the new Verona DA, the two access -- the two issues I heard were reducing from nine buildings to five buildings and, then, the Council needs to address the cross-access issue. Zaremba: I'm in favor of the access. Rountree: Madam Mayor, having visited a community in southern California recently and a very upscale community, I was very disappointed at seeing -- I was excited about the access control that went on in the community. I was excited about the signage that was not allowed in the community. But what I found very disappointing is that as the traveling public that you would be controlled accessed into a rather large parking lot and see a retail or commercial establishment that you wanted to get to and you couldn't, because there was no cross-access. Every -- almost every store or every site you drove into you were contained to that particular development and all the other developments around it, you either had to go in it right in or right out or find an access to an arterial and go around the- block and get to it. So, I strongly support cross-access in these kinds of situations and I know it may not happen, but I think the DA ought to be written in such a way as that it be investigated and be required to be dealt with not only with this parcel and the future development of the one adjacent to it. Unfortunately, they are not occumng at the same time. I don't know how we can tell them to put your cross- access at this point out into a vacant field when we don't know what kind of retail and what kind of concept we are going fo see next door. But I think when that happens we need to have these parties come together and understand that they are going to allow cross-access amongst one another, so people can get from their establishments to the other ones and from the other one to theirs without having to go on an arterial. So, I support it, but I don't know how you word it when you -- we have a preliminary plat, but we don't have specifics, we have a concept. We have an adjacent use that's a similar • Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 57 of 81 • use, but no concept or preliminary plat, so it's really tough to say you're going to put it here. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, President Rountree, typically what we do is at the time of the CZC approval we just require that they get to -- who's ever in first, basically, selects where the cross-access goes. If you want to apply it to the southem lot or the north and south lot, we would just get it when they come in for a building permit and just say, you know, you can put it where you want, but -- and, then, the next guy just hooks up to it. Rountree: Well, my preference would be the southem lot, but if that doesn't fit with their concept, then, where they decide to put it I'm okay with that as well. But I would think one would be sufficient. De Weerd: Okay. Any other comment? Canning: Okay. Moving on to the new Bridgetower Crossing Office. The amendments to the DAs I heard there were from -- requiring eight buildings down to five, from limiting square feet to 137,650, bumping that up to 155,000. And, then, this was the one that has the edits that instead of pages nine to 14, it should be pages seven of 14. And I don't think any of those were contested or -- those were all fine with staff, if Council is okay with those amendments as well. De Weerd: Okay. Canning: And finally -- De Weerd: Hold on. Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: And we are okay with them not tiling the -- what was it, Settlers? Bird: And the Settlers Canal. Rountree: Settlers Canal. Canning: I believe that's the way it's currently written, so -- and, then, moving on, finally, to new Bridgetower Crossing Commercial. The changes I heard were four buildings down to two buildings and -- or a minimum of two buildings and instead of 80,260 square feet, they'd like a maximum cap of 90,000 square feet. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. • Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 58 of 81 Bird: Anna, what number is the MI for the Bridgetower Crossing Commercial? Twelve is for Verona -- Verona and 15 is just Bridgetower Crossing Office. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the whole reason we started off by opening all of these is because the DAs are very entertained at this point. So, what we are suggesting is that a new DA be developed for the commercial areas that's currently, actually, part of Bridgetower DA, I believe. Bird: With the south -- the southwest comer of the Ten Mile and McMillan you want a new DA for it completely? Canning: Yes. We want new DAs for all of the projects. Bird: Well, new DAs for all of them, but we have already got two and this other one intertwined. Canning: And, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, that's why I suggested that the Council approval just reflect all of the conversation that went on, because it's, really, the same for both miscellaneous applications that are before you tonight, since they are both -- one's just -- they are all tied together. De Weerd: Okay. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Zaremba: And on this one there was a discussion of which concept plan we would -- De Weerd: Oh, yes, sir. Thank you. I forgot that. Yeah. The concept plan. One, two, three or all four or -- Zaremba: Hybrid or not or -- Canning: Right. Zaremba: Frankly, I don't have an opinion. Bird: Frankly, I'm for whatever the market allows them to do. Rountree: Madam Mayor, if we have a minimum of two buildings that it seems to me to incorporate all the concepts that have been presented -- I think there was one that didn't seem to do much for me and it was the one where the -- the middle one where it seemed to be -- I have a tough time figuring out how you're going to get around that • Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 59 of 81 • middle one. Get in and out of those parking spaces between those buildings. So, I would think either the one on the left or the one on the right work forme. De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I agree with Councilman Rountree, the middle one is not attractive or probably not good circulation, but would we want to allow them the flexibility to choose version one or version three or the lower portion of one or the other, just exclude version two, to mix the versions. Is that too much flexibility? Rountree: I think they have got that flexibility if either one of them are okay. Canning: Okay. Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Those were all the issues, I believe, with regard to the two miscellaneous applications. De Weerd: Okay. Those two public hearings are open. Applicant comments? No? Any public testimony? Okay. Council, any further information needed? If not, I'd entertain a motion to close the public hearings on Item 12 and 15. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Having heard all staff and applicant testimony and giving the public the opportunity to testify, I move that we close the public hearings on Items 12 and 15. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close the public hearings on items 12 and 15. All those in favor say aye. Okay. All ayes. Motion carves. MOTION CARRIES: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Canning: If there isn't any further discussion, I would entertain a motion on these two items. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I move that we approve MI 07-013 and MI 07-014 and the related development agreements that will relate to Verona Commercial, Bridgetower Crossing Office, and Bridgetower Crossing Commercial with all of the changes that the staff has just read to us. • Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 60 of 81 De Weerd: Okay. Any discussion? Rountree: I have none. Bird: Did we have a second? De Weerd: Did we have a second? Rountree: No. De Weerd: Yes. Bird: Are you going to second it? Rountree: Second it. Bird: Okay. Discussion now. Did that -- did that include the applicant's testimony, public testimony also? Zaremba: Yes. De Weerd: But it was clarified in the questioning that Anna walked Council through. Zaremba: I believe the applicant's response was they didn't have any changes to what Director Canning was -- Bird: Well, they had already testified earlier is what they have testified on, is what I was getting at. To include that. De Weerd: Okay. Anything further? Rountree: I have nothing. De Weerd: Madam Clerk, will you, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, absent. MOTION CARRIES: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Okay. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, thanks. Sony that one was a little convoluted, but thank you for sticking with us on that. • Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 61 of 81 Item 18: Public Hearing: RZ 07-019 Request for a Rezone of 0.602 of an acre from I-L to C-G zone for Rockin KB Saloon by Patrick McKeegan - 3163 East Lanark: Item 19; Public Hearing: CUP 07-019 Request for Conditional Use Permit approval of a drinking establishment in a proposed C-G zone for Rockin KB Saloon by Patrick McKeegan - 3163 East Lanark: De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Items 18 and 19 are public hearings on RZ 07-019 and CUP 07-019. I will open these two public hearings with staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Rockin KB Saloon project. It's located at 3163 East Lanark Street on the southwest comer of Eagle Road and Lanark. The applications before you tonight include a rezone and conditional use approval. The highlights of the proposed development are the rezone of 2.20 acres from I-L to C-G zoning and the Conditional Use Permit for the operation of a drinking establishment in the proposed C-G district. The gross square footage of the structure is 8,042 square feet. It an existing structure. The Comprehensive Plan designation is currently for industrial. The property just north of this was just today approved for commercial designation, so it's surrounded pretty much by commercial. The proposed DA requirements, we aren't recommending a DA or the planning commission has not recommended a DA. The Conditional Use Permit would take care of any conditional requirements necessary for the drinking establishment. We do have elevations of the structure. And this is the floor plan. The floor plan does -- or the proposal does include a portion of the adjoining structure, that's where they would have some of their storage maintenance and bathroom facilities. I believe it's these two sections. The Commission recommended approval at their January 3rd, 2008, Public Hearing. The -- Patrick McKeegan spoke in favor of the applicant representing the -- spoke in favor of the application, representing the applicant. And Kevin Kelly, who is the applicant, also spoke. No one spoke in opposition. Ron Van Auker commented about the parking concerns. And written testimony was provided by Bradley Miller, also of Van Auker Properties. And those written testimonies, we have letters dated December 19th, January 3rd, and February 25th, all with regard to the parking issue. Key issues of discussion by the Commission were the adequacy of the off-street parking for the proposed use. The location of the restroom in the adjacent building and the landscaping sidewalk, what's in the street buffer along Eagle Road. The key Commission changes to staff recommendation, they add a condition of approval for the restroom facilities in the adjacent building to remain available as a condition of the Conditional Use Permit. And they added a condition of approval for a copy of the cross- parking agreement for the 69 off-street parking spaces to be provided with the certificate of zoning compliance application and remain in force as condition of the CUP. The outstanding issues for City Council -- parking remains an issue as raised in letters from Mr. Miller, again, dated February 25th, 2008. With that I'll answer any questions that the • Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 62 of 81 Council may have. I believe you got a copy of that letter in your packet today or in front of you today. De Weerd: I'm sorry. I'm pulling it up. You have to flip through 61 pages. Canning: I'm sorry. The outstanding issue is the parking. I'll summarize it. The UDC is just a per square footage basis, so with this use we would only require 16 parking spaces. They do have 69 spaces provided, but that includes shared parking with the adjacent site. They felt that the times would stagger on that, but the seating capacity for the use as stated in the application is 243. So, there is some question as to -- although the UDC doesn't require it, it certainly allows the Commission and Council the flexibility to consider parking -- the adequacy of the parking with relationship to the application. De Weerd: So, Anna, how many total parking spaces, then? Canning: Will they have? De Weerd: Uh-huh. Canning: Sixty-nine. De Weerd: Okay. So, tell me -- we have parking issues all the time with bars and Rudy's is our most recent one, where we are severely underparked. It's had negative affects on other business owners out there and I don't know what the answer is. Do you think -- and those aren't as big as this. So, do you think that's enough parking? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, no. The situation you have here is you have a street section for an industrial property where you don't have curb, gutter, or sidewalk or improved edges to the street in this instance. I think there are instances where a bar should not need to provide necessarily all the parking that it may generate, but they could walk from a distance, but in this case the neighborhood just isn't set up well to receive parking on the street. There is just -- those facilities aren't built on those streets yet and they are industrial properties. So, I do believe there is a concern. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Any questions, Council? Bird: I have none. Rountree I have none at this point. De Weerd: Okay. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 63 of 81 De Weerd: Yes. Zaremba: It's not actually a question, but can you display a site plan again? Just to look at it. Canning: This is the structure where the saloon would be housed and, then, these are the facilities within the adjoining structure. And this is Eagle Road. Significant change in elevations here. Zaremba: Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Is the applicant here? If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. McKeegan: Madam Mayor, Council, my name is Patrick McKeegan. I'm an architect for the applicant in this item. My address is 280 North Latah, Suite 100, Boise, Idaho. And are we addressing both of them right now or just the rezone? De Weerd: Both. McKeegan: Both at once? Okay. What you have before you are two -- are, really, two applications. We are asking for the rezone, because the use of the property and the development of Eagle Road for the properties contiguous to Eagle Road are more conducive to the commercial zoning, than the industrial zoning. I have been associated with this property for about five years from when it was the original -- the previous structure. We remodeled that to make it more of a -- to bring it more in line with -- with the commercial type uses than the industrial uses. The owner has -- consistently, the types of uses that have come into it have been more of a retail office type nature than an industrial nature and we feel that this -the rezone -- the zoning is going to be appropriate for that. Getting to the -- to the conditional use. In our -- before the Planning and Zoning Commission, we addressed parking. As stated, in the -- you know, we have 69 spaces available on our property. The other uses for the property are a company that makes blinds for your windows and a furniture store, which is going to be coming online. Those uses are daytime uses. The proposed use for the Rockin KB Saloon is a nighttime use. It will start out at about 5:30 and go until to 2:00 a.m. So, there may be a little bit of overlap, but based on previous tenants and their current -- tenant parking census, we don't anticipate as significant number of parking of the parking spaces after 5:00 o'clock, you used for -- the uses in the north building. As stated, a required number of parking spaces, per the ordinance is 16. We would agree that that's slow. We feel that the 69 is adequate. If you look at -- at Lanark Street, which we did -- if you go 300 feet down the street, there are 29 on -- legal on-site spaces available and the road continues another 600 feet. So, while we are not allowed to consider off-site, on-street parking as a part of the application. In this case it is available. The other unique factor we have in this case is if that is an industrial zone. Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 64 of 81 For the most part, after the business day, except for some loading and unloading activities at some of the businesses, that street is vacant and it's not like we are -- it's not like a residential zone where there is people there and there is a lot of traffic on that street, so could anticipate that people utilizing that on-street parking as not a -- without a problem. Mr. Kelly, the tenant is going to offer some words about how he -- how his business is going to operate. It's not really fair to compare this to a -- I have heard of Rudy's. I don't know what it is. But this is more if an entertainment venue where you would have -- instead of having one person in a car coming, we are anticipating you're going to have, you know, two people, four people, coming. The inside of the building -- it's not wall to wall seats, actually, 33 to about 40 percent of the area inside the building is not core seating, it's for a stage, there is bull riding area, there is some other entertainment venues that are going to be in there, which Mr. -- Mr. Kelly will -- will elaborate on later. So, we believe that that's going to -- the parking will not be a problem. Specifically, getting to the details in the -- in the staff report and the conditions of approval for the conditional use, there is a recommendation that the sidewalks on Lanark Street be five feet wide. We went out and measured them, the ones that were installed as part of the previous application were five feet and they are five feet. There is one little corner in the northwest comer of the property -- if you can bring up the site plan -- if you look at the northwest comer of the property, there is about a six foot section between the driveway and our property line, which we did not put a sidewalk in or -- because it just -- it doesn't connect to anything. There aren't sidewalks currently on Eagle Road and there is no connection up to -- up to Eagle -- Eagle Road. But we'd be glad to put that six or eight foot section in if that's -- if that's a requirement of approval. Regarding -- there is a condition of approval asking for amulti-use path along -- along Eagle Road. We have been in communication with ITD, both on this project and on previous projects and we have consistently told that with the lifestyle center development that's happening north of here on Fairview Avenue, that there is going to be redevelopment of Eagle Road from Fairview south and at this point in time ITD has not determined what that -- what the details of that are going to be, except that it's going to require some widening of Eagle Road in this location. They have some conceptual plans, which I'm going to hand out. The first page I just handed out is sheet two of seven of ITD's conceptual plan, which is for the right of way -- or for the improvements along -- along the road. The second page is a blowup of the area at the comer of Lanark and Eagle Road and what you will notice is north is towards the bottom of the sheet, that the ten foot pathway, which is the two red lines, actually ends on south -- on the north side of Lanark and, then, from the north side of Lanark there is a single red line, which indicates a sidewalk up to -- from Lanark Street to -- to Franklin Road. The reason for that is the same conclusion that we had and the same thing that we have been making a point of is at the north side of our property -- from our property line up to Eagle Road there is about a four foot elevation change. At the south side of our property you're anywhere from 18 to -- Eagle Road is at that point anywhere from 18 to 20 feet above our property. So, the road slopes off. There isn't a lot of room. And as they -- you can see that as they get closer to Franklin they are actually going to be -- they are planning on adding two lanes, one will be a dedicated tum lane onto Franklin ! ~ Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 65 of 81 and they are going to add a third through lane for traffic going -- going south on Eagle Road towards the -- towards the freeway. So, I think what they are -- what I'm seeing here, what I'm indicating here is that -- or the interpretation I have here is that the ten foot path is in an area where you're flat and you have the ability to have a ten foot path and you would maybe see pedestrians in that, but as you go up the hill and towards the road, they want to bring that down to a standard sidewalk size, because of the -- of the slope and the grading and not wanting to come in and having to put in the expensive retaining walls and everything that they are going to have if they were to put the full ten foot lane there. If we come down on our property, if you look at our site plan, we have 13 feet of landscaping between our parking lot and our -- or between our driveway and our -- and our parking lot -- or our property line. That was approved at the last conditional use hearing. When we built the south building as a trade off, we are providing more landscaping in the parking -- in the parking lot. We actually pulled the sidewalk and the paving away from the building and we put landscaping against the building, because, again, at that point, as stated in the staff report you have before you, the 35 foot buffer that you normally see around Eagle Road doesn't make any sense, because it drops off so fast that when you're in your car you can't even see the slope. And so we wanted to put the landscaping in the parking lot and that. If we were to come in that 13 foot wide buffer and use ten feet of that for alane -- or a pedestrian lane, then, we would really -- we would end up with no landscaping on the east side there, which is -- we don't want to do. We had had communications with ITD. They have requested that in regards to the ten foot -- in regards to the ten foot pedestrian lane and also any lighting that's been requested along there, that we defer that at this time, because they don't know what the specific designs are and they are concerned that if we go in and start just building things and they are going to be in there in two or three years tearing them out and moving them around. And so that's what we would like to request is that requirement not be enforced at this time, because we don't know what's going there, ITD doesn't know what's going there and it really isn't -- isn't feasible to the topography of the -- of the land. Regarding the conditions for landscaping, we are in agreement that the ten foot space along -- landscaping buffer along Lanark Street is not adequate and we are going to be beefing that up, adding trees and adding landscaping in accordance with the revised -- with the ordinance. In the parking lot we are going to be replacing some of the gravel with ground covers and additional planting materials to bring that into compliance with the stated requirements. There is one interior planter in the parking lot that was not constructed to the five foot width. We are going to correct that by moving the curb. And, then, there was a request for an addition of a -- of a landscape island next to the proposed outdoor seating. At this point in time we have decided not to go -- even though it's being recommended as a condition of approval and we would like to have the condition remain, at this time we don't anticipate putting in that outdoor seating and, therefore, the planter would not be required because we'd just keep the parking that's there and there is already a planter at the end of that parking on the southern property line. What we would accept is an editing of that, that if we were to ever put in the outdoor seating that, then, we would be required to put in the landscape island at that -- at that point in time. There was also -- it was also pointed out to us that • • Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 66 of 81 the trash enclosure needs to be upgraded from the chain link to a material compatible with the building. What we are proposing is the building is stucco and stone and we are proposing a tan colored split face masonry enclosure with metal gates to match the -- to be a -- to compliment the -- the building. There is also two -- two additional requirements. One that the restrooms be allowed -- because they are in another building, that we have some kind of an agreement in place. Basically, the agreement in place is a lease between the lease holder and the owner. The lease states that the -- if, for some reason, the property was to change ownership or the buildings were to change ownership or something, that as long as the -- as long as the -- the entertainment use is in -- is in use and has alease -- and has that, that the -- they also -- the lease goes with the -- with the property and that the owner of the north building could not change the terms of that without -- really just couldn't. It's a legal document. And also we are -- I thought we had the cross-parking agreement already recorded with the previous application, but apparently we don't, so we are in the process of getting that put together. And, finally, there is a requirement for us to work with staff on alternate compliance for a pathway from Eagle Road to the building. We already have a sidewalk along Lanark Street, which connects to a sidewalk, which connects to all the front doors of the buildings and, again, at this time, since Eagle Road is not improved at this time with any kind of a sidewalk or a walkway and ITD does not know exactly what form that's going to take, we would ask that that be deferred until we have some kind of an idea of what they are going to do and, then, we can react -- react to it. At this time I would just stand for any questions and I'd like to give the tenant, Mr. Kelly, an opportunity to actually speak about the business and what he's going to be doing there. De Weerd: Okay. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Bird: Anna, would you go back to the floor plan. What is that, about six foot walkway between the two buildings? McKeegan: It's actually -- it's aten -- Madam Mayor, Councilman Bird, it's a ten foot area walkway between the two. Bird: It's ten foot? McKeegan: Yes. And it's -- what isn't shown on that plan is there will no be direct access from -- from the public right of way back into the -- into that restroom area. We are going to put in a gate that exists only out, so they can maintain control of the people coming into the facility. They don't want people walking up there and coming in the back door. All the people -- all the customers will enter at the -- at the front door on the angled portion, on the lower right-hand comer in our drawing and, then, if they want to Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 67 of 81 go to the restroom, they will go out the double doors over to the restroom and, then, back through that way. But we will have a -- Bird: But you're going to have some kind of gate there -- McKeegan: Right. With a -- Bird: -- at the east end of that and probably at the west end, too? McKeegan: At the west -- at the west end we are going to enclose that off completely. there was some concerned at the Public Hearing about -- about -- well; it's -- on the west end you're five feet off the property line, looking at -- Bird: I got some real safety concerns on that, going out there between -- McKeegan: Well, it will -- the gate will have a detach unit on it, it will be operable from the inside. Bird: How much lighting are you going to have there? McKeegan: It's all lit up right now. We have -- we -- at one time when we designed the building, the building was designed so that the back part of this building could actually be a separate tenant, so we provided more than enough lighting back there to keep it from being a tunnel or a cave. Plus the other previous tenants had -- had to have access also. Bird: And the one restroom has got a door that goes out to the west? McKeegan: No. That's in the -- that's a secondary exist for the office area. And that will be only accessed by -- by the -- Bird: You mean that isn't one restroom there, that's two restrooms? That's a mens and a womens in that one location? McKeegan: There is, actually, about -- there is actually one, two, three, four, five, six, seven -- fourteen toilets and urinals in there. Bird: Yeah. But one's women and one men; right? McKeegan: Yes. Bird: Okay. Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 68 of 81 C~ McKeegan: And we -- before -- when we first put this together, we checked with the fire marshal and the building department to make sure that a because it was -- quite frankly, it was an area that I had never been in either and the area between the buildings is adequate. We have adequate separation. Our exit widths are -- are satisfactory and it would be just like a -- just like a door with the panic on it in a shopping center. It's not really any different than the -- than the front. The buildings are fully fire sprinkler. De Weerd: But who monitors -- I mean it's not like someone monitors a bathroom, but when it's in a different building and you don't have doors -- you have doors to the stalls, but who's to say that someone is just not going to walk around the comer. That's weird. Bird: Show me the route in there. McKeegan: Okay. If you're a customer, you come here, there is a checkpoint where they check ID and, then, you're free to go into the facility. If you need to use the restroom, you come through this door, you go through this door and, then, you go into either the men's or the women's facility. And these are not -- and these are not -- these are not -- we don't want to have enclosed restrooms in this type of facility. The building code and the Americans With Disability Act allows for remote restrooms. A good analogy of thus would be like a mall. The mall does not -- not every business in the mall has a restroom. You have public restrooms. The only -- this is very similar to that. We have -- we have the restrooms in a -- in a separate building. About this location right here is going to be a fence with a door and if you were in this area and something happens or if you want to -- if you want to leave, you walk up to that door, you will push on a paddle and it's just like the back door in a retail store, an alarm will sound, so they will know this door is opening. One of the people will go there and determine what the problem is. If it's fire, in 15 seconds the door opens and you're -- and you come down this -- down this corridor and you're in the public right of way. De Weerd: Okay. But what kind of monitoring -- I mean -- I don't want monitoring in the bathrooms, but say I'm the only woman in there and some drunk guy walks into the women's room and you scream, you're in a different building than anyone else is, what happens? McKeegan: I -- I don't know. What happens if you're the only woman at the mall and you go down that long comdor -- I'm thinking of Boise Town Square -- De Weerd: I'm not -- I don't have any responsibility for Boise Town Square. McKeegan: Right. De Weerd: I do for Meridian, Idaho. So, I'm just asking a scenario question that I think is an issue, because there is no one over there -- if there is only two people over there, something happens, who is going to do something? Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 69 of 81 McKeegan: I think Mr. Kelly can address that. De Weerd: Okay. I will wait until he's up here and ask him. McKeegan: Because that's what -- and he looks like he's chomping at the bit to -- being the cowboy he is, to discuss how his operation is going to work and how security is going to work. De Weerd: Okay. McKeegan: So, if there is -- if I would like -- if there is any other questions, I'd like -- I'd answer them, if not I'd like to let him -- Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I do. On the subject of parking, the 69 spaces you said that your outdoor seating and the landscape that would be required because of the outdoor seating, currently are parking spaces? McKeegan: Right. Currently this -- the whole front of the building here has parking. Mr. Kelly wanted us to allow for some outdoor seating in this area, which means that -- and currently this is landscaped right here. The City of Meridian has an ordinance that any landscape -- any parking area has to have landscaping at either end. We did not show additional landscaping at this area to take care of this parking right here. Zaremba: Would that seating area take some of the 69 spaces or does the 69 not count that area? McKeegan: The 69 does not count that. Those weren't in the -- were not included in that. Zaremba: Okay. So, at the moment, if you don't do the outdoor seating, there is actually more than 69 spaces? McKeegan: We are gaining three spaces back, I believe. Zaremba: Okay. McKeegan: I believe that's about 21 feet. Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 70 of 81 Zaremba: Then, you mentioned Lanark Street, which, as Director Canning pointed out, does not have sidewalk or curb and gutter and all that sort of stuff. Do you know if it has lighting? McKeegan: Have I driven down there at night? I know we have lighting at our parking lot at the entrance. I believe the -- I believe the other businesses that have parking in front of their buildings do have lighting, but Ican't -- Zaremba: But it's not street lighting, that's parking lot lighting. McKeegan: I can't answer that question, if it is or not. I have only been down there once at night to -- Zaremba: Okay. All right. Thank you. De Weerd: Well, I guess just to -- to kind of take off where he left behind is if you don't have an improved street, so you don't have sidewalks, how -- I guess the intention would be that the patrons would walk down the middle of the road to get to the saloon or the facility? McKeegan: If there was overFlow parking on the street. De Weerd: And you're not sure if there is lighting. McKeegan: I'm not sure. No, I'm -- I haven't been out there -- I have only been out there once at night and I -- I can't remember. I can't answer the question. De Weerd: Okay. Can you tell me if Lanark -- I anticipate I already know the answer to this, but is there a signalization intended on Lanark? McKeegan: At this point in time there is no signalization and ITD has not indicated to us that they intend on doing that. De Weerd: Okay. And I don't know if this is going to be for you or Mr. Kelly, but you have a saloon here and it's -- it's what you're saying more entertainment than drinking, but the speed there is 50 miles an hour. You're at the bottom of an incline, why -- where are the safety precautions you're putting in place by allowing that kind of intense traffic onto a high speed road? What are the precautions you're putting in there, if that's not going to be a lit intersection? McKeegan: We have three -- three lights on our -- on our property and I don't know if they -- I know they aren't supposed to go onto the street, but Idon't -- De Weerd: Okay. I mean a signal light. How about a signal light? • Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 71 of 81 McKeegan: A signal light. Well, it's -- it's -- the street is -- the street is -- coming down Franklin Road there is the light there and I don't know if everybody can hit -- can hit 50 miles an hour in -- in the, you know, 300, 600 feet of coming down the hill. Coming from the other way -- I don't know the answer to the question. I -- ACHD has reviewed it and they have determined that a signal is not required there. They haven't asked for one. They didn't ask for one in their -- in their report on it, but Iknow I -- I used to attend a karate studio there in the evening at this -- and my class started at 6:30 and I was there until 9:00 o'clock and I never felt that I had a problem getting in or out of the facility at those hours, because Ithink -- I don't know what the trafFc count at 10:00 o'clock or 11:00 o'clock or 2:00 o'clock is at -- on -- on the roadway. De Weerd: But you hadn't been drinking. McKeegan: That's correct. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. McKeegan: You know -- and, again, maybe Mr. Kelly can address how he's going to monitor that. De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions? Bird: I have none. Rountree: None. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Zaremba: You asked them. De Weerd: Mr. Kelly. Kelly: Madam Mayor, Council Members, Kevin Kelly, 580 West Meridian Road, Kuna. De Weerd: Thank you. Kelly: Don't know where to start. I guess we will start with the parking issue. The 69 parking spots -- you try to compare us with Rudy's, which isn't quite fair. Rudy's has three or four businesses in that same complex that are open as long as Rudy's is, so they are competing for the same parking spaces. In our building where we would be, we would get all 69 spaces. The other business closes at 5:00 o'clock. They are not -- they are not open later than that. As far as the street parking goes, there are sidewalks down the street of Lanark, not directly out the tum, but a couple hundred feet down and, • Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 72 of 81 then, there is sidewalks on both sides of the road. I assume we are afforded the same parking rights as the businesses that are already there that park there all day long, as Mrs. Canning mentioned. It is an industrial street, but if you go down there during the day those businesses park their vehicles out on the street during the day. They got trucks and cars and everything else there. So, I assume we would be afforded the same rights at nighttime. The parking lot is lit up quite well. There is -- real well, actually. And going out into the Eagle Road -- granted, some of these people will be drinking, there is no doubt about that, but it's not any different than right across the road from R.C. Willey, who their customers come out at nighttime the same spot, and the same 50 mile an hour road. So, I don't know if that would be different, other than the fact that they will be dancing here and probably will have a couple beers or something. But to get back to the setup there, the bathrooms we are talking about, it's going to be closed on both ends -- and don't know how to operate this thing. Or if it operates. That will beaten foot wall on that end, so no one will go that way. There will be another wall here, as you mentioned earlier, with a gate. We are going to have a security camera on the wall here to monitor that and it's hooked up to our point of sale system, so they can monitor it all the time. As well as this is a smoking area. That's we decided to have our bathroom on this side, because we didn't want smoking inside. We had a courtyard outside, so we made it this way so that they can come out and smoke here and the bathrooms are across the way. This also is an ofFce. We have -- since this is a doorway to the bathrooms and the smoking area, we are going to have a security guy stand here at this -- this door, as well as the other doors. But as you mentioned, if someone would scream or there is an occurrence over there, we would have on our point of sale system on our camera, as well as our security guy here. And, then, anybody that would be in this area smoking, which seems like lots of people smoke now, would likely have several people out there was well. This isn't going to happen, so we would have those spaces available. We just -- this isn't really the thought we had in mind anyhow. We thought we had a ten foot walkway there and we thought we could put a couple of tables out on the walkway and still give ourselves the four foot walkway required out front. The whole point of this is -- is not a drinking establishment, although we fall under that category, just like a restaurant down the street that has a bar also and you sit and watch TV, watch ball games. This primarily is -- our vision was -- is that people would make a night of it. They'd go downtown to the restaurants right down the street to the fine restaurants they have and, then, after having dinner they come down and dance here. We have live music one night a week and, then, sound system music the rest of the time. So, we are just trying to add entertainment to Meridian. We are not looking at it as a -- it's going to be an upscale entertainment facility, it's not a bar like you might think where you see people go in and just slump over the bar in a dark cave and so they think. This is more of an entertainment added value to Meridian and we are trying to keep upscale. That's our -- I know the bar thing gets into a lot of connotation. We are trying to stay away from that and try to value the entertainment part of it, so -- I'll take any questions if you have any. De Weerd: Council, any questions? • Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 73 of 81 Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Will there be food served? Kelly: We didn't want to serve -- we are going to have snacks, like peanuts and pretzels, things like that, but we didn't want to compete with the fine restaurants right a quarter mile down the road. We hope that their customers would have dinner and, then, come down and dance with us. So, we didn't -- we didn't see that there was any need to compete with the kitchen facilities and the -- they have a dozen or more real good restaurants within a quarter of a mile of the -- of this place. So, we didn't see any need to compete with that and hoped it would intertwine with the same thing, same customers. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Are you going to have a cover charge if you -- at the door if you're going to be upscaled and -- Kelly: We are going to have a cover charge at the door only on the nights that we have a live band, which would be -- Bird: Oh, I thought you were going to have a live band every night. Kelly: Rlo. I~lo. One night a week. Most likely a Saturday night. And, then, the rest of the time they can come in and dance and -- we have -- actually, we have three events. This right here is a quick draw -- laser type quick draw pistols. You compete against one another for time. This right here is actually a calf roping machine. It's a -- you sit on a fiberglass horse and a calf comes out from under it and they can rope it. And this is just amechanical -- just a mechanical bull that you see -- I think there is one other place in Boise that actually has one. And this would be our dance floor, which is about a 1,200 square foot dance floor. That's our primary entertainment is what we are trying to base it on. Bird: That's a pretty good size dance floor. Kelly: I hope we can fill it with dancers. Bird: Most people don't make money on a dance floor. Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 74 of 81 Kelly: No. It's the entertainment. De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions, Council? Thank you. You have the last word. It is a Public Hearing. There might be someone else who would like to provide testimony. This would be the time to do it. Anyone? Van Auker: That's a long wait. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Ron Van Auker, 3084 East Lanark Street, just across from the proposed entertainment establishment. Not going to beat it to death. We all know -- in my opinion, parking -- in our opinion, parking is a serious issue. That was the bulk of our letter that we have sent out to the other tenants on the street, as well as the Council and the Planning Department. With the capacity of 243 people, it seems ridiculous that 69 spaces would be adequate parking. I know .there is on-street parking, but on a street with no sidewalks and no way to get the people from the end of the street to the bar, it just poses kind of a safety issue. We all know about Rudy's Bar and Grill. We actually own the property -- the 40 acres to the east of that bar and had to spend 15,000 dollars to put a chain link fence up from Overland Road to the freeway, because the trucks were loading the restaurant from the rear and we are trying to keep a -- a tax status of agriculture on that property, because we all know the tax guy likes to hit us up whenever he can, so -- but if you do choose to approve this project, we'd like to see as a condition of the approval that the operating hours are strictly enforced from 5:00 to 2:00 a.m. and in order that the parking issue does not conflict with the other industrial uses in the subdivision. So, with that -- oh, the other one issue -- well, no, I won't say that. That's another parking thing and we have talked about parking enough, so -- if anybody has any questions I would be happy to answer them. De Weerd: So, Ron, you mentioned there are not sidewalks along that road? Van Auker: From Eagle Road to just beyond YMC there is no -- there is no sidewalks. And I guess it's Olson -- Olson Road that heads up towards Franklin, that's the point where the sidewalks start. We installed those. De Weerd: So, you have sidewalks that begin after -- Bird: After YMC. Van Auker: Right. Where Manr's Insulation -- there is a building right here that we built for Marv°s. There is sidewalk from that point on all the way down to the cul-de-sac. De Weerd: Okay. But closer to Eagle Road there it's unimproved. Van Auker: Correct. De Weerd: Is there street lighting in that area where there is no sidewalks? Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 75 of 81 J Van Auker: No. Along this side of the street there is not -- I couldn't tell you a hundred percent sure if there is on this side, but I don't think there is. Bird: YMC's got some of their lot in there. Van Auker: Yeah. We -- our building sits right here. We have wall packs all the way around the building, just to -- for security. But that lights to the parking lot to about right there, so -- De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Any other public testimony? Okay. You can wrap up with your remarks. McKeegan: Mr. Sigmont pointed out to me an answer to the question about the tuming. If you look on the -- on the second page of this document, this is the -- again, the long range plan for this intersection. If you look out in Eagle Road you will see that there are the red lines. Those are going to be in the future. Those are going to be raised medians. So, what you can see is, basically, from our property it will be right --aright tum out only and from the R.C. Willey property it's going to be a right tum out only. And If you're coming into our property, as people coming down will be accelerating, they will tum into a protected entry and, then, come in. So -- and I -- I cannot tell you that there is a deceleration lane going up the road or an acceleration lane going up the road or -- because this thing is in such a hard scale, but it appears to me like there may be an acceleration lane when you tum out to allow you to accelerate up the -- up the road on that. So, it looks to me like they are not planning on signalizing this intersection, but they are going to severely limit the left tuming movements, because of the problems. And I -- and it appears if you look at the rest of the document they are going to be going that on down Eagle Road as they head north towards Fairview. So, I just wanted to offer that -- that clarification. Getting back to the parking and the numbers, at 70 spaces, if you have three people per car, that gets us up to 210 people. If you have four people per car that gets us up to 280 people. So, granted, not every -- not every car is going to have four people in it, but, again, the way that Mr. Kelly's configured this as an entertainment, he's not anticipating that every car is going to have one person in it, either. So, I think that -- I think it's going to be adequate. The philosophy behind -- at least I have been told the philosophy behind Meridian's parking ordinance was not to make it so -- so menu driven or numbers driven, that it -- that it placed a burden on the business, that it was up to the business to have agood -- a good business plan and a good understanding of what they felt was going to be adequate and, then, to let them, you know, live with that or work. But I -- my -- you know, we think the 69 spaces are going to be adequate for the anticipated use. With that I'll stop and take any questions. Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 76 of 81 Bird: Madam Mayor. De Weerd: Thank you. Mr. Bird. Bird: Patrick, what -- did you say there is a fumiture store and what else in the rest of the building? McKeegan: There is a company that sells blinds for your windows. Bird: A bind company. Yeah. McKeegan: Shutters. Bird: And they both close at 5:00 o'clock? McKeegan: I believe the blind guy closes at 5:00. I think the fumiture store -- what's the new hours of the -- Bird: Is it a manufacture or retail? McKeegan: Retail. Bird: And you can't -- and they are going to close at 5:00 o'clock? They would be the first -- McKeegan: Before they were closing around 7:00, just because they -- when Everton was in there they would -- they were closing at round 7:00 or 8:00 o'clock, because they just didn't have any -- any customers. Again, when I -- when I went there -- I went there for karate for a year and we would come out at -- you know, I would get there at 6:30 and there would be -- and that side of the parking lot there would be like three cars and I'm pretty sure all of them belong to the guys that were working there. When I came out the parking lot was deserted, except for those of us that were coming out of the studio. And Iknow -- Bird: My biggest concem, not only is safety along -- parking along Lanark because of no lighting and stuff, but also the trash that's going to be out there every morning for the people to clean up and stuff like that. You know, a guy parking there from 7:00 to 4:00 at work at YMC or Van Aukers or someplace is a lot different than some guy that sits in a bar for four or five hours and, then, hauls out and, you know, usually can cant' a bottle out with him or something. I mean, you know, I have some real concem over that, the problems it's going to raise there. Even with the explanation of that bathroom, Istill -- I don't -- I wouldn't want to write the insurance, let's put it that way. ! • Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 77 of 81 De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions from Council? Rountree: I have none. De Weerd: No? Thank you. McKeegan: Okay. Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Council, the applicant has had his concluding remarks. There is no further public testimony. Any additional staff comments? Canning: No, ma'am. De Weerd: Does police or fire have any comment on this? Bird: I want police to comment. Stowe: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, obviously, with any drinking establishment it's going to increase calls for service. However, with that said we are not categorically against drinking establishments. I don't know if it's been addressed in staff comments, there were some areas of concern I had just looking at the layout of the establishment as far as natural surveillance goes and where a patrol car driving by would be able to look down into certain areas to be able to see if people were actually in a safe position. It looked like there was a lot of closed off areas to me that we would not be able to actually have visual surveillance of it and that concems me. The location itself, there are some concems with the people after drinking going out onto Eagle Road. However, overall, this is a much better location than say near a residential area, because of the industrial location where there are no other businesses or residences that would maybe complain of noise or other disturbances in the area. So, with that I would answer any questions, but that's just my concems looking at it from just this one evening. De Weerd: Thank you, Lieutenant. Any further questions? Council, if there is no further information needed, I would entertain a motion to close. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we close the Public Hearing on RZ 07-019 and CUP 07-019. Zaremba: Second. Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 78 of 81 De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion to close Items 18 and 19. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIES: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Any discussion? If not, do I have a motion? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, before you make a motion, I did want to point out it's been awhile since the introductory testimony from the applicant, but you do have two very different applications before you. One is the rezone and the question of the appropriateness of the rezone and the other is the conditional use, which would be allowed by the rezone. De Weerd: Thank you. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Yeah. The rezone -- you have to pass it to make the CUP applicable. Madam Mayor, I'll try a deal. I move that we approve RZ 07-019, rezone of .602 acres from I-L to C-G for Rockin KB Saloon. De Weerd: I have a motion to approve Item 18. Do I have a second? Rountree: Madam Mayor, I'll second for discussion purposes. De Weerd: Okay. So, discussion. Rountree: It's amazing what you learn sitting up here. We have heard tonight that the Rockin KB Saloon and entertainment results in people, essentially, car pooling. I don't see that. It doesn't happen anyplace else. We also team that it's a saloon and there will be dancing and you might go in there and probably have a couple beers. I get real concerned when I hear those kinds of comments from applicants, because I don't think that's really the case. But none of those are issues with me. The issue with me -- and I have been consistent, is that industrial zoning in this city is being chiseled away bit by bit, day by day, and at some point in time when we need industrial zoning, we are not going to have it. I'm not in favor of this rezone. And I'm not against the Rockin KB Saloon, but I would hope that it would be portrayed in the light in which it's being marketed at some point in time in the future. So, my vote on the motion would be no for the rezone. De Weerd: Okay. Any further discussion? • Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 79 of 81 Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I can see that there could be -- that this particular venue could find a place in Meridian where it would add another thing for people to do. I'm very uncomfortable with this location for it. And along with Councilman Rountree, I also feel that the current zoning of this area as industrial is appropriate. Those are the uses that should be here. That doesn't mean I wouldn't be happy to approve such a use in a different location, but I feel this is -- speaking to the CUP as well, I don't feel this is the correct location for this and I, too, would not be in favor of the rezone. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Any discussion? Mr. Bird. Bird: I, too, don't like -- and I know we need as much industrial zone as we do, but we seem -- we don't seem to think twice about taking 20 or 30 or 40 acres in out of industrial and putting it in as high density residential. So, I didn't think .602 of an acre would really take a lot of industrial out of that. I don't see a big building being built on that, but I -- I hate to tell anybody about their business, but Idon't -- I don't think -- to be truthful with you, I don't know whether -- the location don't bother me as much as the layout. I hate restrooms being away from the main building. I don't care how many security cameras you have out there or how many things doing and -- I don't know. It just don't feel right to me. Anyway, call for the question. De Weerd: Okay. Madam Clerk, will you, please, call roll on this motion. And the motion is to approve Item 18. Roll-Call: Bird, nay; Rountree, nay; Zaremba, nay; Borton, absent. MOTION FAILED: THREE NAYS. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Okay. Item 19 -- Rountree: We still haven't done anything with 18. De Weerd: Oh, that's right. Rountree: We haven't approved, but we haven't denied it. Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree. • Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 80 of 81 Rountree: I move that we deny the request for rezone in Item 18. Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to deny the request on Item 18. If there is no discussion, Madam Clerk, will you, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, absent. De Weerd: All ayes. MOTION CARRIES: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: The CUP would still need to be voted on, even though it's not allowed in the current zoning; correct? Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the findings we would process for the CUP, based on your motion on the prior application, would be that it's not in the appropriate zone. It's not zoned for that use. But we would need to make a motion to move to deny it. Bird: Madam Mayor'? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we deny CUP 07-019. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to deny Item 19. If there is no discussion, Madam Clerk, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, absent. MOTION CARRIES: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Okay. Council, we are at the end of our agenda. I would entertain a motion to adjourn. Bird: Before you do, Madam Mayor, may I say something? • Meridian City Council February 26, 2008 Page 81 of 81 De Weerd: Yes. • Bird: I want to compliment a gentleman back there that -- we got an article in the Statesman that is finally positive and it couldn't have -- it couldn't have been on a -- for a better person, Frank. De Weerd: Nice picture, too. Bird: And I'm very very proud of you and I'm very proud of Jennifer who wrote it. The stock -- my stock in the Statesman went up about a hundred percent when I read that this morning and I'm like Councilman Rountree, what a nice positive article and couldn't have happened to a better guy. Rountree: Congratulations. Move the adjourn. Bird: Second. De Weerd: All those in favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Thank you. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:57 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) MAYOR TA De WEERD ATTESTED:, JAYC DATE APPRO_~~f~ ~-- ~''~ ~~~ ADO ~~. ~`' ~ L L. HOLMAN, SIT CL~ERKA ~fJJJll111 i 11 II~~I~~~~` i February 22, 2008 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 2b, 2008 APPLICANT ITEM NO. J1'-A REQUEST Approve Minutes of January 22, 2008 Pre-Council Meeting AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: ~ ~ / ~p wyV~/lil~~ MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: r ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUMAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: _ Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. • February 22, 2008 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 26, 2008 APPLICANT REM NO. S-B REQUEST Approve Minutes of February 1,2008 City Council Special Meeting AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: _ Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at pubic meeflngs shall become properly of the City of Meridian. COMMENTS r February 22, 2008 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 26, 2008 • APPLICANT ITEM NO. S-C REQUEST Approve Pedestrian Pathway Easement Agreement with Ten Mile Center, LLC for McNelis Subdivision AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: See attached CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings sha11 become properly of the City of Meridian. ADA COUNTY RECORDER J. DAVID NAVARRO ~ AMOUNT .OD 5 BOISE IDAHO 02121108 01:12 PM DEPUTY Bonnie Oberbil0g III ~,ll'~~~:'I'ILII~'ll',1'°'~'~III"~ ~~~ RECORDED-REQUEST OF 10$22166 Meridian City PEDESTRIAN PATHWAY EASEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this G~ da of 2008 Y , between Ten Mile Center, LLC, an Idaho limited liability company, the party of th first part, hereinafter referred to as "Grantor", and the City of Meridian, an Idaho municipal corporation, the party of the second part, hereinafter referred to as "Grantee"; WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Grantor is the owner of a development on which portions of the Nine Mile Creek and Ten Mile Creek Multiple-Use Pathways aze located; and WHEREAS, the Grantee required as a condition of approval that the Grantor provide an easement for the pedestrian pathways, which easements are to be shown on the plat of McNelis Subdivision; and WHEREAS, Grantor was responsible for the construction of the pathways with adjacent landscaping to the east and south of said pathways; and WHEREAS, it may be necessary for Grantee to maintain and service said pathways from time to time; NOW, THEREFORE, the Grantor does hereby grant unto the Grantee the following described property: (SEE ATTACHED EXHIBITS A and B) The easement hereby granted is for the purpose of providing pedestrian pathway easements for multiple-use pathways designated in the City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan, together with their maintenance, repair and replacement at the convenience of the Grantee, with the free right of access to such facilities at any and all times. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the said easement unto the said Grantee, it s successors and assigns forever. IT IS EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED, by and between the parties hereto, that after making repairs or performing other maintenance, Grantee shall restore the area of the easement and adjacent property to that existent prior to undertaking such repairs and maintenance. However, Grantee shall not be responsible for repairing, replacing or restoring anything placed within the area described in this easement that was placed there in violation of this easement. Pedestrian Pathway Easements McNelis Subdivision ~ ~ THE GRANTOR hereby covenants and agrees that it will not place or allow to be placed any permanent structures, trees, brush, or perennial shrubs or flowers within the azea described for this easemenrt, which would interfere with the use of said easement, for the purposes stated herein. THE GRANTOR hereby covenants and agrees with the Grantee that should any part of the easement hereby granted become part of, or lie within the boundaries of any public street, then, to such extent, such easement hereby granted which lies within such boundary thereof or which is a part thereof shall cease and become null and void and of no further effect and shall be completely relinquished. TI3E GRANTOR does hereby covenant with the Grantee that it is lawfully seized and possessed of the aforementioned and described tract of land, and that it has a good and lawfial right to convey said easement, and that it will warrant and forever defend the title and quiet possession thereof against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said party of the first part has hereunto subscribed its signature the day and year first hereinabove written. GRANTOR: TEN MILE CENTER, LLC Western Ho ' n In . i~ ~~_ ~ Edwazd J. A~Nelis,lVYanalging Member STATE OF IDAHO ) County of Ada . ) On this ~ day of C 2008, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, persona appeazed Edwazd J. McNelis, known or identified to me to be the Managing Member of the limited liability company that executes the within instrumern, and acknowledged to me that such company executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my~official seal the ,day~,yeaz fist above written. ~• ~pTA~+1, : •: ..•o ~ NOT Y PUBLIC FOR IDAHO S• ~°UBL~G •.' Residiag at: ~'j, •.• ~.• p ec Commission Expires: a®siding in Middleton, ldshg . q 4+~ m 11~0~ :~•s•?,~ OF I~P••• • ~ ~ GRANTEE: CITY OF MERIDIAN Tammy de Attest by C ~ytte ~toin-an ~ Approved By City Council On: STATE OF IDAHO, ) ss. County of Ada ) . ~ .,~ __ //==yam~y. [1i'.:- .~as~ 0~ ~ G c~ ~ ~LuT 1 ~S • ~ .~ ~C` Cliff cOI~ft9~"f ,,~`~~.~`. a-a6 -off On this ~~ day of 2008, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally peared TAMMY DE WEERD and ~rl~'G. TAG B~~rrJ~e-, known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of ~ Meridian, Idaho, and who executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and axed my official seal the day and year first above written. .° Cs'~E1~'~ ~~~ ~~,~ ~,~~~ ~~i SEAL ~ e NOTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO r•~ ~ Zi ; ~ ;~ ; ~ O: Residing at: f ~ :, ~'~; Commission Expires: ~o `~ ~~ ~~ Pedestrian Pathway Easements McNelis Subdivision January 28, 2008 PEDESTRIAN PATHWAY EASEMENT PROPOSED McNELIS SUBDIVISION Easements for a pedestrian access pathway, located in the SE'/e of Section 34, T.4N.., R. 1 W., B.M., Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: EASEMENT A A strip of land of varying widths, left of and adjacent to the following described easement line: Commencing at the Southeast corner of the said Section 34; thence along the South boundary of the SE'/4 of said Section 34 North 89°43'00" West, 951.83 feet; thence North 00°17'00" East, 48.00 feet to the BEGINNING POINT of this easement line; said easement being 16.00 feet in width: thence North 37°25'41 ° West, 814.12 feet; thence North 43°06'33° West, 45.92 feet to a point of curvature; thence 161.23 feet along the arc of a curve to the left, said curve having a radius of 306.92 feet, a delta angle of 30°05''54", and a-long chord bearing North 58°09'30" Wes#, 159.38 feet to a point of tangency; thence North 73°12'27" West, 77.88 feet; said easement becoming 22.00 feet in width: thence North 38°09'29° West, 73.10 feet; said easement becoming 16.00 feet in width: thence North 08°36'40° West, 113.13 feet; said easement becoming 25.00 feet in width: thence North 26°22'44" East, 76.06 feet to the terminus of this easement line. Said Easement containing 22,716 SF, more or less. EASEMENT B A strip of-land 12.00 feet in width, right of and adjacent to the following described easement line: Commencing at the Southeast corner of the said Section 34;~thence-along the South boundary. of the SE'/4 of said Section 34 North 89°43'00° West, 543.79 feet; thence North 00°17'00" East, 1189.55 feet to the BEGINNING POINT of this easement line; - A ~ ~ thence South 64°14'16" West, 305.02 feet; thence North 86°51'15" West, 758.00 feet to the terminus of this easement line. containing 12,250 SF, more or less. 50414\50414-pathease.doc ~~ - ~ ti _ o ~? . - i r~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ '~~ '°V'~ ~ D Z ~~ ~ ,~ O rs, $~ w Z '.=~ ~~ 1 N o - ~ ~ ~ z ~' ~ '~ o~w~ ~ i~~ ~~_ ~ I D o N fT7 I Z ~~ ~ / / 9 ~ ~ V N Z I -~ ~ z ~ 0 ~`~ / ~ ~~ ~ i ~ ° c7 I m -'-I 12' ~ ~ N ~^~y i ~0 ~~ ~ o m Z II , I ~• ~ itj al ~ ~ P ~ ..ti` ~ ~i ~ ~ ` / ~ _ ~I ~ $i ~s $ // i ~ A ' ` c~ ~ ~~ ~ 12 ~ ~ .w ~ o N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "0 r I . ~ _ ~ I~ I ~ rr1 C!? I ~~ ~ z I z • z z ~ Q ~- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~\ ~ ~ ° ~' I ~ z . ~ o z ~~~~ ~ ~~~ . ~I~- -------------------------- ' ° ' 1` `~ ------------:-- I I~ N 00 1TQO E 1189.55 _ I I m I Z ~ ~ z f 1 zz w W -r ~ I ~ ~ ~ rv I ~ N. TEN MFLE RD ~ z SCALE 1 °=200' ; f ~/I E R I D IAN PATHWAY EASE M E N~T ENGINEERING i1~G. DATE o ~28~oa bkb . ;ROJ. NO.. 50414 PROPOSED M.cNELIS SUBDIVISI~O.N ~SOLUTIGNS ~HE,ET ~ 1 OF ~ LOCATED IN THE SE ~ OF SECTION 34, T.4N., R.1Vd., B.M. 150 E. AIKENS STREET, SUITE B ~ EAGLE, IDAHO 83616 MERIDIAN ADA COUNTY IDAHO Ph (208) 938-0980 F (208) 938-0941 ,,.,,,,, , ,,,,,,~,,,~,,,,,,, ,.: , one ax . i,~ i 1~~7 ~~ 1 ~~ ~ ai ~ ~d ~r~ ~ gyring communities for the future 029 N. Rosario Street, Suite 100 ~~~ ~ ~ ~~~~ Meridian, ID 83616 Phone: (208) 938-0980 City ®f Meridian Fax: (208) 938-0941 City Clerk Office LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL To: City of Meridian Attn: Tara Green 33 East Idaho Meridian, ID 83642 Date: 2/26/2008 Project Name: McNelis Subdivision Project Number: 50414 We are sendin ou: Co ies Dated Descri tion 1 Undated Pedestrian Pathwa Easement Ori final Si ned and Notarized These are transmitted as indicated below: For A royal A roved as Submitted Submit for Distribution X For Your Information A roved as Noted Return Corrected Prints As R uested Returned for Corrections For Pre-Construction For Review and Comment/Si nature Price X For Recording For Bids Due: Resubmit for A royal Remarks: Tara: I so much appreciate your help, it's nice having someone so on top of things. You are always so prompt and professional, it really is great to work with you. Please call and a-mail me when I can come and pick up original documents signed by the Mayor and Clerk, so you can tell me what to do when I go record them. You rock! to: File Shari Stiles M Tara Green From: Shari [es-shari clgwest.net] Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 1:44 PM To: Tara Green Cc: Steve O'Brien Subject: McNelis Pedestrian Pathway Easement Attachments: McNelis Ped Pathway Easement.pdf .'. McNelis Ped Wray Easemen~ Tara/Steve: Attached is the signed pedestrian pathway easement for the multiple-use pathways along Nine Mile and Five Mile Creeks in the McNelis Subdivision. Could you please put this on the next available agenda for the City Council? I will bring the originals over to Tara after Steve O. has had a chance to review. I am still waiting on the instrument number for the sewer and water easements. Do we need to recreate the document? Shari Stiles Engineering Solutions, LLP io2g N. Rosario Street, Suite zoo Meridian, ID 83642 Telephone: (ZO8) 938-og8o Fax: (ZO8) g38-o941 es-sharisQa gwest.net N M February 22, 2008 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 2b, 2008 APPLICANT TEEM NO. 5-D REQUEST Water Main Easement Agreement for Hickory Office by Hickory Land Partners, LLC AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: _ Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at pubBc meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. COMMENTS See attached • ADA COUNTY RECORDER J. DAVID~RRO AMOUNT .00 6 BOISE IDAHO 03!'13108 01:46 PM DEPUTY PaiOThompson IIII",.Iltlll„~`.I'~II",I)I,I~I~"I, ( RECORDED-REQUEST OF 10£i~029095 f City of Meridian WATER MAIN EASEMENT THIS INDENTURE, made this 13 day of Feb. , 20 08 between ickory Land Partners~e par~fies of the first part, and hereinafter called the Grantors, and the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, the party of the second part, and hereinafter called the Grantee; WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Grantors desire to provide a water main right-of--way across the premises and property hereinafter particularly bounded and described; and WHEREAS, the water main is to be provided for through an underground pipeline to be constructed by others; and WHEREAS, it will be necessary to maintain, service and subsequently connect to said pipeline from time to time by the Grantee; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the benefits to be received by the Grantors, and other good and valuable consideration, the Grantors do hereby give, grant and convey unto the t,rrantee theright- of-way for an easement for the construction, operation, maintenance, repair, replacement of a water main over and across the following described property: (SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT A and B) The easement hereby granted is for the purpose of construction and operation of a water line and their allied facilities, together with their maintenance, additional connection thereto, repair and replacement at the convenience of the Grantee, with the free right of access to such facilities at any and all times. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the said easement and right-of--way unto the said Grantee, it's successors and assigns forever. IT IS EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED, by and between the parties hereto, that after construction, malting repairs, performing other maintenance or making subsequent connection to the water line, Grantee shall restore the azea of the easement and adj acent property to that existent prior to undertaking such construction, repairs and maintenance. However, Grantee shall not be responsible for repairing, replacing or restoring anything placed within the azea described in this easement that was placed there in violation of this easement. THE GRANTORS hereby covenant and agree that they will not place or allow to be placed any permanent structures, trees, brush, or perennial shrubs or flowers within the area described for this easement, which would interfere with the use of said easement, for the purposes stated herein. THE GRANTORS hereby covenant and agree with the Grantee that should any part of the right-of- way and easement hereby granted shall become part of, or lie within the boundaries of any public street, then, to such extent, such right-of--way and easement hereby granted which lies within such boundary thereof or which is a part thereof, shall cease and become null and void and of no further Water Main Easement EASMT WTR- Meridian PW.doc Po~ • • effect and shall be completely relinquished. THE GRANTORS do hereby covenant with the Grantee that they are lawfully seized and possessed of the aforementioned and described tract of land, and that they have a good and lawful right to convey said easement, and that they will warrant and forever defend the title and quiet possession thereof against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said parties of the first part have hereunto subscribed their signatures the day and year first herein above written. GRANTOR: On this 13 day of February , 20 OQ before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeazed Timothy P. Opp and Gregory M. Brotan ,known or identified to me to be the President and Secretary, respectively, of the corporation that executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that such corporation executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my off cial seal the day and year fist above written. ~',~e0 ~~$RA jN ~~i~~ V+ 4Q g~~omaM+O~~ C~ ~~~ • ~ a '(sL~J,q '':~~.'s No'TARY P ®, ~~ i ~ Residing at -~~ v' ' '°~ ~ ~ Commission Ex fires: ~ ~ ~~LIC o°'f ~ p 9 ~ ~~ Water Main Easement Meridian PW.doc a EASMT WTR- P } ss County ofd/ )Canyon i CITY OF MERIDIAN Tammy do Weerd, Jaycee Approved by Council on STATE OF IDAHO, ) . ss. County of Ada, ) ``,``- ~ y ~r~rrirrrri~~,,~~~,,. ~j ~~ ., ~' ~~ O ' ~L ,~',~ ~ .~ r~~• ,. rn • On this `'tom day of _~~~ ,20_, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the State of Idaho, personally appeared Tammy de Weerd and Jaycee Holman, known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Meridian, Idaho and who subscribed their names to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year f rst above written. .~~~u.aa~~~ ~~ ~.~ 'i SEAL ~''~~~ Y '•. ~ 'i~ ~ ~,- ~ : ; Notary Public for Idaho ;. ~ ~ ; Residing at: '1(J 'H' . ~' My Commission Expires: -~ ~-~ ~ i ; ,,,~~VG; • ~„~._ .~. . V~LEY ~~ ~;, CIVJL AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEF.RlNCANDLAND SURYEYINC EXIT "A" PROJECT DESCRIPTION City of Meridian Water Easement DATE: January 31, 2008 PROJECT: 1020 N. Hickory Ave. CC A parcel of land being a part of Lot 9, Block 2, of Gemtone Center No. 2 Subdivision, as shown in Book 74 of Plats at Pages 76b4 and 7665, Ada County Records, located in the NE 1/4 of Section 8, T. 3 N., R. 1 E., B.M., City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: COMMENCING at a brass cap monument, corner record No. 7521457, marking the C I/4 corner of said Section 8; Thence South 89°54'01" East coincident with the south lute of said NE 1/4 of Section 8, a distance of 1223.89 feet; Thence North 0°24'45" East, 442.08 feet; Thence North 89°54'01" West, 30?.59 feet; Thence North 0°24'45" East, 252.61 feet to the southeast corner of said Lot 9, Block 2, of Gemtone Center No. 2 Subdivision; Thence continuing North 0°24'45" East coincident with the east line of said Lot 9, Block 2, of Gemtone Center No. 2 Subdivision, 113:00 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 9, Block 2, of Gemtane Center No. 2 Subdivision; Thence North 89°35' 15" West coincident with the north line of said Lot 9, Block 2, of Gemtone Center No. 2 Subdivision, 254.76 feet to the northwest corner of said Lot 9, Block 2, of Gemtone Center No. 2 Subdivision; Thence South 0°01'48" West coincident with the west line of said Lot 9, Block 2, of Gemtone Center No. 2 Subdivision, 18.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence South 89°35' 15" East parallel with said north line of Lot 9, Block 2, of Gemtone Center No. 2 Subdivision, 87.31 feet; Thence South 0°01'48" West parallel with said west line of Lot 9, Block 2, of Gemtone Center No. 2 Subdivision, 45.48 feet; Thence North 89°35' 15" West para11e1 with said north line of Lot 9, Block 2, of Gemtone Center No. 2 Subdivision, 20.00 feet; Thence North 0°01'48" East parallel with said west line of Lot 9, Block 2, of Gemtone Center No. 2 Subdivision, 25.48 feet; Thence North 89°35' 15" West para11e1 with said north line of Lot 9, Block 2, of Gemtone Center No. 2 Subdivision, 67.31 feet to said west line of Lot 9, Block 2, of Gemtone Center No. 2 Subdivision; P:12009~0721111020 OFFICE SUILDWG1Drawings\SurveyU.egals\1020 Hiokory Water Easement Legal (1-31-08).doc RGHlcp 1/3]/08 Page 1 of 2 ~4.•~ ~~ ~ i V~~NG -~; ., C!V!L AND STRUCTURAL ENGJNEERJNGAND LAND SURYEYlNG Thence North 0°01'48" East coincident with said west line of Lot 9, Block 2, of Gemtone Center No. 2 Subdivision, 20.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. The above described pazcel contains 2256 square feet more or less. Together with and subject to covenants, easements and restrictions of record. Note: This legal description was written without the benefit of a field survey by the registrant whose name is shown hereon, but was written based on said Plat of Gemtone Center No. 2 Subdivision. .... ~Al. I.AN~ ~~SS~~C~ISTE;~~G~~ .a°C. e.s~..Am '~ D ~ 3~~ P:\2007\07211\(020 OFFICE BUILDING\Dra~vings\Stuvey\i.egals\1020 Aidcory Water Easement Legal (l-3I-08).doc RGH/cp 1/31108 Page 2 of 2 ~~g~, 5 EXHIBIT "B " CITY WATER EASEMENT FOR 102D N. HICKORY AVE. A PORTION OF THE LOT 9, BLOCK 2, OF GEMTONE CENTER N0. 2 SUBDMSION A PORTION OF TAE NE I/4 OF SECTION 8 T. 3 N., R. 1 E., B.M., CITY OF MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAAO LOT 8 o_ ~°o N89'35'15"W 254.76' ~o POB 9'35'15"E 87.31' ~ WATER EASEMEPI7 -~' p 2, 256 S. F, t ~ ap Nj _ sF ° ~ N89'35'15"W =~`' o '~ ~ LOT 3 °~ •°°0 67.31' ~ ~ N ~ 0 ~ Z Np N89'35'15"W -dom. N.T.S. ~ Z 20.00' cV a' ° LOT 9 z w ~ co ,Z N ~ o N LOT 2 z N89'S4'O1 "W ~, LANp ~ E. STATE AVE. 307.59' ~ ~ . ~,5~~~~lST$p~~G~y~ N ~ o. o ~ ~ N~ °~- g o ~ o O z pr O ~_ ~~ ~~ Z ~~T G. HZ~G t~ '~ (- S89'S4'Q7 "E 1225.89' C 1 /4 CoR. ~ E. PI1YE AVE. FND BRASS CAP COR. REC. #7521457 I~iI ,~1 rRSASURe YAirsr eNG~N1sE~zs; INC. tWWiI l;~r 1204 6TH S7`R6BT NORTH NAEfPA, IDAHO 8366y "~~ (206) 46?-0305 ~A~a~ ~Ax (2os) 463-43s1 mails'!'reasureYal/eyEngiaeers.crom ~, EiVGINBeRS • PLIIVNBRS• SURYBYORS ~ O YISlT OUR N'EB SITE: wmr.TreasureValleyEngiaeers.com rasa.~~ M Memo To: Mayor De Weerd 8~ City Council From: Kane Glenn CC: File Date~ 2/15/2008 Re: Proposed Agenda Items for 2/26/08 City Council Meeting FED `` ~ ~00~ ~iLy ~!f lVl~ric~~ ~it~ ~l~r~ ®f~c~ The Public Works Department respectfully requests that the following items be placid on the 2/26/08 City Council agenda, on the Consent Agenda, for Council's consideration: ~) Water Main Easement for Hicko Office b Hicko Land Partners LLC. Typical Water Main Easement. Recommended Council Action: Approve the Water Main Easement for Hickory Office by Hickory Land Partners LLC and authorize the Mayor to sign and City Clerk to attest Thank you for your consideration. City of Meridian Public Works Dept. I~Ef;FY~id+;L~ • Page 1 WATER MAIN EASEMENT Hickory Land Partnersth par~,ies of 20 08 between Ada County, aid ho, the party of 13 day of Feb. , --- and the City of Meridian, THIS INDENTU~' made this _ e Grantors, and hereinafter called th tee., the first part and hereinafter called the Gran the second part wi-~ESSETH: ater main right-of-way across the premises and ~E~,p~S, the Grantors desire to provide a w ereinafter particularly bounded and described; and i eline to be constructed property h rovided for through an underground p p AS, the "Water main is to be p WHERE i eline from by others; and ce and subsequently connect to said p P WHEREAS, it will be necessary to maintain, servi time to time by the C'mntee; tors, and other good the Gran t and convey unto the Grantee the right- FORE, inconsideration of theb enbef~Ve bge~received Y lacement of a water NOW, THERE atr, rep eration, maintenance, rep and valuable consi~ea~ for the construction, oP of-way for an eas described property: main over and across the following ~~, A and B) (SEE ATTACHED EXH d is for the purpose of construction and operation of a atr tuetra ePan ement The easement hereby grante facilities, together wtth their maintenance, ad ht f acre s to such factl ties at any and all times. allied with the free rig at the convenience of the Grantee the said easement and right-of'way unto the said Grantee, if s successors TO HAVE ANA TO HOLD, and assigns forever. arties hereto, that after ERSTOOD AND AGREED' by and between the p I'f IS EXPRESSLY IJND other maintenance or making subsequent connection to the kin re airs, performing P p to that existent prior to construction, ma g P water line, Grantee shall restore the area of the easement and adjacent ro e m this easement that was coon, repairs and maintenance • H°t" /e ea descnb d hall not be responsible for undertaking such constru an hing placed within the ar repairing, replacing or restoring Yt laced any placed there in violation of this easement. ee that they will not place or allow to be p THE GRANTORS hereby covenant and agr h or perennial shrubs or flowers w~einuhposes sstated hereinor this permanent structures, trees, brus , easement, which would interfere with the use of said easement, o art of the right-of- ee with the Grantee that should any p ublic THE GRANTORS hereby covenant and agr ~ of, or lie within to t d which lies within such way and easement hereby granted shall become p ht-of--way and easement hereby gr street, then, to such extent, such ngihereof, shall cease and become null and void and of no further boundary thereof or which is a part gpSMT WTR- Water Main Easement Meridian PW dOC CITY OF MERIDIAN Tammy de Weerd, Mayor M Jaycee Holman, City Clerk Approved by Council on STATE OF IDAHO, ) . ss. County of Ada, ) On this day of ,20^, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the State of Idaho, personally appeared Tammy de Weerd and Jaycee Holman, known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Meridian, Idaho and who subscribed their names to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. SEAL Notary Public for Idaho Residing at: My Commission Expires: N v~~G CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING AND LAND SURVEYING EDIT "A" PROJECT DESCRIPTION DATE: PROJECT: M City of Meridian Water Easement January 31, 2008 1020 N. Hickory Ave. A parcel of land being a part of Lot 9, Block 2, of Gemtone Center No. 2 Subdivision, as shown in Book 74 of Plats at Pages 7664 and 7665, Ada County Records, located in the NE 1/4 of Section 8, T. 3 N., R. 1 E., B.M., Gity of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: COMMENCING at a brass cap monument, comer record No. 7521457, marking the C 1/4 comer of said Secrion 8; Thence South 89°54'01" East coincident with the south line of said NE 1/4 of Section 8, a distance of 1223.89 feet; Thence North 0°24'45" East, 442.08 feet; Thence North 89°54'01" West, 307.59 feet; Thence North 0°24'45" East, 252.61 feet to the southeast comer of said Lot 9, Block 2, of Gemtone Center No. 2 Subdivision; Thence continuing North 0°24'45" East coincident with the east line of said Lat 9, Block 2, of Gemtone Center No. 2 Subdivision, 113.00 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 9, Block 2, of Gemtone Center No. 2 Subdivision; Thence North 89°35' 15" West coincident with the north line of said Lot 9, Block 2, of Gemtone Center No. 2 Subdivision, 254.76 feet to the northwest corner of said Lot 9, Block 2, of Gemtone Center No. 2 Subdivision; Tbence South 0°01'48" West coincident with the west line of said Lot 9, Block 2, of Gemtone Center No. 2 Subdivision, 18.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence South 89°35' 15" East parallel with said north line of Lot 9, Block 2, of Gemtone Center No. 2 Subdivision, 87.31 feet; Thence Sauth 0°01'48" West parallel with said west line of Lot 9, Block 2, of Gemtone Center No. 2 Subdivision, 45.48 feet; Thence North 89°35' 15" West parallel with said north line of Lot 9, Block 2, of Gemtone Center No. 2 Subdivision, 20.00 feet; Thence North 0°01'48" East parallel with said west line of Lot 9, Block 2, of Gemtone Center No. 2 Subdivision, 25.48 feet; Thence North 89°35' 15" West parallel with said north line of Lot 9, Block 2, of Gemtone Center No. 2 Subdivision, 67.31 feet to said west line of Lot 9, Block 2, of Gemtone Center No. 2 Subdivision; P:~2b07107211\1020 QFF]CE BUILDING~Drawings~SurveyU.ega1s11020 Hi~~:ory VNatrr Easement Legal (1-31-08).doc RGHIcp 1/31/O8 }-- ;= Page 1 of 2 M M V>~~~G CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEERINGANDLAND SURVEYING Thence North 0°01'48" East coincident with said west line of Lot 9, Block 2, of Gemtone Center No. 2 Subdivision, 20.04 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. The above described parcel contains 2256 square feet more or less. Together with and subject to covenants, easements and restrictions of record. i Note: This legal description was written without the benefit of a field survey by the registrant whose name is shown ~ hereon, but was written based on said Plat of Gemtone Center No. 2 Subdivision. ~ `o~p~L LANps . t~eeS ~ISTB,p~G~~ ~~~ l ~ 3 0~ P:\2007107211110200FFICE BLJILbINGIDrawingslSuneyU.egels\1020 Hickory Water Easement Legal (1-31.08).doe RGH/cp Il31 /08 Page 2 of 2 r r EXHIBIT "B" CITY WATER EASEMENT FOR 10,20 N. HICKORY AVE. A PORTION OF THE LOT 9, BLOCK 2, OF GEMTONE CENTER NO. 2 SUBDIVISION A PORTION OF THE NE 1/4 OF SECTION 8 T. 3 N., R. 1 E., B.M., CITY OF AlERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO o ~ LOT 8 ° ~ o N89'35'15"W 254.76' ~o POB 9' ~ " 87.31' 3 WATER EASEMENT g w ~ 2,256 S.F.t ~ p~ Mj N89'35'15"W w o vi LOT 3 ' ~ a 67.31 oo ~ o w `~ ~ ~ z ~ o ~ No N89'35'15"W -~`t. N.T S ~„ o z 20.00' N . . ~+ O O z V LOT 9 x w 11 F in ~p ~ N N N LOT 2 0 z° N89'54'O1"W ' ~""~ ~ypS,LAlU ~ E. STATE AVE. 307.59' ~ E,,; w ~ `~ sG ~~ ~yS ~~STEip~ o ~ o ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~~ 6i '. O 7~ '~ Oo ~ O z~ iti ~r+ ~C ~'~ ~ r G. H1 C~ (' .~ L 5 S89'S4'O1"E 1225.89' C 1 /4 COR. rE E. PINE AVE. FND BRASS CAP COR. REC. #7521457 ~I~T CV~1 TREASURE YALLEY ENGINEERS, INC. ~(~~ j~r 1204 6TX STREET NORTI/ NAdfPA, lDA80 83687 ,;>,~,v~<ti v"~~~~ (208J 462-0305 ~,;,~ . °~ ~~" '~v:4:'~..:Y::~.::?5: F'AX (208J 483-4391 mail®TreasureValleyEngineers com ENCINEBIbS' • PL4IVNERS • SURYEYDRS Cv d VISIT OUR ifEB SITE.• www.TreasureValleyEngineers.com CITY OF MERIDIAN ~~~~ Wvt~S `~oje~'" ~?S 3 TASK ORDER NO. ~,i -FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR WATER, WASTEWATER, AND MISCELLANEOUS PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS TEN MILE CREEK SEWER CROSSING REPLACEMENT City Project No. Engineer Project No. 10-08-011 THIS TASK ORDER, entered into this day of ,2008, ~tween City of Meridian, Idaho, hereinafter referred to as the 'CITY°, J-U-B ENGINEERS. Inc. ,hereinafter referred to as the ENGINEER, is subject to the provisions of the Agreement for Engineering Service for Water, Wastewater, and Miscellaneous Public Works Prajeds, approved December 12, 2008, hereinafter referral to as the MASTER AGREEMENT for PROFESSIONAL SERVICES. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the CITY intends to construct improvements to the Ten Mile Creek Sewer Crossing, hereinafter reterrat to as the PROJECT; NOW, THEREFORE, the CITY and J-U-B ENGINEERS. inc in consideration of their mutual covenants herein agree in respect as set forth below. CITY INFORMATION AND RESPONSIBILITIES: Tha CITY grill provide to ENGINEER the data and/or services specified in the AGREEMENT. In addition, the CITY will furnish to ENGINEER items fisted in Aftachmgnt °B°. SCOPE OF SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED BY ENGINEER: ENGINEER will grovide those services desdil~d in Attachment 'A°. SCHEDULE OF WORK TO BE PERFORMED: ENGINEER will pertomt said servir~s in a timely manner. BASIS OF FEE AND BILLING SCHEDULE: The CITY will pay ENGINEER for its services artd reimbursable expenses as follows: as shown on Attachment'C'. file Folder Title: Citv of Meridian -Ten Mile Creek Sev+erCrQss Remarks: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this TASK ORDER as of the day and year first above written- CITY: City of Meridian, Idaho ENGINEER: J-U-B Engineers, inc. 33 E. Idaho St. 250 S Beachwood Ave, Ste, 201 Meridian, ID 83842 Bofse, ID 837 B ~I ,'' ,~ ~Ii 11 illllt~~~~~r, y: ~ By: ~~~, ~ ~%' Namelf'itle: d or NamefCitte: Ph' ' ':. 1 ~~ ~~. PUBLIC WORKS APP'RIOVAL: ATTES ~ = 1 ~ :. NameJi-itle: Len Gradv. P.E.. City Engineer NamelTRle~Wi~i~~94, Cit lark a~ "Q f ~ 0~ ~y ~R V `Lw-ic,l ~ 1'C~wa~ y Z6 ~ ~~ r'~~~,ri~ `~ITITY .~*.~ ~. / lhryr•.., ., .,,~~,. J-U-B ENG1NFfR5, Inc. Attachment `A' - fO-08-01 t CITY OF MERIDIAN TEN MILE CREEK SEWER CROSSING REPLACEMENT This project provides design of the replacement of the Ten Mile Creek sewer crossing as described herein and shown an Figure 1. It is assumed that the project will be designed as one {1 i bid package, and that the City will serve as the Engineer during construction phases. Table of Conterrts: Attachment "A" -Scope of Engineering Services • Task A - Protect MgerinQs • Task B - Feasibility Analysis • Task C -Preliminary and Final Dg~ign • Task D -Additional Services • Task E - Aeencv Coordination and Perm• ittinQ • Task F -Easement Coordination • Exhibit A-1 -Labor and Eauiament Detail • Figure 1 - Project Overview Attachment "B" -Items Provided by City Attachment "C" -Fee Schedule City oJAieridian -Ten Mile Creek Sewer Crossing Replacement Page - l J-U-B ENGfMFERS, Jrtc. Attachfient `A' - !d-DB-011 CITY OF MERIDIAN TEN MILE CREEK SEWER CROSSING REPLACEMENT Attachment "A" -Scope of Engineering Services Protect Understanding The following is J-U-B's understanding of the Project. The City of Meridian identified a segment of the Ten Mile Trunk, crossing Ten Mile Creek, that has failed or is nearing failure. The aerial sewer crossing is an un-sleeved 15-inch diameter steel carrier pipe. The Project includes a preliminary evaluation to determine a preferred replacement method, pipe material(s), arxi alignment. The project includes design of the replacement and possible upsizing of the T5-inch Ten Mile Trunk Sewer Crossing of which includes approximately Z25 lineal feet from the existing Ten Mile interceptorlLanding Lift Station diversion structure to the manhole near the intersection of W. Kimra Street and S. Heidi PEace. The project does not include hydraulic modeling of the sanitary sewer system or Ten Mile Creek. Task A -Protect Meetinits 1. Protect Meetings A. Attend progress meetings, as required over the duration of the project for the purpose of updating the City, presenting information, designs, and facilitation of issues. An assumed number of meetings is shown on Exhibit A-1. B. Attend property owner meetings, if requested by City, to present project information and identify property owner issues that affect design and construction. Task B -Feasibility Analysis 1. Feasibility Analysis A. Review feasibility of alternate trunk sewer replacement methods, materials, and lacatlons as follows: • Open "cut and cover" replacement of buried trunk sewer at existing alignment easement corridor. • Pipe bursting existing of concrete pipe. • Replacement of aerial crossing with PVC carrier pipe and steel pipe sleeve. • Replacement of aerial crossing with alternate pipe materials such as ductile iron or fiberglass reinforced pipe. • Alternate sewer crossing location and alignment. • Short term temporary replacement of failing section of aertal crossing follmn+ed by long-term solution involving one of previously listed optior>s in this paragraph. B. Prepare a draft summary letter report and submit three (3) copies to the City for review. C. Incorporate applicable review comments and issue final letter report to City. Ciry of MerJdian -Ten MQe Creek SewerC~assing Replacemeru Page - 2 i J-U-B ENGINEERS, rnc. Acr~d~menr ~A' - ~ao8-off ~ i Task C - Preiiminarv and Final Design 1. Trpn~ Sewer Preliminarv Design A. Research, Control, and TopograpMc Survey and Mapping 1. Research Ada County Surveyor's records for wrvey monuments to add in establishing horizontal control and include re~arch of land monuments, plats, records of survey, right-of-ways, and easements of record along the preferred trunk sewer alignments. Worizontal coordinate system shall be based on NAD 1483 translated to the Ada County G.1.S. system. Yerticai control shall be based on NAVD 198$. 2. Establish temporary construction benchmarks (T.B.M.'s) and control points on the south side of Ten Mile Creek and near W. Kimra Street. Conduct field research of wrvey monuments of adjoining subdivisions. 3. Contact utility companies {gas, power, telephone, storm drain, table T.V., street lighting, traffic signals, irrigation) and other utilities identified along the alignment prior to survey to request field locations of utilities and to obtain available utility mapping. 4. Complete topographic survey along the alignment as generally shown on Figure 1. Supplemental topographk wrvey of Ten Mile Creek cross-section will be developed at the crossing alignment chosen for final design. 5. Complete topographic mapping in AutoCAD 2008. The anticipated scale of the plan and profile drawings will be 1 "=20' and 1 "=5' vertical scale. Topographic features shall be depicted using standard symbols. Topographic features shall be shown on the construction plans to the extent that they are found or field located by the utility companies, such as fences, utility poles, surfacing, utilities, top of bank and waterway flowltnes, and include monuments of record and physical survey of monuments and property pins that are found. Property lines will be shown based on Ada County G.I.S. mapping. Where easements are to be secured, property lines shall be determined using research from title reports and field search of found land monuments. C. Basic ~ Final Design of Trunk Sewer & trossing 1. Complete preliminary design of the preferred trunk sewer replacement option with considerations on constructability, surface disturbance, impact to waterways, sanitary separations, dewatering, impacts to public traffic access, utility conflicts, construction access, excavation depths, easement issues, maintenance of sewage conveyance, and other pertinent design issues. 2. Design details for the trunk sewer crossing will be provided including: aerial crossing of Ten Mile Greek; trench and bedding details, connection details, wrface details, and other special details needed for construction. 3. Prepare 90% complete construction plans and contract documents. It ~ antidpated that one (1) construction package will be prepared for the Ten Mile Creek Sewer Trunk Crossing. Perform design drafting in AutoCAD 2008 of the construction plans which will include project title blocks, City standard notes, vicinity maps, sheet indexes, north arrows, bar scales, topography, pipe size, type, slope, invert elevations, ground surface elevations, wrface repair, boring details, property lines, easements, found monuments and property corners, land ownerships, survey control, pay limits, special details necessary for a biddable product. Clry of Meridian -Ten Mile Creek Sewer Crossing Replacatnent Page - 3 .--u-e t~vwr~s. rnc. arraaur+enr ~a ~ - raos-or r Drafting shall be completed on 11 "x17" sheets, ANSI standard size "B" sheets. To the extent practicable, the 20Q2 City of Mertdian Standard Specifications and Drawings for Construction will be utilized in the design. 4. Prepare technical specifications in accordance with the 2007 Edition of the Idaho Standard Public Works Construction (ISPWC) format, and City Standard Specifications and Drawings. J•U-B shall be responsible for preparing special provisions necessary for the project. R formally bid, Contact Documents will be prepared using ISPWC standard front-end documents and City rerisions. 5. Submit three (3) sets to the City for revieNr. 6. Prepare 100% complete construction plans and contract document for agency review and approvals. Provide an estimate of probable construction cost. 7. Incor~rate appropriate revisions as suggested by the City and reviewing agencies in the final set of purrs and contract documents. 8. Develop and issue to the City a final opinion of probable construction cost. D. ConstructaWlity Review and Q/Uf2C Review 1. Complete in-house constructabifity review and Qf1/QC review of the 90% complete construction plans and contract documents. Incorporate appropriate suggestions into project design. Task D -Additions[ Services J-U-B will initiate these services only upon approval by the City. 1. Ceotechnica) Investistation and Analysis J-U-B will retain the services of an kiaho licensed geotechnical subconsultant to provide a geotethnical reconnaissance and related geotechnical engineertng support services as described below. The focus of the exploration will be to provide the design team base data and information to Bidders on subsurface conditions south and north sides of the Ten Mile Creek sewer crossing. The cost listed in Exhibit A-1 is budgetary value. An estimate from Strata, inc. will be provided for review to the City. 1. Field Investigation: a. Obtain all necessary permits for the drilling and/or test pits. b. Complete one (1) test piton the south side of Ten Mile Creek. c. Complete sampling, togging, and classification of soils. 2. Analysis and Design Recommendation a. Review available geologic and geotechnical information in the area. b. Develop recommendations for aerial crossing foundatfon design and construction pertormance requirements. c. Prepare a draft summary letter report and submit three (3) copies to JUB and the City for review. d. Incorporate the review comments and publish four (4) copies of the final report. Task f - Aaencv Coordination and Permitting City of Me+idtm--Ten MUe Cretk Sewer Crossing Replacement Page - 4 J-U-B ENGINEERS, hx. Artachn-enr ~A~ - iO-~-O11 1. gstencv Goordinatl'on and Permitting A. Drainage/Irrigation District Coordination and Permitting 1. Permitting with Nampa-Meridian irtigadon District will be required. J-U-B will meet with NMID after a preferred sewer trunk replacement method is selected by the City and prior to initiating preliminary design. J-U-B will coordinate and submit 90~ complete plans to the NMID for review prior to initiating the licence agreement. 2. For the purpose of estimating this Scope of Service, it is assurr~d that one license agreement will be required for the trunk sewer crossing of Ten Mile Creek. JUB will prepare the necessary license agreement applications, legal descriptions and exhibits. It is also assumed no floodway infringement will be considered as this is an existing facility. B. USCi~ 404 Coordination and Permitting 1. This task encompasses the design and permitting of aerial sewer vossing of Ten Mile Creek that • is under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers(USCf?E) and requires 404 permitting. For the purpose of estimating fees in the Scope of Services, preparation of one (1) Nationwide 12, 404 permit is assumed to complete the crossings. 2. Complete a field visit with representatives from the USCOE to review project scope and waterways. The field meeting will determine if a joint 404 permitting is required. Coordinate with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for crossing requirements and construction methods for preparation of a Nationwide 12, 404 permit for utility crossing or stream alterations. A wetland irnentory study may be required at the crossings to define sensitive wetland areas and restoration requirements and wilt require an addendum to this Scope of Services. 3. A crossing plan; details, and specifications wfll be developed and 404 permit application submitted to the Corps of Engineers. C. IDEQ Submittal Packages A formal IDEQ submittal is not anticipated since this is a sewer replacement project. However, ff an IDEQ submittal is required, J-U-B will perform the following tasks. 1. J-U-B shall coordinate, prepare, and submit final construction plans, specifications, and checklists for approval to the Idaho Department of Ernironmental pDEQ). For the purpose of these Scope of Services, it is assumed that one (1) submittal package will be required. 2. Incorporate applicable IDEQ review comments into the construction plans and spedfications. Task F -Easement Coordinatio,~ 1. Easement Acoulsition The existing trunk sewer lies within a platted 20-foot sanitary sewer easement as shown on the plat of Crest Wood Estates Subdivision No. 4 (Ada County Records Book 56, Page 5239). If additional temporary construction easement is needed, or the City chooses an alternate sewer crowing alignment requiring acquisition of a new sanitary sewer easement, J-U-B will assist the City with permanent and temporary constriction easement acquisition as follows. A. Easement identification and Preliminary ExMbits 1. Reconfirm easements required from preliminary engineering task. City of MeriJian -Ten MUe Creek SewerCracsing Repkueirteat Page - 5 ~-u-a~rHet:as, Mc arrachmenr ~a~- ao•oB-orr 2. Prepare preliminary easement maps using available COMPASS aerial mapping, Ada County G.I.S. base mapping, and preliminary alignments. These preliminary easement maps will be used for initial property owner contact. 3. Research Ada County G.I.S. data base to determine parcel tax identification number, and assessed value. B. Easement Legal Descrfptions 1. Prepare legal descriptions and exhibit drawings necessary to secure additional temporary construction or new permanent easements. For the purpose of estimating fees, preparation of two (2} legal descriptions are assumed. C. Property Owner Meetings and Nlegotfatlons 1. Property Owner Meetings: Attend meetings with Cfty staff and each affected property owner to review the preliminary alignment maps, discuss easement acquisition process, confirm specific issues and concerns, request access to survey. For the purp~e of estimating fees, (2) property owners are assumed. There will be one (1) meeting with each property owner. Interview notes will be prepared documenting each meeting. 2. Easement Negotiations: It is assumed City staff wil! conduct easement negotiations with property owners. J-U-B will assist City staff with easement negotiations through incorporation of property owner and City provisions into the easement(s) -and constnution contract documents. 3. Prepare easement documents. Note that legal descriptions are provided under Task E.1.8. City of Meridian -Ten Mile Creek SewerCrossing Replaee+nent Page - 6 J-U-B ENG/NEfRS, inc. Attachment 'C' - f0-Q8-Ot f CITY OF MERIDIAN TEN MILE CREEK SEWER CROSSING REPLACEMENT ATTACHMENT °C" -FEE SCHEDULE Basis of Fee and Billing Schedule The City shall pay J-U-B for its services and reimbursable expenses as follows. A detailed labor and equipment is presented in Exhibit "A-1 ": Task A -Project Meetings • Task A -Project Meetings Time and material basis with an estimated budget of ......................................... $695 Task B -Feasibility Analysis • Task B -Feasibility Analysis Lump sum price .................................................................................... $3,288 • Lnmp~>cM~~rier .................................................................................. $16;858 s T T ....................................... #~},3~ff Task E -Agency Coordination and Permitting • Tasks E -Agency Coordination and Permitting Time and material basis with an estimated budget of ....................................... $7,202 Task F -Easement Coordination • Task F -Easement Coordination Time and material basis with an estimated budget of ...................................... $2,08 ~/3,Z70°-~ City ofMeridian -Tai Mile Creek Sewer Crossing Replacement Page - 1 F~o-9jser a-~ Page 7 ot2 CITY QF MERIDIAN -TEN MIULE CREEK TRUNK SEWER CROSBIN~i LA8OR AND EQtJiPMENT DETAIL Project Project al Suvay 2-l~.~ GPS TASK Mane r E.r ineer E hear fIT Pl,S Tech. Orahs CrerKal S• E. ~ S+.bc:ormall,tnt TOTAL HO P Rata ` .84 $44.37 $42.Id $23.57 $41.27 $72.31 $t7.W $14.50 $t5.W $50.Ot1 TASK A • PROJECT MEETIN4S { 7&M) ~ t ~ t ~ a Omrar 2 TOTAL TASK A 1. 3.00 0.00 9.00 O.QO 0.00 0.00 0. 0.00 0.00 5895 TASK 8 - FEAS181LITY ANALYSIS {LUMP SUM) t testa Evapnta errt t~l66tod8 ~ a 2 Evakrata aaetermle 1 2 Evaluate A9lemete Tank LowOoN nt 0.6 2 _ Lettar rt 2 8 2 t TOTAL TASK B 4. 14.00 2.00 O:QO O.QO 0; 2.00 1.00 .00 0.00 S ,288 TASK C • PAEUy11NARY AND FINAL DBSIQPI 1 end T hb , d+ {LUMP SUM) . Researai Rfw artd MornenerMe 1 a semodert Har. a vetttoal conga sec caertrl~icn Tsksserccama tao>nta cn«a. w com les, sire vas as as t.e ~ os o.6 t.s as i s T 05 1 0.8 2 8 8 T O.B 7 4 Sde Vbk 6 FNkI Cheat T . Addfttatal AL .7 0 0 18 7.5 OS 8 8 0 6s, a Baste 3 Flntl ~ Conatruoueo Pltrb Can Bask Tank Sewers 1 4 4 Oval l>btam 1 Z 4 8 Can 1 4 24 Prepare 6096 Canpbie Cartstruatlaf Plans and Coshed Ooderretee 2 4 4 1 Prepare Taotrtkxl Spattona atttl CaMtad ooarnerrte t e t 2 Prepare yao%compreta canaaucem Ptatn ata Contrad Doaenerda 1 2 4 - 4 2 - of PrOhabfe CorlsgruoUat Cost 025 2 1 Prepare Fkwl Ctenplere Cor~trtrcflat Plmm sort Corttrad Oeamerda, 20 sate 2 2 3 tb Itsvisw end QMQC Reuter 426 6 36 0 0 BO 8 0 0 Revtetrat80% a _ _-_ wt o o a o 0 0 0 0 7 ALT. . C 6:26 18;50 8:00 40.50 2 7.60 54 B.50 8.00 8~J SO 18,880 TASK D • TRU#tK SEWER AODRIdNAL SER9RCHS {TBrM? 1 Oa0teciutlerl_ IAwat9yetlen nod Ana_xats _ Stake brstlar 1 fieeteattraal atbrl end emare 33,W0 o As9rD goo aoo .o: 1.00 0.00 .00 0.00 0.~ ooo oA0 s3.5~1 s>' F~diIBIT A•1 Page 2 of 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN - 7EN MILE CREEK TRUNK SLOWER CROSSING LABOR AND EtiUIP11IENT DETAIL PraiaCt ProleG Stmctural Survey 2 • Man t ~ TASK M r meer eieer E1T pLS 7ach, Orate Clerical E uy. S;~bconcuitant TOTAL EmplaveaHourhPeY $53.84 $44.37 $42.14 $23.57 $41.27 $22.34 617.o1t $1x.50 .00 .00 TASK E • ACsE1+ICY COORCiNATfON AND PERNIITTING 1 DlHrlett:oordlriallonmrd i (TB~M} Silo & 1 2 2 pare ~ 1 a~~. ~~~ C 1 1 0 2 2 4 4 4 4 1 1 0 ,~ 2 IiSCO! 401 Cowdirmtbn Q Psrmlitl Sfte 1 1 AEI ~tl T 1 1 4 4 Pre 'bite. Plan, Sectlana, t>ataYs 1 4 8 USCOE mrl IDVVFt Perm IDL and ExldbBe 1 AL 0 1 1 4 2 2 2 3 10 0.6 O.S t 4 4 31D~ SUBMII7'AL PACKAtlB 1leoertn - - -' . Trunk Sever 1 2 Incapolate Tnnk Sewer erda 1 2 2 2 0 2 0 0 $0 8 OTAL TAS E 2.40 i8 0-~ 30A4 10. 14.E 34.00 4.4p 8.00 8.00 S4 S7,202 TASK P - EA~£Mt:NT COORDINATION (TriiMl 1 eseemant irbtdMteNtaa mid P4Mtrn1 6chgNb Fssernent Wm1D11cation --- 1 1 Pre1m Easement Z Reatearch 1 - - - -- - --6531 Z ElieunroM - - - al D and F.td~ O,~i 2 4 1.5 6880 9 Owner mid om Owner ownero, 2 2 Easemerd 2 2 ~0 T i4L: K F 4.00 1,25 0 2,00 4.40 4.00 3. 0.00 .40 0.00 tf.dAtlS COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT Black Cat Water Main Extension, Black Cat Lift Station to Chinden BLVD '~Z THIS AGREEMENT made this day of ~FQ~u t-tQ~/, 200,7, by and between the CITY OF MERIDIAN, a municipal corporation, hereinafter called "CITY," and Primeland Development Co., LLP, Keego Springs Development Co. Inc, Pole Creek Properties, Inc., and ~~~,ycto} I..trC ,hereinafter called "DEVELOPERS": WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, DEVELOPERS own properties inside the corporate limits of the City of Meridian and desire to share the cost of building a water main that to be owned, operated, and maintained by CITY to serve DEVELOPERS' properties, shown on Exhibit "A" and Exhibit «B,,. WHEREAS, upon recommendation of the Public Works Department, the City Council of CITY accepted and approved the proposal to construct the water main, subject to all conditions hereinafter provided by this Agreement; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing premises, CITY and DEVELOPER hereby agree: A. Preparation of Plans. CITY has prepared plans and specifications, drawings, instructions, bid proposal and all other contract documents for the construction and installation of water main (hereinafter called "Project"), shown on Exhibit "B," including rights-of--way, grades and elevation, and materials used in the construction and installation of said water main. B. Construction of the Project. 1. CITY shall install and construct the Project in compliance with and subject to all conditions provided herein. 2. CITY shall obtain andJar provide all engineering, surveying, contract administration, and/or permanent and temporary easements necessary for the construction of the Project. 3. CITY shall undertake and/or provide all testing, sampling and other normally conducted measures for quality controUquality assurance regarding any and all installed systems. COOPERATNE CONSTRUCTION AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT - Page I of 9 4. CITY shall provide inspection services for the construction of the Project in accordance with CITY standards. C. Solicitation of Bids. CITY shall solicit bids and publish requests for bid proposals for construction of the Project from at least three (3) properly licensed public work contractors. CITY shall award the construction contract to the lowest qualified bidder pursuant to all applicable public bidding rules as required by Idaho law. CITY shall reserve the right to reject all bids and/or cancel this Agreement if CITY, in its sole discretion, determines that the successful bidder or bid amount is unacceptable for any reason. D. DEVELOPER and CITY Responsibility for Costs. Because the CITY construct water main improvements, as shown on Exhibit "B", with the cooperation of the DEVELOPERS, it is mutually agreed that CITY shall fund 100% of the cost of the Project, estimated at 503 773, with reimbursement from the DEVELOPERS in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement . E. Change Orders to Construction Contract. CITY shall notify DEVELOPERS before approving any change order to the construction contract if (a) the cost of the change order will exceed one percent (1 %) of the contract price or (b) the cumulative total of all previously approved change orders exceeds ten percent (10%) of the contract price. In the event of a change order, CITY and DEVELOPER shall execute an amendment to this Agreement to record the amount of the change order to be reimbursed to DEVELOPER, if any. In the event that a change order or other amendment to the construction contract results in a cost savings, CITY and DEVELOPERS shall share the cost savings F. Reimbursement to CITY. 1. Estimated Total Reimbursement. Because CITY will construct the Project, DEVELOPERS shall reimburse to CITY 25% of the actual construction cast, estimated at $125,943. Each DEVELOPER shall reimburse to the CITY their equal portion (25%) of the total reimbursement. Each portion is estimated at $31,486. 2. Method of Pa, ent. Each DEVELOPER shall be responsible for payment in full at the time their Property as shown in Exhibit "A" connects to the water main constructed in this project. 3. Reimbursement Payment. CITY shall provide proof of total cost of construction of the project to DEVELOPERS at time of reimbursement. G. Indemnification and Insurance. DEVELOPER shall indemnify and save and hold harmless CITY from and for any and all losses, claims, actions, judgments for damages, and/or injury to persons or property and losses and expenses caused or incurred by DEVELOPER, its servants, agents, employees, guests, and/or business invitees, and not caused by or arising out of tortious conduct of CITY or its employees. COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT -Page 2 of 9 H. No Assignment. DEVELOPERS shall not assign any portion of this Agreement or any privilege here under, either voluntarily or involuntarily, without the prior written consent of the CITY, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. The agreement shall be tied to the Properties owned and proposed to develop by the DEVELOPERS, as shown on exhibit "A". I. Attorney Fees. Should either•party find it necessary to employ an attorney for representation in any action seeking enforcement of any provision of this Agreement, or to recover damages for breach of this Agreement, or to resolve any disagreement as to the interpretation of this Agreement, the unsuccessful party in any final judgment or award entered pursuant to such action shall reimburse the prevailing party for all reasonable costs, charges and expenses, including attorneys' fees expended or incurred by the prevailing party in connection therewith and in connection with any appeal, and the same maybe included in such judgment or award. This provision shall be deemed to be a separate contract between the parties and shall survive any default, termination or forfeiture of this Agreement. J. Notices. Any notice desired by the parties and/or required by this Agreement shall be sent via United States Mail, registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, and shall be addressed as follows: CITY: City Clerk City of Meridian 33 E. Idaho Ave. Meridian, Idaho 83642 DEVELOPERS: Primeland Development Co., LLP 3120 W Belltower Dr, Suite 100 Meridian, ID 83646 Keego Springs Development Co. Inc. P.O. Box 140298 Boise, Idaho 83714 Pole Creek Properties LLC PO Box 190073 Boise, ID 83719 ~e~t ~7.~Yeloart+a'1~.L~.~ tai ~~ b~e~1,~,~d Rarx.d YYle~cdt ~ CD $~G ~a- COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT -Page 3 of 9 Such notice shall be deemed delivered if and when delivery is accepted or three (3}days after deposit in the United States Mail. Either party shall have the right to change its address by delivering to the other party a written notification thereof in accordance with the requirements of this section. K. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Idaho and the ordinances of the City of Meridian. L. Exhibits. All exhibits to this Agreement are incorporated by reference and made a part of this Agreement as if the exhibits were set forth in their entirety in this Agreement. M. Entire Agreement. This Agreement and the exhibits hereto constitute the full and entire understanding and agreement between the parties with regard to the transaction contemplated herein, and no party shall be liable or bound to any other in any manner by any representations, warranties, covenants and agreements except as specifically set forth herein. N. Definition of DEVELOPER's Pronerty. The term "DEVELOPER's Property" in the Agreement shall mean the parcels shown on Exhibit "A" attached hereto. O. Binding Effect. 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 DEVELOPERS of DEVELOPERS' Properties. P. Reports and Information. At such times and in such forms as the CITY may require, DEVELOPER shall furnish to CITY such statements, records, reports, data and information as the CITY may request pertaining to matters covered by this Agreement. Q. Construction and Severabilitv. If any part of this Agreement is held to be invalid or unenforceable, such holding will not affect the validity ar enforceability of any other part of this Agreement so long as the remainder of the Agreement is reasonably capable of completion. R. A~nroval Required. This Agreement shall not become effective or binding until approved by CITY. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties shall cause this Agreement to be executed by their duly authorized officers the day and year first above written. COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT -Page 4 of 9 DEVELOPER: Primeland Development Co., LLP 1 F~~ S, ~~~~.~E Name (printed) v t J Signature Title ~ Q.~8 Date STATE OF IDAHO ) ss County of Ada ) ~~- on this ~' 1~ day of ~l'.y'J'~~~~ ,2187 efor the and rsigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared ' ~L~I,I,I/Y~( Q,~~ ,known or identified to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that heJshe executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. . ,. -- Ki,Vii;~;r:CLY ~ ~ 1I;LE~ ~_ a Notary P~~.'ic State .~ ~ _ `~:~ Notary Public F~RrjIdaho Residing at: ~~~ Commission Expires: 7 ;Ze 4 COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT -Page 5 of 9 DEVELOPER: Keego Springs Development Co. Inc. " Ic~r~t7 ~rw~~ti~~ Name (printed) ~etr1~/' Title Signature STATE OF IDAHO ) ss ~1~ (~~ Date County of Ada ) ~/ . ~y~" On this ~y~ day of ~C ~~i"ll.t~-~~'~ ~ ,~, bef e me the~undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, pers nally appeared T ~YV-t~~~.~1 ,known or identified to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that he/she executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. a :-' r' ~1' ~_ ~~ - - ~ N Public For Idaho ~ • ~ . ~• ~ 41 x t ~ .~ Residing at: S~Z r L?~ . ~; ,,,.,~, ,,, ,,;,,;;;, .~ Commission Expires: l 7c. ~~ `~ COOPERATNE CONSTRUCTION AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT -Page 6 of 9 DEVELOPER: Pole Creek Properties, Inc. I;.J©.~ 1~aV~y Name (printed) Sign ~r r ~'e cr l ~r v J~ Title Date STATE OF IDAHO ) ss County of Ada ) ~; ~~ ~ On this ~`'~ day of (,~ i'4LbI.~ 77,_before me the undersigned, a Notary ublic in and for said State, p nally appeared I~y1 Q.C*-~J-zr }~ ,known or identified to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that he/she executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. ~~i~ExLti' ~r~~:.;tH N tary Public Fpr Idaho 'i ~ Nocar; F~r~:;~ ;~ Residing at: -ram- t2rc .. ~ > ,~,~4, ~ Co ssion .._ __.... .. _ - mmi Expires: I ~u`i COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT -Page 7 of 9 DEVELOPER: ~~~~~~~~~ ~--~ Co~ec~ ~~,r{v~ Narne (printed) Signature ~Wz~id ent- Title a-~-oa Date STATE OF IDAHO ) ss County of Ada ) On this ~_day of ~efD y' 1~.GL r N ,200, before me the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared L' O~rey -1-on ,known or identified to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to tie within instrument, and acknowledged to me that helshe executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. KO.L1,, (~ Yll~j~ ~° ~'r%pT'`~P,~`.'~'N ~ Notary Public For Idaho ~~ ~ o Residing at: N~~~ , Z~ i Commission Expires: lo -D~-apl p a e i • • ~_ r..~.1G:Ae •~eee COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT -Page 8 of 9 CITY: TAMMY de MAYOR G~ Dt ,,.:~~;:, a e Attest: Jw y cc c 4.. ~ I ~.~-, STATE OF IDAHO ) ss County of Ada ) ~~~~ •e, ~~~~ JCL ~' t tf'~ , ~ \~z =. ~,, . ~, On this Z~}~ day of rY ,2008 before me the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared TAMMY DE WEERD and . ~ C~1.., ~,(~/~B, known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Meridian, Idaho, who executed the within instrument and acknowledged to me that they executed the same on behalf of the City of Meridian IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. ~•~,,.,,~~ .• N •. Cs~_ •. ~.. i fir' ~' C7 ~,~ • • 4 ~ z ' ~itary Public or I aho C ' ,~esidin at: ~'•, .Q,ti~ ~~ommission Expires: ~~-~ ~-~ ~ '••.~'AT ; •• COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT -Page 9 of 9 _. _ _- - ____ Tri ogy Volterra North- Prim land Devel _~ : ~ ent Co. ,- } ~__ _, Exhibit A __ ~-. a°`,4~ a°' ~°~ SN11ld NOIlOf1211SN00 a, ~~ ~ ~a~,~.~ ~a~ ~ tzet~ ~ ~oaaeane oim an ssaae~t~ o~uavisetoa OHVdI `A1Nf100 1144 `N111U1213W € € 3~~", ;a~ ~, ~, •~rn ~s~vcznsxo~ z~nxns vn~a ~ ~„~. ~ aarr aMOr •ava store `'"''~ -~~~. t o ~ ~ a~ ~ a B s ~ °~~ ~y¢ ~ ~ ~ ~ W ~ a, ~~°~~ W~ grg~~l~3 ~ o ~a T ®o ,~® ~.~ _ n z z Q ~ z . O ~ ~~ o~u° W Z o o z~ N ~ ~ ~ o t ~ F' d W ~v~ o ~ ~ OC g o ~ m z _ ~ Z W p 3 v b $a ~ g~~ s ~ ~ a 8E i ~.~ee w a~s ~a b '~ ~s ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~f has ~ ~~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~~~ ~~ fi ~~ ~g a T e a :~~ gi ~~ : ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ s a ~ ao l3 ~~ a ~ ~ ~~~ ~6s - d rf . 6 d w d d d = `~ ~ « A i avow ~iw nom,. r~ Z y ~~~ ~~ #~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ s~ ~ ~~~~~~g~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ B ~ gg~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~~ 6 ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ &$ 8~ ~ a ~ ~~ ~fi~ ~~ ~ b i ~ 6 ~ 88 ;~ ~ ,~~ as s^ s s ~k ~~ d d n d a - ~ N ~ ~ '~ d . ~ ~ ~ s~awanoadw~ w~s~s a~.dnn ,,, r„ ~ ~ ~ ' J ~NJVIB L 3SVHd WO?11V t t ~o~wne a~vc adv se~rm awa~a~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ °° •aru 'syxvyznsuaa aaeans vn~a ~ ~~ ,~ NtlIaR~31N ~O lll.I~ ~~ e ~. ~ . ~~~ ~,~ ~ ~~ I ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~~ i s ~. i ~~ r it ~ ~ ~~ .s ~ ~~~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~ i~ ~~ m~ a~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~ N ~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~ ~~~ ~~ ~ ~~ a ~ P R a~~ tl~~ s~~ ~~ ~~~ ~~~ gl{ ~~ ~ ~~~~~ ~ i ~ ~ 4QQ~~a~~ ea ~ ~ R~~~~~~~~~ ~~ ~~ --, .~ ~~{C~p ~a ~~ .~ ~~ ~ _•_ ~~~~sa p ~~gg ~B :NCH 1 (3 r fi ~?Z ~~,~~ ~ ~ ~^- ~ s~3wanoa iwi w~s~s a~d H ,,. ~.,~ ~ QS00 ' a , ~ m ~'~' t 1TGLLi WO1LJpA ]001 ' ~ ~ ~ eaoeaeens mava may l~i~t~LL01aH oiaa.~ta1 Z 3$tlHd ~IO~l 11fJ J1r ~I 18 ~ "' 41d ~b ~~ ~, 'CHI 'SJddVJ.'II1SAtQ'J .l3AtIRS 7IAI.7 JJ ll ^ ~ s~ >~ 1rYla'~~I' 7O I~ i ~~ ~~ A Y9000 9AH1W . . . $ ~~~ ~~'~ )~~~~ (ltOW ~ >M Wpg1 (~ yr1111 71~ 3R7 Ilppll Q$ 1 1 ~ I I W _N el.~_ ~L+I ~ nl- y ~ F~___~y~_ ~9 1 1 j ® I I I __ __. .e-- _ .... q ~S, 1 -,` 01011 MI/fIDgll QQQ $gg~~`t~t ~ i I5 i I 6 I I ~~yq C 4CCC 31 B ~ ~ _ I . ._ __~ 1 3 6 I _ _- _~y_~ - 6 R 8 b B ,~~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~~ o~~ 5 ~~~~ ~~ ~~ ~, 9 9 d----- r- ~ a5 j~ ~~$ ~~ (~wr v9 an wnw ~~ ~ 11 ~ ~~-~~ 4 ~ ICI ~e ~ r 4~L t$ ~~~ v` jg I ~I S it . Ik 119 .. ° - ~ ~°° sAS a~dnn s~awanoadwi w~ a~ ,,o ~ . g ~ ~ ~ ~ ,mu9~q 7 W~1 W ~; Z 3SVHd ~V02111PJ WJV18 ~ r' rteu ~. ~ ~~ ,~ s~asa~ mava may wsa~aAaa aai,~nexa> . • ~ ~ , 6 ~~ ~ ~,-~~SUO~ x~,,~s ~~ ~~ ~ ~ • rwco p!>nW saa m v ~naia3w ~o ui~ 4 ~~OA~ ~I#A~ D9Y10~~ 0099 ~ WI 1(1911 ~ (9 lYiB 97 ~ 9M4 1pl.MI g „ ~ 1 I I I 4•~I ~ + I I~ - ~~ ~~ I l 1 1 gyQl a! ~ ' ~ B I [ t 1 '~I ~~ - ~ I B I ' $ 6 3 I ~~ ~ I , . . .IpI{{~~.^$$I~IIy 6~ iii0 ' l I i 9 ~ I yypp i I ~d~ ~~ 6 I D B ~~ ~~ I I I I l 1 1 I~ 1 1 ~I 1 1~ 1I I I~ I B 9 1~ ~ I' E 1 ~ ~a I I I 1 , ~; , ' a ' , 8 t ~ ~ .I I ' I 6 I . B ~ i I I I ~ I 8 1 $ ~ I I I 1 t 9 1 1 I B 8 1 i 1 I I I I I 8 1 1 8 I 1 1 ~ ~ I I ~ 1 I~ B ~ B ~ ; ~8~ ~ ,:~ ~ ~ ~ A Y I ~i 0 1 g ~l j R I B M I ~g e l s ~ I I 6 ° ~ B 'I j ~ I I ~ E ~ )) a 1 t~'~ 1$ ~ 1 17b1 ~ I 1 p I f B ZZZ I I l ' I , I I ~~ ~ 5 I g I I 1 I 1 ' I I g$ II a ' 1 9 1j 1 1i 61 I 9 0 1 1 1 I B.Ip. ~~~ ! ph'1 l 1 ; 1 I fi l I I 6 I 1 1 I I ..-._~a _____ Q ~ @d ~i Li~115 31~OIdtiO 8 I I 1 I `I I 1 ~ 1 9 I F ~ Y I~ ~s==~a----- 11 I ~ C ; I y~ ~ I I I I ~ I ~ ~ 6 B ~ I , ~ ® I I I I I I I f ~ I Y ~ I ~ ~ ~~ 6 U I I I I 6 B I ~ j ~ 1 ' I I I 1 I l i I i ~ I . R ,Y 8 $~ C B B I p 1 I I i I' 4 I I 1 I I I I 1 ~ B 1 B g g ~ ~ 6 1 1 I gg } J{ I F7 3& 1 ~ I 1 I IB e~ I m ~~ ~~ I e a ± 1 11 I I i I $~ i I i B Y B r'~ i[ ~ ~ I ° I, ~ l 1 11 l ~ 1 6~ ~ ~ ! i l ' ' I B 1 ~ ~~ ~~` ~ I, s I CA i l ~~ ~ ~ I f ~ • 1 1 1 0 ~ ~ 8 SSS 9 11 I~ ~ ~~ ~ i 9j yII 5 8 I E~ ~ 1 l YI ~ S ~ 1 ~ I I I ' ~ ~ I ~ b1 I , I I I {{ B 50 { l i B I ~ '~ 6 ~ I l 1 f 111 i l I ~ 1 1 M1 1 fi l Ig ISI „I 6 ~ 1 l~ 0 I a ~; I n ' I I ~{I a I I B 6 ~ a 1 1 ~ 1 ' ~ j ~ I 1 I I I 1 I I I l 6 I I ~~ ~ I I I 5 1 I I l 1 I y~ 1 6 1 I I ~ I p ~, \ ~ iJ ~ ~, I ~ - --~--~+.-___ l a ~ I I R m e ~ 9N1 w,al lvge r m >9M1 wm ~x Her? ~ r~ ~Lf o,,n.,y, ~- ~"- ~I~A S1N3W3AOZldWI W31SAS 2131VM ~ ~ ~ -aeu .~ eaoxaasns am aHV er~uaNS nwa,~a~ Z ~SbHd QV0211HJ WJV18 ~ ~~,;~~,,.~ ~ ~aru `saxvs~tnsKaa mans vua MdIa12~3W ~O JI.LIJ ~ a ~ .1~ .~ ~~ -~I~v... ~~~ uow rrd 7,1 lauw G ®IS ~ an uuwl ~~~ I I 199 I J I I I I 'I e ~ I I~ 1 I 9 ~~ I I 1 1 ~~~ I II~ , I I I 1 1 s I I I ~ p I I e 1 e D ~ ~~~ ~~, I i i i I; ' ~1g1 I i t aQ Q~ ~ 1 ® B ! o` 6 p ~ 1 t ! s II I I I g bl ~~ 1 I I ` ~ I I I N6Q a 1 B ~ 1 g„` I ~ I e I I l 0 I B ~ ~ ®-~I >j i i e I I I ~ 0 1 I 1 1 e I 9 I I I ~ I 1 E I e l ~~ ~ I~ I I IJ 1 I I I 1 9 17 g I ~ 1 ~~ ~~ ~, m 11 D fa;' 11 I I g @I ~ I ~ ~~ ~I I I 1 I a~ 1 I I 1 ~ I 7 1 I 9 6 ~ ° ~/ I , 1 1 I I ~ D I ~ I_~~ I I L~ 1 I 1 ` 4 I e ~ 3NI1 AtllIV1 i I I, 0 I I I I I I I I D ~ I I ~ I i ~ U ~ 1 °~ I 1 ® 1 I I 11 9 y I ,~ a I I I I I• ~ 5 1 l i R I b l 1 1 I ~~ 6 1 ~ 1 0 I 1 I i 1 I ~~ I~ ~ e a nl I ~~ l e I i ^^ ~` l i 5 1 1 9 I I I I I l e I; I 1' S I I 1 I 1 1 1 e I 1 I 1 I I a B ~ ~ ~ je ; _ ~ I i i ~~ ~ I I ' I a ~~ I~~ ' 8 II D 1 I }I a ,le BI ~~ ~~~ ;~~: S 1 1 ^ I 1 I ~ ; i i ~~ ~~~ i 0 I 8 I I 1 1 Ilr I I I p -- 1 I ~ 6 ~ 6 ~ ~ 2s~~ o~,jo ~ m_,_ I ,y _~1 I m_____ I I 1 I. a e i p ~~ ~ e ®, I q ~ 8 1 I I P I I I I ~$ ~~ i t I ~~ 8a I e~* d 1 0 C I 6 I ~ Qpi ~~ 11 1 ~ I I I ~ ~~~ 5 I 1 ~ 1 I lie 0 I I a ®~ ~ i 0 I I I @i I 1 1 I I I ICI 1 1 , i I 1 8 I B I X 0 6 d (f lli6 ~ 711 171 (9~09r dsl 7f1 Ig11A a"°•'~. ~"' ~"~~~ S1N3W3AObdWI W31SJlSZ13.LtlM ' ~ _ ~ Z ' ~ ~ tim<< °a a° ~ . m9 woaanans man ~saaaoNa nauv>maaa ' 3StlHd ~dOZI 11/J ~ JVlB ~ ~ '° u '' "``' sa.~cviznsNO~ ~nxns vets '~11I TMI ~ >~ ~ ~ MdIt7~~13W ~~ ul~ ~ ~ ~>~ ~ ~b~ 7a6T~100 »i~'i . W OYf11YpMI0~f g 9 ~~~ ~~~ ~ 1 t ~e a s~ ~ ~ it ~~ s e 1 11 1 lu 1 I 1 1e ____ _____ _____ I _ _____ _ _ _o ___ ___ 0 n 0 ~ .~®___ h . _ _m____- 4 1 i 1 l UiIg1971108 N3WiQq i 1 1 1 -~-___ y1 iB-m--___ l' ..~ _ ___ -~n____ a __ i ~~ I 1 1 6 1 I 1 I 1 I I 9 I i j B 1 R 1 1 I sg I 1 O ~ ~, 6 i I .1 I I u 1 j 6 h 61 H y y 1 1 1 ~~ ~ i5 ® 8 ; I I B ~ ~ H ~ ~1 I 1 1 11 1 B ! ~~ ~I 6 I. ij I I a I ~ r -^___ ~_ 1 I ~ I 1 I I I I I 1 4 1 0 11~ 1 I I ^^ ~1 11 I q I I 60 1 ' ~ fi - I ® ~L5 EC 1 1 I 1 I i of i 1 I ~ B I ~ a S 1 P g I`~ 1 I I I '~ I 1 `B 1 a a I~ 1 1 I • I I I I B . ~ 6 y , *~7 B ~ ~ ~ p ~ ~ I B ~~r B , ' { y ~iA ^^ 1 OB 11 I~ I 1 I 1 S~ t I 1 ~ ~ y ~F~ [ _.-__.~___. I 1 C 1, ~' ` g~~ Y~ I ~ ~ ~I 1LfNY~ M1®Ipl ~Ip ~ ,~ -- - I' ~ - I'g~ ~ , ~ 1 r I B I ~1 I ' sl a~ I i 1 I '~ 1 j1 1 1 I 1 ~ p I~ [16 ~ 8 I i I 1• 1 ,1 1 I B I I ~ ~1 1 I 1 ~o i ~ !~ ~~~~~ ~x~iffr-r-- f3Cr TASK ORDER N0.0733 CITY OF MERIDIAN (OWNER) AND HYDRO LOGIC, INC. (HYDROGEOLOGISTj This Task Order ~ issued by Owner and acxepted by the Hydrogeologist pursuant to the mutual promises, covenants and conditions contained in the Agreement between the above named parties dated February 18, 2008. CITY OF MERIDIAN EXPLORATORY TEST AND MUNICIPAL WATER SUPPLY WELL REGULATORY APPROVALS, DESIGN, DRILLING AND CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION, WELL DEVELOPMENT, HYDRAULIC TESTING, WATER QUALITY SAMPLING, AND FINAL REPORTING FOR WELL #28 ~~~ The Hydn~eologist's scope of services, time of completion and compensation shall be as set forth herein. Services shall generally be descn'bed as Engineering Consulting Services per the Consultants proposal dated February 14.2008. TASK 1.1 -CITY WATER WELL #28 FACILRIES Per the City's request, Hydrogeologist w~l evaluate, obtain regulatory approvals arx! water rights, develop and administer bidding documerrts and corrtracts, develop t~hnicai specifications, review contractors invoices for payment, design well facalfies, provide geotechnical services such a geophysical logging - underwater camera inspections - and water lave(/water-quality instrumentation, oversee dulling -well construction - emplat~nent of well seals -well development, des~n and conduct hydraulic teeing, sample grourul water quality, serve as a liaison between contractors and the City, make final regulatory submittals, and develop a comprehensive report documentation for the project. Hydrogeoiogist will develop any necessary change orc~rs to the work and keep the City regularly updated with respell to the work. In addition to regulatory submittals, individual task completion reports wip be developed as needed andlor n3queated by the Ciiy. The Owner will provide all available information neta:ssary to facilitate the project. Hydrogeologist wi!! fiollow through with regulatory agena~ to closure arsi wilt work closely with the City's Public Works Department. TIME OF COMPLETION Hydrogeologic services win be completed on an as needed basis and time of completion will be set as servicss are requested. COMPENSATION The Not To-Exc~ amount f~ this Task ceder No. 0733 is fifty-seven thousand, four- hundred oral twenty dollars {$57,420.00). The hourly rate for services and direct expenses is attached (Prevailing Fes Schedule Effective January 1, 2008) and by this reference made a part hereof. CITY OF MERIDIAN ., T MY de ERD, MAYOR Attest: HYDROGEOLOGIST C_._ ED SQUIRES, HYDRO LOGIC, INC. ~ ~. ,, .~`'~'~y ''~. ~-. - SEA ~l fRK ,,,~r ~~„~ ,~```, TASK ORDER N0.0732 CITY OF MERIDIAN (OWNER) AND HYDRO L061C, INC. (HYDRt3GEOLOGIST) This Task Order is issued by Owner and accepted by the Hydrogeobgist pursuant to the mutual promises, covenants and conditions contained in the Agreement between the above named parties dated February 18, 2008. CITY OF MERIDIAN MUNICIPAL WATER SUPPLY WELL REHABILITATION AND TESTING PURPOSE The Hydrogeologist's scope of services, time of completion and compensation shah be as set forth herein. Services shall generally be described as F~gineering Consulting Services per the Consukarrt's proposal dated February 14.2008. TASK 1.1-CITY WATER t4VELL #14 REHABILITATION AND TES7INQ Per the City's request, Hydrogeologist win evaluate, design, acrd inspect reconstr~tiv® maintenance ~ City munk~pal water supply Well #14. The recorwtrudive design, oversight, and documentation would include work tasks such as re-development of wail scxeen completion intervals, installation of plugs and/or liners inside wen casings, perforation and/or pressure routing of the unsealed surt'ace casing, wen developmenrt, twmi}testing and water quai"ity sampnng, and reoommenda6ons for sustainable yield. In addition to regulatory submittals, individual task completion reports will be developed as need8d and/or requested by the City. The Own®r w~l provide all available information wry to conduct the rehabilitation. Hydrogeolog~t will perform down hole video surveys, design the rec~strudion, inspect the work, obtain regulatory permit, review and approve the c~rrtractor's kwaices, sdredufe and conduct pump testing, serve ~ the 6a~on befi+~reen the dn'lling corrtra~tor and the City to obtain cost estimates from contractors ark to develop contractual agreenrents and #echnical sp~ilications for' the work. Hydrogeok~ist will develop any necessary change oniers to the work and keep the City regularly updated with respect to the work. Hydrogeologist w~i alb serve as inspector for the City with to the work inducting review of contractor invoices and developing as-butt recorci drawings. Hydrogeologist wdl follow through with regulatory agencies to closure and wilt work closely with the City's Public Works Department. nME of coMPI.E~r1oN Hydrogeologic services ~nn71 be completed on an ~ nee~al basis and 6me of completion w01 be set as services are requested. COMPENSATION The Not To-Exceed amount for this Task Order No. 0732 's: twenty~ve thousand dollars ($25,000.00). The hourly rate for services and direct expenses is attad~ed (Prevailing Fee Schedu~ Effective January ~ 1, 2008) and by this re#erence made a part hereof. CITY OF MERIDIAN BY: ~ TAMMY de RD, MAYOR ~~~ ~ ''~I v~ f '~ ~ ~~ HYDR~EOLOGI3T ~~ ` ED SQUIRES HYDRO LOGIC, INC. f ~~~ ~ L ~ 1002 tit. Franklin Street Boise. ID 83702 X20813-I?-8369. ll:a~t) 34?-3100. h~~drologic.,aq~~estnet Ed Squires Mark Utting Loren Pearson Kurt Newbry Jannette Young Clerical office staff Hydro Lo¢ic, Inc. Rate Schedule 2008 Managing Hydrogeologist Project Hydrogeologist Geophysicist/Project Manager Hydrogeologist Geologist Directly allocable $120/hour* $ 105/hour $ 95/hour $ 85/hour $75/hour $ 45/hour Mileage billed at $ 0.44/mile Down hole camera. survey base charge = $ 850 Minimtun geophysical togging charge = $1,500 Mobile geophysics unit standby time a $ 200/hour * Ed Squires = Expert witness in legalproceedings = $1751hr. Billing rates for Hydro Logic, Inc. will remain fixed for 2008 C,. /~.r~ sl February 14, 2~ February 22, 2008 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 26, 2008 APPLICANT ITEM NO. REQUEST Task Order No. 2.1 for the Ten Mile Creek Crossing Replay JUB Engineers, Inc. for $13,270 AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: See attached CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: ~ ~~~ CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Dote: Emailed: ~iwr r-nncn~: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Phone: 5-E with CITY OF MERIDIAN P~r,~ ~~&s P~o;Q~ o7s 3 TASK ORDER NO. ~,l _FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR WATER, WASTEWATER, AND MISCELLANEOUS PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS TEN MILE CREEK SEWER CROSSING REPLACEMENT City Project No. Engineer Project No. 10-08-011 THIS TASK ORDER, entered into this day of ,2008, ta3tween City of Meridian, Idaho, hereinafter referred to as the °CITY°, J-U-B ENGINEERS. Inc. ,hereinafter referred to as the ENGINEER, is subject to the provisions of the Agreement for Engineering Service for Water, Wastewater, and Miscellaneous Public Works Projects, approved December 12, 2008, hereinafter referred to as the MASTER AGREEMENT for PROFESSIONAL SERVICES. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the CITY intends to construct improvements to the Ten Mile Creek Sewer Grossir-g, hereinafter referred to as the PROJECT; NOW, THEREFORE, the CITY and J-U-B ENGINEERS. Inc in consideration of their mutual covenants herein agree in respect as set forth below. CITY INFORfMAT10N AND RESPONSIBILITIES: The CITY will provide to ENGINEER the data andlor services specified in the AGREEMENT. In addition, the CITY will furnish to ENGINEER items fisted in Attachment °B" SCOPE OF SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED BY ENGINEER: ENGINEER will erovide those services described in Attachment °A°_ SCHEDULE OF WORK TO BE PERFORMED: ENGINEER will perform said services in a timely manner. BASIS OF FEE AND BILLING SCHEDULE: The CITY will pay ENGINEER for its services and reimbursable expenses as follows: as shown on Attachment °C". File Folder Title: Citv of Meridian -Ten Mi, le Creek Sewer Crossing Remarks: iN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this TASK ORDER as of the day and year first above written. CITY: City of Meridian, Idaho 33 E. Idaho St ./ M~e~ridi~an, ID 83642 By. ~.v ~ NamelT'Itte: f d or ENGINEER: J-U-B Engineers, Inc. 250 S Beachwood Ave, Ste, 201 Boise, ID 837 By. ,,~ ~~ 1,IIIIfI/~r~~~,, i NametTlUe: P i ' bau O 1 ~~ '~~. PUBLIC WORKS APP,R1OVAL: Name/TIUe: Len Gradv, P.E.. City Engineer A~pr,,,~ ~y C~+y ~L~f,/tC~1 Ftbcwa~ y Zb, Zoop ~,,. ~ a$~~., Nameffdle:~W Cif lent ,~~ qJ yu~ ~ulrrldvt ', ~ T 18~ ,;~' ~.~~ ~ ~. .,, ,.; ~r,,,,..,,, ., ,,,~~ J-l1-B ENGJNEERS, ir-t. AttocJ-ment 'A' - fa-~-Of 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN TEN MILE CREEK SEWER CROSSING REPLACEMENT This project provides design of the replacement of the Ten Mile Creek sewer crossing a5 descn'bed herein and shown on Figure 1. It is assumed that the project will be designed as vne {1) bid package, and that the City will serve as the Engineer during construction phases. Table of Conterrts• Attachment "A" -Scope of Er~gineering Services • Task A -Protect Meeting • Task B -Feasibility Analysis • Task C -Preliminary and Finai Design • Task D - Additional Services • Task E - Aeencv Coordination and Permitting • Task F - Easement Coordination • Exhibit A-1 -Labor and Equ,1L ent Detail • Figure 1 -Protect Overview Attachment "B" -Items Provided by City Attachment "C" -Fee Schedale CAy oJMerldian -Tin Mile Creek SewerCrossing RrPlatement Page - ! J-u-B ENGtI~ERS, rnr. Atcacrtment a ° - tao9-or f CITY OF MERIDIAN TEN MILE CREEK SEWER CROSSING REPLACEMENT Attachment "A" -Scope of En;ineering Services Protect Understanding The following is J-U-B's understanding of the Project. The City of Meridian identified a st~ment of the Ten Mile Trunk, crossing Ten Mile Creek, that has failed or is nearing failure. The aerial sewer crossing is an un-sleeved 15-inch diameter steel carrier pipe. The Project includes a preliminary evaluation to determine a preferred replacement method, pipe material(s}, and alignment. The project includes design of the replacement arM possible upsizing of the T5-inch Ten Mile Trunk Sewer Crossing of which includes approximately 225 lineal feet from the existing Ten Mile interceptorlt.anding Lift Station diversion structure to the manhole near the intersection of W. Kimra Street and S. Heidi PEace. The project does not include hydraulic modeling of the sanitary sewer system or Ten Mile Creek. Task A -Protect Meetings 1. Protect Meetings A. Attend progress meetings, as required over the duration of the project for the purpose of updating the City, presenting information, designs, and facilitation of issues. An assumed number of meetings is shown on Exhibit A-1. B. Attend property owner meetings, if requested by City, to present project information and identify property owner issues that affect design and construction. Task B -Feasibility Analysis 1. FeastbiNty Analysis A. Review feasibility of alternate trunk sewer replacement methods, materials, and locations as follows: • Open "cut and cover" replacement of buried trunk sewer at existing alignment easement corridor. • Pipe bursting existing of concrete pipe. • Replacement of aerial crossing with PVC carrier pipe and steel pipe sleeve. • Replacement of aerial crossing with alternate pipe materials such as ductile iron or fiberglass reinforced pipe. • Alternate sewer crossing location and alignment. • Short term temporary replacement of failing section of aerial crossiruJ followed by long-term solution Involving ane of previously listed options in this paragraph. B. Prepare a draft summary fetter report and submit three (3) copies to the City for review. C. Incorporate applicable review comments and issue final letter report to City. Ciry ofMerrdtoa -Tea Mile Creek SewerCrassiag Repdacemeat Page - 2 .t-u-e ~cmF~RS. aK. i arraclunenr 'a ~ - raa-or t Task C - Preiiminarv and Final Design 1. Trpn~ Sewer Preliminarv Desiitn A. Research, Corrtrol, and Topographic Survey and Mapping 1. Research Ada County Surveyor's records for survey monuments to add in establishing horizontal contrd and include research of land monuments, plats, records of survey, right-of-ways, and easements of record along the preferred trunk sewer alignments. Worizontal coordinate system shall be based on NAD 1983 translated to the Ada County G.I.S. system. Vertical control shall be based on NAYD 19~. 2. Establish temporary construction benchmarks {T.B.M.'s) and control points on the south side of Ten Mile Creek and near W. Kimra Street. Conduct field research of survey monuments of adjoining subdivisions. 3. Contact utility companies (gas, power, telephone, storm drain, cable T.V., street lighting, traffic signals, irrigation) and other utilities identified along the alignment prior to survey to request field locations of utilities and to obtain available utility mapping. 4. Complete topographic survey along the a[ignment as generatly shown on Figure 1. Supplemental topographic wrvey of Ten Mile Creek cross-section will be developed at the crossing alignment chosen for final design. 5. Complete topographic mapping in AutoCAD 2008. The anticipated scale of the plan and profile drawings will be 1 "=20' and 1 "=5' vertical scale. Topographic features shall be depicted using standard symbols. Topographic features shall be shown on the construction plans to the extent that they are found or field located by the utility companies, such as fences, utility poles, surfacing, utilities, top of bank and waterway flowlines, and include monuments of record and physical survey of monuments and property pins that are found. Property lines will be shown based on Ada County G.I.S. mapping. Where easements are to be secured, property lines shall be determined using research from title reports and field search of found land monuments. C. Basic i} Final Design of Trunk Sewer i3 Crossing 1. Complete preliminary design of the preferred trunk sewer replacement option with considerations on constructability, wrface disturbance, impact to waterways, sanitary separations, dewatering, impacts to public traffic access, utility conflicts, construction access, excavation depths, easement issues, maintenance of sewage conveyance, and other pertinent design issues. 2. Design details for the trunk sewer crossing wail be provided including: aerial crossing of Ten Mile Creek; trench and bedding details, connection details, surtace details, and other special details needed for construction. 3. Prepare 90% complete construction plans and contract documents. It ~ anticipated that one (1) construction package will be prepared for the Ten Mile Creek Sewer Trunk Crossing. Perform design drafting in AutoCAD 2008 of the construction plans which will include project title blocks, City standard notes, vicinity maps, sheet indexes, north arrows, bar scales, topography, pipe size, type, slope, fnvert elevations, ground surface elevations, surface repair, boring details, property lines, easements, found monuments and property corners, land ownerships, survey control, pay Hmits, special details necessary for a biddable product. CityafMeridian -Ten Mite Creek SewerCrossLrg Ra~ement Page - 3 J-U-B FNGfNEEI?S, /nc. Attaltment 'A' - r0-08-of 1 Drafting shall be completed on 11 "x17" sheets, ANSI standard size "13" sheets. To the extent practicable, the 2002 City of Mertdian Standard Specifications and Drawings for Construction will be utilized in the design. 4. Prepare technical specifications in accordance with the 2007 Edition of the Idaho Standard Public Works Construction (15PWC) format, and City Standard Specifications and Drawings. J•U-S shall be responsible far preparing special provisions necessary for the project. ff formally bid, Contact documents will be prepared using ISPWC standard front-end documents and Gity revisions. 5. Submit three (3) sets to the City for review. 6. Prepare 100% complete construction plans and contract document for agency review and approvals. Provide an estimate of probable construction cost. 7. Incorporate appropriate revisions as suggested by the City and reviewing agencies in the final set of pions and contract documents. 8. Develop and is~e to the City a final opinion of probable construction cost. D. ConstructaWlity Review aril QpIQC Review 1. Complete in-house constructability review and QA/QC review of the 909K complete construction plans and contract documents. Incorporate appropriate suggestions into project design. Task Q - Additional Services J-U-B will initiate these services only upon approval by the City. 1. Geatechnicai InvesNaation and Analysis J-U-B wilt retain the services of an Idaho licensed geotechnical subconsultant to provide a geotechnical reconnaissance and related geotechnical engineering support services as described below. The focus of the exploration will ~ to provide the design team base data and information to Bidders on subsurface conditions south and north sides of the Ten Mile Creek sewer crossing. The cost listed in exhibit A-1 is budgetary value. An estimate from Strata, Inc. wlll be provided for review to the City. 1. Field Investigation: a. Obtain all necessary permits for the drilling and/or test pits. b. Complete one (1) test piton the south side of Ten Mile Creek. c. Complete sampling, logging, and classification of soils. 2. Analysis and Design Recommendation a. Review available geologic and geotechnical information in the area. b. Develop recommendations for aerial crossing foundatlon design and construction pertormance requirements. c. Prepare a draft summary letter report and submit three {3) copies to JUB and the City for review. d. Incorporate the review comments and publish four (4) copies of the final report. Task E - A{tencv Coordination and Permitting City of Merldl~ -Ten Mile Creek Sewer Crossing Repl®centeru Page - 4 J-!!-8 F.NGUVEERS, trx. Attacluttent 'A' - f0~08-Of 1 1. ~jgfenc~ Coardir~t~on and Permit i~r g A. Drainage/Irrigation District Coordinatlon and Perrnitti~ 1. Permitting with Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District will be required. J-U-B will meet with NMID after a preferred waver trunk replacement method is selected by the City and prior to initiating preliminary design. J-U-B wil! coordinate and submit 90~ complete plans to the NMID for review prfor to initiating the license agreement. 2. For the purpose of estimating this Scope of Service, it is assumed that one license agreement wilt be required for the trunk sewer crossing of Ten Mile Creek. JUB will prepare the necessary Eicertse agreement applications, legaE descriptions and exhibits. It is also assumed no floodway infringement will be considered as this is an existing farility. B. USCOE 404 Coordination and Permitting 1. This task encompasses the design and permitting of aerial sewer crossing of Ten Mile Creek that • is under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Anmy Corps of Engineers{USCOE) and requires 404 permitting. For the purpose of estimating fees in the Scope of Services, preparation of one (1) Nationwide 12, 404 permit fs assumed to complete the crossings. 2. Complete a fold visit with representatives from the USCOE tv review project scope and waterways. The field meeting will determine if a joint 404 permitting is required. Coordinate with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for crossing requirements and constnaction methods for preparation of a Nationwide 12, 404 permit for utility crossing or stream alterations. A wetland irnentory study may be required at the crossings to define sensitive wetland areas and restoration requirements and will require an addendum to this Scope of Services. 3. A crossing plan; details, and specification wfll ~ developed and 404 permit application submitted to the Corps of Engineers. C. IDEA Submittal Packages A formal IDEQ submittal is not anticipated since this is a sewer replacement project. However, if an IDEQ submittal is required, J-U-B will perform the following tasks. 1. J-U-B shall coordinate, prepare, and submit final construction plans, specifications, and checklists for approval to the Idaho Department of Ernironmental (IDEQ). For the purpose of these Scope of Services, it is assumed that one (1) submittal package will be required. 2. Incorporate applicable IDEQ review comments into the construction plans and spedfications. Tasl~ F - Fa ent Coordination 1. Easement AcaWsition The existing trunk sewer lies within a platted 20-foot sanitary sewer easement as shown on the plat of Crest Wood Estates Subdivision No. 4 (Ada County Records Book 56, Page 5239). If additional temporary construction easement is needed, or the City chooses an alternate sewer crossing alignment requiring acquisition of a new sanitary sewer easement, J-U-B will assist the City with permanent and temporary construction easement acquisition as follows. A. Easement Identification and Preliminary Exhibits 1. Reconfirm easements required from preliminary engineering task. City ofMerblign - Tes Mite Creek SewerCrassii+g Repfacemera Page - S J-Il-B fWG11rEER5, Ir1c. Attachment 'A' - 10.08.0! f 2. Prepare preliminary easement maps using available COMPASS aerial mapping, Ada County G.I.S. base mapping, and preliminary alignments. These preliminary easement maps will be used for initial property owner contact. 3. Research Ada County G.I.S. data base to determine parcel tax identification number, and assessed value. B. Easement Legal Descriptions 1. Prepare legal descriptions and exhibit drawings necessary to secure additional temporary construction or new permanent easements. For the purpose of estimating fees, preparation of two (2) legal descriptions are assumed. C. Property Owner Meetings and Negotiations i. Property Owner Meetings: Attend meetings with City staff and each affected property owner to review the preliminary alignment maps, discuss easement acquisition process, confirm specific issues and concerns, request access to survey. For the purpose of estimating fees, {2) property owners are assumed. There will be one (1) meeting with each property owner. Interview notes wiU be prepared documenting each meeting. 2. Easement Negotiations: It is assumed City staff wil! conduct easement negotiations with property owners. J-U-B wilt assist City staff with easement negotiations through incorporation of property owner and City provisions into the easement(s) -and construction contract documents. 3. Prepare easement documents. Note that legal descriptions are provided under Task E.1 .B. Ciry of Meridian -Ten Mile Creek Sewer Crossing Replacemtnt page - 6 CITY OF MERIDIAN TEN MILE CREEK SEWER CROSSING REPLACEMENT ATTACHMENT "C" -FEE SCHEDULE arracnmenr 'c' - to-~s-ot t Basis of Fee and Billing Schedule The City shall pay J-U•B for its services and reimbursable expemes as follows. A detailed labor and equipment is presented in Exhibit "A-1 ": Task A -Project Meetings • Task A -Project Meetings Time and material basis with an estimated budget of ......................................... $695 Task B -Feasibility Analysis • Task B -Feasibility Analysis Lump sum price ................................................................................... $3 288 • Lnmpyteprprice' ................................................................................... $rt6;'85b • T ....................................... 8' Task E -Agency Coordination and Permitting • Tasks E -Agency Ordination and Permitting Time and material basis with an estimated budget of ....................................... $7,202 Task F -Easement Coordination • Task F -Easement Coordination Time and material basis with an estimated budget of ...................................... $2,08 ~13,270°~ Ciry ofMcridian -Ten Mile Creek Sewer Crossing Replatenunt Page - 1 F_7011f3tT A 1 Page 1 ~ 2 CITY OF AiERIDIAN -TEN MIpLE CREEK TRUNK SEWER CROSBIN6 LABOR AND E@UIPMENT DETAIL Project Project Structural Smvay 2 Me+~ GFS TASK Mara r 6 ir+ecr Er blear EIT PLS Tech. Orates Crer~cal $trve E: ~ S•.bcmiaukant TOTAL Eel ti0 P ~ .g4 $44.37 $42.14 $23.57 $41.27 $22.3:7 $!7.(~ $14.59 $15.9(1 859.911 TASK A • PROJECT MEETINGS (TBrluq s orrrttar 2 TOTA4 TASK A t. 3.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 O.QO 0. 0.00 0.00 S896 TASK B • FE~t3191L1TY ANALY319 {LUMP SU 1 Feerti4111 M) i~altate ~ a z Evaluate kbierfate 1 2 EtraMtate Alternate Tank LamtlaN rd 0.6 2 Letter 2 g 2 1 TOTAL TA6K 8 4. 14.00 $.Qp O:t10 0.00 0. 2.00 1.90 .00 S3,288 TASK C • Pt~UIrA1NARY AND FINAL DESIt3N (LUMP SUM) . 1 t111tl T hb , # Researetr R14Y and MonumerNe Eefab46Ft Hat d Vertbal Cattrd 1 0.8 2 1.6 0.6 0.8 get Carstrtm0ar TBM'e/Cartrq Potnts co«a. w can ice. site vteds 0.8 1 os 1.5 1 T OS 1 0.8 2 g T 0.8 1 4 6+Poe Y~(t 6 Fbkl Check T . Additbnal AL .1 Z Basio a Pltyd a Conrarrwtlon PIY1e 0 0.6 0 1B 7.5 Ob 8 8 0 Beek Tnnk Servers 1 4 4 Deal DtHaie 1 2 4 8 Com 1 4 24 Prepare 9D% Complete Carstrw4ia+ Plans aril Corrtraot Oadarrerr~6r 2 4 4 1 Prepare Teghnkgl Spat~etbns ikltl Cagrad oaxrrrert>s 1 g - 1 2 Prepare Toa% comp>Bea Certstrrm8at Pmr>s are Contrail DoaerteNa 1 2 4 -- 4 2 - -- -. of Prefoabfe Carat COSt 025 2 1 Prepare Ftret Ganplete Car>atr(w1fa11 and CsrlUaal Doaenerrte, 20 sets 2 2 3 Co end QMQC itavlsrr 428 8 ~ 0 0 SO 0 0 Revbw ate0% Z w< o a o 0 T AL TASK C 8;26 18.50 8:ti0 40.E x 7.60 5400 8.50 e.oo 8~1 SO 16,880 TASK D • TRUNK SEWER ADDITIONAL SfR1RC13S (T&.illl) 1 OaOteahlslesl U,troettAatlsn and AnettYafe. -- _ StekO IwaNwr tieatechinoal atbn aril 8m8ts 1 33.600 OT TASK D 000 0;00 •0:00 1. OdIO .00 0.00 0.00 O.OD 0.00 33.500 67 awigrr a 1 Page2of2 CITY OF MERid -TEN MILE CREEK TRUNK SEWER CROSSUIlti LABOR AND EIWIPMENT DETAIL PtojaCt Projgp StnlCtual Swvey 2 • Man !':. TAfiK Marta r E weer e~eer EIT PLS Tech, Draft Clerical up. S;~bCa+sulta~N TOTAL Employee HourM Pay Rate !53.84 $44.37 $42.14 $23.57 $41.27 $,22.34 E17.00 $14.50 .00 0.00 TASK E -AGENCY COORCINI4TK~{rl AND PERMiiTING {TSM) 1 DldrletCoer~ttatbnand Silo & 1 2 2 pare ett~ 1 aewnted~, ~ 8. 1 1 0 4 2 2 4 4 4 4 1 1 0 1,~3 2 Ii84.'O8 401 COntdityRlen d~ Parmlitl ` Sae 1 1 Additlonal Ffetl T 1 1 4 4 Pre 6du'bife. Plan, Ser~ao, OetaBe USCOE and IDWR Perot t 1 4 2 8 0.6 IDL and E1d~Ua 1 AL 0 1 4 0 2 2 3 10 Ob 1 4 4 91DEC SEAL PACKAIiB lAaeaaa - -" -" Tank Sealer S;ubmRlal 1 2 -- Int~polBte Trudt Sad9t Reylew 1 2 2 2 0 O 2 0 0 0 8 OTAL TAS E 2.00 18.00 0.00 30. 10 14.00 30.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 SO S7,202 TASK R - EAS£ME1+IT COORp1AlATiON {T8~ M) 1 8eeaalmrt Ident111adott and Pr~tml E><hilbta EttsemmR klntDdk~an --- - t t Prelm Easernatd 2 RBeemtrh 1 _ - - - --8.191 2 8etavneM Dural ota . al D and E>d~ 0.~ 2 4 1.S S888 3 Oarner and arts Owner owners, 2 2 Eaaernerd 2 2 > TO AL 8K F 4.00 1,2b fl. 2: 4. 4.00 3. 0.00 .00 0.00 S2,085 • Memo ~~ty ~~~~~~~~~~~x C'i~y ~l~r~ Gbc:c To: Jaycee Holman; Tara Green From: Clint Dolsby, P.E., Assistant City Engineer CC: Len Grady, P.E., City Engineer Date: 02/21 /2008 Re: Proposed Agenda Item for February 26, 2008 City Council Meeting The Public Works Department respectFully requests the following items be placed on the February 26 City Council agenda, under Consent Agenda, for Council's consideration: Task Order No. 2.1 -Ten Mile Creek Crossing Replacement. JUB Engineers, Inc. has submitted a task order, scope of work, and budget for the engineering services. They propose to complete the work for $13,270. This is an extension of the miscellaneous wastewater services agreement approved by City Council on the 12"' of December, 2006 for the Engineering Services for Miscellaneous Wastewater Projects. This project provides engineering services to prepare a feasibility analysis with alternatives for the crossing design along with the agency coordination and construction easements for the project. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the contract for Task Order No. 2.1 -Ten Mile Creek Crossing Replacement with JUB Engineers, Inc. for $13,270 and authorize the Mayor to sign it. Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding any of these items. r ~~ ~a ~ Page 1 • cITY of MERrDIAN TASK ORDER N0. ~; f .FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR WATER, WASTEWATER, AND MISCELLANEOUS PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS TEN MILE CREEK SEWER CROSSING REPLACEMENT City Project No. Engineer Project No. ]~&Ot 1 THIS TASK ORDER, entered into ibis day of _„-,2008, betwNrr Criy of Martd'ien, Idaho, hereineRer referred bo as the "CITY", J-Ik~B ENt31NEERS. inc.. hereinafter referred to as the ENGINEER, b subject to the provisions of the Agreement far Engineering Service for Water. Wastewater, and MISQeNeneoiie Public Worl® Projects, approved December 12, 2008, hereinafter referred to ~ the MASTER AGREEMEM for PROFESSIONAL SERVICES. ,~t~ a.~,ar. WHEREAS, the CITY trrterMa to aonetruct ImDrovernerrts to the Ten MNe reek Server CrastlinD hereinafter referred to as ttre PROJECT; NOW, THEREFORE, Ote CITY and J-U-B FJIIQINEERS. Inc kr cormkleradarr of tlteh mutual oover0arrta herein agree in respect ae set forth below. CITY INFORIAA7fOiV AND RlrSPONStBRJi1E8: The CITY will provkle to ENGINEER fire data and/or services specHled in the AGREBJIENT. In addBOn, the CITY wiN furNah to ®VCi181EER hems listed In Attaohment °'e•. SCOPE OP SERVICES 7'00 ~ PERFORMED BY ENGINEER: ENGINEER wIN Dravida iha~se descrfl~,~l In ALtaChrn erd •A". SCF~OIiLE OF WORt( TO BE PERFORMED: ENGINEER wtp perform saki saMoes to a tbrrely mariner. BAt318 CIF FLE AND BILLIiV(li SCHEDULIe: The C17Y will pay ENGINEER tar he servbes and r~thrusaDle er~er0aes as toNowa: as sfroym on Attachment °C°. File Folder Title: Chv of Meridian -Ten MNe Creak Sewer Crossino Remarks: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the partles hereto Have erawuted this TASK ORDER as of the day and year first above wrihen. CITY: City of Meridian, Idaho ENGINEER: J-U-e Engineers, Irrc. 33 E. Idaho SL 2b0 S Beachwood Ave, Ste, 201 Meridlari, ID 8;1642 tom, ID By: N~neJTitle: Tatrtmv de Weend. Maws PUBLIC WORKS APPROVAL: Name/11tte: . P.E. Chv Errainser tNamefTltle: PhNI1D H. KrichbaDm. P,E. PrDlect Me_~aer ATTEST: Name/Title: G. Bern. Jr.. City Clerk PUt'iCHASMG APPROVAL BK Name/'Title: Keith Wat6s. Purc~esirm Aoent • • J-u-9 ExG~NEERS, tnc. arrcchme„r ~a ~ - fa~-of 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN TEN MILE CREEK SEWER CROSSING REPLACEMENT This project provides design of the replacement of the Ten Mile Creek sewer crossing as described herein and shown on Figure 1. It is assumed that the project will be designed as one {1) bid package, and that the City will serve as the Engineer during construction phases. Table of Contents: Attachment "A" -Scope of Engineering Services • Task A -Protect Meetin • Task B - Feasibility Analysis • Task C -Preliminary and Finai Design • Task D - Additianai Services • Task E - Agency Coordination and Permitting • Task F -Easement Coordination • Exhibit A-1 -Labor and Equiarnent Detait • Figure 1 - Proiect Overview Attachment "B" -Items Provided by City Attachment "C" -Fee Scheduie Cery oJMertdian -Ten Mile Creek Sewer Crossing Rrplace»oent Page - l ~ • J-L-B ENGINEERS, inc. Attncl~mcmt 'A' - iQ-08-01 J CITY OF MERMAN TEN MILE CREEK SEWER GLOSSING REPLACEMENT Attachment "A" -Scope of Engineering Services Protect Understandilu~L The following is J-U-B`s understanding of the Project. The City of Merfdian identified a segment of the Ten Mile Trunk, crossing Ten Mile Creek, that has failed or is nearing failure. The aerial sewer crossing is an un-sleeved 15-inch diameter steel carrier pipe. The Project includes a preliminary evaluation to determine a preferred replacement method, pipe material(s), and alignment. The project includes design of the replacement and possible upsizirig of the 15-inch Ten Mile Trunk Sewer Crossing of which includes approximately 225 lineal feet from the existing Ten Mlle InterceptoNLanding Lift Station diversion structure to the manhole near the intersection of W. Kimra Street and S. Heidi Place. The project does not include hydraulic modeling of the sanitary sewer system or Ten Mile Creek. Task A -Protect Meetini~ 1. Protect Meeting A. Attend progress meetings, as required over the duration of the project for the purpose of updating the City, presenting information, designs, and facititation of issues. An assumed number of meetings is shown on Exhibit A-1. B. Attend property owner meetings, if requested by City, to present project information and identify property owner issues that affect design and construction. Task B -Feasibility Analysis 1. feasibility Analysis A. Review feasibility of alternate trunk sewer replacement methods, materials, and locations as follows: • Open "cut and cover" replacement of butted trunk sewer at existing alignment easement corridor. • Pipe bursting existing of concrete pipe. • Replacement of aerial crossing with PVC carrier pipe and steel pipe sleeve. • Replacement of aerial crossing with alternate pipe materials such as ductile iron or fiberglass reinforced pipe. • Alternate sewer crossing location and alignment. • Short term temporary replacement of failing section of aertal crossir~ followed by long-term solution involving one of previously listed options in this paragraph. B. Prepare a draft summary letter report and submit three {3) copies to the City for review. C. Incorporate applicable review comments and issue final letter re~rt to City. Ciry of Meridian -Ten Mtle Creek Sewer Croxsing 12ePtacemmr Poge - 2 • M J-U-B ENGINEERS, brc. attach-ne,:t 'a ~ -Taos-off r Task C - Pre~iminarv and Final Design ll~f'iTl'~1'~.a..- ~fTfrEL'l~~' A. Research, Control, and Topographk Survey and Mapping 1. Research Ada County Surveyor's records for survey monuments to add in establishing horizontal control and include research of land monuments, plats, records of wrvey, right-of-ways, and easements of record along the preferred trunk sewer alignments. Horizontal coordinate system shall be based on IVAD 1983 translated to the Ada County G.I.S. system. Vertkal control shall be based on NAVD 19~. 2. Establish temporary construction benchmarks {T.B.M.'s) and control points on the south side of Ten Mile Creek and near W. Kimra Street. Conduct field research of survey monuments of adjoining subdfirisions. 3. Contact utility companies (gas, power, telephone, storm drain, cable T.V., street lighting, traffic signals, irrigation} and other utilities identified along the alignment prior to survey to request field locations of utilities and to obtain available utility mapping. 4. Complete topographic wrvey along the alignment as generally shown on Figure 1. Supplemental topographk survey of Ten Mile Creek cross-section will be developed at the crossing alignment chosen for final design. 5. Complete topo$raphic mapping in AutoCAD 2008. The anticipated scale of the plan and profile drawings will be 1 "=20' and 1 "=5' vertical scale. Topographic features shall be depicted using standard symbols. Topographk features shall be shown on the construction plans to the extent that they are found or field located by the utility companies, such as fences, utility poles, surfacing, utilities, top of bank and waterway flowlines, and include monuments of record and physical wrvey of monuments and property pins that are found. Property lines will be shown based on Ada County G.I.S. mapping. Where easements are to be secured, property lines shall be determined using research from title reports and field search of found land monuments. C. Basic Et Final Design of Trunk Sewer tt Crossing 1. Complete preliminary design of the preferred trunk sewer replacement option with considerations on constructability, wrface disturbance, impact to waterways, sanitary separations, dewatering, impacts to public traffic access, utility conflicts, construction access, excavatfon depths, easement issues, maintenance of sewage conveyance, and other pertinent design issues. 2. Design details for the trunk sewer uossing will be provided inching: aerial crossing of Ten Mile Creek; trench and bedding details, connection details, wrtace details, and other spedal details needed for construction. 3. Prepare 90% complete construction plans and contract documents. It is anticipated that one {1) construcfion package will be prepared for the Ten Mile Creek Sewer Trunk Crossing. Perform design drafting in AutoCAD 2008 of the construction plans which will include project title blocks, City standard notes, vicinity maps, sheet indexes, north arrows, bar scales, topography, pipe size, type, slope, invert elevations, ground surface elevations, surface repair, boring details, property lines, easements, found monuments and property corners, land ownerships, wrvey control, pay limits, special details necessary for a biddable product. Cuyof Meridian -Ten MUe Cmk Sex+erCrossing Replacement Page - 3 • J-U-B ENGINEERS, Jrtc. Attcchment 'A' - i0-08-Of t Drafting shall be completed on 11"x17" sheets, ANSI standard size "8" sheets. To the extent practicable, the 2002 City of Meridian Standard Specifications and Drawings for Construction will be utilized in the design. 4. Prepare technical specifications in accordance with the 2007 Edition of the kiaho Standard Public Works Construction {ISPWC) format, and City Standard Specifications and Drawings. J-U-B shall be responsible for prepartng special provisions necessary for the project. If formally bid, Contact Documents will be prepared using ISPWC standard front-end documents and City revisions. 5. Submit three (3) sets to the City for revi~,/, 6. Prepare 100% complete construction plans alai contract document for agency review and approvals. Provide an estimate of probable construction cost. 7. Incorporate appropriate revisions as suggested by the City and reviewing agencies in the final set of plans and contract documents. 8. Develop and issue to the City a final opinion of probable construction cost. D. Gorrstructability Review and QNQG Review 1. Complete in-house constructabitity review and QA/QC review of the 9096 complete construction plans and contract documents. Incorporate appropriate suggestions into project design. Task D -Additional Services J-U-B wail initiate these services only upon approval by the City. 1. Geotechnicai lnvesHeatlon and Analysis J-U-B will retain the services of an Idaho licensed geotechnical subconsultant to provide a geotechnical retonna~sance and related geotechnical engineering support services as described below. The focus of the exploration will be to provide the design team base data and information to Bidders on subsurface conditions south and north sides of the Ten Mile Creek sewer crossing. The cast listed in Exhibit A•1 is budgetary value. An estimate from Strata, Inc. will be provided for review to the City. 1. Field Investigation: a. Obtain alt necessary permits for the drilling and/ar test pits. b. Complete one (1 }test piton the south side of Ten Mile Creek. c. Complete sampling, togging, and classffkation of soils. 2. Analysis and Design Recommendation a. Review available geologic and geotechnical information in the area. b. Develop recammendatians for aerial crossing foundation design and construction performance requirements. c. Prepare a draft summary letter report and submit three (3) copies to JUB and the City for review. d. Incorporate the review comments and publish four (4) copies of the final report. Task E - Aiaencv Coordination and Permittine Ctry of Merldiare -Ten bfUe Cretk S'ewerCmssln6q Replace»~nt Page - 4 ~-u-e,:nrclrv~s, hrc. 1. ~ncv Coordination and Permitting atcaahmenc ~a~- ram-orr A. Drainage/irrigation District Coordination and Permitting 1. Permitting with Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District will be required. J-U-B will meet with NMfD after a preferred sewer trunk replacement method is selected by the City and prior to initiating preliminary design. J-U-B will coordinate and submit 90% complete plans to the NMID for review prior to initiating the license agreement. 2. For the purpose of estimating this Scope of Service, it is assumed that one license agreement will be required for the trunk sewer crossing of Ten Mile Creek. JUB will prepare the necessary license agreement applications, legal descriptions and exhibits. It is also assumed no floodway infringement will be considered as this is an existing facility. B. USCOE 4f14 Coordination and Permitting 1. This task encompasses the design and permitting of aerial sewer crossing of Ten Mile Creek that • is under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers(USCOEj and requires 404 permitting. For the purpose of estimating fees in the Scope of Services, preparation of one (1) Nationwide 12, 404 permit is assumed to complete the crossings. 2, Complete a field visit with representatives from the USCOE to review project scope and waterways. The field meeting will determine if a joint 4114 permitting is required. Coordinate with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for crossing requirements and construction methods for preparation of a Nationwide 12, 404 permit for utility crossing or stream alterations. A wetland inventory study maybe required at the crossings to define sensitive wetland areas and restoration requirements and will require an addendum to this Scope of Services. 3. A crossing plan, details, and specifications will be developed and 404 permit application submitted to the Corps of Engineers. C. IDEQ Submittal Packages A formal IDEQ submittal is not anticipated since this is a sewer replacement project. However, if an IDEQ submittal is required, J-U-B will pertonm the following tasks. 1. J-U-B shall coordinate, prepare, and submit final construction plans, specifications, and checklists for approval to the kiaho Department of Ernironmental (IDEQ). For the purpose of these Scope of Services, it is assumed that one {1) submittal package will be required. 2. Incorporate app[icabie IDEQ review comments into the constnrction plans and specifications. Task F -Easement Coordination 1. Easement AcQUtsition The existing trunk sewer lies within a platted 20-foot sanitary sewer easement as shown on the plat of Crest wood Estates Subdivision No. 4 (Ada County Records Book 56, Page 5239). If additional temporary construction easement is needed, or the City chooses an alternate sewer uossing alignment requiring acquisition of a new sanitary sewer easement, J•U-B wilt assist the City with permanent and temporary construction easement acquisition as follows. A. Easement Identification and Preliminary Exhibits 1. Reconfirm easements required from preliminary engineering task. City ofMeridimi-Ten Mite Creek SewerCnassing Replacement Page - S • • J-U•B ENGINEERS, lnc. Attarhmertt `A' - f0.08-of f Z. Prepare preliminary easement maps using available COMPASS aerial mapping, Ada County G.I.S. base mapping, and preliminary alignments. These preliminary easement maps will be used for initial property owner contact. 3. Research Ada County G.I.S. data base to determine parcel tax identification number, and assessed value. B. Easement Legal Descriptions 1. Prepare legal descriptions and exhibit drawings necessary to secure additional temporary cor~truction or new permanent easements. For the purp~e of estimating fees, preparation of two {2) legal descriptions are assumed. C. Property Owner Meetings and Negotiations 1. Property Owner Meetings: Attend meetings with City staff and each affected property owner to review the preliminary alignment maps, discuss easement acquisition process, confirm specific issues and concerns, request access to survey. For the purpose of estimating fees, {2) property owners are assumed. There will be one (1) meeting with each Property owner. Interview notes will be prepared documenting each meeting. 2. Easement Negotiations: It is assumed City staff will conduct easement negotiations with property owners. J-U-B will assist City staff with easement negotiations through incorporation of property owner and City provisions into the easement(s) and construction contract documents. 3. Prepare easement documments. Note that legal descriptions are provided under Task E.1.8. City of Meridian-Ten Mik Creek Sewn Crossing ReplaceArent Page - 6 J-U•B EHGflVEERS, lnc CITY OF MERIDIAN TEN MILE CREEK SEWER CROSSING REPLACEMENT ATTACHMENT "C" -FEE SCHEDULE Attad-mettt 'C' - 10-Q8-Uf i Basis of Fee and Billing Schedule The City shall pay J-U•B for its services and reimbursable expenses as follows. A detailed labor and equipment is presented in Exhibit "A-1 ": Task A -Project Meetings • Task A -Project Meetings Time and material basis with an estimated budget of ......................................... $695 Task B - FeasibiNty Analysis • Task B -Feasibility Analysis Lump sum price .................................................................................... $3,288 ttsmp-cwt-priea ................................................................................... • T ....................................... ~,3~& Task E -Agency Coordinatlon and Permittlng • Tasks E -Agency Coordination aril Permitting Time and material basis with an estimated budget of ....................................... $7,202 Task F -Easement Coordinatlon • Task F -Easement Coordination Time and material basis with an estimated budget of ...................................... $2,08 • ~13,Z70 °~'' City of Meridian -Tar Mlle Creek Sewer Crossing Replacement Page - 1 • • EXHIBIT A-1 Page 1 of 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN -TEN MILE CREEK TAU SEWER CROSSING LABOR AND EOIAP•MENT DETAIL Project Project Stnrcluat Suvay 2 - tufa„ Gr`:; TALC Wbna 6 ineer E iteer EIT PLS Tech. Orahama Cier~cal Suv E ~ - S:6conaidtant TOTAL HO YS3.84 $44.37 .14 $23.57 $4127 $22.34 $17.(!(I $i4.5U $45.W 35p.Uli TASK A -PROJECT MEETINGS (T&141y 1 1 ee 1 1 1 2 Pr 2 2 OTAL TASK A 1,00 3.00 0. 1.00 0. 0.~ O.OA 0. 0. B.OD 5895 TASK 8 - FEA91BIL1TY ANALYSI8 (LUMP SUb7y t Erak®te era Medade 1 4 2 Erahreta t 1 2 EraMrate ARerrrete Tank Lacatlor/ M a6 2 l.etl~ 2 8 2 1 TOTAL T!lSIC B 4.50 14.00 2.00 0:00 0.~ 0.00 2, 1.00 4. 0. 53,2 TASK C - PRELIMINARY AND FINAL DFSIt#N (LUMP 6UM) 1 and T lib a Ree6aroh W W end Manunertls EsteD~h Hort. a VeAbal Cnntral Bat Constrirctlan Tt3tdal~Cixttral Polite Cond. WA1S , Ske disits T Suv b 1 1 as O.B Ob 2 1.6 1 2 ,g a8 15 8 Ob 18 8 T Ob 1 4 SRe dbH & F~kl Chock T .. AddNicnet .1 Z BWo a Plrrtl best a Cotatruotlon Pena 0.8 0 i b 7, 4 0.5 0 $5, Can Besie Tnnk saniera 1 4 4 t>etata 1 a a e Cam 1~e n D 7 4 24 PYepeoe 90% Compote Conshuotimt Plena and Canhact DoGarrerde 2 4 4 1 Prepare Tadtrlkral 3pectloro erltl Cdrtreq OOOII116IHa 1 8 1 y Prepare Y 0096 Complete Canefncl~n Plere and Cordraot Daarrrrerd8 1 2 4 4 2 - - - o11°rdlahfe CWlebuotlorl C0~ 0 2 1 - - Propera FFreI Complete Ctulatrtctlort Ptmle area Cattraol Dammerim 20 eats 2 2 2 SU 3 Caa>fh l9aWe~ arw OIAltiC HaNaw 4.~ 18 8 0 0 60 p ?78 Revbw at aa96 a AL z a p o 0 0 0 0 T ALT . C 8:26 19:50 8:00 40 . 2:50 7.60 5400 8: B:Ob $18,880 TASK D -TRUNK SEWER ADDITIONAL SERVICES R~ t Qau~cM~cet~n~lEptronendaa~d~sis ._ - Stales hcatbn Geoteckir~al am Eamrate 1 33,soo T AS D 4.00 •0: 1: 0.00 0. 0. 0:00 0.00 0.00 .500 878 • ~ EXHIgiT A-1 Pape 2 ~ 2 OF D -TEN OAILE CREEK TRUNK SEWER CR~SINQ LABOR AND EQUIPIAENT DETAIL Project Project Sfi~cteral Survey 2 -Man P:i TASK Mann r meer ineer EIT P Ted. Oratt Clerical $ury ~ S:d>ca+sultant TOTAL Fin Hourly PayRa6a 3.84 §48.37 2.14 $23.57 $dt.27 S'd2.34 StT.00 $14,50 $45.00 O.OD TASK E • AGENCY COQRDlNATtON AND PERMriTING R5~ 1 ONwkt CooMinatbn and Perm) tt » & 1 2 2 e neYi ertfe 1 . ~~~ AL 1 1 3 0 4 2 2 4 4 4 8 t 1 0 0 B?3 Z IfBCOE 404 Ctrwditmtlon 6 Pprtttktl Sde 1 1 ~~T Pre Eahiblle. Pkin, Satalale. DeteAe 1 4 1 1 2 8 4 USCOE and ID411R Perm IDL and Eldlmfls 1 AL L'9 1 1 4 0 2 7 3 2 3 10 0.6 Ob 1 4 4 31QFQ SUBMITTAL P/~KAOE ~ - P-ef~eU®Tnnk Sealer StUndt~l 1 2 1 Tnnk Ssa~ Ravlew ertfa 1 2 2 0 0 4 0 2 0 8 TOTAL ASK- 9 18.90 0.40 .00 1 14.00 30.00 4.IM 8.00 8.00 SO 7,242 TASK F -EASEMENT C4tORDINATIOa (T&M) 1 tdsntlflattorr arW Preilml EYhIMb Easement Wtl ~ - 1 - Prelm Easernettt g Reaearo>t ~ - - _ 1:931 T eaeematt Dnaerl one el and EsitlbRe 2 ) 2 4 1.6 ` ~ S Owner QANt ertd Owner arswre.2 e Easement 2 2 2 X88 ALT . IC F .00 1.25 0.00 2.00 4. 4.OD 3. 0.00 0.1f0 0.00 S2,095 t February 22, 2008 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 26, 2008 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 5-F REQUEST Black Cat Water Main Reimbursement Agreement with Primeland Development, Keego Springs, Pole Creek Properties and Dyver Development for $31,486 each AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: See attached CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: ~ ~~~~ CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented aF pubNc meetir~s shall become property of fhe CHy of Meridian. COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT Black Cat Water Main Extension, Black Cat Lift Station to Chinden BLVD ~C~' THIS AGREEMENT made this day of ~~Q~u ~~y, 20Q7, by and between the CITY OF MERIDIAN, a municipal corporation, hereinafter called "CITY," and Primeland Development Co., LLP, Keego Springs Development Co. Inc, Pole (:reek Properties, Inc., and ~~eyctoprv~rlf LLC ,hereinafter called "DEVELOPERS": WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, DEVELOPERS own properties inside the corporate limits of the City of Meridian and desire to share the cost of building a water main that to be owned, operated, and maintained by CITY to serve DEVELOPERS' properties, shown on Exhibit "A" and Exhibit «B,,. WHEREAS, upon recommendation of the Public Works Department, the City Council of CITY accepted and approved the proposal to construct the water main, subject to all conditions hereinafter provided by this Agreement; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing premises, CITY and DEVELOPER hereby agree: A. Preparation of Plans. CITY has prepared plans and specifications, drawings, instructions, bid proposal and all other contract documents for the construction and installation of water main {hereinafter called "Project"), shown on Exhibit "B," including rights-of--way, grades and elevation, and materials used in the construction and installation of said water main. B. Construction of the Project. 1. CITY shall install and construct the Project in compliance ~~ith and subject to all conditions provided herein. 2. CITY shall obtain and/or provide all engineering, surveying, contract administration, and/or permanent and temporary easements necessary for the construction of the Project. 3. CITY shall undertake and/or provide all testing, sampling acid other normally conducted measures for quality controUquality assurance regarding any and all installed systems. COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT - Page I of 9 4. CITY shall provide inspection services for the construction of the Project in accordance with CITY standards. C. Solicitation of Bids. CITY shall solicit bids and publish requests for bid proposals for construction of the Project from at least three (3) properly licensed public work contractors. CITY shall award the construction contract to the lowest qualified bidder pursuant to all applicable public bidding rules as required by Idaho law. CITY shall reserve the right to reject all bids and/or cancel this Agreement if CITY, in its sole discretion, determines that the successful bidder or bid amount is unacceptable for any reason. D. DEVELOPER and CITY Responsibility for Costs. Because the; CITY construct water main improvements, as shown on Exhibit "B", with the cooperation of the DEVELOPERS, it is mutually agreed that CITY shall fund 1.00% of the cost of the Project, estimated at 503 773, with reimbursement from the DEVELOPERS in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement . E. Change Orders to Construction Contract. CITY shall notify DEVELOPERS before approving any change order to the construction contract if (a) the cost of the change order will exceed one percent (1%) of the contract price or (b) the cumulative total of all previously approved change orders exceeds ten percent (10%) of the contract price. [n the event of a change order, CITY and DEVELOPER shall exe~~ute an amendment to this Agreement to record the amount of the change order to be reimbursed to DEVELOPER, if any. In the event that a change order or other amendment to the construction contract results in a cost savings, CITY and DEVELOPERS shall share the cost savings F. Reimbursement to CITY. 1. Estimated Total Reimbursement. Because CITY will construct the Project, DEVELOPERS shall reimburse to CI I'Y 25% of the actual construction cost, estimated at $125,943. Each DEVELOPER shall reimburse to the CITY their equal portion (25%) of the total reimbursement. Each portion is estimated at $31,486. 2. Method of Pa ent. Each DEVELOPER shall be responsible for payment in full at the time their Property as shown in Exhibit "A" connects to the water main constructed in this project. 3. Reimbursement Payment. CITY shall provide proof of total cost of construction of the project to DEVELOPERS at time of reimbursement. G. Indemnification and Insurance. DEVELOPER shall indemnify and save and hold harmless CITY from and for any and all losses, claims, actions, judgments for damages, and/or injury to persons or property and losses and expenses caused or incurred by DEVELOPER, its servants, agents, employees, guests, and/or business invitees, and not caused by or arising out of tortious conduct of CITY or its employees. COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT -- Page 2 of 9 H. No Assignment. DEVELOPERS shall not assign any portion c~f this Agreement or any privilege here under, either voluntarily or involuntarily, without the prior written consent of the CITY, which consent shall not be unreasonably ~Nithheld. The agreement shall be tied to the Properties owned and proposed to develop by the DEVELOPERS, as shown on exhibit "A". I. Attorney Fees. Should either•party find it necessary to employ an attorney for representation in any action seeking enforcement of any provision of this Agreement, or to recover damages for breach of this Agreement, or to resolve any disagreement as to the interpretation of this Agreement, the unsuccessful party in any final judgment or award entered pursuant to such action shall reimburse the prevailing party for all reasonable costs, charges and expenses, including attorneys' fees expended or incurred by the prevailing party in connection therewith and in connection with any appeal, and the same maybe included in such judgment or award. This provision shall be deemed to be a separate contract between the parties and shall survive any default, termination or forfeiture of this Agreement. J. Notices. Any notice desired by the parties and/or required by this Agreement shall be sent via United States Mail, registered or certified mail, postage: prepaid, return receipt requested, and shall be addressed as follows: CITY: City Clerk City of Meridian 33 E. Idaho Ave. Meridian, Idaho 83642 DEVELOPERS: Primeland Development Co., LLP 3120 W Belltower Dr, Suite 100 Meridian, ID 83646 Keego Springs Development Co. Inc. P.O. Box 140298 Boise, Idaho 83714 Pole Creek Properties LLC PO Box 190073 Boise, ID 83719 i~vye~t 'D.eYetIIOr~+'1~ LLB ~~ -~~ ~e~~,~ Rand Y1~~~di~ t~J $3b~~-- COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT --Page 3 of 9 Such notice shall be deemed delivered if and when delivery is ~~ccepted or three (3) days after deposit in the United States Mail. Either party shall have the right to change its address by delivering to the other party a written notification thereof in accordance with the requirements of this section. K. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Idaho and the ordinances of the City of Meridian. L. Exhibits. All exhibits to this Agreement are incorporated by reference and made a part of this Agreement as if the exhibits were set forth in their entirc;ty in this Agreement. M. Entire Agreement. This Agreement and the exhibits hereto constitute the full and entire understanding and agreement between the parties with regard to the transaction contemplated herein, and no party shall be liable or bound to a,~y other in any manner by any representations, warranties, covenants and agreements except as specifically set forth herein. N. Definition of DEVELOPER's Propertv. The term "DEVELOPER's Property" in the Agreement shall mean the parcels shown on Exhibit "A" attached hereto. O. Binding Effect. This Agreement shall be binding upon and imlre to the benefit of the parties hereto and their heirs, successors and assigns, and shall survive any transfer by DEVELOPERS of DEVELOPERS' Properties. P. Reports and Information. At such times and in such forms as the CITY may require, DEVELOPER shall furnish to CITY such statements, records, reports, data and information as the CITY may request pertaining to matters covered by this Agreement. Q. Construction and 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. R. Approval Required. This Agreement shall not become effective or binding until approved by CITY. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties shall cause this Agreement to be executed by their duly authorized officers the day and year first above written. COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AND REIlVIBURSEMENT AGREEMENT -Page 4 of 9 DEVELOPER: Primeland Development Co., LLP Name (printed) .~ ~0..,~.(y ~t Signature ~~gs2_ Title _~~ ~O8 Date STATE OF IDAHO ss County of Ada } ~,. ~ (~ n (~ On this ~~ day of ~Y..y'J'~-~~~ ,~@7 efor r. the and rsigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared _~ y. Q.~~ ,known or identified to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that he/she executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. KI,Vtii~:TcLY < y:~I~LE 1 Notary ~'~~~'ac Notary Public F~gr~/I,daho Residing at: ~IL~"~ Commission Expires:_ ~ Z~e 4 COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMEN'T' -Page 5 of 9 DEVELOPER: Keego Springs Development Co. Inc. " Icyr7~I ~.~w~~Pi~~ Name {printed) ~e~~ Title Signature STATE OF IDAHO ) ~ ~ b Date ss County of Ada ) ~v ,Z ~L~ On this ~~~ day of ~~ ~.~i"ll-l~-•~'~~ ,?BfJl, bgf erne the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, pets pally appeared T ~~ ~~.C ,known or identified to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that he/she executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. a!;' / ~ f ~1 •~~ - Y - - N Public For Idaho ~, -_, , . •. x , ~ x t ~: .. .~. Residing at: S~ r C?~ . ,; ,.;;~. ,; , ;..;,;, ~~ Commission Expires:_ 7c. C- COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT -Page 6 of 9 DEVELOPER: Pole Creek Properties, Inc. ~.J©.~ 1~~Vv Name (printed) Sign I r. ~~~ ~~<< Title ~ ~ ~a ~> ~' Date STATE OF IDAHO ) ss County of Ada ) ~; ~~ ti On this~~`~___day of (~~/ 7, before me the undersigned, a Notary ub1P is in and for said State, per nally appeared 1 Q.C•-r~-~- {~ ,known or identified to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that he/she executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. ~ /' ----- ±;i~:~izi.~ '::v~t_~ N tary Public FQr Idaho 7~ ~~ !~focary ~~^:;~ ~ Residing at:~_ ,Y .. ~ ,.. ,~ ~`~~'~ ~_,~ ~" _ .. _. Commission Expires:_ I `~ COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMEN'T' -Page 7 of 9 DEVELOPER: ~Ie+(De~e~o~cxi~' LAC. Co~ev~ ~~cr~ ~P'e~ide~ri- Name {printed) Title a-~-oa Signature Date STATE OF IDAHO } ss County of Ada ) On this ~( ~` day of t-p~pV' 1~.Q.ru ,200, before me the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared CO~r .~,--(-an ,known or identified to me to be the person whose name is subscrib~within instrument, and acknowledged to me that he/she executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. ^ s °e+seee 0 s a w ~.~ ~~ Notary Public For Idaho Residing at: N(11~~1aQ . Z~ Z Commission Expires:_ to -DS ~1 c~ COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT -Page 8 of 9 CITY: BY: / s.~Y~ A~~rGI/~'~t'~ ~~ TAMMY de ,MAYOR ,;,.,,:,,,;,: Date Attest: ;`~~ -~~~~-,~„_'"~ '~, ~ ~~~I~ __ ., CITYCL ~S' ~7 ~' STATE OF IDAHO ) ss County of Ada ) On this 2~~ day of ~Y~(~Q,kl ,20~ before me the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared TAMMY DE WEERD and . ~ ~„~... }b~~~BFR~'r3'R, known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Meridian, Idaho, who executed the within instrument and acknowledged to me that they executed the same on behalf of the City of Meridian IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. ,~„~„ •••g,EEN•• .• G, •. .~ • ~,x ! Mary Public or I aha ;~ ~;: ` ~esiding at:_~~ :~ '~ ~ti' ;~~ommission Expires:_ ~~-! ~-~ COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT -Page 9 of 9 _... __ - .~ _____ - __. _ _.__ ~~ Trif o9Y i ~: ~ • _ _.__....--r---_..._ _ ~i ^! r_ ~~:!~.. _ ---, > ... ~ .. „,, _ __ _ ~ ~ V i c+' # _ Yf _.__ __ __ T _, _ __ _ . ___. Volterra North- Prim Develodment Co, ,- i,_T I~ ......._......... -- ------ ~~ _ __L-- ~ -- J_-- Water Main r ~~ r r-...~ ~..~ ~ a _..; _..~'~rte.--._ _ ~ - - __ _. -- - - - _ ~o,.,`-•ya ~ ~~~~'~ SNV'ld NOIlOf1211SN00 a, rz9tt ~„ ~oeanane mm ma Na flzwrmexoo OH\IQI 'AlNf100 dOY `NVI41213W ~~°,~ ~ ~, ~ •aw 'saxvzznsxoa zsnxns vn~a s~+.unwauvw aaoravaaors ~~ a pp ~~ ~10aNi `~ry~~ ner ~ma~roear~~ve ~F` q~'' AitlgP~llCY®A ~ ~~y 0 o ~ S .n ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ ~ Z ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ $~~ ~ 5 ~ ~s~3a~t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W.q~Io~ a ~~~ d _ ~~ ~r~~~1 n a 0 W O V N d Z O V OC F- Z O V W ~~~ 0 ~~N O ~~W ~ v.m V g~o m~z 3 ~ ~~~~~~ k~~ ~ ge aai b~~ e~g ~~4~ ~i $~ ~8 ~~~ ~ • as °~ 'i~~~ ~~ '~~ ~,«, ~~ ~~ j~ i~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~i ~~aa z a i~ ~ s., e< s~ ~= Z~ e ~ ~_$~ ~ s~ ~~~~~ '~ .¢~ # ~ a 3 gb.lEs~ $$~~a ~~ ~ E@ ~'.p~' ~~ ~ g~ ~~ ai 8e ~~'~ ~3~ i~ ~ +f~ ~~ is 6 ~6~ ~ ~$~ E~~~ ~i~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ a~ ~ ~~L d d n d a ~ ~ N '~ .- d l ~... ~ ~ s~aw~~oadw~ w~s~s a~.vnn ~ ~ ~ ~~~,~~ ~ ssoaatgns am ~. s~uoHa ~ruaa~naxo~ L 3stlHd WOZI 11~J WJVIe 4 ~ ~ ~' -ern •saxviznsxoa ~anans •un~a Mdlala3W ~O )lll~ ~~ e ~ ~~ -~~a.. ,~...~ wtio~o~s Uav pW xn wnw ~ i ~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~~ i ~. i 4~ r i~ ~~~~~ ~ 1 w ~ o i ~~ ~ ~~ glii ~ ~~ '~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1e4l~~I~~~ ~ ~ e~ e ~=a s~~ ~ ~ s~ I _ ~ ~ ~~y~~ I~ ~~ ~ as 5 ~ R~~ ~~I ~ a~ ~`p~~~~ DID I tl~ -~.. ~ ~ , -~. ~ I ~~~~1 I~ ~ s~ m~amm9$ a °~~! ~ f I ~J ,~~I ~~,• ~R ~ ~~~ l' i I ' ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~~ I~~ ~~ m~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~~ ' ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~~ ~~ ,~d~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~ ~~~ ~~~~ .?C H 1 ~ f fi ~'Z ~~~~ ~ . >:~ ~ s~3w~wadwi w~s~s a~dnn ,,, ~,, ~ „ , ' ' tiz~u ,.,,, seoaaeane mom qtr ao~a oina,.weHOO VMd WO?l 1VJ~1 JVIB Z 33 ~ ~,~y~ ~ ~ NV cznsxoa ~n~ns uua •aH[ •sa ~ , , ~~ ~, , . ~®1213W ~O Jlll~ ~~ ~ ~, ,~,. I ~>oo.. ..,~~. I I I I E 1 ~_N ^N ~.~ -'~.- ~ a H____y~_ 8y~ya , I ~ 1 I I J' pt G1Otl NVrDpll Y 1 $ II 1 1 p I ~ gg ypyQ ~~9 , 1 B ~F I I 1 I '- e 1 _"ayL I dd '~~~j I I d~{~q~iL ~ ~ $ ~~I;' ® I ~ ~• I ! ""- 5 - ~d-~ 6 r `^ ~ a e I ga ~ 'I ~~yy f ~ I! I! ~. ~ ~ ~ l ie ~ ~~Cs ~ g ~ ~A w e . 9 s e °li . .' 1 ~II 1 ,e ~~ ~ 1 ~l% ~. ~ s~ I~ ~~~ ~~ ~~ a~4 s~~ ~~~ °~~ 5 ~~~~ ~~ ~~~ ~Q~ ~ ~~~ ~: >H~ E=xHfts'i~ ~?; ~~~~ ~'r ~'" ~ ~ S1N3W3~~OadWl W31S lS b3111M a+ v, ~ „ i ~ ~ ' ~ ~,' ~.~ ~, ' A mlm >~srao,~s orutivl~c~ • Z 3SV Hd 41/0211VJ WJVl9 ~ ~ -~ ,, ~ •aru saxvyznsrtoa mans ~-wa ,,, ~ ,,, ,~ {~®Ia3W ~O JI.LI~ ~ ~ e ~~~ ~ ~~~ atYgil~llYl®O Wva e ~ An wpa e ( v m is ~ an wiw ggpp I j 1 I 1''I S ~ ~ ~ I I I 1 ~I aaB 3 i ~R 3 I i 16 ~ € I i'I 4Q I I I B a I E D ~~9_j 1 1 ~~ ~ II 6 ~~>Q0 I ~ I I C I 999 1 i 1 ~~R ~RgR~ ~i 6 i 1 ~ ~ i ' I ~ 0 ~ 1 1 , 0 i ^ b~ I I 1 1 b 1 ~ I , I I I I I { I I ~ ~ 8 I 8 ''I I ' 1 , 8 I I ~ I I ~ ~ I ~ 6 1 I II ~ I ~ ' D j e j I I 1 1 I I ~ I 0 1 & W , 1 ~ I I ~ I I B ' 1 1 i I i 1 , B 0 I I I I I . 8 1 1 Q 1 1 1 I 1 I I B l 1 ' 1 1 e I a I I i 9 ~ ® I ~ 1 ~ ~Y 11 I B I ~ ' ~ a y ~ B ! ~ 1 I el B 1 ~~ R~ 1 i I 3 o 0 B ~~ h I ~ ! ~ I I I aP I ~~ ~~ 1 1 ' I f I I I 1 I B i y8 I $a I ~ 1 i I I ~ I 7 j 8 I k I 1 ®.I~ ~~ III 1 I 1 I i ~ I I 8 ' ' 0 _____ ____- ~e E I I ~ y I ~ ~ ~ 173tlLa 381d~O I I ' 6 r I~ l4__==tea----' ~ I I B E I ~ O ® ~ I I 1 ~ ~ A B I I e 9 I I I 6 I ygyq I I I ~ E O B ~~ I I l I I I I f I I I 1 ! 1 ~ ~p p~ ly I I aV I e I I ® k e l e I B I ~ ~ , I ~ ~ / ~ B B 7 0 1 I ~ ~ I ~7 ~ 1 1 1 I e a y ~ e ~ ; s I I I it I 99 ~ I I B 0 yr-"- ~~ EE I f l t l I I I 1 Q~ ~ l ~ 9 C e 7 ~ I I I y I CO ~ ~ 1 I ~ 0 1 ^ p ^y$y$ I Y ~I II ~ ~1i 1 8 I I i ~ I I ~6 I D Q I ~p ~, I S , II B I ~ 1 sa~ 0 ~- . i \,~ 1 0 L 1 1 I I I , II ~ I ~ e I' 1 5 1 •' e i 8 1 l ; e I I I ;' ~ e I ~s I I I ' „ I I e 'FI ~ ' e D I ~ ~ ' ID ~ I y I ~ I ~ ~ I ' I fi I I I BI 1 I I 1 ~ G I I I i p~I 6 I ~ I l 1 I r i D I I ~~ ~~. ~ I1- I V __~_•-w1-_•- B I 1 I ~ 1L R Z~ All F91Y11 (i1W Y T/! y ]Ifl W1~11 I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ o,~,,.,yy ~., y1>ky~~~IM11~1 S1N3W3~~OZIdWI W31SJlS 2~31VM $ {R yy 001pq llttll0 tIMOALL~r 90011 ~ 9 w O -~e~t .:, aeoaaeaas mom atav ea~uoets owyv~ai Z 38~Md W021 lV3 WJMB (At ~ ,,, ~~„~,~ ~, >~ ,~ ~ •~ra 's~vs~nsHOO mans ve><a ill®1~13W ~O ll.l.l~ ~ e ~ ~~ -~~~... °.~ OBI. Iq i~ 1 1~ l i I B I ~~~~ 1 I I 1 I / 1 ' a ~~_ I p I B B 7 I ! 16 1 I• $~ @ I II ~ ~ '~ B d I. 1 , , y e ~ ~ ~~9 ~ ~' I ~ ~ 1~ i I ~ ~a .I B I 11 I ~ ~ I B n O B !1 ~ 1 ! I 1 I i I i' a ~ ~ I I 8 I ~ y B~ ~ i i 1 M ~~I` i E I i I 1 e I g. I 1 ®"11 ~ I 1 I I ~ I I `~ D I I d I i B ; ~ a ~ ~ 1 8 B ~ q I i ~ I ~ YI 1 I ~ 1 I I ~ 1 I u I I 1j~ II I 9 ~ ~ ~~ II 1 1 I 1 i I I 1 lY I 1 I 6 B ' I I I 1 , ~i I I ~_ J ~~ I yg 1 I I =---='^--== ~g a I ~0 ! ° ' ~m ,ltarn ~ I ~ 1 1 I li I' I I I I 1 I I D I I I ~ s i I I ~ 0 I I I I O i I B I 1 I II II fi P ~B'I~ ~al~~~~ i ~ I I ~~I J I B' ~~ ~ G 1 , i y ,I I ,~~ ~l ' ~~ s I 9 I p B I I~~ I I + I B I I I I 1 I I ~ ~ 1 i I 1 , ~~ I I e o f ~ 1 1 I I t 1 a 1 = I 1 7 ~ 1 4` I I I ~ ' I ac ~~ ~ i I ~ p^®y 18Y~ 1' i i ~~ I I 1 19 I i C3 I I } ~ I B 6 d~ ~ II ( I 1 i I ~ ~ ~ ~ I }, I ~ ice. I 0 T 6~ ~~ ~ ~ 1 1' ~^ B I ~ I I I 1 I" I I ~ 1 1 ~_?- ' I I I 7ggkF I B 8 1 ~! gg p g I~~ ~ I f, 1 1~ P ^ I 1 16 O 13 i I 1 I B I® I~ ~~ ~7 ~ h B I ~n I 1 I s I ~~ ~ii ~ ~ I ~ { 4~pp ~ ~ ' ~ ~~~pW M7 j 1 I Y01 a10 6 6 ~~ 1 9 u 1 C 0 1 1 1 ~ 160 9Q ~ 1 6 B II 6 ®~ si~JyP ~~~ $ 1 1 I I i fA I 1 I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I p ~ e ~ B ~ ~ i b 1910116 D81 71If 1ID001 (fIIpW ~ 7n anw ~xH 11?rT (~.~ ~-• ~ ~; s~3wanoadwi w~s~s a~dM ,. w ~ m ~ i~ 6L01lt 171tl1i >WOpllWl9OD~1 ~ fmu ~ aeoaaeane mm atv ~a9xe 9NL47IIWiDD Z 3S9fHd Q1/OZI 1VJ ~JK18 ~ '° ° ~ • ~ ~ ~° ~ ~~~,o~ ~~ ~~ a~ ~ ~ .~ ~ nroiaia3w ~o ui~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~~ ~I I B d ~~~~ ~~ 51 ~ ~ II i ~ a II 1 1 I ~ _.___.r~_.___ B E 1 _~s_--_ -•_____y_ _ _o ___o __- -®---- '+,-m----- + i mNnamoe K~mmc r I 1 I _°---- liy ~-~'---- -_~___ Td _~ ~ -___ _.._~._.. 1 I 1 1 8 I I I I 1 ~ I I d I 1 I 1 B 1 I R 1 1 I 1 I , Af 1 I ~ i 1 I I o 11• q j 8 h 8 q g p I j i [~ 8 ' y 8 ~ 1 6 q I 1 1 D ~ ~ R I I I 'I 1 1 b ` ~~ ~I 0 ~ I. 4 ~~ I Q ~ -D~~_ aIU~ 1 * ; I it 1 ~ 1 i 1 I 1 0 ~ 1 ~ I ~ i ~ S$ __ 1 j 80 N e I 1 1 I 1 Q ~ 1 1 ~ 0 1~ I ' ~ p I 1 f ~ e I i i I 1 ~ 1 I yg 6 a I y, I I I I I I ~ ~ I p ~ yy `y i S fi I l ~ ~' ~ I 6 ~~ ale ~ ~ e I l~ y I I g B I ~ I ;; e 11~~__ e~~ I ~ r I , 1 "R~------ 1 I I r ~! yp i I 6 I .gl~ I 1 1 1 I 1 ' I 1 I i 1 I i 4 8 1 ~ I I l I ~ P ' I II9 I 1 ~~ I 1 ~I I 1 pr I I ~ I C.I~ (i lif3 3Sj l1f 1411!1 ~Xt-ti~(T- ~~ a ~ ~~ . ~~~ ~E~ ~ ~ ZQ~ Memo Ta Will Berg; Tara Green From: Kyle Radek, P.E., Staff Engineer ~/~ CC: File Date: February 21, 2008 Re: Proposed Agenda Item for February 26 City Council Meeting City ~f 1Vieg°idia~`a City Clerk Cf-~ce The Public Works Department respectfully r~uests the followring item be placed on the February 26 City Councl agenda, under Consent Agenda, for Caun~:il's consideration: Black Cat Water Main Reimbursement Agreement Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the Black Cat Water Main Reimbursement Agreement with Primeland Developmerrt, Keego Springs, Pole Creek Properties, and Dyver Development that arranges reimbursement to the City from the aforementioned parties, and authorizes the Mayor to sign it Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me if you have: any questions regarding this item. • Page 1 COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AND REIlVIBURSEMENT AGREEMENT Black Cat Water Main Extension. Black Cat Lift Station to Chinden BLVD THIS AGREEMENT made this day of ~FQ~u , 20Q7 by and between the CITY OF MERIDIAN, a municipal corporation, hereinafter called "CITY," and Primeland Development Co., LLP, Keego Springs Development Co. Inc, Pole Creek Properties, Inc., and ~~~/clD~rne+'1{- LLC ,hereinafter called "DEVELOPERS": WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, DEVELOPERS own properties inside the corporate limits of the City of Meridian and desire to share the cost of building a water main that to be owned, operated, and maintained by CITY to serve DEVELOPERS' properties, shown on Exhibit "A" and Exhibit «B,,, WHEREAS, upon recommendation of the Public Works Department, the City Council of CITY accepted and approved the proposal to construct the water main, subject to all conditions hereinafter provided by this Agreement; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing premises, CITY and DEVELOPER hereby agree: A. Preparation of Plans. CITY has prepared plans and specifications, drawings, instructions, bid proposal and all other contract documents for the construction and installation of water main (hereinafter called "Project"), shown on Exhibit "B," including rights-of--way, grades and elevation, and materials used in the construction and installation of said water main. B. Construction of the Project. 1. CITY shall install and construct the Project in compliance with and subject to all conditions provided herein. 2. CITY shall obtain and/or provide all engineering, surveying, contract administration, and/or permanent and temporary easements necessary for the construction of the Project. 3. CITY shall undertake and/or provide all testing, sampling and other normally conducted measures for quality controUquality assurance regarding any and all installed systems. COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT -Page 1 of 9 • 4. CITY shall provide inspection services for the construction of the Project in accordance with CITY standards. C. Solicitation of Bids. CITY shall solicit bids and publish requests for bid proposals for construction of the Project from at least three (3) properly licensed public work contractors. CITY shall award the construction contract to the lowest qualified bidder pursuant to all applicable public bidding rules as required by Idaho law. CITY shall reserve the right to reject all bids and/or cancel this Agreement if CITY, in its sole discretion, determines that the successful bidder or bid amount is unacceptable for any reason. D. DEVELOPER and CITY Responsibility for Costs. Because the CITY construct water main improvements, as shown on Exhibit "B", with the cooperation of the DEVELOPERS, it is mutually agreed that CITY shall fund 100% of the cost of the Project, estimated at S03 773, with reimbursement from the DEVELOPERS in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement . E. Change Orders to Construction Contract. CITY shall notify DEVELOPERS before approving any change order to the construction contract if (a) the cost of the change order will exceed one percent (1%) of the contract price or (b) the cumulative total of all previously approved change orders exceeds ten percent (10%) of the contract price. In the event of a change order, CITY and DEVELOPER shall execute an amendment to this Agreement to record the amount of the change order to be reimbursed to DEVELOPER, if any. In the event that a change order or other amendment to the construction contract results in a cost savings, CITY and DEVELOPERS shall share the cost savings F. Reimbursement to CITY. 1. Estimated Total Reimbursement. Because CITY will construct the Project, DEVELOPERS shall reimburse to CITY 25% of the actual construction cost, estimated at $125,943. Each DEVELOPER shall reimburse to the CITY their equal portion (25%} of the total reimbursement. Each portion is estimated at $31,486. 2. Method of Payment. Each DEVELOPER shall be responsible for payment in full at the time their Property as shown in Exhibit "A" connects to the water main constructed in this project. 3. Reimbursement Payment. CITY shall provide proof of total cost of construction of the project to DEVELOPERS at time of reimbursement. G. Indemnification and Insurance. DEVELOPER shall indemnify and save and hold harmless CITY from and for any and all losses, claims, actions, judgments for damages, and/or injury to persons or property and losses and expenses caused or incurred by DEVELOPER, its servants, agents, employees, guests, and/or business invitees, and not caused by or arising out of tortious conduct of CITY or its employees. COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT -Page 2 of 9 H. No Assignment. DEVELOPERS shall not assign any portion of this Agreement or any privilege here under, either voluntarily or involuntarily, without the prior written consent of the CITY, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. The agreement shall be tied to the Properties owned and proposed to develop by the DEVELOPERS, as shown on exhibit "A". I. Attorney Fees. Should either.party find it necessary to employ an attorney for representation in any action seeking enforcement of any provision of this Agreement, or to recover damages for breach of this Agreement, or to resolve any disagreement as to the interpretation of this Agreement, the unsuccessful party in any final judgment or award entered pursuant to such action shall reimburse the prevailing party for all reasonable costs, charges and expenses, including attorneys' fees expended or incurred by the prevailing party in connection therewith and in connection with any appeal, and the same maybe included in such judgment or award. This provision shall be deemed to be a separate contract between the parties and shall survive any default, termination or forfeiture of this Agreement. J. Notices. Any notice desired by the parties and/or required by this Agreement shall be sent via United States Mail, registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, and shall be addressed as follows: CITY: City Clerk City of Meridian 33 E. Idaho Ave. Meridian, Idaho 83642 DEVELOPERS: Primeland Development Co., LLP 3120 W Belltower Dr, Suite 100 Meridian, ID 83646 Keego Springs Development Co. Inc. P.O. Box 140298 Boise, Idaho 83714 Pole Creek Properties LLC PO Box 190073 Boise, ID 83719 ~~ be~eloam~'1~ LLC t~ -t~ b~exl~.~ ~~.d YYIe~(1di ~~ t~ ~3(0~~- COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT -Page 3 of 9 • Such notice shall be deemed delivered if and when delivery is accepted or three (3) days after deposit in the United States Mail. Either party shall have the right to change its address by delivering to the other party a written notification thereof in accordance with the requirements of this section. K. Governing_Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Idaho and the ordinances of the City of Meridian. L. Exhibits. All exhibits to this Agreement are incorporated by reference and made a part of this Agreement as if the exhibits were set forth in their entirety in this Agreement. M. Entire Agreement. This Agreement and the exhibits hereto constitute the full and entire understanding and agreement between the parties with regard to the transaction contemplated herein, and no party shall be liable or bound to any other in any manner by any representations, warranties, covenants and agreements except as specifically set forth herein. N. Definition of DEVELOPER's Property. The term "DEVELOPER's Property" in the Agreement shall mean the parcels shown on Exhibit "A" attached hereto. O. Binding Effect. 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 DEVELOPERS of DEVELOPERS' Properties. P. Reports and Information. At such times and in such forms as the CITY may require, DEVELOPER shall furnish to CITY such statements, records, reports, data and information as the CITY may request pertaining to matters covered by this Agreement. Q. Construction and 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 sa long as the remainder of the Agreement is reasonably capable of completion. R. Approval Required. This Agreement shall not become effective or binding until approved by CITY. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties shall cause this Agreement to be executed by their duly authorized officers the day and year first above written. COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT -Page 4 of 9 • DEVELOPER: Prirneland Development Co., LLP tYz~iG S, ~/~.ta~E Name (printed) Signature STATE OF IDAHO i +ge~L- Title ~.~~8 Date ss County of Ada ) On this ~` l~ day of _ ~~ ~~ ~ ,~ efo~rQ ~aI the and rsigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared ~~. V (FYI ~~ ,known or identified to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that he/she executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and yeaz first above written. Notary c ~~:ie Stare •,. >.'~'~;~ ~r C Notary Public F r Idaho. Residing at: -/'~ Commission Expires: ~7 ~ COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT -Page 5 of 9 • I?EVELUPER: Keego Springs Development Co. Inc. Name (printed) ~~~~ Title Signa`-f -ure STATE OF IDAHO ~-i ~~ (~~ Date } ss County of Ada } ~~ ~,'~ On this ~~~ day of ~C ~.~r~.L~-~~~ , beef a me. the^undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, pers nally appeared `TC ~ ~.ph~L( ,known or identified to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that he/she executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. ;~ ;~' ~~ ~ - N Public For daho • .. '' w z . w ' ' ~ t~ i € `~ Residing at: S~ r ~~ ;.;,~. ,,, .~ :;, ,~ Commission Expires: ~. ?.~ c~ ~ COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT -Page 6 of 9 • DEVELOPER: Pole Creek Properties, Inc. tJ©~ ~t76N Name {printed) Sign STATE OF IDAHO ) I~ L r` Title Date ss County of Ada ) ~; (;~ Z~ ~. On this day of (yJYUt~{•k _ 7, before me the undersigned, a Notary ~lutilic m and for said State, per Wally appeazed 1 Q.t~-zr{~ ,known or identified to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that he/she executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. >; ..~~ci~~,uL~= ~:~~tix-_} N tary Public FQr Idaho NCri3r}• F~~;^.;r_ f Residing at: _ . ~_ ... ~ •: `~~ `~ '' ~, ~ ~~~'"• -- _ -- € Commission Expires: I • J 9 COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT -Page 7 of 9 C~ • DEVELOPER: ~le~p2F/eto~m~rt'~' trl~ Coffey ~~,r{yn ~rz~id~rt-- Name (printed) Title a-~-o8 Signature Date STATE OF IDAHO ) ss County of Ada ) On this ~~' day of ~~pV' ~.q,Ytt ,Z00~, before me the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared (,' Qre~i -~-o~ ,known or identified to me to be the person whose name is subscribed tot a within instrument, and acknowledged to me that he/she executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. Emm.m,~~® ••~4: KQlJ•~ t, (~1.~. 1~~ 0 o 4%' p'~~,E.`.'~'~;. Notary Public For Idaho .,~ Residing at: N M Z ~ e Commission Expires~ lo s ~tp ~ a ~ :~ G ~ ~ s °~ s.`~.plJBL1 '~e` ~ ~~e'~ OF~~~~ series COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT -Page 8 of 9 • CITY: BY: Attest: TAMMY de WEERD, MAYOR Date WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CITY CLERK STATE OF IDAHO ) ss County of Ada ) On this day of ,2007, before me the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared TAMMY DE WEERD and WILLIAM G. BERG, JR, known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Meridian, Idaho, who executed the within instrument and acknowledged to me that they executed the same on behalf of the City of Meridian IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. Notary Public For Idaho Residing at: Commission Expires:_ COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT -Page 9 of 9 y ~ • -: __, ~_ --- ' -- - w_ Volterra North- Prim~eland Develodment Co. r~ ~C~ I f ~ • February 22, 2008 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 26, 2008 APPLICANT ITEM NO. S-G REQUEST Task Order 0733 with Hydro Logic, LLC for Weli 28 Test and Production Well Design, Development and Inspection for a Cost Not to Exceed $57,420 AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: See attached CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: ~~ CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at pubec meetings shop become properly of the Ctiy of Meridian. TASK ORDER N0.0733 CITY OF MERIDIAN (OWNER) AND HYDRO LOGIC, INC. (HYDROGEOLOGIST) This Task Omer is issued by Owner and aa:eptal by the Hydrogeotogist pursuant to the muival promises, covenant and conditions contained in the Agreement between the above names parties dated February 18, 2008. CITY OF MERIDIAN EXPLORATORY TEST AND MUNICIPAL WATER SUPPLY WELL REGULATORY APPROVALS, DESIGN, DRILLING AND CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION, WELL DEVELOPMENT, HYDRAULIC TESTING, WATER QUALITY SAMPLING, AND FINAL REPORTING FOR WELL #28 The Hydrogeologist's scope of senric~s, time of completion and compensation shall be as set forth herein. Services shall generally be desk as Engineering Consulting Services per the Consultant's proposal dated February 14.2008. TASK 1.1- CITY WATER WELL #28 FACILITIES Per the City's request, Hydrogeologi~ w~i evaluate, obtain regulatory approvals and vw~ter rights, develop and administer bidding documents and contracts, develop technical spedfications, review oontradors invoices for paymer~, design well fadlfies, provide geoteohnical services such a geophysical logging -underwater camera inspedior~s - and water level /water-quality instrumentation, oven3ee dulling -well canstrudion - emplacaanent of well seals -well development, des~n and conduct hydraul'~c testing, sample ground water quality, serve as a liaison between contractors and the CitSt, rnalce final regulatory submittals, and develop a comprehensive report documentation for the project. Hydrogeologist will develop any necessary change orders to the work and keep Use City regularly updated with respect to the work. In edition to regulatory submittals, individual task completion reports wiq be developed as needed and/or n3quested by the City. The Oarner w~l provide all available information necessary to facilitate the project. Hydrogeologist wip follow through with regulatory agenda to closure ark will work dosely with the City's Public Works Department. TIME OF COMPLETION Hydrogeologic services wiU be completed on an as needed basis and time of completion will be set as services are requested. COMPENSATION The Plot-To-Exc~ed amount f~ this Task Order No. 0733 is fifty-seven thousand, four- hundred and twenty dollars ($57,420.00). The hourly rate for services and cGr+ect expenses is attat~ted (Prevailing Fee Schedule Effective January 1, 2008) and by this reference made a part hereof. CITY OF MERIDIAN ., TAMMY de ~ERD, MAYOR Attest: HYDROGEOLOGIST ED SQUIRES, HYDRO LOGIC, INC. ~ ~. w s~ ~i f~ERK _~ ~ .. ,,,,,4,~~~,,,,, ~rrnrrn u~~~``~ Memo To: WII Berg; Tara Green From: Kyle Radek, P.E., Staff Engineer ,~~i~-- CC: File Date: February 21, 2008 Re: Proposed Agenda Item for February 26 City Council Meeting A ~.~~9 ~E~ ~ 1 200 ~;ity Of tilex~.dia~~ pity ~l~x~ O~,ce The Public Works Department respectfuNy requests the following item be placed on the February 26 City Council agenda, under Consent Agenda, for Council's consideration: Task Order 0733 with Hxdro Logic. LLC for Well 28 Test and Production Well Design, Development, and Inspection Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves Task Order 0733 with Hydro Logic for Well 28 Test and Production Weil Design, Development, and Inspection for a cost not to exc~d $57,420, and authorizes the Mayor to sign it. Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding this item. • Page 1 • • TASK ORDER N0.0733 CITY OF MERIDIAN (OWNER) AND HYDRO LOGIC, INC. (HYDROGEOLOGIST) This Task Order is issued by Owner and accepted by the Hydrogeologist pursuant to the mutual promises, covenants and conditions contained in the Agreement beiween the above named parties dated February 18, 2008. CITY OF MERIDIAN EXPLORATORY TEST AND MUNICIPAL WATER SUPPLY WELL REGULATORY APPROVALS, DESIGN, DRILLING AND CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION, WELL DEVELOPMENT, HYDRAULIC TESTING, WATER QUALITY SAMPLING, AND FINAL REPORTING FOR WELL #28 PURPOSE The Hydrogeologist's scope of services, time of completion and compensation shall be as set forth herein. Services shall generally be described as Engineering Consulting Services per the Consultant's proposal dated February 14.2008. TASK 1.1-CITY WATER WELL #Zt3 FACILITIES Per the City's request, Hydrogeologist will evaluate, obtain regulatory approvals and water rights, develop and administer bidding documents and contracts, develop technical specifications, review contractors invoices for payment, design well facilities, provide geotechnical services such a geophysical logging -underwater camera inspections - and water level /water-quality instrumentation, oversee drilling -well construction - emplacement of well seals -well development, design and conduct hydraulic testing, sample ground water quality, serve as a liaison between contractors and the City, make final regulatory submittals, and develop a comprehensive report documentation for the project. Hydrogeologist will develop any necessary change orders to the work and keep the City regularly updated with respect to the work. In addition to regulatory submittals, individual task completion reports will be developed as needed and/or requested by the City. The Owner will provide all available information necessary to facilitate the project. Hydrogeotogist will follow through with regulatory agencies to closure and will work closely with the City's Public Works Department. TIME OF COMPLETION Hydrogeologic services will be completed on an as needed basis and time of completion will be set as services are requested. COMPENSATION The Not-To-Exceed amount for this Task Order No. 0733 is fifty-seven thousand, four- hundred and twenty dollars ($57,420A0). The hourly rate for services and direct expenses is attached (Prevailing Fee Schedule Effective January 1, 2008) and by this reference made a part hereof. CITY OF MERIDIAN BY: TAMMY de WEERD, MAYOR HYDROGEOLOGIST ED SQUIRES, HYDRO LOGIC, INC. Attest: WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CITY CLERK fiy~n 1a4c Zrc~ 100? W. Franklin Street. Boise. ID 8370? f20$) 3-t2-8369. (Fax) 3-t2-310(1, h~~droloQic•ugv-es~t.net February 14, 2008 Mr. Kyle Radek, P.E. Public Works Department City of Meridian 600 East Watertower Meridian, Idaho 83642 Hydrogeologic Design, Consultation, Inspection Services & Oversight of the Construction and Sampling of the Proposed City of Meridian's # 28 Test Well Dear Kyle: I have developed a scope of work, and estimated costs to work with you and the City on the specifications, design, drilling, construction, development, and samplvng of a new exploratory test-well for the City's water supply. We understand that finished water- quatity in a subsequently drilled supply well is a major concern of the City and this proposal is directed towazd developing the best understanding of subsurface conditions, including ground water chemistry and the hydrogeologic framework, to provide the best possible knowledge for the City to base its water resource decisions. I have tabulated the costs to complete the work as a single project on the attached spreadsheet. The cost estimates are considered maximum amounts but I would recommend a 15 percent contingency owing to the inherent unknowns of subsurface exploration and drilling. We stand ready to commence the work right away and to proceed continuously to completion of the project without interruption. The following narratives correlate with the spreadsheet tasks tv explain, in more detail, the scope of work. Regulatory Permitting This task includes obtaining drilling permits and associated waivers for PVC casings, and multiple completion intervals. All available information, including Driller's Reports, water quality, water-levels, well locations, neazby sources of pollution, existing City water rights files, and other site characteristics will be reviewed. Digline will be contacted for buried utilities. Technical Well Drilling Specifications and Bid Documents. Contractual agreements, specifications and bid documents for the test-well will be developed. Hydro Logic, will field calls from prospective drillers concerning the specifications and pnncedures. • Project Coordination With Staff, Driller, and City. This includes staffbriefings, meetings at the City, calls to and from the driller, e-mails, transmittal letters, and faxes to the City over the entire length of the project and as the project progresses. Includes pre-construction conference with driller and City on site. On Site Well Drilling and Surface Seal Oversight. This task includes measurement of the driller's tools, on-site observation of the surface seal casing depth and verification of the surface seal according to IDWR rules. A geologist will be on site during drilling to ensure good sampling of the drilled geologic section and to arrest drilling at the selected depth. This task includes the design and oversight of the drilling and on-site logging of the drill cuttings. Final Well Design. Sieve analyses of target aquifer sands will be conducted and a graphic lithologic log will be constructed from cuttings and compared and interpreted with respect to geophysical logs of the test-well. Geophysics will be interpreted to most accurately place aquifer/ aquitard units with respect to screen locations and optimum yield of the supply well to fallow. Casing, Surface Seal, Well Screen/Filter Sand Installation and Oversight. On site inspection services to include installation and centralization of the PVC casing including observation and documentation of the full-depth surface seal and seals between piezometer completion zones. Piezometer screens, filter sand specif cations, and depth placement will be verified by on-site tagging and verified by volumetric calculations. Measurements will be taken for as-built construction drawings. Well Development, Hydraulic Testing, and Water Quality Sampling This task includes coordination and observation of well development techniques of up to four piezorneter tubes. We will oversee the testing which will consist of air-lift pumping and swab-surge-bail development to clear residual drilling muds from the piezometers followed by the installation of a sample pump to obtain water quality samples from four zones. Water samples will be analyzed for IDEQ/USEPA water quality requirements for Public Drinking Water Systems and delivery to the laboratory of City's choice. Includes on-site su~rvision of sampling protocol and pump-sampling equipment. Field parameters of temperature, pH, conductivity, dissolved oxygen, oxidation reduction potential, and sand content are to be measured. Laboratory costs for water analyses are not included in our cost estimate. 2 • Well Disinfection and Security Measures for the Well Head. This task includes disinfection of the completed piezometers and scheduling. The test- well bore and piezometers will be protected, covered, and secure at all times throughout the project. A steel well head security enclosure to match the existing other City test well enclosures will be provided and installed. The cost of fabricating the enclosure is included. Final Report. A final comprehensive report to the City will be prepared. This task includes consolidation of all pertinent documentation, sketches, diagrams, plots, letters, permits, and water chemistry results into a bound document for future reference. Report will present conclusions and recommendations for completion depths, groundwater development potential for the site, and recommendations for a new municipal water supply well on the site. Respectfully submitted by: Edward Squires Hydro Logic, Inc. • Q ~ «.77 QN~ iR ~ ff? t ~ d9 01 ~ ~ ~ (~y 6/! .Ny~ fA l7 ~ ~ 0a0 y T ~ vv~~ ~ ~ pp i9 pp (A Q ~ H p fA o V! ~ 0 Vf (A 0 VN~ t/~ Q Q p O O p p h .~ ~ p W ~ .~ ~ ~' a' ~ ~ ~ ~ $ v! ~ ~ aig ~ ~ ~ N !A W V ~ 9bp~p ~ ~ O ~ is! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t~ i~ ~ 8i ~ p f14 ~ o .~ p ~ d ~0 ~ ~ O O O O O O O O O O p ~y W ~+ ~ ~ ~ :n O ~ vl v- h ~ M ~ h ~ ~ ~ .6 S V ~ ~ U ~ AG E" vi 'S~^rC ~ ~~ ~ IIIFF~~1„ Q. ~4 1 ~ ~ ~ O w O O ~' ~ N O ~ N O M ~pp ~ 8 T ~ ~ ~ ~ .~~.,, ~ ~~yy µy~ ~Q ~ O v ~ ~ ~ ~dj fflA~ 9H~ x ~~ N N N O t~1 of O ,,fin O p N ~ Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O O d g ~~ o m R ~O O b '+ 00 V1 N O ~ b A x ~a ~ " ~4J ~`S ~ ' ~ ~ op 0 ~ y ~ 3 3 F ~ ~ a a ~ y m ° ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ a, x ~ ~ a N r~ ~ ~ ~ n o b d d N V d } Hriio lsgc. Tire i00' ~V` Franklin Stn`ei* Boise ID 8370 1208) 342-8369 tFa~) 342-3100 h~~dr+ologic ~t~q~~~est.net February 14, 2008 Mr. Kyle Radek, P.E. Public Works Department City of Meridian 600 Fast Watertower Meridian, Idaho 83642 Hydrageologic Design, Consultation, Inspection Services, Geotechnical Services, & Oversight of the Proposed City of Meridian's # 2$ Municipal Supply Well Dear Kyle: I have developed a scope of work, and estimated costs to work with you on the specifications, design, drilling, construction, development, and hydraulic testing of a new City water supply well. We understand that finished water-quality is a major concern of the City and this proposal is directed toward developing the most efficient well with the best ground water-chemistry available. I have tabulated the costs to complete the work as a single project on the attached spread sheet. The cost estimates are considered maximum amounts but I would recommend a 15 percent contingency owing to the inherent unknowns of subsurface exploration and drilling. We stand ready to commence the work right away and to proceed continuously to completion of the project without interruption. The following narratives correlate with the spreadsheet tasks to explain, in more detail, the scope of work. Regulatory SnbmittalslWell Site Approval This task includes obtaining, compiling, and review of all available information including Driller's Reports, water quality, water-levels, well locations, nearby sources of pollution, existing City water rights files, and other site characteristics. This information will be used in filings for drilling permits and DEQ site approval (including a preliminary check- list). Digline will be contacted for buried utilities and the water rights filed with IDWR. Technical Well Drilling SpeciScations and Bid Documents. Contractual agreements, s~cifications and bid documents for the supply well will be developed. A public drinking water system submittal to DEQ for well site and well- construction approval will be executed with three stamped sets of plans but I have included this in the Regulatory approvals. • ! Project Coordination With Staff, Driller, and City. This includes staff briefings, meetings at the City, calls to and from the driller, e-mails, transmittal letters, and faxes to the City over the entire length of the project and as the work progresses. On Site Well DriWng and Surface Seal Oversight. This task includes measurement of the driller's tools, on-site observation of the surface seal casing depth and verification of the surface seal according to IDWR/IDEQ rules. Geologist to be on site during drilling of the last portion of the pump-chamber casing bore to verify that the geologic section is the same as the test-well and to arrest drilling at the selected seal location. This task includes the design and oversight of the drilling and on-site logging of the drill cuttings. Borehole Geophysics This is a provision to run borehole geophysical logs in the supply well should it be deemed necessary; for example if the supply well lithology appeared different from the test-well lithology or if voids aze suspected. This provision includes natural gamma-ray, single-point resistivity, normal resistivity, caliper, and temperature logs. Final Well Design. Sieve analyses of tazget aquifer sands will be conducted and a graphic lithologic log will be constructed from cuttings and compared and interpreted with respect to geophysical logs of the test-well. Geophysics will be interpreted to most accurately place aquifer/aquitazd units with respect to screen locations and optimum yield. Casing, Seal, Well Screen /Filter Sand, and Packer Seal Installation Oversight. On site inspection services to include installation and centralization of the PVC casing including observation and documentation of the full-depth surface seal. Well screen, packer reducer assembly, and filter sand specifications will be verified and measurements taken for as-built construction drawings. Packer installation will be field-inspected. Hydraulic Testing, Weil Development, and Sampling This task includes coordination and observation of well development techniques along with the installation of the packer-reducer assembly and well head assembly. Pumping test design and scheduling for constant-discharge and stepped-dischazge testing periods, to include pump-setting, HP, discharge considerations, and measuring/sampling ports. We will oversee the testing which may include some development testing, stepped- dischazge testing, and constant-discharge testing. We will conduct the IDEQ/USEPA water quality sampling for Public Drinking Water Systems and deliver the samples to the lab of the City's choice using appropriate protocols and chain of custody procedures. HLI will provide on-site supervision, appropriate sampling preservatives, and pump-sampling equipment. Field-measured parameters of temperature, pH, conductivity, and sand content aze to be obtained during sampling. Laboratory costs for water analyses aze not included in our cost estimate and will be billed to the Water Department. Down Hole Camera Survey and Well Disinfection. This task includes disinfection of the completed well and scheduling, on-site observation, and review of a down hole camera survey of the completed well. Includes field notes and archive quality videotape delivered to the City with back-up copy kept at Hydro Logic, Inc. Final Report and Regulatory Snbmittals. A final comprehensive report to the City will be prepared and a final DEQ Checklist will be submitted. This task includes consolidation of all pertinent documentation, sketches, diagrams, plots, letters, permits, and regulatory submittals into a bound document for future reference. Final IDEQ submittals will be coordinated with the City and include all necessary revisions etc. Respectfully submitted by: Edward Squires Hydro Logic, Inc. i i0 ~ ~ v '~z7 'A ~ ~-l 7t7 O ~ H y ~~" O ~ ~ C ~ ~ ~ G ~ y ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C ~ y s o • W ~ ~ t7 ~ .a ~ H ~ A C ' ~' ~, ty C m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ A ~ O ~ C ~ ~ g~5 tra~ ~ v m ~ o x ~ ~` ~ a 0 ~ ~ c w w oo O~ ~ w C °•°* 8 ~ d A €~ ~ ~ x x ~ ~A ~ er U O ~ O W A C N A ~ ~ ~p ~ 1D G ~ ~G ~l ~ ~ ~My ~M'/ 1 ~ ~ ~ E~a~ O ~ Q . G ~ 3 ~ ~ /L DQ A ! ~ IC i B F+ ~ W A W N O ~ A O A ~ aa II Q a$ ,mr, ~ a ~ p ~ y ~,,,~, ~ A ~ R U ~ rig ~ ~ ~ ~ Q ~ U c ~ w ~ c N N ~ ~ w ~ ~ p '~ Fy 0 ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ w o w w g S A C A s.. O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ < ~; ~ .~ "O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ a tIi Fd ~ ~ A g a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~~ > b~ ~~ U w O C S O O p ~ tR C. O y g w ~~„ S u ~ ~ w ~+ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ o N ~ ~ U ~ N H o ~ S }d 1002 VIA". Franklin St~ret. Boise. ID 837U~ (208) 3~?-8369 (Faxl 3~#~-31()<i h~-drolo~ic`aq~~est net Ed Squires Mark Utting Loren Pearson Kurt Newbry Jannette Young Clerical office staff H dy ro Logic, Inc. Rate Schedute -2008 Managing Hydrogeologist Project Hydrogeologist GeophysicistlProject Manager Hydrogeologist Geologist Directly allocable $ 120lhour* $ 105/hour $ 95/hour $ 85/hour $75/hour $ 45/hour Mileage billed at $ 0.44lmile Down hole camera survey base charge = $ 850 Minimum geophysical togging charge = $1,500 Mobile geophysics unit standby time = $ 200/hour * Ed Squires = Expert witness in legal proceedings = $ 175/hr. Billing rates for Hydro Logic, lnc. will remain fixed for 2008 February 14 2008 Ed Squires, President a February 22, 2008 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 26, 2008 APPLICANT ITEM NO. S-H REQUEST Task Order 0732 with Hydro Logic, LLC for Well 14 Rehabilitation Design for a Cost Not to Exceed $25,000 AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: COMMENTS See attached ~l~ro~~ J Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian. TASK ORDER N0.0732 CITY OF MERIDIAN (OWNER} AND HYDRO LOt31C, iNC. (HYDROGEOLOGIST} This Task Order is issued by Owner and accepted by the Hydrogeobgist pursuant to the mutual promises, covenants and conditions contained in the Agreement between the above named parties dated February 18, 2008. CITY OF MERIDIAN MUNICIPAL {HATER SUPPLY WELL REHABILITATION AND TESTING PURPOSE The Hydrageologist's scope of services, time of completion and compensation shall be as set forth herein. Services shalt generatiyy be described as Engineering Consulting Services per the Consulthnt's proposal dated February 14.2008. TASK 1.1-CITY WATER WELL #14 REHABILITATION AND TE9TIN6 Per the City's reque~, Hydrogeologist win evaluate, design, and inspect n3cor~rudive maintenance ~ City munidpal water supply Weil #14. The recoraarudive design, oversight, and documentation would irwlude work tasks such as re-development of va~il scxeem completion intervals, installation of plugs ardor liners inside wen casings, perfora#ion arai/orpressur~-grouting of tl'~ unsealed surface casirxl, welt ~velopment, pump-testing and water quality sampling, and recurrunendationsfcr sustainable yield. In addition to regulatory submittals, individual task completion reports win be developed as r and/or requested by the City. The Owner win provide all available information r~essary to conduct the rehabil~#ion. Hydrogeolog~t will perform down hole video surveys, des~n the reconsbrudion, inspect the work, obtain regulatory permits, review and approve the c~nbador's voices, sd~edule and c~ndud pump testing, serve as the liaison between the drilling contractor and the City to obtain cost estimates from contractors arttt to develop contractual agreements and technical spe~ificatiorw for the work. Hydrogeologist will develop any necessary change coders to the work and keep the City regularly updated with rasped to the work. Hydrogeologist wdl also serve as inspector for tine City with respect to the work inducting review of contractor invoices and ~vekrping as-built r~rd drawings. Hydrogeologist wiU follow through with regulatory agendas to closure and wilt work sagely with the City's Public Works De~rtment. TIME OF COMPLETION Hydrogeologic servioes rrr71 be completed on an as need basis and time of completion w0! be set as services are requested. COMPENSATION The Not To-Exceed amount for this Task Order No. 0732 is tNrenty~ive thousand dollars {$25,0.00). The hourly raga for services and direct expenses is attached (PrevalGng Fee Sch~ule Effective January~1, 2008) and by this reference made a part her~f. CITY OF MERIDIAN BY: ~-~ TAMMY de ~ RD, MAYOR Attest: ~.J>'~ ~cec ~-D f .~.,r1 HYDROGEOLOGIST ~~ ` ED SQUIRES HYDRO LOGIC, INC. i. i ~~ ~~ ~~.L = y ~ ~~ -, '"! O ,. }~o !sue ~Jrc. 1002 ~'. Franfclin Street Boise. ID 8370'. (208)3-)?-8369. 1Far) 342-3100_ h,~dirologic a~q~Eest.rret Hydro Lo¢ic, Inc. Rate Schedule -20~ Ed Squires Managing Hydrogeologist $120/hour* Mark Utting Project Hydrogeologist $105/hour Loren Pearson Geophysicist/Project Manager $ 95/hour Kurt Newbry Hydmgeologist $ 85/hour Jannette Young Geologist $75/hour Clerical office staff Directly allocable $ 45/hour Mileage billed at $ 0.44/mile Down hole camera survey base charge = $ 850 Minimum geophysicstl togging charge = $1,500 Mobile geophysics unit standby time g $ 200/hour * Ed Squires = Expert witness in legal proceedings = $175/hr. Billing rates for Hydro Logic, Inc. will remain fixed for 2008 ~,r,,,,,s L1 February 14, 201 Ed Squires, Memo To: Will Berg; Tara Green From: Kyle Radek, P.E., Staff Engineer ~i`Z- CC: Fife Date: February 21, 2008 R~ Proposed Agenda Item for February 26 City Council Meeting The Public Works Department respectfully requests the following item be placed on the February 26 City Council agenda, under Consent Agenda, for Council's consideration: Task Order 0732 with Hydro Logic, LLC for Well 14 Rehabilitation Design Recommended Council Ac~lon: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves Task Order 0732 with Hydro Logic for Well 14 Rehabilitation Design for a cost not to exceed $25,000, and authorizes the Mayor to sign it, Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding this item. • Page 1 • • TASK ORDER N0.0732 CITY OF MERIDIAN (OWNER) AND HYDRO LOGIC, INC. (HYDROGEOLOGIST) This Task Order is issued by Owner and accepted by the Hydrogeologist pursuant to the mutual promises, covenants and conditions contained in the Agreement between the above named parties dated February 18, 2008. CITY OF MERIDIAN MUNICIPAL WATER SUPPLY WELL REHABILITATION AND TESTING PURPOSE The Hydrogeologist's scope of services, time of completion and compensation shall be as set forth herein. Services shall generally be described as Engineering Consulting Services per the Consultant's proposal dated February 14.2008. TASK 1.1-CITY WATER WELL #14 REHABILITATION AND TESTING Per the City's request, Hydrogeologist will evaluate, design, and inspect reconstructive maintenance on City muniapal water supply Well #14. The reconstructive design, oversight, and documentation would include work tasks such as re-development of well screen completion intervals, installation of plugs and/or liners inside well casings, perforation and/or pressure-grouting of the unsealed surfaces casing, well development, pump-testing and water quality- sampling, and recommendations for sustainable yield. In addition to regulatory submittals, individual task comptettan reports will be developed as needed and/or requested by the City. The Owner will provide all available information necessary to conduct the rehabilitation. Hydrogeologist will pertorm down hole video surveys, design the reconstruction, inspect the work, obtain regulatory permits, review and approve the contractor's invoices, schedule and conduct pump testing, serve as the liaison between the drilling contractor and the City to obtain cost estimates from contractors and to develop contractual agreements and technical spec~c~tions for the work. Hydrogeologist will develop any necessary change orders to the work and keep the City regularly updated with respect to the work. Hydrogeologist will also serve as inspector for the City with respect to the work including review of contractor invoices and developing as-built record drawings. Hydrogeologist will follow through with regulatory agencies to closure and will work closely with the City's Public Works Department. • • TIME OF COMPLETION Hydrogeologic services will be completed on an as needed basis and time of completion will be set as services are requested. COMPENSATION The Not To-Facceed amount for this Task Order No. 0732 is twenty-live thousand dollars ($25,000.00). The hourly rate for services and direct expenses is attached (Prevailing Fee Schedule Effective January 1, 2008) and by this reference made a part hereof. CITY OF MERIDIAN BY: TAMMY de WEERD, MAYOR HYDROGEOLOGIST .~~Q ` ED SQUIRES HYDRO LOGIC, INC. Attest: WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CITY CLERK a ~ a ~c ~ 1002 fib. Franklin Street. Boise, ID 83702 (208) 3~2-8369, (Far) 342-3100. h~dmlog~c a.g~est.net Ed Squires Mazk Utting Loren Pearson Kurt Newbry Jannette Young Clerical office staff Hydro Loaic, Inc. Rate Schedule -2008 Managing Hydrogeologist Project Hydrogeologist Geophysicist/Project Manager Hydrogeologist Geologist Directly allocable $120/hour* $ 105/hour $ 951hour $ 85/hour $75/hour $ 45/hour Mileage billed at $ 0.44/mile Down hole camera survey base charge = $ 850 Minimum geophysical logging charge = $1,500 Mobile geophysics unit standby time = $ 200/hour * Ed Squires = Expert witness in legal proceedings = $175/hr. Billing rates for Hydro Logic, Inc. will remain. fixed for 2008 ~r.~.~..a~ February 14.201 Ed Squires, February 22, 2008 Department Reports MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 2b, 2008 APPLICANT Legal Department /Police Department ITEM NO. 6-A-1 REQUEST Tabled from February 19, 2008: Presentation on Police Pay Plan by Bill Nary & Jeff Lavey AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Emailed: COMMENTS ~~ / < ~N 13v~d ~ ~"d~~ Date: Phone: _ Staff Initials: Materials presented at pubec meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. ~~ February 22, 2008 Department Reports MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 26, 2008 APPLICANT Parks Department ITEM NO. 6-B-2 REQUEST Discussion of Adventure Island Playground Phase 4 AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: COMMENTS ~3scUssed Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Infialr. Materials presented at public meetings shad become properly of the City of Meridian. February 22, 2008 Department Reports MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 26, 2008 Ic~,nn ~ APPLICANT Dep~c rfment REM NO. 8 REQUEST Continued Public Hearing from February 19, 2008: Proposed Fee Increase for Planning Department AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: COMMENTS See Previous Item Packet ~~~ ~ ~0. ~ ~~ Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at pubpc meetings shad become properly of the Cffy of Meridian. ~~ ~` " ~' to w me y, ~'i g y , N < 8 ~ ~ g w ~ s -' ~ ~ 8 8 8 8 $ ~ ~ m m ~ c ~i m o S ~ S ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e a ~ ~ ° _ ~ ~ ~ ~ '' ~ a m c a a ~ ~ 8 ~ ~ a 3 ~ $ 3 ~ o' > c o > c ~ ~ z, m m ~. 8 ~ ~ m 9, m 3 o g ~ ~ m 8 0 y g ~ °' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '~ m ~ m m m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ a ~ 3 m ~ ~ ~ a Q O pro N 8 `~ 3 ~ 3 ~ ~ O° ~ 3 ~ o ~ '~ '~ ~ m ~' 8 F 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ p o. O m ~ ~ ° ~ ~ ~ c ~ M 'fl ~ S y ~ o o. r~o.,, » m 3 ~ , s ~ 3 ~ 3 ~ m 3 3 ~ m ~ ~ 8. 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ o Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ $ ~ ~ ~. ~ ~ ~ ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ m 8 ~ ~ ~ 8 ' °~ ~ ~ m ' o g ~ ~ a ~ ~ a Q g ~ ~ ~ ~ 41 V V Y ~ OD ~ A ~ ~$ j 01 N m V j ~ w (J t~ii ~ ~ ~ ~ j ~ ~ V ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ O O o ~ ~ $ ~ c' Y3 ' ~ Y3 ~ ~ ~ ° ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ D S ° ~ ~ _- n ~ ~ ~ ~ O. o s ~ ££ ~ ~..~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 g g ~ y~ S $ ~g ~ 2S ~. '~ 8 ~ ~ `~ n n. '~ ~ -15 z ~' S ~ 'L~ ~ } ~ '' ~ ~,. ?S $ ~ ~ g 8 r,- $ a r ~ ~S m ... m r. - o'ff' _ `~ ~ _ S ~ _ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . 55~~ iitts~ ~ $ ~ t5 ~ $ ~ - ~ m ~ '~ D $ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ D ~ ~ ~ D U 'o ~+ ~ D cn 25 8 ' ~ ~ ~ - A ~ ~ ~i !q^y~ '" m ~ 1' ~o ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ 3. t a' : ~j a Yn' ~ 'w Y.,'. .~ ~ b ,~ .~ `3 DZ ~ - °' - ~- :Zb "d? ~ ~ ~b ~ S~ zn ~b b~ bi 3 b ]o~ W K ~ .~ .S ~", " ,. .3 ffi - 3 . ~. 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o r L L ~ ~ r. g `~ a _ 3 ~ $ej 8 ~ G Q ~ ~ O z D ~ _ $ ~ ~ }q~{~ zz 7 ~ ~ ~ ~ ? zz I- to b ~ ~ J~ 2S ? ~ ~ 9 r ~ SY ? Y fl - ~ ~'. ~ ~5 . ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ 9 ~ . • "~r~11W~..~Ir~~ im'.IV..~ r ~,.~ti~'I~r~~im~~°".'~,i du .~~.. ~' ~ ~ ~~~ Project: Tee Increase '~'~` ~'l~r~~ i~~~~ Why is an increase necessary at this time? As many of you know, we replaced the zoning and subdivision ordinances with our unified development code in July 2005. Shortly after that date (September 15, 2005), we developed a new fee schedule that was consistent with the new code. The structure of the fee schedule was a significant departure from our previous schedule. Instead of "per acre" or "per square feet" charges, the fee structure was based on the average time it takes Planning Department, Clerks, and Public Works staff to process a typical application. The 2005 fee schedule is still in place; I have not adjusted fees since it was adopted. As I look at our average revenue per application since adoption of the new fee schedule, it has significantly decreased: Planning Department Hearing Staff Average Cost Fiscal Year Revenue Applications Applications per Application Actual FY02 $207,316 203 85 $720 Actual FY03 $266,269 302 98 $666 Actual FY04 $271,474 298 118 $653 Actual FY05 $548,786 390 192 $943 Actual FY06 $521,816 505 259 $683 Est. FY07 $325,000 363 229 $549 In FY06, the Planning Department processed 31% more applications, but experienced a 5% decline in revenue. Similarly, if I compare the estimated revenues from this fiscal year (FYO'~ to FY05, we processed nearly the same total number of applications, but received only 40% of the revenue. This indicates to me that our 2005 fee structure was too low and actually represented a significant decrease in fees than the prior fee structure. In addition to that fact, our cost of doing business has also increased. In developing the new fees, we (Public Works and Planning Staff) re-evaluated the time it takes us to process applications and adjust our spreadsheet accordingly. In general, we felt we had underestimated the time it takes to research projects and to work with applicants to guide them through our review processes to ensure complete applications. In developing the new fees, we also added time for the attorneys that now work with us throughout the application process. Furthermore, we added the costs associated with transcripts and publishing ordinances. What are the new fees? Three new application fees are proposed. We previously charged a "miscellaneous" fee for the development agreement and development agreement modifications. We recently amended the code to specifically address these items, and we felt it was appropriate to have a specific fee as well. We do not currently charge applicants for the many hours of time we spend reviewing, approving, and releasing surety. Tab/e 9: New Fees Permit/Decision Proposed Existing Fee $ Fee $ Development agreement 303 459 Development agreement modification 502 459 Surety fee 133 0 2/19/2008 • We are proposing to lower two fees to better reflect the time we spend on those applications: Table 3: Decrease in Fees Permit/Decision Proposed Existing Fee Fee Accessory use for daycare or home occupation 160 163 Director determination 213 250 A number of our fees have increased slightly (approximately 7%) to reflect an increase in wages over the last two years. Those fees are: Table 2: Modest Increase in Fees Proposed Existing Permit/Decision Fee ($) Fee ($) Inspections, additional 53 50 Planned unit development, per exception fee 107 100 Sign 53 50 Sign, planned sign program 67 63 Sign, temporary 27 25 Zoning verification letter 53 50 What kind of revenue will this generate? If I assume we have a similar number of applications as this last fiscal year, the new fees would generate $472,000. Under the current fee structure the revenue would be $325,000. In preparing the budget for this fiscal year, the finance department estimated an income of $400,000. Without this increase in fees, we will not meet our expected budget. How does this compare to other cities? The proposed fees are most similar to those of Boise City and Ada County. Some communities have consultant engineers review plat and survey documents (Eagle most notably) so the fee schedule does not include engineering fees. Councilmember Borton asked that I call around to other cities and find out why some of their fees were much lower than ours. I only had a chance to contact Boise, and the general sentiment was that some of their fees did not reflect the time necessary to process the applications. As a much more general comment, there is debate among planning professionals as to the extent that planning fees should be borne by developers. One of our primary commitments is to represent the general public in critiquing development applications. The intent of my fee schedule was to recover the cost of processing development applications, but not to fund the comprehensive planning division. Notes: 2/19/2008 • Table 6: Ful! List of Proposed Fee Changes • nPrmit/decisien total fee existing fee $ chance % chance accessory use for daycare or home occupation 160 163 -3 -2% additional hearing (post reconsideration) 692 142 550 387% alternative compliance 160 100 60 60% annexation, staff prepared consensual 2086 1206 880 73% annexation/rezone 1826 906 920 102% annexatioNrezone w/out concurrent application 2092 1206 886 73% certificate of zoning compliance 453 375 78 21 certificate of zoning compliance w/prior approval 187 125 62 49% city council review (appeal) 692 603 89 15% comprehensive plan map amendment 2409 1018 1391 137% comprehensive plan text amendment 1431 606 825 136%. conditional use (or Commission level modification) 1369 1046 323 31 conditional use modification 378 206 172 83% development agreement 303 0 303 #DIV/0! development agreement modification 502 459 43 9% director determination 213 250 -37 -15% design review 173 100 73 73% inspections, additional 53 50 3 7% miscellaneous hearing item 937 459 478 104% planned unit development 2251 1261 990 78% planned unit developmnet, per exception fee 107 100 7 7% plat, combination 2189 1228 961 78% plat, combination per lot fire fee 1 1 0 0% plat, final 1242 718 524 73% plat, final per lot P&Z and PW fee 36 28 8 27% plat, final, modification to condition 541 350 191 55% plat, preliminary 2264 1276 988 77% plat, preliminary per lot fire fee 1 1 0 0% plat, preliminary per lot P&Z and PW fee 24 20 4 22% plat, short 868 410 458 112% private road 198 50 148 296% property boundary adjustment 365 149 216 145% sign 53 50 3 7% sign, planned sign program 67 63 4 6% sign, temporary 27 25 2 7% surety fee 133 0 133 #DIV/O! temporary use 133 125 8 7% time extension, Commission or Council 493 444 49 11 time extension, Director 133 75 58 78% unified development code amendment 1,723 806 917 114% vacations (including recorded plat notes) 589 375 214 57% variance 1,056 603 453 75% zoning verification letter 53 50 3 7% 2/19/2008 • ! CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING SIGN-UP SHEET DATE February 19, 2008 ITEM # 21 PROJECT NUMBER PROJECT NAME Proposed Fee Increase for Planning Dept. PLEASE PRINT NAME ~~ FED ~ ~ Z FOR I AGAINST (NEUTRAL ~°nt~t ~$~sk ~~~ • ~ ~c~~ ~ Requested Changes to the Agenda: None FED 2 6 200 Mayor, the DAs for items 10 through 17 are all linked to one another. We ask that y~ _ _ ° items at the same time so that we have a complete record on the DA modifications. ~ ~ ~ go through the projects one at a time. We also recommend that items 12 and 15 be the last ones you take action on within that group. Project: Fee Increase Why is an increase necessary at this time? As many of you know, we replaced the zoning and subdivision ordinances with our unified development code in July 2005. Shortly after that date (September 15, 2005), we developed a new fee schedule that was consistent with the new code. The structure of the fee schedule was a significant departure from our previous schedule. Instead of "per acre" or "per square feet" charges, the fee structure was based on the average time it takes Planning Department, Clerks, and Public Works staff to process a typical application. I have not adjusted fees since the 2005 was adopted. As I look at our average revenue per application since adoption of the new fee schedule, it has significantly decreased: Planning Department Hearing Staff Average Cost Fiscal Year Revenue Applications Applications per Application Actual FY02 $207,316 203 85 $720 Actual FY03 $266,269 302 98 $666 Actual FY04 $271,474 298 118 $653 Actual FY05 $548,786 390 192 $943 Actual FY06 $521,816 505 259 $683 Est. FY07 $325,000 363 229 $549 In FY06, the Planning Department processed 31% more applications, but experienced a 5% decline in revenue. Similarly, if I compare the estimated revenues from this fiscal year (FY07) to FY05, we processed nearly the same total number of applications, but received only 40% of the revenue. This indicates to me that our 2005 fee structure was too low and actually represented a significant decrease in fees than the prior fee structure. In addition to that fact, our cost of doing business has also increased. In developing the new fees, we (Public Works and Planning Staff re-evaluated the time it takes us to process applications and adjust our spreadsheet accordingly. In general, we felt we had underestimated the time it takes to research projects and to work with applicants to guide them through our review processes to ensure complete applications. We also added time for the attorneys that now work with us throughout the application process. Furthermore, we added the costs associated with transcripts and publishing ordinances. What are the new fees? Three new application fees are proposed. We previously charged a "miscellaneous" fee for the development agreement and development agreement modifications. We recently amended the code to specifically address these items, and we felt it was appropriate to have a specific fee as well. We do not currently charge applicants for the many hours of time we spend reviewing, approving, and releasing surety. 2!26/2008 • Table 7: New Fees Permit/Decision Proposed Existing Fee (~- Fee /~1 Development agreement 303 T 459 Development agreement modification 502 459 Surety fee 133 0 We are proposing to lower two fees to better reflect the time we spend on those applications: Table 3: Decrease in Fees Permit/Decision Proposed Existing Fee FP_P_ Accessory use for daycare or home occupation 160 163 Director determination 213 250 A number of our fees have increased slightly (approximately 7%) to reflect an increase in wages over the last two years. Those fees are: Table 2: Modest Increase in Fees Proposed Existing Permit/Decision Fee t~l Fee /~- Inspections, additional ~ 53 50 Planned unit development, per exception fee 107 100 Sign 53 50 Sign, planned sign program 67 63 Sign, temporary 27 25 Zoning verification letter 53 50 What kind of revenue will this generate? If I assume we have a similar number of applications as this last fiscal year, the new fees would generate $472,000. Under the current fee structure the revenue would be $325,000. In preparing the budget for this fiscal year, the finance department estimated an income of $400,000. Without this increase in fees, we will not meet our expected budget. How does this compare to other cities? The proposed fees are most similar to those of Boise City, Ada County, and City of Eagle. Some communities have consultant engineers review plat and survey documents (Eagle most notably) so the fee schedule does not include engineering fees. I called around to other cities and find out why some of their fees were noticeably lower than ours; the general sentiment was that some of their fees did not reflect the time necessary to process the applications. Sometimes this is a decision on the part of the Council for "competition" reasons. For example, the Caldwell planning director was instructed not to have fees more than those of Nampa. Other times it is just an older fee schedule that has not been substantially updated to reflect the necessary time and expense of processing the application. As a much more general comment, there is debate among planning professionals as to the extent that planning fees should be borne by developers. One of our primary commitments is to represent the general public (that may or may not be present) in critiquing development applications. The intent of my fee schedule was to recover the cost of processing development applications, but not to fund the other aspects of our department. 2!26/2008 • Table 6: Full List of Proposed Fee Changes permit/decision total fee existing fee ~ chanoe % chance accessory use for daycare or home occupation 160 163 -3 -2% additional hearing (post reconsideration) 692 142 550 387% alternative compliance 160 100 60 60% annexation, staff prepared consensual 2086 1206 880 73% annexatioNrezone 1826 906 920 102% annexatioNrezone w/out concurrent application 2092 1206 886 73% certificate of zoning compliance 453 375 78 21 certificate of zoning compliance w/prior approval 187 125 62 49% city council review (appeal) 692 603 89 15% comprehensive plan map amendment 2409 1018 1391 137% comprehensive plan text amendment 1431 606 825 136% conditional use (or Commission level modification) 1369 1046 323 31 conditional use modification 378 206 172 83% development agreement 303 0 303 #DIV/0! development agreement modification 502 459 43 9% director determination 213 250 -37 -15% design review 173 100 73 73% inspections, additional 53 50 3 7% miscellaneous hearing item 937 459 478 104% planned unit development 2251 1261 990 78% planned unit development, per exception fee 107 100 7 7% plat, combination 2189 1228 961 78% plat, combination per lot fire fee 1 1 0 0% plat, final 1242 718 524 73% plat, final per lot P&Z and PW fee 36 28 8 27% plat, final, modification to condition 541 350 191 55% plat, preliminary 2264 1276 988 77% plat, preliminary per lot fire fee 1 1 0 0% plat, preliminary per lot PSZ and PW fee 24 20 4 22% plat, short 868 410 458 112% private road 198 50 148 296% property boundary adjustment 365 149 216 145% sign 53 50 3 7% sign, planned sign program 67 63 4 6% sign, temporary 27 25 2 7% surety fee 133 0 133 #DIV/0! temporary use 133 125 8 7% time extension, Commission or Council 493 444 49 11 time extension, Director 133 75 58 78% unified development code amendment 1,723 806 917 114% vacations (including recorded plat notes) 589 375 214 57% variance 1,056 603 453 75% zoning verification letter 53 50 3 7% 2!26/2008 pennil/decision total fee w/n~rt r-;F annexation, staff prepared consensual 2086 2076 annexatioNrezone 1826 1815 annexatioNrezone w/out concurrent application 2092 2082 conditional use (or Commission level modification) 1369 1319 planned unit development 2251 2001 plat, combination 2189 2029 plat, final 1242 1192 plat, preliminary 2264 2104 time extension, Commission or Council ~ 493 443 2/26/2008 • , February 22, 2048 c~A oa-a~~ MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 2b, 2008 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 9 REQUEST Public Hearing -CPA to modify future Land Use Map to change Four nodes with land use designations of Light Industrial to Commercial; fwo notdes from Commercial to Light Industrial and one node from Light Industrial to Public J Qvasi Public for a future school site AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: COMMENTS See attached PS~Z Item Packet /Minutes See attached Recommendations ~~~ ~ a vta.o c w~- . !tii l ~ ~ Q Fk~ u~.~toJu-Q.,~ w~. ~~u~r-- OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Inifials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the Cfly of Meridian. February 22, 2008 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 2b, 2008 RZ 07-0 ~ 7 APPLICANT Primeland Development Group, LLC ITEM NO. ~ 0 REQUEST Public Hearing -Request for a Rezone of 5.29 acres from R-8 zone to C-G zone (1.62 acres} and L-O zone X3.67 acres} for Verona Commercial - nec of West McMillan Road and North Ten Mile Road AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: COMMENTS See attached P>fiZ Item Packet / AAinutes See aMached Recommendations a~4~ ~ See attached Comments OTHER: Contacted: ~ ~~~ ~~r~ ~~ n Date: G.' !1-~ Phone: ~`t ~ -~'7 Emailed: ~ ~ t t (~ 1C Q~ 1 1 a(~,~~.. ~ Staff initdals• Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. • February 22, 2®08 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING PP 07-022 February 26, 2008 APPLICANT Primeland Development Group, LLC ITEM NO. ~~ REQUEST Public Hearing - Reques# for Preliminary Plat approval of 12 commercial lots and 2 other lots on 18.82 acres in the proposed C-G 8~ L-O zoning districts for Verona Commercial -northeast comer of West McMillan & Ten Mile Road AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: COMMENTS See attached Pt3~Z Item Packet /Minutes See attached Recommendations See attached Comments OTHER: Contacted: ~ ~ S Date: ~ - Z 5 Phone: '~ Z ~~ Emailed: S#aff Initials: ~. Materials presented at pubpc meetings shall become property of the Cffy of Meridian. February 22, MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 2b, 2008 M 107-~ 13 APPLICANT Primeland Development Group, LLC ITEM NO. 12 REQUEST Public Hearing -Request for a Miscellaneous Application to modify the Recorded Development Agreement for Verona Commercial -northeast comer of West McMillan Road and North Ten Mile Road AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CffY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: IMERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: COMMENTS See attached Staff Report ~~,~e. ~ out See attached Comments See attached Comments Contacted: ` ~~~ Date: Phone:.~Z,s (~~ ~ Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian. ! • February 22, 2008 RZ 07-01 ~ MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 26, 2008 APPLICANT Primeland Development Group, LLC ITEM NO. 13 REQUEST Public Hearing -Request for a Rezone of 12.64 acres from R-4 to L-O zone for Bridgetower Crossing Office -southwest comer of West McMillan Road and North Linder Road AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: 1DAH0 POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: See attached Affidavit of COMMENTS See attached P8Z Item Packet i Minutes See attached Recommendations ~v~~ ~„~,~,k, f 2p Contacted: ~ ' Date: 2'2,Cj hone: ~ 2-~' Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the CNy of Meridian. C~ February 22, 2008 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 26, 2008 PP 07-023 APPLICANT Primeland Development Group, LLC ITEM NO. 14 REQUEST Public Hearing -Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 11 commercial lots and 2 other lots on 10.2 acres in the proposed L-O zoning district for Bridge#ower Crossing Office - swc of West McMillan Rd & N. Linder Road AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: COMMENTS See attached P&Z Item Packet / Minutes See attached Recommendations ~ 1~' ~" Contacted: ~~~ Date: 2 Z S Phone: 3y- 2- ~ q f Emailed: Staff Initia . Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian. February 22, 20{}8 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING MI 07-014 February 2b, 2008 APPLICANT Primeland Development Group, LLC REM No. 15 REQUEST Public Hearing -Request for a Miscellaneous Application to modify the recorded Development Agreement for Bridgetower Crossing Office - swc of West McMillan Rd. & N. Linder Road AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: COMMENTS See attached Staff Report ~v See attached Comments See attached Comments Contacted: t'1 ~~r Date: 2-~ hone: 3L `~- Emailed: Staff Ini#ials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. • • February 22, 2008 RZ 07-022 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 2b, 2008 APPLICANT Primeland Development Group, LLc ITEM NO. ~ 6 REQUEST Public Hearing -Request for a Rezone of 7.37 acres from C-G and R-4 to C-N zones and a Rezone of 5.88 acres from R-4 to L-O zones for Bridgetower Crossing Commercial -east of North Ten Mile Road and south of W, McMillan AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: See attached P&Z Item Packet / AAtnutes CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: See attached Recommendations a ~ ~,o~" ~~ ~ ~ See attached Comments See attached Comments See attached Comments MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: See attached Affidavit of Posfing Contacted: Date: Phone: ~ ~- Emailed: ' Staff initialr..~ Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian. February 22.20®$ MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING I'P 07-02b February 2b, 2008 APPLICANT Plimeland Development Group, LLc ITEM NO. ~~ REQUEST Public hearing -Request for Preliminary Plat approval of $ commercial lots and 1 other lot in the proposed C-N zone for Bridgetower Crossing Commercial east of North Ten Mile Road and south of W. McMillan AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: COMMENTS See attached Pil<Z Item Packet / MinurFes See atMched Recommendations ~b See attached Comments See attached Comments See attached Comments Contacted: '°~ L, Date: ~~ 2rJ Phone: ~ ~ ~ GQ 9 I Emailed: Staff Inifials: Matertals presented at pubNc meetings shall become property of the t:Ity of Mertdkm. • • February 22, 2008 RZ 07-019 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 26, 2008 APPLICANT Patrick McKeegan ITEM NO. 1$ REQUEST Public Hearing -Request for a Rezone of 0.602 of an acres from I-L to C-G zone for Rockin KB Saloon - 3163 East Lanark AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CJTY ATTORNEY CITY POtICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS 1RRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: COMMENTS See attached Pi3~Z Item Packet /Minutes See attached Recommendations OTHER: See attached Affidavit of l'os#ing Contacted: ~C. Date: Z" ~ ~ Phone: y-2~ $ ~~ Emaited: ` Staff lnifia4s: Materials pres d at pubpc meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian. • i 1=ebrvary 22, ~oo~ CUP D7-019 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 26, ~DD~ APPLICANT Patrick McKeegan ITEM NO. 19 REQUEST Public Hearing -Request for Conditional Use Permit approval for a drinking establishment in a proposed C-G zone for Rockin KB Saloon - 3163 E. Lanark AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Emailed: COMMENTS See attached P$Z Item Packet /Minutes See attached Recommendations Phone: A ' /'~ Date: Z' ~Z`~ ~®~° ~~, ~('(t]n,,~(y1r, Staff Initials: ~.~ p„ba~ meetings shoo become properly of the city ~ Meridian.